M Hassan Alkazemi1, Zachary R Dionise1, Ruiyang Jiang1, Steven Wolf2, Gina-Maria Pomann2, Elisabeth T Tracy3, Henry E Rice3, Jonathan C Routh4. 1. Division of Urologic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. 3. Division of Pediatric Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. 4. Division of Urologic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. Electronic address: jon.routh@duke.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare and contrast the use of partial nephrectomy (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN) in pediatric malignant renal tumors using a nationally representative database. METHODS: The 2010-2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) was used to obtain PN and RN select postoperative data. ICD-9-CM codes were used to identify children (<10 years), adolescents (10-19 years) and young adults (20-30 years) diagnosed with malignant renal tumors who were treated with a PN or RN. The presence of a 30-day readmission, occurrence of postoperative complications, cost, and length of stay (LOS) were studied and weighted logistic regression models were fit to test for associations. RESULTS: There were 4330 weighted encounters (1289 PNs, 3041 RNs) that met inclusion criteria: 50.8% were children, 7.2% were adolescents, and 42% were young adults. Young adults had the highest rates of PN, whereas children had the highest rates of RN (p < 0.0001). Overall, no evidence was found to suggest a difference in odds between surgical modality and the presence of a 30-day readmission or postoperative complication. While PN was on average $9000 cheaper compared to RN overall, its cost was similar to that of RN for children. Similarly, PN patients had a shorter overall LOS compared to RN patients, but their LOS was similar to that of children who underwent RN. CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of a difference in odds between RN and PN in terms of postoperative readmissions or in-hospital complication rates. Additionally, we observed descriptive differences in both cost and LOS between the surgical modalities across age groups. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective comparative study (administrative database analysis). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
OBJECTIVES: To compare and contrast the use of partial nephrectomy (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN) in pediatric malignant renal tumors using a nationally representative database. METHODS: The 2010-2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) was used to obtain PN and RN select postoperative data. ICD-9-CM codes were used to identify children (<10 years), adolescents (10-19 years) and young adults (20-30 years) diagnosed with malignant renal tumors who were treated with a PN or RN. The presence of a 30-day readmission, occurrence of postoperative complications, cost, and length of stay (LOS) were studied and weighted logistic regression models were fit to test for associations. RESULTS: There were 4330 weighted encounters (1289 PNs, 3041 RNs) that met inclusion criteria: 50.8% were children, 7.2% were adolescents, and 42% were young adults. Young adults had the highest rates of PN, whereas children had the highest rates of RN (p < 0.0001). Overall, no evidence was found to suggest a difference in odds between surgical modality and the presence of a 30-day readmission or postoperative complication. While PN was on average $9000 cheaper compared to RN overall, its cost was similar to that of RN for children. Similarly, PNpatients had a shorter overall LOS compared to RN patients, but their LOS was similar to that of children who underwent RN. CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of a difference in odds between RN and PN in terms of postoperative readmissions or in-hospital complication rates. Additionally, we observed descriptive differences in both cost and LOS between the surgical modalities across age groups. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective comparative study (administrative database analysis). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
Authors: Rand N Wilcox Vanden Berg; Emily N Bierman; Megan Van Noord; Henry E Rice; Jonathan C Routh Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2015-08-05 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Rodrigo B Interiano; Noel Delos Santos; Sujuan Huang; Deo Kumar Srivastava; Leslie L Robison; Melissa M Hudson; Daniel M Green; Andrew M Davidoff Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-04-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: S F Khuri; J Daley; W Henderson; K Hur; J Demakis; J B Aust; V Chong; P J Fabri; J O Gibbs; F Grover; K Hammermeister; G Irvin; G McDonald; E Passaro; L Phillips; F Scamman; J Spencer; J F Stremple Journal: Ann Surg Date: 1998-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Daniel Rhee; Jose H Salazar; Yiyi Zhang; Jingyan Yang; Jessica Yang; Dominic Papandria; Gezzer Ortega; Adam B Goldin; Shawn J Rangel; Kristin Chrouser; David C Chang; Fizan Abdullah Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2013-02-04 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: R Houston Thompson; Sameer Siddiqui; Christine M Lohse; Bradley C Leibovich; Paul Russo; Michael L Blute Journal: J Urol Date: 2009-10-17 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Andrew M Davidoff; Rodrigo B Interiano; Lynn Wynn; Noel Delos Santos; Jeffrey S Dome; Daniel M Green; Rachel C Brennan; M Beth McCarville; Matthew J Krasin; Kathleen Kieran; Mark A Williams Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Hsin-Hsiao S Wang; Michael R Abern; Nicholas G Cost; David I Chu; Sherry S Ross; John S Wiener; Jonathan C Routh Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-04-13 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Paras H Shah; Daniel M Moreira; Zhamshid Okhunov; Vinay R Patel; Sameer Chopra; Aria A Razmaria; Manaf Alom; Arvin K George; Oksana Yaskiv; Michael J Schwartz; Mihir Desai; Manish A Vira; Lee Richstone; Jaime Landman; Arieh L Shalhav; Inderbir Gill; Louis R Kavoussi Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-02-19 Impact factor: 7.600
Authors: Kirsten L Simmons; Jason C Chandrapal; Steven Wolf; Henry E Rice; Elisabeth E Tracy; Tamara Fitzgerald; Gina-Maria Pomann; Jonathan C Routh Journal: J Pediatr Urol Date: 2021-03-19 Impact factor: 1.921