Salloum, Chady

Objective: To establish benchmark cutoffs for robotic liver resection (R-LR), encompassing both major and minor resections, and to determine the impact of patient selection on outcomes. Background: R-LR is a key advancement in minimally invasive liver surgery but lacks standardized benchmarks, especially for minor resections. While guidelines endorse R-LR, its role in optimizing outcomes remains unclear. This study establishes the first benchmarks for R-LR, enabling comparisons across surgical modalities and refining patient selection. Methods: This retrospective, multicenter study analyzed consecutive adult patients undergoing R-LR at 30 international centers (2020–2023). Benchmark centers had an annual case volume of ≥15 R-LR. Benchmark criteria included ASA ≤2, no major comorbidities, no prior liver resections, and Child-Pugh A status. Benchmark cutoffs for 14 key outcomes were set at the 50th and 75th percentiles of median values across benchmark centers. Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of textbook outcomes. Results: Eighteen high-volume centers contributed 4028 cases with 2632 (65.3%) meeting benchmark criteria. Malignancy was the indication in 29.6%, most commonly hepatocellular carcinoma followed by colorectal liver metastases. Major liver resection was performed in 42.6%. The distribution of Iwate difficulty scores was low (25.4%), intermediate (53.9%), advanced (15.9%), and expert (4.9%). Benchmark cutoffs were established for minor and major resection, and stratified by Iwate low (0-3), intermediate (4-6) and high (7-12): Open conversion (≤6.5% minor, ≤10.5% major), major complications within 90 days (≤5.2% minor, ≤16.7% major), R1 resection (≤9.2% minor, ≤6.7% major). Benchmark cases performed at low-volume centers were able to achieve outcomes within the corresponding benchmark cutoffs. In fact, patient selection reflected by the proportion of benchmark patients, rather than case volume, was associated with textbook outcomes. Conclusions: This study defines R-LR benchmarks, emphasizing patient selection over center volume for optimal outcomes. Benchmark cutoffs guide training and support the expansion of R-LR.

Objective: To detail the implementation of a dedicated liver surgery program at a university-affiliated hospital and to analyze its impact on the community, workforce, workload, complexity of cases, the short-term outcomes, and residents and young faculties progression toward technical autonomy and academic production. Background: Due to the increased burden of liver tumors worldwide, there is an increased need for liver centers to better serve the community and facilitate the education of trainees in this field. Methods: The implementation of the program is described. The 3 domains of workload, research, and teaching were compared between 2-year periods before and after the implementation of the new program. The severity of disease, complexity of procedures, and subsequent morbidity and mortality were compared. Results: Compared with the 2-year period before the implementation of the new program, the number of liver resections increased by 36% within 2 years. The number of highly complex resections, the number of liver resections performed by residents and young faculties, and the number of publications increased 5.5-, 40-, and 6-fold, respectively. This was achieved by operating on more severe patients and performing more complex procedures, at the cost of a significant increase in morbidity but not mortality. Nevertheless, operations during the second period did not emerge as an independent predictor of severe morbidity. Conclusions: A new liver surgery program can fill the gap between the demand for and supply of liver surgeries, benefiting the community and the development of the next generation of liver surgeons.