Literature DB >> 17155974

Self-reported volume of radical prostatectomies among urologists in the USA.

Thomas D Denberg1, Robert C Flanigan, Fernando J Kim, Richard M Hoffman, John F Steiner.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the variability in the volume of radical retropubic prostatectomy (RP) performed by urologists in the USA, and the physician characteristics that predict RP volume, as previous studies showed that individual surgeon volume for RP is associated with clinical outcomes.
METHODS: In a nationwide, representative survey of 2000 urologists who treat prostate carcinoma in the USA, we asked respondents to indicate a numerical range of RPs they perform each year (none, 1-10, 11-30, and >30, the last which we defined as 'high volume'). We then identified characteristics of the provider and practice associated with a high volume of RPs. Supplementing survey results with other national data, we estimated the proportion of all RPs in the USA performed by 'high-volume' urologists.
RESULTS: The survey response rate was 66.1% (1313 urologists) with no differences between the respondents and non-respondents for the measured demographic variables. Among urologists who performed RPs (89.1% of the sample), 37.3% did < or = 10, 46.9% 11-30 and 15.8% >30 RPs/year. Academic and urological oncology fellowship-trained urologists were, respectively, 41% and 27% more likely than private-practice and non-fellowship-trained urologists to have a high volume of RPs. Of all RPs performed yearly in the USA, only an estimated 46.1% were by high-volume urologists.
CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of urologists report a RP volume that might be associated with higher rates of cardiac, respiratory, vascular, wound-healing, and genitourinary complications. Further study is needed to characterize the possible relationships between RP volume and tumour recurrence, survival, and long-term erectile dysfunction and incontinence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17155974     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06649.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  4 in total

1.  Adding a newly trained surgeon into a high-volume robotic prostatectomy group: are outcomes compromised?

Authors:  Luchen Wang; Mireya Diaz; Hans Stricker; James O Peabody; Mani Menon; Craig G Rogers
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-06-27

2.  Arguments against investing widely in robotic prostatectomy in Canada: a wrong focus on tool box rather than surgical expertise.

Authors:  Yves Fradet
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  Baseline serum testosterone in men treated with androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Mack Roach; Kyounghwa Bae; Colleen Lawton; B J Donnelly; David Grignon; Gerald E Hanks; Arthur Porter; Herbert Lepor; Varagur Venketesan; Howard Sandler
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-04-08       Impact factor: 7.038

4.  A da Vinci robot system can make sense for a mature laparoscopic prostatectomy program.

Authors:  Peter L Steinberg; Paul A Merguerian; William Bihrle; John A Heaney; John D Seigne
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2008 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.172

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.