Volume-outcome relationship in rectal cancer surgery: A new perspective
Numerous studies on the volume-outcome relationships in rectal cancer surgery have assessed surgical mortality. However, little is known about the association between hospital/surgeon volumes and postoperative complications, including anastomotic leakage and infection, following rectal cancer surgery.
Using a web-based patient registration system, data were collected on inpatients who underwent rectal cancer surgery between November 1, 2006 and February 28, 2007 in Japan. Using multivariate analyses, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications and length of stay were independently compared against the provider volumes and covariates.
No significant association was identified between the blood loss and hospital volume, while surgeons with the highest volume (≥500 procedures) were likely to demonstrate a reduced blood loss (odds ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.46–0.99; P = 0.043). No significant relationship was found between the incidence of postoperative complications and the provider volume. A higher hospital volume significantly decreased the length of stay (hazard ratio, 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.23–1.62; P < 0.01), but the surgeon volume was not associated with the length of hospital stay.
The present study did not find any significant relationship between the volume and postoperative complications. These results do not support the effectiveness of regionalizing rectal cancer surgery to high-volume centers, at least in the Japanese clinical setting.
Key wordsRectal cancer Hospital volume Surgeon volume Volume-outcome relationship
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 12.Meyerhardt JA, Tepper JE, Niedzwiecki D, Hollis DR, Schrag D, Ayanian JZ, et al. Impact of hospital procedure volume on surgical operation and long-term outcomes in high-risk curatively resected rectal cancer: findings from the Intergroup 0114 Study. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:166–174.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Diggle PJ, Heagerty P, Liang KY, Zeger SL. Analysis of longitudinal data. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001.Google Scholar