Effect of operative volume on morbidity, mortality, and hospital use afteresophagectomy for cancer

Citation
Sg. Swisher et al., Effect of operative volume on morbidity, mortality, and hospital use afteresophagectomy for cancer, J THOR SURG, 119(6), 2000, pp. 1126-1132
Citations number
20
Categorie Soggetti
Cardiovascular & Respiratory Systems","Cardiovascular & Hematology Research
Journal title
JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY
ISSN journal
00225223 → ACNP
Volume
119
Issue
6
Year of publication
2000
Pages
1126 - 1132
Database
ISI
SICI code
0022-5223(200006)119:6<1126:EOOVOM>2.0.ZU;2-J
Abstract
Objective: We sought to evaluate the effect of operative volume, hospital s ize, and cancer specialization on morbidity, mortality, and hospital use af ter esophagectomy for cancer. Methods: Data derived from the Health Care Utilization Project was used to evaluate all Medicare-reimbursed esophagectomies for treatment of cancer fr om 1994 to 1996 in 13 national cancer institutions and 88 community hospita ls. The complications of care, length of stay, hospital charges, and mortal ity were assessed according to hospital size (greater than or equal to 600 beds vs <600 beds), cancer specialization (national cancer institution vs c ommunity hospital), and operative volume (esophageal [greater than or equal to 5 Medicare esophagectomies per year vs <5 Medicare esophagectomies per year] and nonesophageal operations [greater than or equal to 3333 cases per year vs <3333 cases per year]). Results: Mortality was lower in national cancer institution hospitals (4.2% [confidence interval, 2.0%-6.4%] vs 13.3% [confidence interval, 4.2%26.2%] , P = .05) and in hospitals performing a large number of esophagectomies (3 .0% [confidence interval, 0.09%-5.1%] vs 12.2% [confidence interval, 4.5%-1 9.8%], P < .05). Multivariate analysis revealed that the independent risk f actor for operative mortality was the volume of esophagectomies performed ( odds ratio, 3.97; P = .03) and not the number of nonesophageal operations, hospital size, or cancer specialization. Hospitals performing a large numbe r of esophagectomies also showed a tendency toward decreased complications (55% vs 68%, P = .06), decreased length of stay (14.7 days vs 17.7 days, P = .006), and decreased charges ($39,867 vs $62,094, P < .005). Conclusions: These results demonstrate improved outcomes and decreased hosp ital use in hospitals that perform a large number of esophagectomies and su pport the concept of tertiary referral centers for such complex oncologic p rocedures as esophagectomies.