Marius Cristian Butea-Bocu1, Guido Müller2, Daniel Pucheril3, Eckhard Kröger2, Ullrich Otto2. 1. Center for Urological Rehabilitation, Kliniken Hartenstein, Bad Wildungen, Germany. butea-bocu@klinik-quellental.de. 2. Center for Urological Rehabilitation, Kliniken Hartenstein, Bad Wildungen, Germany. 3. Department of Urology, Kettering Medical Center, Kettering, OH, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To explore whether patients undergoing radical prostatectomy at a German Cancer Society (DKG: Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft) certified center (CC) have superior functional and surgical outcomes compared to patients undergoing radical prostatectomy at a non-certified hospital (nCC). METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 22,649 patients treated between 2008 and 2017 and subsequently recovered at two rehabilitation clinics within 35 days of surgery were analyzed. Urine loss (24 h-pad-test), margin status, and nerve-sparing status at rehab admission were compared between CC and nCC patients, adjusting for age, histopathology (pT, pN, Gleason score), metastases (cM), Karnofsky performance status, time from surgery to rehabilitation, and insurance provider (statutory vs. private). RESULTS: Thirty-four percent of patients underwent surgery at a CC. Complete continence is more pronounced in patients treated in CC (16.6% vs. 24.4%, p < 0.001). In the adjusted models, incontinent patients from CC had less urine loss compared to patients from nCC (- 27.41% difference; 95% CI - 31.71% to - 22.84%, p < 0.001). CC patients were less likely to have positive resection margins (adjusted OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.76, p < 0.001) and more likely to have had a nerve-sparing procedure (adjusted OR 1.29; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.38, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients treated at certified centers presented to rehab with better urinary continence, higher nerve-sparing rates, and lower positive-margin rates. These results imply superior care at DKG certified centers.
PURPOSE: To explore whether patients undergoing radical prostatectomy at a German Cancer Society (DKG: Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft) certified center (CC) have superior functional and surgical outcomes compared to patients undergoing radical prostatectomy at a non-certified hospital (nCC). METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 22,649 patients treated between 2008 and 2017 and subsequently recovered at two rehabilitation clinics within 35 days of surgery were analyzed. Urine loss (24 h-pad-test), margin status, and nerve-sparing status at rehab admission were compared between CC and nCC patients, adjusting for age, histopathology (pT, pN, Gleason score), metastases (cM), Karnofsky performance status, time from surgery to rehabilitation, and insurance provider (statutory vs. private). RESULTS: Thirty-four percent of patients underwent surgery at a CC. Complete continence is more pronounced in patients treated in CC (16.6% vs. 24.4%, p < 0.001). In the adjusted models, incontinent patients from CC had less urine loss compared to patients from nCC (- 27.41% difference; 95% CI - 31.71% to - 22.84%, p < 0.001). CC patients were less likely to have positive resection margins (adjusted OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.76, p < 0.001) and more likely to have had a nerve-sparing procedure (adjusted OR 1.29; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.38, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION:Patients treated at certified centers presented to rehab with better urinary continence, higher nerve-sparing rates, and lower positive-margin rates. These results imply superior care at DKG certified centers.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer center; Certification; German Cancer Society; Incontinence; Inhouse rehabilitation; Prostate cancer; Quality indicators; Treatment quality
Authors: Carlos D'Ancona; Bernard Haylen; Matthias Oelke; Luis Abranches-Monteiro; Edwin Arnold; Howard Goldman; Rizwan Hamid; Yukio Homma; Tom Marcelissen; Kevin Rademakers; Alexis Schizas; Ajay Singla; Irela Soto; Vincent Tse; Stefan de Wachter; Sender Herschorn Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2019-01-25 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Christoph Kowalski; Julia Ferencz; Peter Albers; Jan Fichtner; Thomas Wiegel; Günter Feick; Simone Wesselmann Journal: World J Urol Date: 2015-09-21 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: M Sant; R Capocaccia; A Verdecchia; J Estève; G Gatta; A Micheli; M P Coleman; F Berrino Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 1998-08-31 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Gabriel P Haas; Nicolas Barry Delongchamps; Richard F Jones; Vishal Chandan; Angel M Serio; Andrew J Vickers; Mary Jumbelic; Gregory Threatte; Rus Korets; Hans Lilja; Gustavo de la Roza Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2007-09-25 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Manfred Wirth; Nicola Fossati; Peter Albers; Chris Bangma; Maurizio Brausi; Eva Comperat; Sara Faithfull; Silke Gillessen; Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa; Ken Mastris; Nicolas Mottet; Stefan C Müller; Bradley Pieters; Maria J Ribal; Vijay Sangar; Ivo G Schoots; Vitaly Smelov; Luzia Travado; Riccardo Valdagni; Simone Wesselmann; Thomas Wiegel; Hendrik van Poppel Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2019-02-22 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Martin Roessler; Jochen Schmitt; Christoph Bobeth; Michael Gerken; Kees Kleihues-van Tol; Christoph Reissfelder; Bettina M Rau; Marius Distler; Pompiliu Piso; Christian Günster; Monika Klinkhammer-Schalke; Olaf Schoffer; Veronika Bierbaum Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2022-06-07 Impact factor: 4.638