Literature DB >> 16905980

Should cystectomy only be performed at high-volume hospitals by high-volume surgeons?

Peter C Black1, Gordon A Brown, Colin P Dinney.   

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Monitoring and improving the quality of healthcare is an evolving process that involves patients, physicians, and healthcare purchasers. Growing interest is seen in addressing quality concerns with policy changes. Surgeon and hospital volumes for specific high-risk procedures have been shown to be predictive of posttreatment outcome, but debate continues as to if the evidence justifies changes in practices. We reviewed the literature for robust evidence that surgeon and hospital volumes are markers of improved outcome of radical cystectomy. RECENT
FINDINGS: Outcome can be measured by postoperative mortality, as well as complication rate, recurrence rate, and several other factors. Evidence suggests that outcome is improved after cystectomy performed at high-volume centers and by high-volume surgeons. The limitations of volume-based referral policies are discussed, and the use of alternative strategies is reviewed.
SUMMARY: A significant regionalization of cystectomy has already been established. Owing to their limitations, however, volume-based referral systems have not been embraced by all parties. New strategies will continue to evolve, and validation of these strategies will be required before clinical implementation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16905980     DOI: 10.1097/01.mou.0000240307.85829.7a

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Opin Urol        ISSN: 0963-0643            Impact factor:   2.309


  7 in total

1.  Bladder cancer: are provider volumes a suitable measure of quality of care?

Authors:  Rowan G Casey; Alan I So
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-06-14       Impact factor: 14.432

2.  Impact of provider volume on operative mortality after radical cystectomy in a publicly funded healthcare system.

Authors:  Girish S Kulkarni; David R Urbach; Peter C Austin; Neil E Fleshner; Andreas Laupacis
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  Outcome of treatment of bladder cancer: a comparison between low-volume hospitals and an oncology centre.

Authors:  R R de Vries; O Visser; J A Nieuwenhuijzen; S Horenblas
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2010-02-04       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Identification of underserved areas for urologic cancer care.

Authors:  Matthew Mossanen; Jason Izard; Jonathan L Wright; Jonathan D Harper; Michael P Porter; Kenn B Daratha; Sarah K Holt; John L Gore
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-02-12       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Variations in referral patterns for hypophysectomies among pediatric patients with sellar and parasellar tumors.

Authors:  Debraj Mukherjee; Hasan A Zaidi; Thomas A Kosztowski; Aditya Halthore; George I Jallo; Roberto Salvatori; David C Chang; Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 1.475

6.  Causes, Timing, Hospital Costs and Perioperative Outcomes of Index vs Nonindex Hospital Readmissions after Radical Cystectomy: Implications for Regionalization of Care.

Authors:  Meera R Chappidi; Max Kates; C J Stimson; Michael H Johnson; Phillip M Pierorazio; Trinity J Bivalacqua
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-08-18       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal neobladder diversion: The Karolinska experience.

Authors:  Justin W Collins; P Sooriakumaran; R Sanchez-Salas; R Ahonen; T Nyberg; N P Wiklund; A Hosseini
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2014-07
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.