Literature DB >> 27806151

National Trends in Prostate Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Volumes Following the US Preventive Services Task Force Guidelines Against Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening.

Joshua A Halpern1, Jonathan E Shoag1, Amanda S Artis2, Karla V Ballman2, Art Sedrakyan2, Dawn L Hershman3, Jason D Wright3, Ya Chen Tina Shih4, Jim C Hu1.   

Abstract

Importance: Studies demonstrate that use of prostate-specific antigen screening decreased significantly following the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation against prostate-specific antigen screening in 2012. Objective: To determine downstream effects on practice patterns in prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment following the 2012 USPSTF recommendation. Design, Setting, and Participants: Procedural volumes of certifying and recertifying urologists from 2009 through 2016 were evaluated for variation in prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy (RP) volume. Trends were confirmed using the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System and Nationwide Inpatient Sample. The study included a representative sample of urologists across practice settings and nationally representative sample of all RP discharges. We obtained operative case logs from the American Board of Urology and identified urologists performing at least 1 prostate biopsy (n = 5173) or RP (n = 3748), respectively. Exposures: The 2012 USPSTF recommendation against routine population-wide prostate-specific antigen screening. Main Outcomes and Measures: Change in median biopsy and RP volume per urologist and national procedural volume.
Results: Following the USPSTF recommendation, median biopsy volume per urologist decreased from 29 to 21 (interquartile range [IQR}, 12-34; P < .001). After adjusting for physician and practice characteristics, biopsy volume decreased by 28.7% following 2012 (parameter estimate, -0.25; SE, 0.03; P < .001). Similarly, following the USPSTF recommendation, median RP volume per urologist decreased from 7 (IQR, 3-15) to 6 (IQR, 2-12) (P < .001), and in adjusted analyses, RP volume decreased 16.2% (parameter estimate, -0.15; SE, 0.05; P = .003). Conclusions and Relevance: Following the 2012 USPSTF recommendation, prostate biopsy and RP volumes decreased significantly. A panoramic vantage point is needed to evaluate the long-term consequences of the 2012 USPSTF recommendation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27806151     DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.3987

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Surg        ISSN: 2168-6254            Impact factor:   14.766


  16 in total

Review 1.  Prostate Cancer Screening.

Authors:  William J Catalona
Journal:  Med Clin North Am       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 5.456

Review 2.  An update on best practice in the diagnosis and management of post-prostatectomy anastomotic strictures.

Authors:  Nicholas R Rocco; Jack M Zuckerman
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2017-04-11

Review 3.  Future Perspectives and Challenges of Prostate MR Imaging.

Authors:  Baris Turkbey; Peter L Choyke
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2017-12-09       Impact factor: 2.303

4.  The Effect of Local Antibiogram-based Augmented Antibiotic Prophylaxis on Infection-related Complications Following Prostate Biopsy.

Authors:  Raoul S Concepcion; Edward M Schaeffer; Neal D Shore; Deepak A Kapoor; Jeffrey A Scott; Gary M Kirsh
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2019

5.  Wide-field optical spectroscopy system integrating reflectance and spatial frequency domain imaging to measure attenuation-corrected intrinsic tissue fluorescence in radical prostatectomy specimens.

Authors:  Emile Beaulieu; Audrey Laurence; Mirela Birlea; Guillaume Sheehy; Leticia Angulo-Rodriguez; Mathieu Latour; Roula Albadine; Fred Saad; Dominique Trudel; Frédéric Leblond
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2020-03-17       Impact factor: 3.732

6.  Trends in the diffusion of robotic surgery in prostate, uterus, and colorectal procedures: a retrospective population-based study.

Authors:  Gary Chung; Piet Hinoul; Paul Coplan; Andrew Yoo
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2020-06-20

7.  Contemporary Incidence and Outcomes of Prostate Cancer Lymph Node Metastases.

Authors:  Adrien N Bernstein; Jonathan E Shoag; Ron Golan; Joshua A Halpern; Edward M Schaeffer; Wei-Chun Hsu; Paul L Nguyen; Art Sedrakyan; Ronald C Chen; Scott E Eggener; Jim C Hu
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2017-12-26       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Use of the 4Kscore test to predict the risk of aggressive prostate cancer prior to prostate biopsy: Overall cost savings and improved quality of care to the us healthcare system.

Authors:  Jeffrey D Voigt; Yan Dong; Vincent Linder; Stephen Zappala
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2017

9.  Trends in treatments for prostate cancer in the United States, 2010-2015.

Authors:  Jianwei Wang; Harry Hua-Xiang Xia; Yuanyuan Zhang; Lanjing Zhang
Journal:  Am J Cancer Res       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 6.166

10.  Bother Associated With Climacturia After Radical Prostatectomy: Prevalence and Predictors.

Authors:  Carolyn A Salter; Phil Vu Bach; Eduardo Miranda; Lawrence C Jenkins; Nicole Benfante; Elizabeth Schofield; Christian J Nelson; John P Mulhall
Journal:  J Sex Med       Date:  2020-01-21       Impact factor: 3.802

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.