Literature DB >> 25040427

Performance comparisons in major uro-oncological surgeries between the USA and Japan.

Toru Sugihara1, Hideo Yasunaga, Hiromasa Horiguchi, Kiyohide Fushimi, Jarrod E Dalton, Jesse Schold, Michael W Kattan, Yukio Homma.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To elucidate the differences in clinical practice between the USA and Japan in major types of uro-oncological surgery by a head-to-head comparison of national databases in the two countries.
METHODS: We compared variations in surgical modality, length of stay, total charges, caseload centralization, transfusion incidence, and in-hospital mortality between the two countries for four major types of uro-oncological surgery (radical prostatectomy, radical cystectomy, nephrectomy and nephroureterectomy) in 2011. Additionally, the chronological changes in surgical modalities were investigated for 2009-11. The national estimates were based on data from the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database and the US National Inpatient Sample.
RESULTS: For radical prostatectomy, radical cystectomy, nephrectomy and nephroureterectomy, minimally-invasive surgery accounted for 24.2% versus 70.2%, 0% versus 14.0%, 50.7% versus 30.7% and 50.2% versus 30.5%, respectively, in Japan versus the USA in 2011. Although minimally-invasive surgery has become increasingly frequent in both countries, the major procedures were robot-assisted surgery in the USA and laparoscopic surgery in Japan. The USA was generally characterized by a slightly younger age at operation, far higher hospital volume, a shorter length of stay, higher charges and less use of transfusion than Japan.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest substantial differences between the USA and Japan regarding clinical practices in uro-oncological surgery. Standing at the beginning of robotic surgery era in Japan, the precise recognition of these differences will aid a proper understanding of clinical practices.
© 2014 The Japanese Urological Association.

Keywords:  cross-cultural comparison; nephrectomy; nephroureterectomy; prostatectomy; radical cystectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25040427     DOI: 10.1111/iju.12548

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Urol        ISSN: 0919-8172            Impact factor:   3.369


  3 in total

1.  Robot-assisted versus other types of radical prostatectomy: population-based safety and cost comparison in Japan, 2012-2013.

Authors:  Toru Sugihara; Hideo Yasunaga; Hiromasa Horiguchi; Hiroki Matsui; Tetsuya Fujimura; Hiroaki Nishimatsu; Hiroshi Fukuhara; Haruki Kume; Yu Changhong; Michael W Kattan; Kiyohide Fushimi; Yukio Homma
Journal:  Cancer Sci       Date:  2014-09-25       Impact factor: 6.716

2.  Cost comparison between open radical cystectomy, laparoscopic radical cystectomy, and robot-assisted radical cystectomy for patients with bladder cancer: a systematic review of segmental costs.

Authors:  Yasuhiro Morii; Takahiro Osawa; Teppei Suzuki; Nobuo Shinohara; Toru Harabayashi; Tomoki Ishikawa; Takumi Tanikawa; Hiroko Yamashina; Katsuhiko Ogasawara
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2019-11-08       Impact factor: 2.264

3.  A Multi-Center International Study Assessing the Impact of Differences in Baseline Characteristics and Perioperative Care Following Radical Cystectomy.

Authors:  Takahiro Osawa; Cheryl T Lee; Takashige Abe; Norikata Takada; Khaled S Hafez; Jeffrey S Montgomery; Alon Z Weizer; Brent K Hollenbeck; Ted A Skolarus; Sachiyo Murai; Nobuo Shinohara; Todd M Morgan
Journal:  Bladder Cancer       Date:  2016-04-27
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.