Literature DB >> 20822929

The effect of minimally invasive and open radical prostatectomy surgeon volume.

Wesley W Choi1, Xiangmei Gu, Stuart R Lipsitz, Anthony V D'Amico, Stephen B Williams, Jim C Hu.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP) surgeon volume on outcomes, and correlate with those of open radical prostatectomy retropubic (ORP). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Observational population-based study of 8,831 men undergoing MIRP and ORP by 1,457 low, medium, and high volume surgeons from SEER-Medicare linked data from 2003 to 2007. After stratifying by surgeon ORP and MIRP volume, the following outcomes were studied: length of stay, transfusions, post-operative 30-day and anastomotic stricture complications, and use of additional cancer therapies.
RESULTS: Men undergoing MIRP with high and medium vs. low volume surgeons were less likely to require additional cancer therapies (4.5% and 4.7% vs. 7%, P = 0.020). Similarly, men undergoing ORP with high vs. medium and low volume surgeons were less likely to require additional cancer therapies (5.7% vs. 6.8% and 7.1%, P = 0.044). Men undergoing ORP with high vs. medium and low volume surgeons experienced shorter lengths of stay (2.9 vs. 3.3 and 3.6 days, P < 0.001), and fewer transfusions (15.4% vs. 21.3% and 22.7%, P = 0.017), 30-day complications (18.4% vs. 25.6% and 25.7%, P < 0.001), and anastomotic strictures (10.1% vs. 15.6% and 16.3%, P = 0.003). However, MIRP surgeon volume did not affect these outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Men undergoing MIRP or ORP with high volume surgeons were less likely to require additional cancer therapies. Additionally, patients of high volume ORP surgeons were more likely to experience shorter hospital stays, fewer transfusions, 30-day complications, and anastomotic strictures, while MIRP surgeon volume did not affect these peri-operative outcomes.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20822929     DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2010.06.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol Oncol        ISSN: 1078-1439            Impact factor:   3.498


  9 in total

Review 1.  Quality of evidence to compare outcomes of open and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy.

Authors:  Branden Duffey; Briony Varda; Badrinath Konety
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 2.  A systematic review of the volume-outcome relationship for radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Quoc-Dien Trinh; Anders Bjartell; Stephen J Freedland; Brent K Hollenbeck; Jim C Hu; Shahrokh F Shariat; Maxine Sun; Andrew J Vickers
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2013-04-19       Impact factor: 20.096

3.  Effect of radical prostatectomy surgeon volume on complication rates from a large population-based cohort.

Authors:  Ashraf Almatar; Christopher J D Wallis; Sender Herschorn; Refik Saskin; Girish S Kulkarni; Ronald T Kodama; Robert K Nam
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 4.  Does robotic prostatectomy meet its promise in the management of prostate cancer?

Authors:  Kuo-How Huang; Stacey C Carter; Jim C Hu
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  Trends in immediate perioperative morbidity and delay in discharge after open and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (RP): a 20-year institutional experience.

Authors:  Phillip M Pierorazio; Jeffrey K Mullins; Ashley E Ross; Elias S Hyams; Alan W Partin; Misop Han; Patrick C Walsh; Edward M Schaeffer; Christian P Pavlovich; Mohamad E Allaf; Trinity J Bivalacqua
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 5.588

6.  Access to high-volume surgeons and the opportunity cost of performing radical prostatectomy by low-volume providers.

Authors:  Afsaneh Barzi; Eric A Klein; Siamak Daneshmand; Inderbir Gill; David I Quinn; Sarmad Sadeghi
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 3.498

7.  Prostatectomy at high-volume centers improves outcomes and lowers the costs of care for prostate cancer.

Authors:  A Barzi; E A Klein; T B Dorff; D I Quinn; S Sadeghi
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2015-12-15       Impact factor: 5.554

8.  Patterns and characteristics of patients' selection of cancer surgeons.

Authors:  Natalie J Del Vecchio; Natoshia M Askelson; Knute D Carter; Elizabeth Chrischilles; Charles F Lynch; Mary E Charlton
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2020-10-15       Impact factor: 2.565

9.  The cost-utility of open prostatectomy compared with active surveillance in early localised prostate cancer.

Authors:  Florian Koerber; Raphaela Waidelich; Björn Stollenwerk; Wolf Rogowski
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-04-10       Impact factor: 2.655

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.