Variation in the volume-outcome relationship after rectal cancer surgery in the United States: Retrospective study with implications for regionalization

Effect of centre volume on pathological outcomes and postoperative complications after surgery for colorectal cancer: results of a multicentre national study

BACKGROUND

The association between volume, complications and pathological outcomes is still under debate regarding colorectal cancer surgery. The aim of the study was to assess the association between centre volume and severe complications, mortality, less-than-radical oncologic surgery, and indications for neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 16,883 colorectal cancer cases from 80 centres (2018-2021). Outcomes: 30-day mortality; Clavien-Dindo grade >2 complications; removal of ≥ 12 lymph nodes; non-radical resection; neoadjuvant therapy. Quartiles of hospital volumes were classified as LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH, and VERY HIGH. Independent predictors, both overall and for rectal cancer, were evaluated using logistic regression including age, gender, AJCC stage and cancer site.

RESULTS

LOW-volume centres reported a higher rate of severe postoperative complications (OR 1.50, 95% c.i. 1.15-1.096, P = 0.003). The rate of ≥ 12 lymph nodes removed in LOW-volume (OR 0.68, 95% c.i. 0.56-0.85, P < 0.001) and MEDIUM-volume (OR 0.72, 95% c.i. 0.62-0.83, P < 0.001) centres was lower than in VERY HIGH-volume centres. Of the 4676 rectal cancer patients, the rate of ≥ 12 lymph nodes removed was lower in LOW-volume than in VERY HIGH-volume centres (OR 0.57, 95% c.i. 0.41-0.80, P = 0.001). A lower rate of neoadjuvant chemoradiation was associated with HIGH (OR 0.66, 95% c.i. 0.56-0.77, P < 0.001), MEDIUM (OR 0.75, 95% c.i. 0.60-0.92, P = 0.006), and LOW (OR 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.52-0.94, P = 0.019) volume centres (vs. VERY HIGH).

CONCLUSION

Colorectal cancer surgery in low-volume centres is at higher risk of suboptimal management, poor postoperative outcomes, and less-than-adequate oncologic resections. Centralisation of rectal cancer cases should be taken into consideration to optimise the outcomes.

High-risk surgery among Medicare beneficiaries living in health professional shortage areas

PURPOSE

Americans who reside in health professional shortage areas currently have less than half of the needed physician workforce. While the shortage designation has been associated with poor outcomes for chronic medical conditions, far less is known about outcomes after high-risk surgical procedures.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of Medicare beneficiaries living in health professional shortage areas and nonshortage areas who underwent abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, coronary artery bypass graft, esophagectomy, liver resection, pancreatectomy, or rectal resection between 2014 and 2018. Risk-adjusted multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether rates of postoperative complications and 30-day mortality differed between patient cohorts. Beneficiary and hospital ZIP codes were used to quantify travel time to obtain care.

FINDINGS

Compared with patients living in nonshortage areas, patients living in health professional shortage areas traveled longer (median 60.0 vs 28.0 minutes, P<.001). There were no differences in risk-adjusted rates of complications (28.5% vs 28.6%, OR = 1.00, 95% CI 1.00-1.00, P = .59) and small differences in rates of 30-day mortality (4.2% vs 4.4%, OR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.95-0.95, P<.001) between beneficiaries living in shortage areas versus those not in shortage areas, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients living in health professional shortage area undergoing high-risk surgery traveled more than 2 times longer for their care to obtain similar outcomes. While reassuring for clinical outcomes, additional efforts may be needed to mitigate the travel burden experienced by shortage area patients.