Matthew J Maurice1, Simon P Kim2, Robert Abouassaly3. 1. Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 2. Urology Institute, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, 11100 Euclid Ave., Office 4565, Mailstop LKS 5046, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA. 3. Urology Institute, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, 11100 Euclid Ave., Office 4565, Mailstop LKS 5046, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA. robert.abouassaly@uhhospitals.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess socioeconomic disparities in urinary diversion utilization in a contemporary American cohort. METHODS: In the National Cancer Database, we identified 4538 patients who underwent cystectomy with urinary diversion for clinical T1-2N0M0 bladder cancer from 2010 to 2013. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of urinary diversion type: ileal conduit (IC), continent cutaneous reservoir (CCR), or orthotopic neobladder (ON). Covariates included age, gender, race, income, Charlson score, clinical T stage, hospital cystectomy volume, teaching status, and surgical approach. Subgroup analysis by hospital volume (low, intermediate, or high) and teaching status (academic or non-academic) was performed to ascertain the impact of regionalization on urinary diversion use. RESULTS: The final cohort included 4066 (89.6 %) patients with IC, 292 (6.4 %) with CCR, and 180 (4.0 %) with ON. On multivariable analysis, younger age (p < .01), higher income (p < .01), and high cystectomy volume predicted increased use of CCR and ON. Female gender predicted increased use of CCR versus IC (p < .01), and academic hospital status predicted increased use of ON versus IC (p = .04). On subgroup analysis, after further adjustment for hospital volume and teaching status, higher income remained an independent predictor of ON use. CONCLUSIONS: Despite regionalization of care, higher income patients are more likely to receive complex urinary diversions after radical cystectomy. Other related socioeconomic factors, especially patient education, may influence this practice pattern.
PURPOSE: To assess socioeconomic disparities in urinary diversion utilization in a contemporary American cohort. METHODS: In the National Cancer Database, we identified 4538 patients who underwent cystectomy with urinary diversion for clinical T1-2N0M0 bladder cancer from 2010 to 2013. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of urinary diversion type: ileal conduit (IC), continent cutaneous reservoir (CCR), or orthotopic neobladder (ON). Covariates included age, gender, race, income, Charlson score, clinical T stage, hospital cystectomy volume, teaching status, and surgical approach. Subgroup analysis by hospital volume (low, intermediate, or high) and teaching status (academic or non-academic) was performed to ascertain the impact of regionalization on urinary diversion use. RESULTS: The final cohort included 4066 (89.6 %) patients with IC, 292 (6.4 %) with CCR, and 180 (4.0 %) with ON. On multivariable analysis, younger age (p < .01), higher income (p < .01), and high cystectomy volume predicted increased use of CCR and ON. Female gender predicted increased use of CCR versus IC (p < .01), and academic hospital status predicted increased use of ON versus IC (p = .04). On subgroup analysis, after further adjustment for hospital volume and teaching status, higher income remained an independent predictor of ON use. CONCLUSIONS: Despite regionalization of care, higher income patients are more likely to receive complex urinary diversions after radical cystectomy. Other related socioeconomic factors, especially patient education, may influence this practice pattern.
Authors: M Francesca Monn; K Clint Cary; Hristos Z Kaimakliotis; Chandra K Flack; Michael O Koch Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2014-05-23 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Adam M Luchey; Gautum Agarwal; Patrick N Espiritu; Jorge L Lockhart; Julio M Pow-Sang; Philippe E Spiess; Wade J Sexton; Michael A Poch Journal: World J Urol Date: 2015-03-15 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Simon P Kim; Nilay D Shah; Christopher J Weight; R Houston Thompson; Jeffrey K Wang; R Jeffrey Karnes; Leona C Han; Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss; Igor Frank; Matthew K Tollefson; Stephen A Boorjian Journal: BJU Int Date: 2013-03-01 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Jeffrey J Leow; Stephen W Reese; Wei Jiang; Stuart R Lipsitz; Joaquim Bellmunt; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Benjamin I Chung; Adam S Kibel; Steven L Chang Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-01-28 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: John M Sung; Jeremy W Martin; Francis A Jefferson; Daniel A Sidhom; Keyhan Piranviseh; Melissa Huang; Nobel Nguyen; Jenny Chang; Argyrios Ziogas; Hoda Anton-Culver; Ramy F Youssef Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2019-05-31 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Nicholas J Farber; Izak Faiena; Viktor Dombrovskiy; Alexandra L Tabakin; Brian Shinder; Rutveej Patel; Sammy E Elsamra; Thomas L Jang; Eric A Singer; Robert E Weiss Journal: Bladder Cancer Date: 2018-01-20
Authors: Ahmed Elshabrawy; Hanzhang Wang; Furkan Dursun; Dharam Kaushik; Michael Liss; Robert S Svatek; Ahmed M Mansour Journal: Arab J Urol Date: 2022-02-16