Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Effect of institutional case volume on mid-term mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting surgery

  • Original Article
  • Published:
General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The impact of center case volume on mid-term postoperative outcome after coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG) is still controversial and requires investigation. The aim of this study was to compare mid-term survival after CABG according to the institutional annual CABG case volume.

Methods

Adult patients (≥ 18 years) who underwent CABG from 2009 to 2016 were identified by searching National Health Insurance database of Korea for CABG procedure codes. Hospitals were classified into three groups based on annual case volume; low-volume centers (< 20 cases/year), medium-volume centers (20–50 cases/year), and high-volume centers (> 50 cases/year).

Results

A total of 22,575 CABG were performed in 95 centers during the study period, and 14,697 (65.1%) cases performed at 15 high-volume centers, 5,262 (23.3%) cases at 26 medium-volume centers, and 2,616 (11.6%) cases at 54 low-volume centers. The overall 1-year mortality rate was the lowest in high-volume centers (6.5%), followed by medium-volume centers (10.6%) and low-volume centers (15.2%). Logistic regression identified medium-volume centers (adjusted OR 1.30 [95% CI 1.15–1.49], P < 0.01) and low-volume centers (adjusted OR 1.75 [95% CI 1.51–2.03], P < 0.01) as risk factors for 1-year mortality after CABG compared to high-volume centers. In the Cox proportional hazard model, low- and medium-volume centers were significantly risk factors for poor survival (adjusted HR 1.41 [95% CI 1.31–1.54], P < 0.01 and HR 1.26 [95% CI 1.17–1.35], P < 0.01 for low- and medium-volume centers, respectively).

Conclusions

Higher institutional case volume of CABG was associated with lower mid-term mortality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zettervall SL, Schermerhorn ML, Soden PA, McCallum JC, Shean KE, Deery SE, et al. The effect of surgeon and hospital volume on mortality after open and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg. 2017;65:626–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Wouters MW, Wijnhoven BP, Karim-Kos HE, Blaauwgeers HG, Stassen LP, Steup WH, et al. High-volume versus low-volume for esophageal resections for cancer: the essential role of case-mix adjustments based on clinical data. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:80–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Yoon S, Jang EJ, Kim GH, Kim DH, Lim TY, Lee H, et al. Adult lung transplantation case-volume and in-hospital and long-term mortality in Korea. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;14:19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Vassileva CM, McNeely C, Spertus J, Markwell S, Hazelrigg S. Hospital volume, mitral repair rates, and mortality in mitral valve surgery in the elderly: an analysis of US hospitals treating Medicare fee-for-service patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;149(762–8):e1.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dewey TM, Herbert MA, Ryan WH, Brinkman WT, Smith R, Prince SL, et al. Influence of surgeon volume on outcomes with aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg. 2012;93:1107–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Nam K, Jang EJ, Kim GH, Lee H, Kim DH, Ryu HG. Institutional case-volume and mortality after heart transplantation. Int Heart J. 2019;60:695–700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hannan EL, Siu AL, Kumar D, Kilburn H Jr, Chassin MR. The decline in coronary artery bypass graft surgery mortality in New York State. The role of surgeon volume. JAMA. 1995;273:209–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Birkmeyer JD, Stukel TA, Siewers AE, Goodney PP, Wennberg DE, Lucas FL. Surgeon volume and operative mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2117–27.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hannan EL, Wu CT, Ryan TJ, Bennett E, Culliford AT, Gold JP, et al. Do hospitals and surgeons with higher coronary artery bypass graft surgery volumes still have lower risk-adjusted mortality rates? Circulation. 2003;108:795–801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Showstack JA, Rosenfeld KE, Garnick DW, Luft HS, Schaffarzick RW, Fowles J. Association of volume with outcome of coronary artery bypass graft surgery scheduled vs nonscheduled operations. JAMA. 1987;257:785–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Song SO, Jung CH, Song YD, Park CY, Kwon HS, Cha BS, et al. Background and data configuration process of a nationwide population-based study using the Korean national health insurance system. Diabetes Metab J. 2014;38:395–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Quan H, Sundararajan V, Halfon P, Fong A, Burnand B, Luthi JC, et al. Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data. Med Care. 2005;43:1130–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim LK, Looser P, Swaminathan RV, Minutello RM, Wong SC, Girardi L, et al. Outcomes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery in the United States based on hospital volume, 2007 to 2011. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016;151:1686–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Pose PN, Kuijpers M, Ebels T, Zijlstra F. The relation between volume and outcome of coronary interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:1985–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gonzalez AA, Dimick JB, Birkmeyer JD, Ghaferi AA. Understanding the volume-outcome effect in cardiovascular surgery: the role of failure to rescue. JAMA Surg. 2014;149:119–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hata T, Motoi F, Ishida M, Naitoh T, Katayose Y, Egawa S, et al. Effect of hospital volume on surgical outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2016;263:664–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lee SG. A complete treatment of adult living donor liver transplantation: a review of surgical technique and current challenges to expand indication of patients. Am J Transplant. 2015;15:17–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Yoo S, Jang EJ, Kim GH, Kim DH, Kwon SM, Lee H, et al. Effect of institutional case volume on in-hospital mortality after deceased donor liver transplantation: a nationwide retrospective cohort study in Korea. Transplant Proc. 2018;50:3644–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Sousa-Uva M, Milojevic M, Head SJ, Jeppsson A. The 2017 EACTS guidelines on perioperative medication in adult cardiac surgery and patient blood management. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2018;53:1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ohmes LB, Di Franco A, Di Giammarco G, Rosati CM, Lau C, Girardi LN, et al. Techniques for intraoperative graft assessment in coronary artery bypass surgery. J Thorac Dis. 2017;9:S327–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hillis LD, Smith PK, Anderson JL, Bittl JA, Bridges CR, Byrne JG, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA guideline for coronary artery bypass graft surgery: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines. Circulation. 2011;124:2610–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Luckraz H, Norell M, Buch M, James R, Cooper G. Structure and functioning of a multidisciplinary “Heart Team” for patients with coronary artery disease: rationale and recommendations from a joint BCS/BCIS/SCTS working group. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015;48:524–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Begg CB, Cramer LD, Hoskins WJ, Brennan MF. Impact of hospital volume on operative mortality for major cancer surgery. JAMA. 1998;280:1747–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Finlayson EV, Goodney PP, Birkmeyer JD. Hospital volume and operative mortality in cancer surgery: a national study. Arch Surg. 2003;138:721–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ghaferi AA, Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB. Hospital volume and failure to rescue with high-risk surgery. Med Care. 2011;49:1076–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Glance LG, Dick AA, Osler TM, Mukamel DB. The relation between surgeon volume and outcome following off-pump vs on-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Chest. 2005;128:829–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Brown PP, Mack MJ, Simon AW, Battaglia SL, Tarkington LG, Culler SD, et al. Comparing clinical outcomes in high-volume and low-volume off-pump coronary bypass operation programs. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001;72:S1009–15.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Pieri M, Belletti A, Monaco F, Pisano A, Musu M, Dalessandro V, et al. Outcome of cardiac surgery in patients with low preoperative ejection fraction. BMC Anesthesiol. 2016;16:97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Nashef SA, Roques F, Michel P, Gauducheau E, Lemeshow S, Salamon R. European system for cardiac operative risk evaluation (EuroSCORE). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1999;16:9–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. D’Agostino RS, Jacobs JP, Badhwar V, Fernandez FG, Paone G, Wormuth DW, et al. The society of thoracic surgeons adult cardiac surgery database: 2018 update on outcomes and quality. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;105:15–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ho Geol Ryu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

This research received no specific grants from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. No potential COI to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, S., Jang, E.J., Jo, J. et al. Effect of institutional case volume on mid-term mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 69, 1275–1282 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11748-020-01578-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11748-020-01578-x

Keywords

Navigation