Literature DB >> 15812583

Relationship between surgeon caseload and sphincter preservation in patients with rectal cancer.

Harriett Purves1, Ricardo Pietrobon, Sheleika Hervey, Ulrich Guller, William Miller, Kirk Ludwig.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine by means of a national database whether higher surgeon caseload correlates with greater utilization of sphincter-sparing procedures than of abdominoperineal resections in treatment of patients with rectal cancer.
METHODS: Patients with a primary International Classification of Diseases-9 diagnosis code of rectal cancer who underwent a sphincter-sparing procedure or abdominoperineal resection were selected from the 1997 Nationwide Inpatient Sample, a database that represents 20 percent of all U.S. community hospital discharges. Multivariable logistic regression models were used on a 20 percent sample of this database to estimate the risk-adjusted relationship between surgeon caseload volume and the odds of receiving a sphincter-sparing procedure. All models were adjusted for age, gender, race, hospital region, and patient comorbidity.
RESULTS: The study population (n = 477) was 70.4 percent white and 57.9 percent male with an average age of 67.6 years. The mean Deyo comorbidity score was 7.0. Patients treated by surgeons in the highest-volume category (> or =10 rectal cancer surgeries per year) compared with those treated by surgeons in the lowest-volume category (1-3 rectal cancer surgeries per year) were significantly more likely to undergo a sphincter-sparing procedure, after adjustment for other covariates (odds ratio = 5.05; 95 percent confidence interval, 2.5-10.22).
CONCLUSION: This analysis suggests that rectal cancer patients treated by high-volume surgeons are five times more likely to undergo sphincter-sparing procedures than those treated by low-volume surgeon. This has significant implications for those seeking a sphincter-preserving option for the treatment of their rectal cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15812583     DOI: 10.1007/s10350-004-0793-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  24 in total

1.  Surgical outcomes research based on administrative data: inferior or complementary to prospective randomized clinical trials?

Authors:  Ulrich Guller
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Defining the volume-quality debate: is it the surgeon, the center, or the training?

Authors:  James Merlino
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2007-08

3.  Hospital variation in sphincter preservation for elderly rectal cancer patients.

Authors:  Christopher M Dodgion; Bridget A Neville; Stuart R Lipsitz; Deborah Schrag; Elizabeth Breen; Michael J Zinner; Caprice C Greenberg
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2014-03-22       Impact factor: 2.192

Review 4.  Current concepts in rectal cancer.

Authors:  James W Fleshman; Nathan Smallwood
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2015-03

Review 5.  Building an academic colorectal division.

Authors:  Walter A Koltun
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2014-06

Review 6.  Working with existing databases.

Authors:  Melissa Murphy; Karim Alavi; Justin Maykel
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2013-03

7.  Multidisciplinary teams in the management of rectal cancer.

Authors:  Vincent J Obias; Harry L Reynolds
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2007-08

8.  Sphincter-sparing resection for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Kirk A Ludwig
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2007-08

9.  Hospital Characteristics Associated with Stage II/III Rectal Cancer Guideline Concordant Care: Analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare Data.

Authors:  Mary E Charlton; Jennifer E Hrabe; Kara B Wright; Jennifer A Schlichting; Bradley D McDowell; Thorvardur R Halfdanarson; Chi Lin; Karyn B Stitzenberg; John W Cromwell
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 10.  The effect of hospital and surgeon volume on outcomes for rectal cancer surgery.

Authors:  Talya Salz; Robert S Sandler
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 11.382

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.