ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between hospital volume and intermediate- and long-term patient survival for patients undergoing nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with RCC treated with nephrectomy between 2000 and 2010 were identified from the English Hospital Episode Statistics database and National Cancer Data Repository. Patients with nodal or metastatic disease were excluded. Hospitals were categorised into low- (LV; <20 cases/year), medium- (20-39 cases/year) and high-volume (HV; ≥40 cases/year), based on annual cases of RCC nephrectomy. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause mortality by hospital volume, adjusting for patient, tumour and surgical characteristics. We assessed conditional survival over three follow-up periods: short (30 days to 1 year), intermediate (1-3 years) and long (3-5 years). We additionally explored whether associations between volume and outcomes varied by tumour stage. RESULTS: A total of 12 912 patients were included. Patients in HV hospitals had a 34% reduction in mortality risks up to 1 year compared to those in LV hospitals (HR 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.53-0.83; P < 0.01). Assuming causality, treatment in HV hospitals was associated with one fewer death in every 71 patients treated. Benefit of nephrectomy centralisation did not change with higher T stage (P = 0.17). No significant association between hospital volume and survival was observed beyond the first year. CONCLUSIONS: Nephrectomy for RCC in HV hospitals was associated with improved survival for up to 1 year after treatment. Our results contribute new insights regarding the value of nephrectomy centralisation.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Renal Cell/mortality , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/surgery , Hospitals, High-Volume , Hospitals, Low-Volume , Kidney Neoplasms/mortality , Kidney Neoplasms/surgery , Nephrectomy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cohort Studies , Humans , Middle Aged , Survival Rate , Time Factors , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To describe the temporal trends in nephrectomy practice and outcomes for English patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult RCC nephrectomy patients treated between 2000 and 2010 were identified in the National Cancer Data Repository and Hospital Episode Statistics, and followed-up until date of death or 31 December 2015 (n = 30 763). We estimated the annual frequency for each nephrectomy type, the hospital and surgeon numbers and their case volumes. We analysed short-term surgical outcomes, as well as 1- and 5-year relative survivals. RESULTS: Annual RCC nephrectomy number increased by 66% during the study period. Hospital number decreased by 24%, whilst the median annual hospital volume increased from 10 to 23 (P < 0.01). Surgeon number increased by 27% (P < 0.01), doubling the median consultant number per hospital. The proportion of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) nephrectomies rose from 1% to 46%, whilst the proportion of nephron-sparing surgeries (NSS) increased from 5% to 16%, with 29% of all T1 disease treated with partial nephrectomy in 2010 (P < 0.01). The 30-day mortality rate halved from 2.4% to 1.1% and 90-day mortality decreased from 4.9% to 2.6% (P < 0.01). The 1-year relative survival rate increased from 86.9% to 93.4%, whilst the 5-year relative survival rate rose from 68.2% to 81.2% (P < 0.01). Improvements were most notable in patients aged ≥65 years and those with T3 and T4 disease. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical RCC management has changed considerably with nephrectomy centralisation and increased NSS and MIS. In parallel, we observed significant improvements in short- and long-term survival particularly for elderly patients and those with locally advanced disease.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Kidney Neoplasms/surgery , Nephrectomy/statistics & numerical data , Organ Sparing Treatments/statistics & numerical data , Aged , England/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nephrons , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Survival Analysis , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The provision of complex surgery is increasingly centralised to high-volume (HV) specialist hospitals. Evidence to support nephrectomy centralisation however has been inconsistent. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the association between hospital case volumes and perioperative outcomes in radical nephrectomy, partial nephrectomy and nephrectomy with venous thrombectomy. METHODS: Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies published between 1990 and 2016. Pooled effect estimates for nephrectomy mortality and complications were calculated for each nephrectomy type using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the effects of heterogeneity on the pooled effect estimates by excluding studies with the heaviest weighting, lowest methodological score and most likely to introduce bias from misclassification of standardised hospital volume. RESULTS: Some 226 372 patients from 16 publications were included in our review and meta-analysis. Considerable between-study heterogeneity was noted and only a few reported volume-outcome relationships specifically in partial nephrectomy or nephrectomy with venous thrombectomy.HV hospitals were correlated with a 26% and 52% reduction in mortality for radical nephrectomy (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.90, p<0.01) and nephrectomy with venous thrombectomy (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.81, p<0.01), respectively. In addition, radical nephrectomy in HV hospitals was associated with an 18% reduction in complications (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.92, p<0.01). No significant volume-outcome relationship in mortality (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.26, p=0.73) or complications (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.30, p=0.44) was observed for partial nephrectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that patients undergoing radical nephrectomy have improved outcomes when treated by HV hospitals. Evidence of this in partial nephrectomy and nephrectomy with venous thrombectomy is however not yet clear and could be secondary to the low number of studies included and the small patient number in our analyses. Further investigation is warranted to establish the full potential of nephrectomy centralisation particularly as existing evidence is of low quality with significant heterogeneity.
Subject(s)
Hospitals, High-Volume/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Low-Volume/statistics & numerical data , Nephrectomy/mortality , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Humans , Kidney Diseases/surgery , Kidney Neoplasms/surgery , Nephrectomy/adverse effects , Nephrectomy/classificationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There remains uncertainty on the need for bone staging in men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Current guidelines do not use mpMRI-staging information and rely on historic pathology grading. METHODS: We investigated the ability of mpMRI and the new Grade Group system to better predict bone metastasis status in a retrospective cohort study of 438 men with prostate cancer undergoing baseline mpMRI and isotope bone scintigraphy (BS). RESULTS: Including mpMRI-staging information significantly increased the specificity of bone metastasis detection from 3.0% to 24.2% (P<0.01) and sensitivity from 89.2% to 97.3%. The new Grade Group score demonstrated progressive increase in bone metastasis rates (P<0.001). A novel risk-stratification model combining Grade Groups, PSA and mpMRI staging shows promise in predicting bone metastasis and could potentially reduce BS usage by 22.4%-34.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating the new Grade Group system and mpMRI staging more accurately identified bone metastatic risk and suggests men with Grade Group ⩽2 and/or without radiological T3 disease could safely avoid routine bone staging.