National trends with a laparoscopic liver resection: Results from a population-based analysis

Jin He, Neda Amini, Gaya Spolverato, Kenzo Hirose, Martin Makary, Christopher L. Wolfgang, Matthew J. Weiss, Timothy M. Pawlik

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background Interest in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has grown since the International 'Louisville Statement' regarding laparoscopic liver surgery was published in 2009. However, limited population-based data on LLR utilization patterns and outcomes are available. Methods LLR data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS, 2000-2012) and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP, 2005-2012) were compared before and after the Louisville Statement in 2009. Results In total, 1131 and 642 LLR were identified from NIS and NSQIP, respectively. Three-quarters of patients underwent LLR for a malignant indication (NIS primary malignancy, 29.6% versus metastasis, 45.1%; NSQIP primary malignancy, 35.5% versus metastasis, 46.1%). The annual volume of LLR increased from 2000-2008 versus 2009-2012 (NIS: 63 versus 168, P < 0.001; NSQIP: 52 versus 127; both P = 0.001). The peri-operative mortality associated with LLR was 2.8% in NIS and 2.2% in NSQIP. The morbidity was 38.1% in NIS and 30.7% in NSQIP. Mortality and morbidity did not change over time (both P > 0.050). After 2009, LLR was associated with a shorter length of stay (LOS) (NIS: 5 versus 6 days, P = 0.007). Conclusion Since the Louisville Statement in 2009, utilization of LLR has increased. LLR is associated with a modest decrease in LOS and appears to be safe with mortality and morbidity similar to open surgery.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)919-926
Number of pages8
JournalHPB
Volume17
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2015

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Hepatology
  • Gastroenterology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'National trends with a laparoscopic liver resection: Results from a population-based analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this