4.7 Article

Influence of Surgical Volume on Outcome for Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer

期刊

ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 19, 期 3, 页码 948-958

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-011-2090-8

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The volume of surgical procedures performed by hospitals and surgeons has a strong influence on outcomes for a number of surgeries. We examined the influence of surgeon and hospital case volume on morbidity, mortality, and resource utilization for women with endometrial cancer undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy. Perspective, a nationwide inpatient database developed to measure utilization and quality, was used to examine women with endometrial cancer who underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy with or without lymphadenectomy from 2000 to 2010. Perioperative morbidity, mortality, and cost were compared using Chi-square tests and multivariable generalized estimating equations. A total of 4,137 patients were identified. The overall complication rate was 9.8% for low-volume vs. 10.4% for high-volume surgeons [multivariable odds ratio (OR) = 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.41-1.22]. The rates of intraoperative complications, surgical-site complications, medical complications, transfusion, and reoperation were similar for patients treated by low- and high-volume surgeons (p > 0.05 for all). The adjusted estimate for hospital cost for patients treated by high- compared with low-volume surgeons was 219 USD (95% CI, -790 to 1,228 USD). The odds ratio for any complication in high- compared with low-volume hospitals was 1.24 (95% CI, 0.78-1.96). The average cost for patients treated in high- compared with low-volume facilities was -815 USD (95% CI, -1,641 to 11 USD). Neither physician nor hospital volume had a statistically significant effect on perioperative mortality. Laparoscopic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer is well tolerated and associated with an acceptable morbidity profile. Surgeon and hospital volume appear to have little effect on perioperative morbidity, mortality, and resource utilization.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据