SynthesisBMC gastroenterology2026
Volume-outcome relationship in anatomical and non-anatomical liver resections: a rapid systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC gastroenterology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite considerable advancements in recent decades, mortality and complications following liver resection remain high. The volume-outcome relationship has been the subject of extensive research and offers relevant potential for improvement of surgical outcomes. This review aims to examine the impact of hospital and surgeon volume on patient-relevant outcomes in liver resections and synthesize the available evidence.
methodsA rapid systematic literature review was conducted, searching CENTRAL, Embase, PubMed, and study registries for articles published from 2000 to 2023. Eligible studies investigated the association between hospital or surgeon volume and patient-relevant outcomes in anatomical and non-anatomical liver resections. Study quality was assessed using the ISPOR and ROBINS-E checklists and reported alongside the results. The review protocol registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023398566).
resultsThe search yielded 3287 records, of which 38 publications met the inclusion criteria. All included studies were retrospective observational studies. A higher surgical volume was associated with improved patient-relevant outcomes, such as reduced mortality following both anatomical and non-anatomical liver resections and lower rates of postoperative complications. However, the results indicate that the impact of hospital or surgeon volume is limited and likely depends on the respective outcome parameter. A considerable gap remains with respect to long-term outcomes and quality of life, and studies investigating surgeon volume are scarce.
conclusionThe findings provide evidence supporting a positive association between higher hospital volume and improved patient-relevant outcomes in liver resection. However, surgeon volume remains underexplored and the evidence from subgroups indicates that the impact of hospital or surgeon volume likely depends on study quality, procedure type, volume thresholds, and respective outcome parameters. Patient care could benefit from further research on long-term outcomes as well as quality of life, for which the current evidence is scarce.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.