Cargando…

Association of surgeon and hospital volume with short-term outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Nationwide, population-based study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Few studies have investigated the association between surgical volume and outcome of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in an unselected cohort. We sought to investigate the association between surgical volume with peri-operative and short-term outcomes in a nation...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Godtman, Rebecka Arnsrud, Persson, Erik, Cazzaniga, Walter, Sandin, Fredrik, Carlsson, Stefan, Ahlgren, Göran, Johansson, Eva, Robinsson, David, Hugosson, Jonas, Stattin, Pär
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8211177/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34138904
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253081
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Few studies have investigated the association between surgical volume and outcome of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in an unselected cohort. We sought to investigate the association between surgical volume with peri-operative and short-term outcomes in a nation-wide, population-based study group. METHODS: 9,810 RARP’s registered in the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden (2015–2018) were included. Associations between outcome and volume were analyzed with multivariable logistic regression including age, PSA-density, number of positive biopsy cores, cT stage, Gleason score, and extent of lymph node dissection. RESULTS: Surgeons and hospitals in the highest volume group compared to lowest group had shorter operative time; surgeon (OR 9.20, 95% CI 7.11–11.91), hospital (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.53–3.06), less blood loss; surgeon (OR 2.58. 95% CI 2.07–3.21) hospital (no difference), more often nerve sparing intention; surgeon (OR 2.89, 95% CI 2.34–3.57), hospital (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.66–2.44), negative margins; surgeon (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.54–2.35), hospital (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.07–1.53). There was wide range in outcome between hospitals and surgeons with similar volume that remained after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: High surgeon and hospital volume were associated with better outcomes. The range in outcome was wide in all volume groups, which indicates that factors besides volume are of importance. Registration of surgical performance is essential for quality control and improvement.