Edward R Jefferies1, Joanne Cresswell2, John S McGrath3, Catherine Miller3, Luke Hounsome4, Sarah Fowler5, Edward W Rowe6. 1. Department of Urology, Royal United Hospital, Bath, UK. 2. Department of Urology, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK. 3. Department of Urology, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter, UK. 4. Public Health England Knowledge and Intelligence Team (South West), Bristol, UK. 5. British Association of Urological Surgeons, Bristol, UK. 6. Bristol Urological Institute, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To establish the current standard for open radical cystectomy (ORC) in England, as data entry by surgeons performing RC to the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) database was mandated in 2013 and combining this with Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) data has allowed comprehensive outcome analysis for the first time. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients were included in this analysis if they were uploaded to the BAUS data registry and reported to have been performed in the 2 years between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2015 in England (from mandate onwards) and had been documented as being performed in an open fashion (not laparoscopic, robot assisted or the technique field left blank). The HES data were accessed via the HES website. Office of Population Censuses and Surveys Classification of Surgical Operations and Procedures version 4 (OPCS-4) Code M34 was searched during the same 2-year time frame (not including M34.4 for simple cystectomy or with additional minimal access codes Y75.1-9 documenting a laparoscopic or robotic approach was used) to assess data capture. RESULTS: A total of 2 537 ORCs were recorded in the BAUS registry and 3 043 in the HES data. This indicates a capture rate of 83.4% of all cases. The median operative time was 5 h, harvesting a median of 11-20 lymph nodes, with a median blood loss of 500-1 000 mL, and a transfusion rate of 21.8%. The median length of stay was 11 days, with a 30-day mortality rate of 1.58%. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest, contemporary cohort of ORCs in England, encompassing >80% of all performed operations. We now know the current standard for ORC in England. This provides the basis for individual surgeons and units to compare their outcomes and a standard with which future techniques and modifications can be compared.
OBJECTIVE: To establish the current standard for open radical cystectomy (ORC) in England, as data entry by surgeons performing RC to the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) database was mandated in 2013 and combining this with Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) data has allowed comprehensive outcome analysis for the first time. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients were included in this analysis if they were uploaded to the BAUS data registry and reported to have been performed in the 2 years between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2015 in England (from mandate onwards) and had been documented as being performed in an open fashion (not laparoscopic, robot assisted or the technique field left blank). The HES data were accessed via the HES website. Office of Population Censuses and Surveys Classification of Surgical Operations and Procedures version 4 (OPCS-4) Code M34 was searched during the same 2-year time frame (not including M34.4 for simple cystectomy or with additional minimal access codes Y75.1-9 documenting a laparoscopic or robotic approach was used) to assess data capture. RESULTS: A total of 2 537 ORCs were recorded in the BAUS registry and 3 043 in the HES data. This indicates a capture rate of 83.4% of all cases. The median operative time was 5 h, harvesting a median of 11-20 lymph nodes, with a median blood loss of 500-1 000 mL, and a transfusion rate of 21.8%. The median length of stay was 11 days, with a 30-day mortality rate of 1.58%. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest, contemporary cohort of ORCs in England, encompassing >80% of all performed operations. We now know the current standard for ORC in England. This provides the basis for individual surgeons and units to compare their outcomes and a standard with which future techniques and modifications can be compared.
Authors: James W F Catto; Pramit Khetrapal; Federico Ricciardi; Gareth Ambler; Norman R Williams; Tarek Al-Hammouri; Muhammad Shamim Khan; Ramesh Thurairaja; Rajesh Nair; Andrew Feber; Simon Dixon; Senthil Nathan; Tim Briggs; Ashwin Sridhar; Imran Ahmad; Jaimin Bhatt; Philip Charlesworth; Christopher Blick; Marcus G Cumberbatch; Syed A Hussain; Sanjeev Kotwal; Anthony Koupparis; John McGrath; Aidan P Noon; Edward Rowe; Nikhil Vasdev; Vishwanath Hanchanale; Daryl Hagan; Chris Brew-Graves; John D Kelly Journal: JAMA Date: 2022-06-07 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Ashwin Sunil Tamhankar; David Thurtle; Alexander Hampson; Omar El-Taji; Ramesh Thurairaja; John D Kelly; James W F Catto; Tim Lane; James Adshead; Nikhil Vasdev Journal: BJUI Compass Date: 2021-03-12
Authors: Harriet P Mintz; Amandeep Dosanjh; Helen M Parsons; Ana Hughes; Alicia Jakeman; Ann M Pope; Richard T Bryan; Nicholas D James; Prashant Patel Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud Date: 2020-10-31
Authors: Wei Shen Tan; Jeffrey J Leow; Maya Marchese; Ashwin Sridhar; Giles Hellawell; Matthew Mossanen; Jeremy Y C Teoh; Sarah Fowler; Alexandra J Colquhoun; Jo Cresswell; James W F Catto; Quoc-Dien Trinh; John D Kelly Journal: Eur Urol Open Sci Date: 2021-09-20
Authors: Samantha Conroy; Rachel Hubbard; Aidan P Noon; Syed A Hussain; Jon Griffin; Steven Kennish; James W F Catto Journal: BJU Int Date: 2022-06 Impact factor: 5.969