Jonathan C Routh1, David B Joseph2, Tiebin Liu3, Michael S Schechter4, Judy K Thibadeau3, M Chad Wallis5, Elisabeth A Ward6, John S Wiener7. 1. Division of Urology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. Electronic address: jon.routh@duke.edu. 2. Department of Urology, University of Alabama-Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. 3. National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia. 4. Division of Pediatric Pulmonary Medicine, Children's Hospital of Richmond at Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia. 5. Division of Urology, Primary Children's Hospital, Salt Lake City, Utah. 6. National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia; Carter Consulting, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia. 7. Division of Urology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We performed an exploratory analysis of data from the NSBPR (National Spina Bifida Patient Registry) to assess variation in the frequency of bladder reconstruction surgeries among NSBPR centers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We queried the 2009-2014 NSBPR to identify patients who had ever undergone bladder reconstruction surgeries. We evaluated demographic characteristics, spina bifida type, functional level, mobility and NSBPR center to determine whether any of these factors were associated with reconstructive surgery rates. Multivariable logistic regression was used to simultaneously adjust for the impact of these factors. RESULTS: We identified 5,528 patients with spina bifida enrolled in the NSBPR. Of these patients 1,129 (20.4%) underwent bladder reconstruction (703 augmentation, 382 continent catheterizable channel, 189 bladder outlet procedure). Surgical patients were more likely older, female, nonHispanic white, with a higher lesion level, myelomeningocele diagnosis, nonambulators (all p <0.001) and nonprivately insured (p=0.018). Bladder reconstruction surgery rates varied among NSBPR centers (range 12.1% to 37.9%, p <0.001). After correcting for known confounders NSBPR center, spina bifida type, mobility, gender and age (all p <0.001) were significant predictors of surgical intervention. Race (p=0.19) and insurance status (p=0.11) were not associated with surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant variation in rates of bladder reconstruction surgery among NSBPR centers. In addition to clinical factors such as mobility status, lesion type and lesion level, nonclinical factors such as patient age, gender and treating center are also associated with the likelihood of an individual undergoing bladder reconstruction.
PURPOSE: We performed an exploratory analysis of data from the NSBPR (National Spina Bifida Patient Registry) to assess variation in the frequency of bladder reconstruction surgeries among NSBPR centers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We queried the 2009-2014 NSBPR to identify patients who had ever undergone bladder reconstruction surgeries. We evaluated demographic characteristics, spina bifida type, functional level, mobility and NSBPR center to determine whether any of these factors were associated with reconstructive surgery rates. Multivariable logistic regression was used to simultaneously adjust for the impact of these factors. RESULTS: We identified 5,528 patients with spina bifida enrolled in the NSBPR. Of these patients 1,129 (20.4%) underwent bladder reconstruction (703 augmentation, 382 continent catheterizable channel, 189 bladder outlet procedure). Surgical patients were more likely older, female, nonHispanic white, with a higher lesion level, myelomeningocele diagnosis, nonambulators (all p <0.001) and nonprivately insured (p=0.018). Bladder reconstruction surgery rates varied among NSBPR centers (range 12.1% to 37.9%, p <0.001). After correcting for known confounders NSBPR center, spina bifida type, mobility, gender and age (all p <0.001) were significant predictors of surgical intervention. Race (p=0.19) and insurance status (p=0.11) were not associated with surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant variation in rates of bladder reconstruction surgery among NSBPR centers. In addition to clinical factors such as mobility status, lesion type and lesion level, nonclinical factors such as patient age, gender and treating center are also associated with the likelihood of an individual undergoing bladder reconstruction.
Authors: Konrad M Szymanski; Rosalia Misseri; Benjamin Whittam; Martin Kaefer; Richard C Rink; Mark P Cain Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-02-28 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: John S Wiener; Jodi Antonelli; Alisa M Shea; Lesley H Curtis; Kevin A Schulman; Tracey L Krupski; Charles D Scales Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-05-14 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Michael S Schechter; Tiebin Liu; Minn Soe; Mark Swanson; Elisabeth Ward; Judy Thibadeau Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2015-03-16 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Tracy A Lieu; Paula Lozano; Jonathan A Finkelstein; Felicia W Chi; Nancy G Jensvold; Angela M Capra; Charles P Quesenberry; Joe V Selby; Harold J Farber Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Konrad M Szymanski; Rosalia Misseri; Benjamin Whittam; David Y Yang; Sonia-Maria Raposo; Shelly J King; Martin Kaefer; Richard C Rink; Mark P Cain Journal: Urology Date: 2015-10-09 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Judy K Thibadeau; Elisabeth A Ward; Minn M Soe; Tiebin Liu; Mark Swanson; Kathleen J Sawin; Kurt A Freeman; Heidi Castillo; Karen Rauen; Michael S Schechter Journal: Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol Date: 2012-11-02
Authors: Jonathan C Routh; David B Joseph; Tiebin Liu; Michael S Schechter; Judy K Thibadeau; M Chad Wallis; Elisabeth A Ward; John S Wiener Journal: J Pediatr Rehabil Med Date: 2017-12-11
Authors: David I Chu; Tiebin Liu; Priya Patel; Jonathan C Routh; Lijing Ouyang; Michelle A Baum; Earl Y Cheng; Elizabeth B Yerkes; Tamara Isakova Journal: J Urol Date: 2020-03-06 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Lauren E Corona; Ted Lee; Kathryn Marchetti; Courtney S Streur; Vesna Ivancic; Kate H Kraft; David A Bloom; Julian Wan; John M Park Journal: J Pediatr Urol Date: 2019-09-21 Impact factor: 1.830
Authors: Courtney S Streur; Nicholas M Moloci; Kate H Kraft; Aruna V Sarma; Vahakn B Shahinian; John M Hollingsworth Journal: J Urol Date: 2020-07-27 Impact factor: 7.450