OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of surgeon volume on patient outcomes in gynecologic laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: We reviewed all patients who underwent a laparoscopic procedure between January 2000 and December 2008. Surgeons were divided into 3 groups based on surgical volume. The mean number of surgeries per year was calculated for each surgeon. Means were categorized into 3 groups. The low-, medium-, and high-volume surgeon groups were compared with respect to level of surgical complexity and intraoperative and postoperative complications. RESULTS: The study included 829 surgeries. Low-volume surgeons (n=5) performed 5 (31.3%) low-complexity, 10 (62.5%) intermediate-complexity, and 1 (6.3%) high-complexity procedures. Medium-volume surgeons (n=6) performed 26 (11.1%) low-complexity, 203 (86.8%) intermediate-complexity, and 5 (2.1%) high-complexity procedures. High-volume surgeons (n=5) performed 47 (8.1%) low-complexity, 439 (75.8%) intermediate-complexity, and 93 (16.1%) high-complexity procedures. The distribution of surgical complexity was significantly different between the 3 groups of surgeons defined by volume (P<0.001). Conversion rates were higher for low-volume surgeons when compared to high-volume surgeons (18.8% vs. 5.2%; P=0.04). Similarly, overall complication rates (<30 days) were higher for low-volume surgeons compared to high-volume surgeons (31.3% vs. 17%, P=0.003). Mean length of hospital stay was longer for low-volume (2.4 days) than for medium-volume (1.3 days) and high-volume surgeons (1.6 days) (P=0.003). CONCLUSION: High- and medium-volume gynecologic laparoscopists performed a greater proportion of intermediate- and high-complexity procedures than did low-volume surgeons. High-volume surgeons have a lower rate of conversions, overall postoperative complications, and shorter mean length of hospital stay when compared to low volume surgeons. Copyright Â
OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of surgeon volume on patient outcomes in gynecologic laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: We reviewed all patients who underwent a laparoscopic procedure between January 2000 and December 2008. Surgeons were divided into 3 groups based on surgical volume. The mean number of surgeries per year was calculated for each surgeon. Means were categorized into 3 groups. The low-, medium-, and high-volume surgeon groups were compared with respect to level of surgical complexity and intraoperative and postoperative complications. RESULTS: The study included 829 surgeries. Low-volume surgeons (n=5) performed 5 (31.3%) low-complexity, 10 (62.5%) intermediate-complexity, and 1 (6.3%) high-complexity procedures. Medium-volume surgeons (n=6) performed 26 (11.1%) low-complexity, 203 (86.8%) intermediate-complexity, and 5 (2.1%) high-complexity procedures. High-volume surgeons (n=5) performed 47 (8.1%) low-complexity, 439 (75.8%) intermediate-complexity, and 93 (16.1%) high-complexity procedures. The distribution of surgical complexity was significantly different between the 3 groups of surgeons defined by volume (P<0.001). Conversion rates were higher for low-volume surgeons when compared to high-volume surgeons (18.8% vs. 5.2%; P=0.04). Similarly, overall complication rates (<30 days) were higher for low-volume surgeons compared to high-volume surgeons (31.3% vs. 17%, P=0.003). Mean length of hospital stay was longer for low-volume (2.4 days) than for medium-volume (1.3 days) and high-volume surgeons (1.6 days) (P=0.003). CONCLUSION: High- and medium-volume gynecologic laparoscopists performed a greater proportion of intermediate- and high-complexity procedures than did low-volume surgeons. High-volume surgeons have a lower rate of conversions, overall postoperative complications, and shorter mean length of hospital stay when compared to low volume surgeons. Copyright Â
Authors: Nicholas G Csikesz; Anand Singla; Melissa M Murphy; Jennifer F Tseng; Shimul A Shah Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2009-11-13 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Justin B Dimick; James C Stanley; David A Axelrod; Andris Kazmers; Peter K Henke; Lloyd A Jacobs; Thomas W Wakefield; Lazar J Greenfield; Gilbert R Upchurch Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: John A Cowan; Justin B Dimick; B Gregory Thompson; James C Stanley; Gilbert R Upchurch Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: James T McPhee; Joshua S Hill; Giles F Whalen; Maksim Zayaruzny; Demetrius E Litwin; Mary E Sullivan; Frederick A Anderson; Jennifer F Tseng Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Justin B Dimick; Peter J Pronovost; John A Cowan; Pamela A Lipsett; James C Stanley; Gilbert R Upchurch Journal: Surgery Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Robert W Eppsteiner; Nicholas G Csikesz; James T McPhee; Jennifer F Tseng; Shimul A Shah Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Randa J Jalloul; Alpa M Nick; Mark F Munsell; Shannon N Westin; Pedro T Ramirez; Michael Frumovitz; Pamela T Soliman Journal: J Gynecol Oncol Date: 2018-05-04 Impact factor: 4.401
Authors: Miranda P Steenbeek; Laura A M van Lieshout; Johanna W M Aarts; Jurgen M J Piek; Sjors F P J Coppus; Leon F A G Massuger; Rosella P M G Hermens; Joanne A de Hullu Journal: J Gynecol Oncol Date: 2018-04-30 Impact factor: 4.401