BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery has been widely adopted for radical prostatectomy. We hypothesized that this change is rapidly shifting procedures away from hospitals that do not offer robotics and consequently increasing patient travel. METHODS: A population-based observational study of all prostatectomies for cancer in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania from 2000 to 2009 was performed using hospital discharge data. Hospital procedure volume was defined as the number of prostatectomies performed for cancer in a given year. Straight-line travel distance to the treating hospital was calculated for each case. Hospitals were contacted to determine the year of acquisition of the first robot. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2009, the total number of prostatectomies performed annually increased substantially. The increase occurred almost entirely at the very high-volume centers (≥ 106 prostatectomies/year). The number of hospitals performing prostatectomy fell 37% from 2000 to 2009. By 2009, the 9% (21/244) of hospitals that had very high volume performed 57% of all prostatectomies, and the 35% (86/244) of hospitals with a robot performed 85% of all prostatectomies. The median travel distance increased 54% from 2000 to 2009 (P<.001). The proportion of patients traveling ≥ 15 miles increased from 24% to 40% (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Over the past decade, the number of radical prostatectomies performed has risen substantially. These procedures have been increasingly centralized at high-volume centers, leading to longer patient travel distances. Few prostatectomies are now performed at hospitals that do not offer robotic surgery.
BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery has been widely adopted for radical prostatectomy. We hypothesized that this change is rapidly shifting procedures away from hospitals that do not offer robotics and consequently increasing patient travel. METHODS: A population-based observational study of all prostatectomies for cancer in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania from 2000 to 2009 was performed using hospital discharge data. Hospital procedure volume was defined as the number of prostatectomies performed for cancer in a given year. Straight-line travel distance to the treating hospital was calculated for each case. Hospitals were contacted to determine the year of acquisition of the first robot. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2009, the total number of prostatectomies performed annually increased substantially. The increase occurred almost entirely at the very high-volume centers (≥ 106 prostatectomies/year). The number of hospitals performing prostatectomy fell 37% from 2000 to 2009. By 2009, the 9% (21/244) of hospitals that had very high volume performed 57% of all prostatectomies, and the 35% (86/244) of hospitals with a robot performed 85% of all prostatectomies. The median travel distance increased 54% from 2000 to 2009 (P<.001). The proportion of patients traveling ≥ 15 miles increased from 24% to 40% (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Over the past decade, the number of radical prostatectomies performed has risen substantially. These procedures have been increasingly centralized at high-volume centers, leading to longer patient travel distances. Few prostatectomies are now performed at hospitals that do not offer robotic surgery.
Authors: Vincenzo Ficarra; Giacomo Novara; Walter Artibani; Andrea Cestari; Antonio Galfano; Markus Graefen; Giorgio Guazzoni; Bertrand Guillonneau; Mani Menon; Francesco Montorsi; Vipul Patel; Jens Rassweiler; Hendrik Van Poppel Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2009-01-25 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Daniel A Barocas; Shady Salem; Yakup Kordan; S Duke Herrell; Sam S Chang; Peter E Clark; Rodney Davis; Roxelyn Baumgartner; Sharon Phillips; Michael S Cookson; Joseph A Smith Journal: J Urol Date: 2010-01-18 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: James Mohler; Robert R Bahnson; Barry Boston; J Erik Busby; Anthony D'Amico; James A Eastham; Charles A Enke; Daniel George; Eric Mark Horwitz; Robert P Huben; Philip Kantoff; Mark Kawachi; Michael Kuettel; Paul H Lange; Gary Macvicar; Elizabeth R Plimack; Julio M Pow-Sang; Mack Roach; Eric Rohren; Bruce J Roth; Dennis C Shrieve; Matthew R Smith; Sandy Srinivas; Przemyslaw Twardowski; Patrick C Walsh Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Colin B Begg; Elyn R Riedel; Peter B Bach; Michael W Kattan; Deborah Schrag; Joan L Warren; Peter T Scardino Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-04-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jim C Hu; Xiangmei Gu; Stuart R Lipsitz; Michael J Barry; Anthony V D'Amico; Aaron C Weinberg; Nancy L Keating Journal: JAMA Date: 2009-10-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Robert E Mitchell; Byron T Lee; Michael S Cookson; Daniel A Barocas; S Duke Herrell; Peter E Clark; Joseph A Smith; Sam S Chang Journal: BJU Int Date: 2009-08-13 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Stephen A Poon; Jonathan L Silberstein; Caroline Savage; Alexandra C Maschino; William T Lowrance; Jaspreet S Sandhu Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-05-15 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Philipp Mandel; Su J Oh; Christoph Hagner; Pierre Tennstedt; Maximilian C Kriegmair; Hartwig Huland; Markus Graefen; Derya Tilki Journal: World J Urol Date: 2016-03-22 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Ganesh Sivarajan; Glen B Taksler; Dawn Walter; Cary P Gross; Raul E Sosa; Danil V Makarov Journal: Med Care Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Geoffrey A Sonn; Andrew S Behesnilian; Ziyue Karen Jiang; Kirstin A Zettlitz; Eric J Lepin; Laurent A Bentolila; Scott M Knowles; Daniel Lawrence; Anna M Wu; Robert E Reiter Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2015-10-21 Impact factor: 12.531