Risk factors for a high Comprehensive Complication Index score after major hepatectomy for biliary cancer: a study of 229 patients at a single institution

26Citations
Citations of this article
35Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background The Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) is a new tool to evaluate the postoperative condition by calculating the sum of all complications weighted by their severity. The aim of this study was to identify independent risk factors for a high CCI score (≥40) in 229 patients after major hepatectomies with biliary reconstruction for biliary cancers. Methods The CCI was calculated online via www.assessurgery.com. Independent risk factors were identified by multivariable analysis. Results 57 (25%) patients were classified as having CCI ≥ 40. On multivariable analysis, volume of intraoperative blood loss (≥2.5 L) (p = 0.004) and combined pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) (p = 0.006) were independent risk factors for CCI ≥ 40. A high level of maximum serum total bilirubin was identified as independent risk factors for a high volume of intraoperative blood loss. Liver failure (p = 0.046) was more frequent in patients with combined PD than in those without. Discussion Patients who undergo preoperative external biliary drainage for severe jaundice might have impaired production of coagulation factors. When blood loss during liver transection becomes difficult to control, surgeons should consider various strategies, such as second-stage biliary or pancreatic reconstruction. In patients planned to undergo major hepatectomy with combined PD, preoperative portal vein embolization is mandatory to prevent postoperative liver failure.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nakanishi, Y., Tsuchikawa, T., Okamura, K., Nakamura, T., Tamoto, E., Noji, T., … Hirano, S. (2016). Risk factors for a high Comprehensive Complication Index score after major hepatectomy for biliary cancer: a study of 229 patients at a single institution. HPB, 18(9), 735–741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpb.2016.06.013

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free