Maurizio Iacobone1, Gregorio Scerrino2, F Fausto Palazzo3. 1. Endocrine Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova, Via Giustiniani 2, 35128, Padova, Italy. maurizio.iacobone@unipd.it. 2. General and Emergency Surgery Unit, Department of Surgical, Oncological and Oral Sciences, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy. 3. Department of Endocrine Surgery, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The interest in correlation between hospital and surgeon practice volume and postoperative outcomes has grown considerably over the last decades; it has been suggested that surgery is likely to be associated with higher cure rates, lower morbidity and more favourable results in cost-effectiveness when performed in a high-volume setting. The aim of this paper is to undertake an evidence-based literature review of the relationship between surgical volume and clinical outcomes in parathyroidectomy for primary hyperparathyroidism. We used accepted quality markers to identify the relationship between volume and outcome with a view to defining a reproducible minimal surgical volume-related standard of care in parathyroid surgery. METHODS: A peer review literature analysis of volume and outcomes in parathyroid surgery was carried out and assessed from an evidence-based perspective. Results were discussed at the 2019 Conference of the European Society of Endocrine Surgeons devoted to "Volumes, Outcomes and Quality Standards in Endocrine Surgery". RESULTS: Literature reports no prospective randomised studies; thus, a low level of evidence may be achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Parathyroid surgery is at increased risk of failures, morbidity and need for reoperations and cost when performed in low-volume settings; thus, it should be concentrated in dedicated settings, with adequate annual volume and expertise. Acceptable results may be achieved moving parathyroid surgery cases away from low-volume settings (< 15 parathyroidectomies/year). Challenging procedures (primary hyperparathyroidism without unequivocal preoperative localization, hereditary variants, paediatric patients, reoperations) should be confined to high-volume settings (> 40 parathyroidectomies/year).
BACKGROUND: The interest in correlation between hospital and surgeon practice volume and postoperative outcomes has grown considerably over the last decades; it has been suggested that surgery is likely to be associated with higher cure rates, lower morbidity and more favourable results in cost-effectiveness when performed in a high-volume setting. The aim of this paper is to undertake an evidence-based literature review of the relationship between surgical volume and clinical outcomes in parathyroidectomy for primary hyperparathyroidism. We used accepted quality markers to identify the relationship between volume and outcome with a view to defining a reproducible minimal surgical volume-related standard of care in parathyroid surgery. METHODS: A peer review literature analysis of volume and outcomes in parathyroid surgery was carried out and assessed from an evidence-based perspective. Results were discussed at the 2019 Conference of the European Society of Endocrine Surgeons devoted to "Volumes, Outcomes and Quality Standards in Endocrine Surgery". RESULTS: Literature reports no prospective randomised studies; thus, a low level of evidence may be achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Parathyroid surgery is at increased risk of failures, morbidity and need for reoperations and cost when performed in low-volume settings; thus, it should be concentrated in dedicated settings, with adequate annual volume and expertise. Acceptable results may be achieved moving parathyroid surgery cases away from low-volume settings (< 15 parathyroidectomies/year). Challenging procedures (primary hyperparathyroidism without unequivocal preoperative localization, hereditary variants, paediatric patients, reoperations) should be confined to high-volume settings (> 40 parathyroidectomies/year).
Authors: T Weber; C Dotzenrath; H Dralle; B Niederle; P Riss; K Holzer; J Kußmann; A Trupka; T Negele; R Kaderli; E Karakas; F Weber; N Rayes; A Zielke; M Hermann; C Wicke; R Ladurner; C Vorländer; J Waldmann; O Heizmann; S Wächter; S Schopf; W Timmermann; D K Bartsch; R Schmidmaier; M Luster; K W Schmid; M Ketteler; C Dierks; P Schabram; T Steinmüller; K Lorenz Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2021-04-21 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: C Camenzuli; A N DiMarco; K E Isaacs; Y Grant; J Jackson; A Alsafi; C Harvey; T D Barwick; N Tolley; F F Palazzo Journal: Ann R Coll Surg Engl Date: 2020-08-24 Impact factor: 1.891
Authors: Jens Bollerslev; Lars Rejnmark; Alexandra Zahn; Ansgar Heck; N M Appelman-Dijkstra; Luis Cardoso; Fadil M Hannan; Filomena Cetani; Tanja Sikjær; Anna Maria Formenti; Sigridur Björnsdottir; Camilla Schalin-Jantti; Zhanna Belaya; Fraser Wilson Gibb; Bruno Lapauw; Karin Amrein; Corinna Wicke; Corinna Grasemann; Michael Krebs; Eeva M Ryhänen; Ozer Makay; Salvatore Minisola; Sebastien Gaujoux; Jean-Philippe Bertocchio; Zaki K Hassan-Smith; Agnès Linglart; Elizabeth M Winter; Martina Kollmann; Hans-Georg Zmierczak; Elena Tsourdi; Stefan Pilz; Heide Siggelkow; Neil J Gittoes; Claudio Marcocci; Peter Kamenicky Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2022-01-13 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: Maria P Yavropoulou; Sofia Vlachou; Marina Tsoli; Florentia Fostira; Gregory Kaltsas; Eva Kassi Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Nikita R Chander; Swathikan Chidambaram; Klaas Van Den Heede; Aimee N DiMarco; Neil S Tolley; F Fausto Palazzo Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2022-05-17 Impact factor: 6.134