An attempt to establish and apply global benchmarks for liver resection of malignant hepatic tumors

Background: Benchmarking is a process of continuous self-evaluation and comparison with best-in-class hospitals to guide quality improvement initiatives. We sought to define global benchmarks relative to liver resection for malignancy and to assess their achievement in hospitals in the United States.Methods: Patients who underwent curative-intent liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, intra-hepatic cholangiocarcinoma, or colorectal or neuroendocrine liver metastases between 2000 and 2019 were identified from an international multi-institutional database. Propensity score matching was conducted to balance baseline characteristics between open and minimally invasive approaches. Best-in -class hospitals were defined relative to the achievement rate of textbook oncologic outcomes and case volume. Benchmark values were established relative to best-in-class institutions. The achievement of benchmark values among hospitals in the National Cancer Database was then assessed.Results: Among 2,624 patients treated at 20 centers, a majority underwent liver resection for hepato-cellular carcinoma (n = 1,609, 61.3%), followed by colorectal liver metastases (n = 650, 24.8%), intra-hepatic cholangiocarcinoma (n = 299, 11.4%), and neuroendocrine liver metastases (n = 66, 2.5%). Notably, 1,947 (74.2%) patients achieved a textbook oncologic outcome. After propensity score matching, 6 best-in-class hospitals with the highest textbook oncologic outcome rates (>= 75.0%) were identified. Benchmark values were calculated for margin positivity (<11.7%), 30-day readmission (<4.1%), 30-day mortality (<1.6%), minor postoperative complications (<24.7%), severe complications (<12.4%), and failure to achieve the textbook oncologic outcome (<22.8%). Among the National Cancer Database hospitals, global benchmarks for margin positivity, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, severe com-plications, and textbook oncologic outcome failure were achieved in 62.9%, 27.1%, 12.1%, 7.1%, and 29.3% of centers, respectively.Conclusion: These global benchmarks may help identify hospitals that may benefit from quality improvement initiatives, aiming to improve patient safety and surgical oncologic outcomes.(c) 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Automated summary

Benchmarking helps guide quality improvement initiatives to enhance patient safety and surgical oncologic outcomes by comparing hospitals globally.