Variation in annual volume at a university hospital does not predict mortality for pancreatic resections

The impact of surgical volume on outcomes in newly diagnosed colorectal cancer patients receiving definitive surgeries

Colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who receive cancer surgeries from higher-volume providers may have better outcomes. However, the definitions of surgical volume may affect the results. We aim to analyze the effects of different definitions of surgical volume on patient outcomes. We conducted a nationwide population-based study in Taiwan that enrolled all patients who underwent definitive surgery for newly diagnosed CRC. We used three common definitions of surgical volume: total volume means the total surgical number conducted by the same provider during the study period; cumulative volume was calculated as the number of operations the surgeon performed before the index procedure; annual volume was calculated as the number of times the surgeon had been responsible for surgery during the index year. In this study, we included 100,009 newly diagnosed CRC patients, including 55.8% males, of median age 66 years at diagnosis (range 20-105 years). After adjustment for the patient and provider characteristics, we found that CRC patients receiving definitive surgery by higher-volume providers had better outcomes, especially where surgeon volume may play a more important role than hospital volume. The cumulative volume could predict the 5-year mortality of the study cohort better than the total and annual volume.

In France, distance from hospital and health care structure impact on outcome after arthroplasty of the hip for proximal fractures of the femur

BACKGROUND

Hip arthroplasty is a frequently performed procedure in orthopedic surgery, carried out in almost all health structures for two main issues: fracture and coxarthrosis. Even if volume-outcome relationship appeared associated in many surgeries recently, data provided are not sufficient to set surgical thresholds neither than closing down low-volumes centers.

QUESTION

With this study, we wanted to identify surgical, health care-related and territorial factors influencing patient' mortality and readmission after a HA for a femoral fracture in 2018 in France.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were anonymously collected from French nationwide administrative databases. All patients who underwent a hip arthroplasty for a femoral fracture through 2018 were included. Patient outcome was 90-day mortality and 90-day readmission rate after surgery.

RESULTS

Of the 36,252 patients that underwent a HA for fracture in France in 2018, 0.7% died within 90-day year and 1.2% were readmitted. Male and Charlson comorbidity index were associated with a higher 90-day mortality and readmission rate in multivariate analysis. High volume was associated with a lower mortality rate. Neither time of travel nor distance upon health facility were associated with mortality nor with readmission rate in the analysis.

CONCLUSION

Even if volume appears to be associated with lower mortality rate even for longer distance and time of travel, the persistence of exogenous factors not documented in the French databases suggests that regionalization of hip arthroplasty should be organized with caution.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

As volume-outcome relationship must be interpreted with caution, policy makers should not regionalize such surgery without further investigation.

Assessing the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery: a scoping review

Introduction

Many recent studies have investigated the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery. In some cases, the results have prompted the centralization of surgical activity. However, the methodologies and interpretations differ markedly from one study to another. The objective of the present scoping review was to describe the various features used to assess the volume-outcome relationship: the analyzed datasets, study population, outcome, covariates, confounders, volume modalities, and statistical methods.

Methods and analysis

The review was conducted according to a study protocol published in BMJ Open in 2020. Two authors (both of whom had helped to design the study protocol) screened publications independently according to the title, the abstract and then the full text. To ensure exhaustivity, all the papers included by each reviewer went through to the next step.

Interpretation

The 403 included studies covered 90 types of surgery, 61 types of outcome, and 72 covariates or potential confounders. 191 (47.5%) studies focussed on oncological surgery and 37.8% focussed visceral or digestive tract surgery. Overall, 86.6% of the studies found a statistically significant volume-outcome relationship, although the findings differed from one type of surgery to another. Furthermore, the types of outcome and the covariates were highly diverse. The majority of studies were performed in Western countries, and oncological and visceral surgical procedures were over-represented; this might limit the generalizability and comparability of the studies’ results.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-021-01396-6.

Outcomes in pancreatic cancer surgery

The increase in surgery for pancreatic cancer during the last 3 decades can be correlated with a gradual decline in operative mortality and postoperative complications. Although not all surgeons (nor all hospitals) can have equal outcomes, the definition and tabulation of these outcomes have been difficult. This article asks several pertinent questions: (1) what is the scientific rationale for pancreatic resection? (2) what are the best available results at this time? (3) who should be performing pancreatic resections? The article analyzes results of resection for adenocarcinoma of the exocrine pancreas, and excludes duodenal and ampullary cancers, pancreatic endocrine tumors, and tumors of less malignant potential.