Literature DB >> 21170853

Radical prostatectomy practice in England.

Vishwanath S Hanchanale1, John E McCabe, Pradip Javlé.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: As there is paucity of data on radical prostatectomy (RP) as a primary treatment for patients with localized prostate cancer, we analyzed the trends in the RP practice in England.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was carried out on 14 300 patients who underwent RP for carcinoma of the prostate. Database was prepared from hospital episode statistics of the Department of Health in England. National trends in RP practice were summarized as well as volume outcome analysis.
RESULTS: Annual number of RPs exponentially increased from 972 (1998 to 1999) to 3092 (2004 to 2005). Laparoscopic RPs increased from 2 to 257 over the study period. Median waiting duration increased by more than 10 days (13 days). Significant decrease in median length of hospital stay from 8 (range, 7 to 10) days to 6 (range, 5 to 8) days was observed (P < .001). More than 90% mortality was seen in patients of ≥ 60 years of age. Significant inverse correlation was found between the hospital volume (Odds Ratio: 0.40) and in-hospital mortality rate following RP. High volume surgeons (≥ 16) and high volume hospitals (≥ 26) had significantly lower mortality (Odds Ratio: 0.32) and shorter in-hospital stay in comparison to low volume surgeons and hospitals.
CONCLUSION: There is an exponential increase in the number of RPs with an increasing trend towards laparoscopic RP in England. This study showed a significant inverse correlation between provider volume (hospital and surgeon) and outcome (in-hospital mortality and hospital stay) for RP in England; thus, supporting the recommendations for centralization of care for complex radical procedures, including RP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21170853

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol J        ISSN: 1735-1308            Impact factor:   1.510


  7 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair in patients previously having prostatectomy is feasible, safe, and effective.

Authors:  Philip Le Page; Ania Smialkowski; Jonathan Morton; Douglas Fenton-Lee
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-07-23       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Prostatic biopsies in selected men aged 75 years and older guide key clinical management decisions.

Authors:  A L Paterson; M K Sut; A R Khan; H K Sharma
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2013-07-30       Impact factor: 2.370

4.  Robots drive the German radical prostatectomy market: a total population analysis from 2006 to 2013.

Authors:  C Groeben; R Koch; M Baunacke; M P Wirth; J Huber
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2016-08-23       Impact factor: 5.554

5.  Developing a robotic prostatectomy service and a robotic fellowship programme - defining the learning curve.

Authors:  Nikhil Vasdev; Conrad Bishop; Atoine Kass-Iliyya; Sami Hamid; Thomas A McNicholas; Venkat Prasad; Gowrie Mohan-S; Timothy Lane; Gregory Boustead; James M Adshead
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2014-02-10

6.  Factors predicting hospital length-of-stay after radical prostatectomy: a population-based study.

Authors:  Maria Kelly; Linda Sharp; Fiona Dwane; Tracy Kelleher; Frances J Drummond; Harry Comber
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-07-02       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Trends in UK regional cancer mortality 1991-2007.

Authors:  Dominic C Marshall; Thomas E Webb; Richard A Hall; Justin D Salciccioli; Raghib Ali; Mahiben Maruthappu
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 7.640

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.