BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate using national data the role of surgeon laparoscopic caseload in determining outcome following elective laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection. METHODS: All patients who underwent an elective laparoscopic primary colorectal cancer resection between 2002 and 2008 were included from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. Surgeon teams were divided into tertiles according to the mean laparoscopic caseload per year. High volume corresponded to more than 12 laparoscopic procedures per year and low volume corresponded to seven or fewer procedures per year. Outcome measures were 30-day in-hospital mortality, return to theatre (RTT), 30-day medical morbidity, 365-day medical morbidity, length of stay (LOS), and unplanned 28-day readmission. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in the number of surgeons selecting patients for the laparoscopic approach between 2002-2003 and 2007-2008. In 2002-2003, a total of 41 surgeon teams performed laparoscopic resections whereas in 2007-2008 there were 398 surgeon teams. The patients of high-volume surgeon teams had a shorter LOS [OR 0.88 (0.85-0.91), p < 0.0001]. Patients of medium-volume surgeon teams had the highest medical morbidity rates [30-day medical morbidity: OR 1.24 (1.04-1.48), p = 0.015; 365-day medical morbidity: OR 1.22 (1.04-1.45), p = 0.018]. There were no differences between the high- and low-volume groups in terms of mortality, morbidity, RTT, or readmission. CONCLUSION: Although there has been a significant increase in the number of surgeon teams offering the minimal access approach, this study has not found a consistent relationship between surgeon laparoscopic cancer surgery caseload and outcome. WHAT'S NEW IN THIS MANUSCRIPT: This is the first national study to explore the role of surgical volume in determining outcome following laparoscopic surgery. This study questions the impact of surgeon caseload on laparoscopic surgical outcome.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate using national data the role of surgeon laparoscopic caseload in determining outcome following elective laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection. METHODS: All patients who underwent an elective laparoscopic primary colorectal cancer resection between 2002 and 2008 were included from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. Surgeon teams were divided into tertiles according to the mean laparoscopic caseload per year. High volume corresponded to more than 12 laparoscopic procedures per year and low volume corresponded to seven or fewer procedures per year. Outcome measures were 30-day in-hospital mortality, return to theatre (RTT), 30-day medical morbidity, 365-day medical morbidity, length of stay (LOS), and unplanned 28-day readmission. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in the number of surgeons selecting patients for the laparoscopic approach between 2002-2003 and 2007-2008. In 2002-2003, a total of 41 surgeon teams performed laparoscopic resections whereas in 2007-2008 there were 398 surgeon teams. The patients of high-volume surgeon teams had a shorter LOS [OR 0.88 (0.85-0.91), p < 0.0001]. Patients of medium-volume surgeon teams had the highest medical morbidity rates [30-day medical morbidity: OR 1.24 (1.04-1.48), p = 0.015; 365-day medical morbidity: OR 1.22 (1.04-1.45), p = 0.018]. There were no differences between the high- and low-volume groups in terms of mortality, morbidity, RTT, or readmission. CONCLUSION: Although there has been a significant increase in the number of surgeon teams offering the minimal access approach, this study has not found a consistent relationship between surgeon laparoscopic cancer surgery caseload and outcome. WHAT'S NEW IN THIS MANUSCRIPT: This is the first national study to explore the role of surgical volume in determining outcome following laparoscopic surgery. This study questions the impact of surgeon caseload on laparoscopic surgical outcome.
Authors: John D Birkmeyer; Andrea E Siewers; Emily V A Finlayson; Therese A Stukel; F Lee Lucas; Ida Batista; H Gilbert Welch; David E Wennberg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-04-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Deborah Schrag; Katherine S Panageas; Elyn Riedel; Laura D Cramer; Jose G Guillem; Peter B Bach; Colin B Begg Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Elaine M Burns; Haris Naseem; Alex Bottle; Antonio Ivan Lazzarino; Paul Aylin; Ara Darzi; Krishna Moorthy; Omar Faiz Journal: BMJ Date: 2010-08-26
Authors: Heidi Nelson; Daniel J Sargent; H Sam Wieand; James Fleshman; Mehran Anvari; Steven J Stryker; Robert W Beart; Michael Hellinger; Richard Flanagan; Walter Peters; David Ota Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-05-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Peter J Hewett; Randall A Allardyce; Philip F Bagshaw; Christopher M Frampton; Francis A Frizelle; Nicholas A Rieger; J Shona Smith; Michael J Solomon; Jacqueline H Stephens; Andrew R L Stevenson Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: S Pucciarelli; A Chiappetta; G Giacomazzo; A Barina; N Gennaro; M Rebonato; D Nitti; M Saugo Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2015-11-16 Impact factor: 3.781