Cargando…

National nephrectomy registries: Reviewing the need for population-based data

Nephrectomy is the cornerstone therapy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and continued refinement of the procedure through research may enhance patient outcomes. A national nephrectomy registry may provide the key information needed to assess the procedure at a national level. The aim of this study was...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pearson, John, Williamson, Timothy, Ischia, Joseph, Bolton, Damien M, Frydenberg, Mark, Lawrentschuk, Nathan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Urological Association 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4565894/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26366272
http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2015.56.9.607
_version_ 1782389642220273664
author Pearson, John
Williamson, Timothy
Ischia, Joseph
Bolton, Damien M
Frydenberg, Mark
Lawrentschuk, Nathan
author_facet Pearson, John
Williamson, Timothy
Ischia, Joseph
Bolton, Damien M
Frydenberg, Mark
Lawrentschuk, Nathan
author_sort Pearson, John
collection PubMed
description Nephrectomy is the cornerstone therapy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and continued refinement of the procedure through research may enhance patient outcomes. A national nephrectomy registry may provide the key information needed to assess the procedure at a national level. The aim of this study was to review nephrectomy data available at a population-based level in Australia and to benchmark these data against data from the rest of the world as an examination of the national nephrectomy registry model. A PubMed search identified records pertaining to RCC nephrectomy in Australia. A similar search identified records relating to established nephrectomy registries internationally and other surgical registries of clinical importance. These records were reviewed to address the stated aims of this article. Population-based data within Australia for nephrectomy were lacking. Key issues identified were the difficulty in benchmarking outcomes and no ongoing monitoring of trends. The care centralization debate, which questions whether small-volume centers provide comparable outcomes to high-volume centers, is ongoing. Patterns of adherence and the effectiveness of existing protocols are uncertain. A review of established international registries demonstrated that the registry model can effectively address issues comparable to those identified in the Australian literature. A national nephrectomy registry could address deficiencies identified in a given nation's nephrectomy field. The model is supported by evidence from international examples and will provide the population-based data needed for studies. Scope exists for possible integration with other registries to develop a more encompassing urological or surgical registry. Need remains for further exploration of the feasibility and practicalities of initiating such a registry including a minimum data set, outcome indicators, and auditing of data.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4565894
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher The Korean Urological Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45658942015-09-11 National nephrectomy registries: Reviewing the need for population-based data Pearson, John Williamson, Timothy Ischia, Joseph Bolton, Damien M Frydenberg, Mark Lawrentschuk, Nathan Korean J Urol Review Article Nephrectomy is the cornerstone therapy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and continued refinement of the procedure through research may enhance patient outcomes. A national nephrectomy registry may provide the key information needed to assess the procedure at a national level. The aim of this study was to review nephrectomy data available at a population-based level in Australia and to benchmark these data against data from the rest of the world as an examination of the national nephrectomy registry model. A PubMed search identified records pertaining to RCC nephrectomy in Australia. A similar search identified records relating to established nephrectomy registries internationally and other surgical registries of clinical importance. These records were reviewed to address the stated aims of this article. Population-based data within Australia for nephrectomy were lacking. Key issues identified were the difficulty in benchmarking outcomes and no ongoing monitoring of trends. The care centralization debate, which questions whether small-volume centers provide comparable outcomes to high-volume centers, is ongoing. Patterns of adherence and the effectiveness of existing protocols are uncertain. A review of established international registries demonstrated that the registry model can effectively address issues comparable to those identified in the Australian literature. A national nephrectomy registry could address deficiencies identified in a given nation's nephrectomy field. The model is supported by evidence from international examples and will provide the population-based data needed for studies. Scope exists for possible integration with other registries to develop a more encompassing urological or surgical registry. Need remains for further exploration of the feasibility and practicalities of initiating such a registry including a minimum data set, outcome indicators, and auditing of data. The Korean Urological Association 2015-09 2015-09-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4565894/ /pubmed/26366272 http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2015.56.9.607 Text en © The Korean Urological Association, 2015 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Pearson, John
Williamson, Timothy
Ischia, Joseph
Bolton, Damien M
Frydenberg, Mark
Lawrentschuk, Nathan
National nephrectomy registries: Reviewing the need for population-based data
title National nephrectomy registries: Reviewing the need for population-based data
title_full National nephrectomy registries: Reviewing the need for population-based data
title_fullStr National nephrectomy registries: Reviewing the need for population-based data
title_full_unstemmed National nephrectomy registries: Reviewing the need for population-based data
title_short National nephrectomy registries: Reviewing the need for population-based data
title_sort national nephrectomy registries: reviewing the need for population-based data
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4565894/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26366272
http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2015.56.9.607
work_keys_str_mv AT pearsonjohn nationalnephrectomyregistriesreviewingtheneedforpopulationbaseddata
AT williamsontimothy nationalnephrectomyregistriesreviewingtheneedforpopulationbaseddata
AT ischiajoseph nationalnephrectomyregistriesreviewingtheneedforpopulationbaseddata
AT boltondamienm nationalnephrectomyregistriesreviewingtheneedforpopulationbaseddata
AT frydenbergmark nationalnephrectomyregistriesreviewingtheneedforpopulationbaseddata
AT lawrentschuknathan nationalnephrectomyregistriesreviewingtheneedforpopulationbaseddata