Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24002759›Full record

SynthesisJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2013

The volume effect in liver surgery--a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Arthur J Richardson, Tony C Y Pang, Emma Johnston, Michael J Hollands, Vincent W T Lam, Henry C C Pleass

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Hospital Volume and Textbook Outcomes in Minimally Invasive Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Variation in complications and mortality following ALPPS at early-adopting centers.HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Evaluating Trends in the Volume-Outcomes Relationship Following Liver Surgery: Does Regionalization Benefit All Patients the Same?Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2017
    Article
  18. Hospital Volume and Survival After Hepatocellular Carcinoma Diagnosis.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2016
    Article
  19. Surgical management of hepatocellular carcinoma.World journal of hepatology · 2015
    Review
  20. Volume-outcome associations after major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a nationwide Taiwan study.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2014
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Arthur J RichardsonDepartment of Surgery, Westmead Hospital, University of Sydney, Westmead, Sydney, Australia, arthurr@arthurrichardson.com.au.
Tony C Y Pang
Emma Johnston
Michael J Hollands
Vincent W T Lam
Henry C C Pleass

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is an inverse relationship between hospital and surgeon volume and mortality in many types of complex surgery. The aim of this paper is to investigate the volume effect on outcomes of liver surgery.

methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. A literature search was conducted using Medline and EMBASE from 1995 to 2012. A random effects model was used.

resultsSeventeen studies were selected for detailed analysis. Definition of a high-volume institution varied from 2 to more than 33 procedures per year. The pooled odds ratio of mortality rate in low- vs high-volume centres was 2.0 [95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.6-2.4; P < 0.001]. Some studies divided centres into more than two groups and compared the highest and lowest volume groups. The pooled odds ratio of mortality rate for this comparison type was 3.2 (95 % CI, 1.7-5.8; P < 0.001). Funnel plots suggest possible publication bias. There was inadequate data to compare morbidity. Only two of seven studies demonstrated a shorter length of stay in the high-volume centres. There was no convincing volume effect on long-term survival.

conclusionsThis study suggests a strong relationship between volume and perioperative mortality. No difference in morbidity, length of stay or survival was demonstrated.

Indexed as

HepatectomyHospitals, High-VolumeHospitals, Low-VolumeHumansLength of StaySurvival Analysis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.