LAUSR

BACKGROUND The use of the American College of Surgeons (ACS) NSQIP has increased in hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery (HPB) research as it provides access to high-quality surgical outcome data on a national scale. Using the ACS-NSQIP database, this study examined the methodological reporting of HPB publications. STUDY DESIGN Web of Science core collection (all editions) was queried for all HPB studies using the ACS-NSQIP database published between 2004 and 2022. In addition, a critical appraisal was performed using the JAMA (Journal of American Medical Association)-Surgery Checklist, STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) Statement, and RECORD (Reporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected Health Data) Statement. RESULTS In total, 276 studies were included in the analysis. The median scores for the JAMA-Surgery Checklist, RECORD Statement, and STROBE Statement were 4 of 7 (IQR 3, 5), 3 of 10 (IQR 2, 4), and 15 of 21 (IQR 13, 17), respectively. The criteria with the highest rates of nonadherence were discussing competing risks, clear definitions of inclusion and exclusion criteria, unadjusted and adjusted outcomes, provision of supplementary data, and performing subgroup analyses. Additionally, when examining checklist fulfillment of hepatobiliary studies and pancreatic studies separately, pancreatic studies demonstrated significantly greater fulfillment of the STROBE Statement checklist items. CONCLUSION Satisfactory reporting of methodology is present among HPB studies utilizing the ACS-NSQIP database, with multiple opportunities for improvement. Areas for improved adherence include discussing competing risks, providing supplementary information, and performing appropriate subgroup analysis. Given the increasing role of large-scale databases in surgical research, enhanced commitment to reporting guidelines may advance HPB research and ensure quality reporting.