The British Association of Urological Surgeons radical cystectomy audit 2014/2015: An update on current practice, and an analysis of the effect of centre and surgeon case volume

Author:

Khadhouri Sinan1ORCID,Miller Catherine1,Cresswell Joanne2,Rowe Edward3,Fowler Sarah4,Housome Luke5ORCID,McGrath John S.16

Affiliation:

1. Exeter Surgical Health Services Research Unit, Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust, UK

2. Urology Department, South Tees NHS Hospitals Trust, UK

3. Urology Department, North Bristol NHS Trust, UK

4. Cancer Registry and Audit, British Association of Urological Surgeons, UK

5. Cancer Analytics, Public Health England, UK

6. University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, UK

Abstract

Objective: The Consultant Outcomes Publication has made it mandatory to submit surgeon-level data on radical cystectomy (RC) practice in England. The current analysis describes contemporary surgical practice and compares this by surgeon and centre case volume. Materials and methods: Between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2015, data on 3742 RCs performed by 161 surgeons over 84 centres were recorded on the British Association of Urological Surgeons audit and data platform. Centre case volumes were grouped as high (> 60), medium (30–60) and low (< 30), while surgeon case volumes were grouped as high (> 30), medium (8–30) and low (< 8). All data averages were for the combined 2-year period. Results: The median number of RCs performed was 16/surgeon and 31/centre; 45.4% of cases were performed for muscle-invasive transitional cell carcinoma (TCC). The commonest performed urinary diversion was ileal conduit (85.2%), followed by orthotopic bladder substitution (5.7%). Open radical cystectomy (ORC) was performed in 67.8%, robotically-assisted cystectomy (RARC) in 20.6% and laparoscopic cystectomy (LRC) in 9.1% of cases. RARC was more likely to be performed by high-volume surgeons and centres. The majority of patients underwent a lymph node dissection (LND), with rates varying from 79.5% to 90.3%. Reported rates of high-grade complication were generally low across all groups, suggesting under-reporting. There was a trend towards higher reported transfusion rates as centre volumes decreased. The median length of stay (LOS) was 7–9 days for minimally invasive approaches compared to open surgery, which was 11–12 days. Mortality rates were low across all groups. Conclusions: Compliance with the data registry is high. ORC remains the most common approach. High-case volume surgeons and centres more commonly offer RARC. The majority of patients undergo LND. There is a trend towards higher reported rates of transfusion as centre volume decreases. LOS is shorter in RARC and LRC in comparison to ORC, but is otherwise similar across centres and surgeons. Level of evidence: 2b

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Urology,Surgery

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3