Association between surgical case volume and survival in T1 bladder cancer: A need for centralization of care?
Keywords:muscle-invasive bladder cancer, surgical case volume, outome, rationalization of care
Introduction: Prior research demonstrated an association between surgeon case volume and survival in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (BC). This relationship, however, has not been investigated in the setting of high-risk, non-muscle-invasive BC (NMIBC). Hence, we investigated whether a higher surgeon case volume of T1 BC translates into improved survival outcomes.
Methods: Province-wide pathology reports (January 2002 to December 2015) were linked with health administrative data to identify patients diagnosed with T1 BC. For each patient, we determined the T1 case volume of the involved surgeon by benchmarking (percentile) her/him against his/her colleagues during a lookback period of one year. The volume-outcome (overall survival) relationship was then investigated by Cox proportional hazards regression (unadjusted and adjusted for a wide range of assumed confounders) that incorporated volume in three different ways (≥80th percentile vs. below, ≥ median vs. below, continuous [quintiles]). Effect sizes were presented as hazard ratios (95% confidence interval).
Results: We identified 7426 patients who were diagnosed with T1 BC and followed for a median of 4.8 years. A third of all patients (n=1895, 25.5%) received surgery by a high-volume surgeon (80th percentile and higher). Higher T1 case volume was associated with improved survival both in unadjusted (80th percentile: 0.93 [0.86– 0.99]; median: 0.93 [0.87–0.99]; continuous: 0.97 [0.94–0.99]) and adjusted analysis (80th percentile: 0.94 [0.88–1.01]; median: 0.93 [0.87–0.99]; continuous: 0.97 [0.95–0.99]) regardless of the method by which volume was analyzed.
Conclusions: This population-based cohort study demonstrated a volume-outcome relationship in T1 BC and raises questions regarding the centralization of care in high-risk NMIBC.
How to Cite
You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:
- Post the Article on any Web site
- Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
- Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
- Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.
The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.
You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.
The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:
- That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
- That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
- That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
- That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.