Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Relationship Between Volume and Outcome in Surgery: A Brief Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Volume-Outcome Relationship in Oncological Surgery

Part of the book series: Updates in Surgery ((UPDATESSURG))

  • 225 Accesses

Abstract

Since the first report of the relationship between volume and outcome in surgery by Luft et al. in 1979, many different original studies and systematic reviews have reported a positive relationship between hospital volume and clinical outcome for different surgical procedures. Starting from there, specific national policies have been implemented worldwide to centralize highly complex procedures with the aim of improving the overall quality of care. However, despite the long-standing literature in favor of the volume-outcome relationship and of the consequent centralization of certain high-risk operations, many aspects require further investigation. This introductory chapter covers the brief history of the topic and opens this collection of contributions from outstanding, world-renowned authors with the hope of sustaining the volume-outcome relationship in oncological surgery with objective data and thoughts.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Luft HS, Bunker JP, Enthoven AC. Should operations be regionalized? The empirical relation between surgical volume and mortality. N Engl J Med. 1979;301(25):1364–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Luft HS. The relation between surgical volume and mortality: an exploration of causal factors and alternative models. Med Care. 1980;18(9):940–59.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Gruen RL, Pitt V, Green S, et al. The effect of provider case volume on cancer mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009;59(3):192–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Finks JF, Osborne NH, Birkmeyer JD. Trends in hospital volume and operative mortality for high-risk surgery. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(22):2128–37.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Liu JH, Zingmond DS, McGory ML, et al. Disparities in the utilization of high-volume hospitals for complex surgery. JAMA. 2006;296(16):1973–80.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Pearse RM, Moreno RP, Bauer P, et al. Mortality after surgery in Europe: a 7 day cohort study. Lancet. 2012;380(9847):1059–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bauer H, Honselmann KC. Minimum volume standards in surgery—are we there yet? Visc Med. 2017;33(2):106–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EV, et al. Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(15):1128–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Birkmeyer JD, Stukel TA, Siewers AE, et al. Surgeon volume and operative mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(2):2117–27.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Morche J, Mathes T, Pieper D. Relationship between surgeon volume and outcomes: a systematic review of systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016;5(1):204. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0376-4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Mole DJ, Parks RW. Centralization of surgery for pancreatic cancer. In: Shrikhande SV, Büchler MW, editors. Surgery of pancreatic cancer: current issues. New Delhi: Elsevier; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Varagunam M, Hardwick R, Riley S, et al. Changes in volume, clinical practice and outcome after reorganisation of oesophago-gastric cancer care in England: a longitudinal observational study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018;44(4):524–31.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Cronin-Fenton DP, Erichsen R, Mortensen FV, et al. Pancreatic cancer survival in central and northern Denmark from 1998 through 2009: a population-based cohort study. Clin Epidemiol. 2011;3(Suppl 1):19–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mesman R, Faber MJ, Berden BJJM, Westert GP. Evaluation of minimum volume standards for surgery in the Netherlands (2003–2017): a successful policy? Health Policy. 2017;121(12):1263–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jonker FHW, Hagemans JAW, Burger JWA, et al. The influence of hospital volume on long-term oncological outcome after rectal cancer surgery. Int J Color Dis. 2017;32(12):1741–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Spolverato G, Ejaz A, Hyder O, et al. Failure to rescue as a source of variation in hospital mortality after hepatic surgery. Br J Surg. 2014;101(7):836–46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Buettner S, Gani F, Amini N, et al. The relative effect of hospital and surgeon volume on failure to rescue among patients undergoing liver resection for cancer. Surgery. 2016;159(4):1004–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Liu JB, Bilimoria KY, Mallin K, Winchester DP. Patient characteristics associated with undergoing cancer operations at low-volume hospitals. Surgery. 2017;161(2):433–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Vonlanthen R, Lodge P, Barkun JS, et al. Toward a consensus on centralization in surgery. Ann Surg. 2018;268(5):712–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mesman R, Faber MJ, Westert GP, Berden HJJM. Dutch surgeons’ views on the volume-outcome mechanism in surgery: a qualitative interview study. Int J Qual Health Care. 2017;29(6):797–802.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Ravaioli M, Pinna AD, Francioni G, et al. A partnership model between high- and low-volume hospitals to improve results in hepatobiliary pancreatic surgery. Ann Surg. 2014;260(5):871–5; discussion 875–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy

    Matteo Donadon & Marco Montorsi

  2. Department of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy

    Matteo Donadon

  3. Department of General Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy

    Marco Montorsi

Authors
  1. Matteo Donadon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marco Montorsi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Montorsi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy

    Marco Montorsi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Donadon, M., Montorsi, M. (2021). The Relationship Between Volume and Outcome in Surgery: A Brief Introduction. In: Montorsi, M. (eds) Volume-Outcome Relationship in Oncological Surgery. Updates in Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51806-6_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51806-6_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-51805-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-51806-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation