Literature DB >> 26501701

Surgeon Volume and Cancer Esophagectomy, Gastrectomy, and Pancreatectomy: A Population-based Study in England.

Ravikrishna Mamidanna1, Zhifang Ni, Oliver Anderson, Sir David Spiegelhalter, Alex Bottle, Paul Aylin, Omar Faiz, George B Hanna.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to assess whether there is a proficiency curve-like relationship between surgeon volume and operative mortality and determine the minimum surgeon volume for optimum operative mortality.
BACKGROUND: The inverse relationship between hospital volume and operative mortality is well-established for esophageal, gastric, and pancreatic cancer. The recommended minimum surgeon volumes are however uncertain.
METHODS: We retrieved data on esophagectomies, gastrectomies, and pancreatectomies for cancer from the NHS Hospital Episodes Statistics database from April 2000 to March 2010. We defined mortality as in-hospital death within 30 days of surgery. We determined whether there was a proficiency curve relationship by inspecting surgeon volume-mortality graphs after adjusting for patient age, sex, socioeconomic, and comorbidity indices. We then statistically determined the minimum surgeon volume that produced a mortality rate insignificantly different from the optimum of the curve.
RESULTS: Sixteen thousand five hundred seventy-two esophagectomies, 12,622 gastrectomies, and 9116 pancreatectomies were examined. Surgeon volume ranged from 2 to 29 esophagectomies, from 1 to 14 gastrectomies, and from 2 to 31 pancreatectomies per surgeon per year. We demonstrated a proficiency relationship between surgeon volume and mortality in esophageal, gastric, and pancreatic cancer surgery. Each additional case of esophagectomy, gastrectomy, and pancreatectomy would reduce 30-day mortality odds by 3.4%, 7.2%, and 4.1%, respectively. However, as surgeon volume increased, mortality rate continued to improve. Therefore, we were unable to recommend minimum surgeon volume.
CONCLUSIONS: Mortality after resections for esophageal, gastric, and pancreatic cancer falls as surgeon volume rises up to 30 cases. Within this range, we did not demonstrate any statistical threshold that could be recommended as a minimum volume target.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26501701     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001490

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  30 in total

Review 1.  Clinical applications of circulating tumor DNA and circulating tumor cells in pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Francesca Riva; Oleksii I Dronov; Dmytro I Khomenko; Florence Huguet; Christophe Louvet; Pascale Mariani; Marc-Henri Stern; Olivier Lantz; Charlotte Proudhon; Jean-Yves Pierga; Francois-Clement Bidard
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 6.603

Review 2.  Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer in UK: current status and future perspectives.

Authors:  Muhammad Shafique Sajid; Madhusoodhana Hebbar; Mazin E Sayegh
Journal:  Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2017-05-09

3.  Surgical resection of gastric cancer hepatic metastases: expanding the indications for curative treatment.

Authors:  Sheraz R Markar; George B Hanna
Journal:  Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2016-10-29

Review 4.  Regionalization of esophagectomy: where are we now?

Authors:  James M Clark; Daniel J Boffa; Robert A Meguid; Lisa M Brown; David T Cooke
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 2.895

5.  Centralization of Pancreatic Surgery in Europe.

Authors:  Adam Polonski; Jakob R Izbicki; Faik G Uzunoglu
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 3.452

6.  The Impact of Increasing Hospital Volume on 90-Day Postoperative Outcomes Following Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Daniel J Kagedan; Nik Goyert; Qing Li; Lawrence Paszat; Alexander Kiss; Craig C Earle; Paul J Karanicolas; Alice C Wei; Nicole Mittmann; Natalie G Coburn
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 3.452

7.  International Variation in Surgical Practices in Units Performing Oesophagectomy for Oesophageal Cancer: A Unit Survey from the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA).

Authors: 
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Role of lymphadenectomy, adjuvant chemotherapy, and treatment at high-volume centers in patients with resected pancreatic cancer-a distinct view on lymph node yield.

Authors:  Rene Warschkow; Catherine Tsai; Nastassja Köhn; Suna Erdem; Bruno Schmied; Daniel P Nussbaum; Beat Gloor; Sascha A Müller; Dan Blazer; Mathias Worni
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2020-02-10       Impact factor: 3.445

9.  Surgical team proficiency in minimally invasive esophagectomy is related to case volume and improves patient outcomes.

Authors:  Akihiko Okamura; Masayuki Watanabe; Ian Fukudome; Kotaro Yamashita; Masami Yuda; Masaru Hayami; Yu Imamura; Shinji Mine
Journal:  Esophagus       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 4.230

10.  Unplanned Hospital Encounters After Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in 3 Large North American States.

Authors:  Robert J Huang; Monique T Barakat; Mohit Girotra; Jennifer S Lee; Subhas Banerjee
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2018-09-19       Impact factor: 22.682

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.