PURPOSE: The choice between liver transplantation (LT), liver resection (LR), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) as initial therapy for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial, yet little is known about how surgeons choose therapy for individual patients. We sought to quantify the impact of both clinical factors and surgeon specialty on surgical decision making in early HCC by using conjoint analysis. METHODS: Surgeons with an interest in liver surgery were invited to complete a Web-based survey including 10 case scenarios. Choice of therapy was then analyzed by using regression models that included both clinical factors and surgeon specialty (non-LT v LT). RESULTS: When assessing early HCC occurrences, non-LT surgeons (50% LR; 41% LT; 9% RFA) made significantly different recommendations compared with LT surgeons (63% LT; 31% LR; 6% RFA; P < .001). Clinical factors, including tumor number and size, type of resection required, and platelet count, had significant effects on the choice between LR, LT, and RFA. After adjusting for clinical factors, non-LT surgeons remained more likely than LT surgeons to choose LR compared with LT (relative risk ratio [RRR], 2.67). When the weight of each clinical factor was allowed to vary by surgeon specialty, the residual independent effect of surgeon specialty on the decision between LR and LT was negligible (RRR, 0.93). CONCLUSION: The impact of surgeon specialty on choice of therapy for early HCC is stronger than that of some clinical factors. However, the influence of surgeon specialty does not merely reflect an across-the-board preference for one therapy over another. Rather, certain clinical factors are weighed differently by surgeons in different specialties.
PURPOSE: The choice between liver transplantation (LT), liver resection (LR), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) as initial therapy for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial, yet little is known about how surgeons choose therapy for individual patients. We sought to quantify the impact of both clinical factors and surgeon specialty on surgical decision making in early HCC by using conjoint analysis. METHODS: Surgeons with an interest in liver surgery were invited to complete a Web-based survey including 10 case scenarios. Choice of therapy was then analyzed by using regression models that included both clinical factors and surgeon specialty (non-LT v LT). RESULTS: When assessing early HCC occurrences, non-LT surgeons (50% LR; 41% LT; 9% RFA) made significantly different recommendations compared with LT surgeons (63% LT; 31% LR; 6% RFA; P < .001). Clinical factors, including tumor number and size, type of resection required, and platelet count, had significant effects on the choice between LR, LT, and RFA. After adjusting for clinical factors, non-LT surgeons remained more likely than LT surgeons to choose LR compared with LT (relative risk ratio [RRR], 2.67). When the weight of each clinical factor was allowed to vary by surgeon specialty, the residual independent effect of surgeon specialty on the decision between LR and LT was negligible (RRR, 0.93). CONCLUSION: The impact of surgeon specialty on choice of therapy for early HCC is stronger than that of some clinical factors. However, the influence of surgeon specialty does not merely reflect an across-the-board preference for one therapy over another. Rather, certain clinical factors are weighed differently by surgeons in different specialties.
Authors: B J Bouma; J H P van der Meulen; R B A van den Brink; A Smidts; E C Cheriex; H P Hamer; A E R Arnold; A H Zwinderman; K I Lie; J G P Tijssen Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: B J Bouma; J H van der Meulen; R B van den Brink; A E Arnold; A Smidts; L H Teunter; K I Lie; J G Tijssen Journal: Heart Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: J Figueras; L Ibañez; E Ramos; E Jaurrieta; J Ortiz-de-Urbina; F Pardo; J Mir; C Loinaz; L Herrera; P López-Cillero; J Santoyo Journal: Liver Transpl Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 5.799
Authors: Emily C Bellavance; Kimberly M Lumpkins; Gilles Mentha; Hugo P Marques; Lorenzo Capussotti; Carlo Pulitano; Pietro Majno; Paulo Mira; Laura Rubbia-Brandt; Alessandro Ferrero; Luca Aldrighetti; Steven Cunningham; Nadia Russolillo; Benjamin Philosophe; Eduardo Barroso; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2008-08-15 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Lucas M Bachmann; Andrea Mühleisen; Annekatrin Bock; Gerben ter Riet; Ulrike Held; Alfons G H Kessels Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2008-07-30 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Gaya Spolverato; Alessandro Vitale; Aslam Ejaz; Yuhree Kim; Shishir K Maithel; David P Cosgrove; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: World J Surg Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Hari Nathan; John F Bridges; David P Cosgrove; Luis A Diaz; Daniel A Laheru; Joseph M Herman; Richard D Schulick; Barish H Edil; Christopher L Wolfgang; Michael A Choti; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2012-08-09 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Jean-Michel Aubin; Alexsander K Bressan; Sean C Grondin; Elijah Dixon; Anthony R MacLean; Sean Gregg; Patricia Tang; Gilaad G Kaplan; Guillaume Martel; Chad G Ball Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Leonidas G Koniaris; David M Levi; Felipe E Pedroso; Dido Franceschi; Andreas G Tzakis; Juan A Santamaria-Barria; Jennifer Tang; Marissa Anderson; Subhasis Misra; Naveenraj L Solomon; Xiaoling Jin; Peter J DiPasco; Margaret M Byrne; Teresa A Zimmers Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: John F P Bridges; Lara Slawik; Annette Schmeding; Jens Reimer; Dieter Naber; Olaf Kuhnigk Journal: Health Expect Date: 2011-06-14 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Omar Hyder; Rebecca M Dodson; Hari Nathan; Joseph M Herman; David Cosgrove; Ihab Kamel; Jean-Francois H Geschwind; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2013-09-13 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Yu-Ning Wong; Brian L Egleston; Kush Sachdeva; Naa Eghan; Melanie Pirollo; Tammy K Stump; John Robert Beck; Katrina Armstrong; Jerome Sanford Schwartz; Neal J Meropol Journal: Med Care Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 2.983