Literature DB >> 24380984

Comparison of the outcomes for laparoscopic gastrectomy performed by the same surgeon between a low-volume hospital and a high-volume center.

Min Gyu Kim1, Sung Joon Kwon.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The volume-outcome relationship in laparoscopic surgery is controversial. This study was designed to identify differences in laparoscopic gastrectomy outcomes between a low-volume hospital and a high-volume center and to provide guidelines for overcoming the problems associated with a low-volume hospital.
METHODS: From April 2009 to November 2012, one surgeon performed 134 totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomies (TLDGs) at a high-volume center (HVC; ASAN Medical Center) and at a low-volume hospital (LVH; Hanyang University Guri Hospital). All laparoscopically assisted gastrectomies were excluded from this study. During the early period of laparoscopic gastrectomy at the low-volume hospital, TLDG with Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy (RYGJ) was performed according to the surgeon's choice. The reconstruction method was classified as gastroduodenostomy (GD) or RYGJ. Early surgical outcomes achieved at the LVH were investigated and compared with those obtained at the HVC.
RESULTS: The early surgical outcomes differed significantly between the two hospitals. In particular, the postoperative complication rate for the patients who underwent TLDG RYGJ at the LVH was higher than at the HVC (LVH 15.4 % vs. HVC 0 %; p = 0.037). Furthermore, significant differences were observed in the mean operation time (TLDG GD: LVH 141.0 min vs. HVC 117.4 min, p = 0.001; TLDG RYGJ: LVH 186.3 min vs. HVC 134.6 min, p = 0.009) and length of hospital stay (TLDG GD: LVH 8.1 days vs. HVC 7.2 days, p = 0.044; TLDG RYGJ: LVH 11.5 day vs. HVC 6.8 day, p = 0.009).
CONCLUSIONS: Although all the operations were performed by one experienced surgeon, the early surgical outcomes differed significantly between the low- and high-volume hospitals. Low-volume hospitals often lack well-trained surgical professionals such as first assistants and scrub nurses. Therefore, the authors recommend that a surgeon who works at an LVH should assess potential personnel shortages and find a solution before operating.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24380984     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-013-3352-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  32 in total

1.  Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States.

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

2.  Volume and outcome relationship in bariatric surgery in the laparoscopic era.

Authors:  Mehraneh D Jafari; Fariba Jafari; Monica T Young; Brian R Smith; Michael J Phalen; Ninh T Nguyen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  The accordion severity grading system of surgical complications.

Authors:  Steven M Strasberg; David C Linehan; William G Hawkins
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Learning curve of laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer, a laparoscopic distal gastrectomy-based analysis.

Authors:  Xiaoqiao Zhang; Nobuhiko Tanigawa
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-09-24       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy and the challenge of esophagojejunostomy.

Authors:  Theodore Liakakos
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Prospective randomized study of open versus laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy with extraperigastric lymph node dissection for early gastric cancer.

Authors:  H Hayashi; T Ochiai; H Shimada; Y Gunji
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-07-28       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Quantitative assessment of the advantages of laparoscopic gastrectomy and the impact of volume-related hospital characteristics on resource use and outcomes of gastrectomy patients in Japan.

Authors:  Kazuaki Kuwabara; Shinya Matsuda; Kiyohide Fushimi; Koichi B Ishikawa; Hiromasa Horiguchi; Kenji Fujimori; Hideo Yasunaga; Hiroaki Miyata
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Variations in morbidity after radical prostatectomy.

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

9.  Outcomes from 3144 adrenalectomies in the United States: which matters more, surgeon volume or specialty?

Authors:  Henry S Park; Sanziana A Roman; Julie Ann Sosa
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2009-11

10.  The Early Experience of Laparoscopy-assisted Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer at a Low-volume Center.

Authors:  Shi Jun Yang; Eun Jung Ahn; Sei Hyeog Park; Jong Heung Kim; Jong-Min Park
Journal:  J Gastric Cancer       Date:  2010-12-31       Impact factor: 3.720

View more
  9 in total

1.  Eleven-year experience with 3000 cases of laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery in a single institution: analysis of postoperative morbidities and long-term oncologic outcomes.

Authors:  Young Suk Park; Sang-Yong Son; Aung Myint Oo; Do Hyun Jung; Dong Joon Shin; Sang-Hoon Ahn; Do Joong Park; Hyung-Ho Kim
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  An international comparison of the utilisation of and outcomes from minimal access surgery for the treatment of common abdominal surgical emergencies.

Authors:  Karina Tukanova; Sheraz R Markar; Sara Jamel; Alberto Vidal-Diez; George B Hanna
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-08-19       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  [Hospital volume effects in surgical treatment of gastric cancer : Results of a prospective multicenter observational study].

Authors:  H Ptok; I Gastinger; F Meyer; A Ilsemann; H Lippert; C Bruns
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 0.955

4.  Effect of hospital volume on outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: an observational study.

Authors:  Atsuhiko Murata; Toshihiko Mayumi; Keiji Muramatsu; Makoto Ohtani; Shinya Matsuda
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-01-17       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 5.  Associations of Annual Hospital and Surgeon Volume with Patient Outcomes After Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jiafu Ji; Leiyu Shi; Xiangji Ying; Xinpu Lu; Fei Shan
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-09-15       Impact factor: 4.339

6.  Advantages of a robotic approach compared with laparoscopy gastrectomy for patients with high visceral fat area.

Authors:  Makoto Hikage; Keiichi Fujiya; Yuhei Waki; Satoshi Kamiya; Yutaka Tanizawa; Etsuro Bando; Akifumi Notsu; Masanori Terashima
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 3.453

7.  Laparoscopic Surgeons' Perspectives on Risk Factors for and Prophylaxis of Trocar Site Hernias: A Multispecialty National Survey.

Authors:  Ali Wells; George J Germanos; Jason L Salemi; Emad Mikhail
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2019 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

8.  Beginner Surgeon's Initial Experience with Distal Subtotal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer Using a Minimally Invasive Approach.

Authors:  Yung Hun You; Yoo Min Kim; Dae Ho Ahn
Journal:  J Gastric Cancer       Date:  2015-12-31       Impact factor: 3.720

9.  Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer in middle-low-volume centers in Western countries: a propensity score matching analysis.

Authors:  Giovanni Maria Garbarino; Gianluca Costa; Giovanni Guglielmo Laracca; Giorgio Castagnola; Paolo Mercantini; Massimiliano Di Paola; Simone Vita; Luigi Masoni
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 3.445

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.