Association of hospital volume and operative approach with clinical and financial outcomes of elective esophagectomy in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Literature regarding the impact of esophagectomy approach on hospitalizations costs and short-term outcomes is limited. Moreover, few have examined how institutional MIS experience affects costs. We thus examined utilization trends, costs, and short-term outcomes of open and minimally invasive (MIS) esophagectomy as well as assessing the relationship between institutional MIS volume and hospitalization costs. METHODS: All adults undergoing elective esophagectomy were identified from the 2016-2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Multiple regression models were used to assess approach with costs, in-hospital mortality, and major complications. Additionally, annual hospital MIS esophagectomy volume was modeled as a restricted cubic spline against costs. Institutions performing > 16 cases/year corresponding with the inflection point were categorized as high-volume hospitals (HVH). We subsequently examined the association of HVH status with costs, in-hospital mortality, and major complications in patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy. RESULTS: Of an estimated 29,116 patients meeting inclusion, 10,876 (37.4%) underwent MIS esophagectomy. MIS approaches were associated with $10,600 in increased incremental costs (95% CI 8,800-12,500), but lower odds of in-hospital mortality (AOR 0.76; 95% CI 0.61-0.96) or major complications (AOR 0.68; 95% CI 0.60, 0.77). Moreover, HVH status was associated with decreased adjusted costs, as well as lower odds of postoperative complications for patients undergoing MIS operations. CONCLUSION: In this nationwide study, MIS esophagectomy was associated with increased hospitalization costs, but improved short-term outcomes. In MIS operations, cost differences were mitigated by volume, as HVH status was linked with decreased costs in the setting of decreased odds of complications. Centralization of care to HVH centers should be considered as MIS approaches are increasingly utilized.

Influence of broader geographic allograft sharing on outcomes and cost in smaller lung transplant centers.

OBJECTIVE: On November 24, 2017, Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network implemented a change to lung allocation replacing donor service area with a 250 nautical mile radius around donor hospitals. We sought to evaluate the experience of a small to medium size center following implementation. METHODS: Patients (47 pre and 54 post) undergoing lung transplantation were identified from institutional database from January 2016 to October 2019. Detailed chart review and analysis of institutional cost data was performed. Univariate analysis was performed to compare eras. RESULTS: Similar short-term mortality and primary graft dysfunction were observed between groups. Decreased local donation (68% vs 6%; P < .001), increased travel distance (145 vs 235 miles; P = .004), travel cost ($8626 vs $14,482; P < .001), and total procurement cost ($60,852 vs $69,052; P = .001) were observed postimplementation. We also document an increase in waitlist mortality postimplementation (6.9 vs 31.6 per 100 patient-years; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Following implementation of the new allocation policy in a small to medium size center, several changes were in accordance with policy intention. However, concerning shifts emerged, including increased waitlist mortality and resource utilization. Continued close monitoring of transplant centers stratified by size and location are paramount to maintaining global availability of lung transplantation to all Americans regardless of geographic residence or socioeconomic status.

Is Improved Survival in Early-Stage Pancreatic Cancer Worth the Extra Cost at High-Volume Centers?

BACKGROUND: Volume of operative cases may be an important factor associated with improved survival for early-stage pancreatic cancer. Most high-volume pancreatic centers are also academic institutions, which have been associated with additional healthcare costs. We hypothesized that at high-volume centers, the value of the extra survival outweighs the extra cost. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study used data from the California Cancer Registry linked to the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2012. Stage I-II pancreatic cancer patients who underwent resection were included. Multivariable analyses estimated overall survival and 30-day costs at low- vs high-volume pancreatic surgery centers. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental net benefit (INB) were estimated, and statistical uncertainty was characterized using net benefit regression. RESULTS: Of 2,786 patients, 46.5% were treated at high-volume centers and 53.5% at low-volume centers. There was a 0.45-year (5.4 months) survival benefit (95% CI 0.21-0.69) and a $7,884 extra cost associated with receiving surgery at high-volume centers (95% CI $4,074-$11,694). The ICER was $17,529 for an additional year of survival (95% CI $7,997-$40,616). For decision-makers willing to pay more than $20,000 for an additional year of life, high-volume centers appear cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Although healthcare costs were greater at high-volume centers, patients undergoing pancreatic surgery at high-volume centers experienced a survival benefit (5.4 months). The extra cost of $17,529 per additional year is quite modest for improved survival and is economically attractive by many oncology standards.

Impact of payer status and hospital volume on outcomes after head and neck oncologic reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: High-volume centers improve outcomes in head and neck cancer (HNCA) reconstruction, yet it is unknown whether patients of all payer status benefit equally. METHODS: We identified patients undergoing HNCA surgery between 2002 and 2015 using the National Inpatient Sample. Outcomes included receipt of care at high-volume centers, receipt of reconstruction, and post-operative complications. Multivariate regression analysis was stratified by payer status. RESULTS: 37,442 patients received reconstruction out of 101,204 patients who underwent HNCA surgery (37.0%). Privately-insured and Medicaid patients had similar odds of receiving high-volume care (OR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.87-1.11) and undergoing reconstruction (OR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.86-1.05). Medicaid beneficiaries had higher odds of complication (OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.22-1.51). The discrepancy in complication odds was significant at low-volume (OR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.12-1.84) and high-volume centers (OR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.15-1.47). CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid beneficiaries are as likely to receive care at high-volume centers and undergo reconstruction as privately-insured individuals. However, they have poorer outcomes than privately-insured individuals at both low- and high-volume centers.

Trends in Costs and Risk Factors of 30-Day Readmissions for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

As transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) continues its rapid growth as a treatment approach for aortic stenosis, costs associated with TAVI, and its burden to healthcare systems will assume greater importance. Patients undergoing TAVI between January 2012 and November 2017 in the Nationwide Readmission Database were identified. Trends in cause-specific readmissions were assessed using Poisson regression. Thirty-day TAVI cost burden (cost of index TAVI hospitalization plus total 30-day readmissions cost) was adjusted to 2017 U.S. dollars and trended over year from 2012 to 2017. Overall, 47,255 TAVI were included and 30-day readmissions declined from 20% to 12% (p <0.0001). Most common causes of readmission (heart failure, infection/sepsis, gastrointestinal causes, and respiratory) declined as well, except arrhythmia/heart block which increased (1.0% to 1.4%, p <0.0001). Cost of TAVI hospitalization ($52,024 to $44,110, p <0.0001) and 30-day cost burden ($54,122 to $45,252, p <0.0001) declined. Whereas costs of an average readmission did not change ($9,734 to $10,068, p = 0.06), cost burden of readmissions (per every TAVI performed) declined ($4,061 to $1,883, p <0.0001), including reductions in each of the top 5 causes except arrhythmia/heart block ($171 to $263, p = 0.04). Index TAVI hospitalizations complicated by acute kidney injury, length of stay ≥5 days, low hospital procedural volume, and skilled nursing facility discharge were associated with increased odds of 30-day readmissions. In conclusion, the costs of index hospitalizations and 30-day cost burden for TAVI in the U.S. significantly declined from 2012 to 2017. However, readmissions due to arrhythmia/heart block and their associated costs increased. Continued strategies to prevent readmissions, especially those for conduction disturbances, are crucial in the efforts to optimize outcomes and costs with the ongoing expansion of TAVI.

Impact of Hospital Volume on Outcomes of Elective Pneumonectomy in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in surgical technique and perioperative management, pneumonectomy remains associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of annual institutional volume of anatomic lung resections on outcomes after elective pneumonectomy. METHODS: We evaluated all patients who underwent elective pneumonectomy from 2005 to 2014 in the National Inpatient Sample. Patients less than 18 years of age, or with trauma-related diagnoses, mesothelioma, or a nonelective admission were excluded. Hospitals were divided into volume quartiles based on annual institutional anatomic lung resection caseload. We studied the effect of institutional volume on inhospital mortality, complications, and failure to rescue, as well as costs and length of stay. RESULTS: During the study period, an estimated 22,739 patients underwent pneumonectomy, with a reduction in national mortality from 7.9% to 5.5% (P trend = .045). Compared with the highest volume centers, operations performed at the lowest volume hospitals were associated with 1.74 increased odds of mortality (95% confidence interval, 1.14 to 2.66). Despite similar odds of postoperative complications, low volume hospital status was associated with increased failure to rescue rates (18.3% vs 12.7%, P = .024) and adjusted odds of mortality (1.70; 95% confidence interval, 1.09 to 2.64) after any complication. CONCLUSIONS: High volume hospital status is strongly associated with reduced mortality and failure to rescue rates after pneumonectomy. Efforts to centralize care or disseminate best practices may lead to improved national outcomes for this high-risk procedure.

Centralization of Pancreatic Surgery Improves Results: Review.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The effect of operation volume on the outcomes of pancreatic surgery has been a subject of research since the 1990s. In several countries around the world, this has led to the centralization of pancreatic surgery. However, controversy persists as to the benefits of centralization and what the optimal operation volume for pancreatic surgery actually is. This review summarizes the data on the effect of centralization on mortality, complications, hospital facilities used, and costs regarding pancreatic surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic librarian-assisted search was performed in PubMed covering the years from August 1999 to August 2019. All studies comparing results of open pancreatic resections from high- and low-volume centers were included. In total 44, published articles were analyzed. RESULTS: Studies used a variety of different criteria for high-volume and low-volume centers, which hampers the evaluating of the effect of operation volume. However, mortality in high-volume centers is consistently reported to be lower than in low-volume centers. In addition, failure to rescue critically ill patients is more common in low-volume centers. Cost-effectiveness has also been evaluated in the literature. Length of hospital stay in particular has been reported to be shorter in high-volume centers than in low-volume centers. CONCLUSION: The effect of centralization on the outcomes of pancreatic surgery has been under active research and the beneficial effect of it is associated especially with better short-term prognosis after surgery.

Bundled Payments for Care Improvement: Health System Experience With Lower Extremity Joint Replacement at Higher and Lower Volume Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative was introduced in 2013 to reduce Medicare healthcare costs while preserving or enhancing quality. We examined data from a metropolitan healthcare system comprised of 1 higher volume hospital and 4 lower volume hospitals that voluntarily elected to participate in the BPCI Major Joint Replacement of the Lower Extremity Model 2, beginning July 1, 2015. Stratifying the data by hospital volume, we determined how costs changed during the 16-month period when all 5 hospitals participated compared to the 1-year period preceding BPCI participation, where savings were achieved, and how the hospitals were rewarded. METHODS: The Medicare data included the 90-day target for each episode and actual part A and part B spending for the anchor hospitalization plus all post-acute payments including inpatient rehabilitation, skilled nursing, home health, outpatient physical therapy, and hospital readmissions. RESULTS: The mean episode of care cost decreased by 11.1% (from $21,324 to $18,953) at the higher volume hospitals and by 8.3% (from $25,724 to $23,584) at the lower volume hospitals during BPCI participation compared to the preceding year. The savings were achieved by reducing the use of inpatient rehabilitation, shortening the length of stay at skilled nursing facilities, and decreasing readmission rates. Although the higher volume hospital achieved an increased mean savings of $230 per episode compared to the lower volume hospitals ($2371 vs $2141), it was penalized $490 per episode after reconciling the actual Medicare expenditures with the BPCI targets while the lower volume hospitals received a mean reward of $315 per episode. CONCLUSION: The BPCI initiative decreased costs and readmissions within our healthcare system. Despite substantial savings compared to the preceding year, the higher volume hospital's low target derived from its 2009-2012 baseline costs was not achieved which resulted in a penalty and led it to withdraw from the BPCI initiative in October 2016.

Cost of Major Complications After Liver Resection in the United States: Are High-volume Centers Cost-effective?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to estimate the cost of major complications after liver resection and determine whether high-volume (HV) centers are cost-effective. METHODS: From 2002 to 2011, 96,107 cases of liver resection performed in the United States were identified using Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Hospitals were categorized as HV (150+ cases/yr), medium-volume (51-149 cases/yr), and low-volume (LV) (1-50 cases/yr) centers. Multivariable regression analysis identified predictors of cost. Propensity score matching comparing cases with versus without complications and costs of specific complications were estimated. Cost-effectiveness of HV centers was determined by calculating the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, the occurrence of a major complication added $33,855 extra cost, increased mean length of stay by 8.7 [95% confidence interval (CI), 8.4-9] days and increased risk of death by 9.3% (all P < 0.001). The cost of most common complications was wound infection (3.8%, $21,995), renal failure (2.8%, $19,201), respiratory failure (2.7%, $25,169), and hemorrhage (3.3%, $9,180), whereas sepsis (0.8%, $33,009), gastrointestinal bleeding (0.5%, $32,835), fistula (0.2%, $27,079), and foreign body removal (0.1%, $29,404) were most costly, but less frequent. Compared with LV centers, liver resection at HV centers was associated with $5109 (95% CI, 4409-5809, P < 0.001) more cost per case, yet on average 0.54 years (95% CI, 0.23-0.86) longer survival for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $9392. CONCLUSIONS: HV centers were cost-effective at performing liver resection compared with LV centers. After liver resection, complications such as surgical site infection, respiratory failure, and renal failure contributed the most to annual cost burden.

Association of Hospital Volume With Laryngectomy Outcomes in Patients With Larynx Cancer.

Importance: A volume-outcome association exists for larynx cancer surgery, but to date it has not been investigated for specific surgical procedures. Objectives: To characterize the volume-outcome association specifically for laryngectomy surgery and to identify a minimum hospital volume threshold associated with improved outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, the Nationwide Inpatient Sample was used to identify 45 156 patients who underwent laryngectomy procedures for a malignant laryngeal or hypopharyngeal neoplasm between January 2001 and December 2011. The analysis was performed in 2018. Hospital laryngectomy volume was modeled as a categorical variable. Main Outcomes and Measures: Associations between hospital volume and in-hospital mortality, complications, length of hospitalization, and costs were examined using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results: Among 45 156 patients (mean age, 62.6 years; age range, 20-96 years; 80.2% male) at 5516 hospitals, higher-volume hospitals were more likely to be teaching hospitals in urban locations; were more likely to treat patients who had hypopharyngeal cancer, were of white race/ethnicity, were admitted electively, had no comorbidity, and had private insurance; and were more likely to perform flap reconstruction or concurrent neck dissection. After controlling for all other variables, hospitals treating more than 6 cases per year were associated with lower odds of surgical and medical complications, with a greater reduction in the odds of complications with increasing hospital volume. High-volume hospitals in the top-volume quintile (>28 cases per year) were associated with decreased odds of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.23-0.88), postoperative surgical complications (odds ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.50-0.79), and acute medical complications (odds ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48-0.81). A statistically meaningful negative association was observed between very high-volume hospital care and the mean incremental length of hospitalization (-3.7 days; 95% CI, -4.9 to -2.4 days) and hospital-related costs (-$4777; 95% CI, -$9463 to -$900). Conclusions and Relevance: Laryngectomy outcomes appear to be associated with hospital volume, with reduced morbidity associated with a minimum hospital volume threshold and with reduced mortality, morbidity, length of hospitalization, and costs associated with higher hospital volume. These data support the concept of centralization of complex care at centers able to meet minimum volume thresholds to improve patient outcomes.

Effects of Hospital Volume on Patient Outcomes and Costs in Infants With Pyloric Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: There is a well-established relationship between surgical volume and outcomes after complex pediatric operations. However, this relationship remains unclear for common pediatric procedures. The aim of our study was to investigate the effect of hospital volume on outcomes after hypertrophic pyloric stenosis (HPS). METHODS: The Kid's Inpatient Database (2003-2012) was queried for patients with congenital HPS, who underwent pyloromyotomy. Hospitals were stratified based on case volume. Low-volume hospitals performed the lowest quartile of pyloromyotomies per year and high-volume hospitals managed the highest quartile. Outcomes included complications, mortality, length of stay (LOS), and cost. RESULTS: Overall, 2137 hospitals performed 51,792 pyloromyotomies. The majority were low-volume hospitals (n = 1806). High-volume hospitals comprised mostly children's hospitals (68%) and teaching hospitals (96.1%). The overall mortality rate was 0.1% and median LOS was 2 d. High-volume hospitals had lower overall complications (1.8% versus 2.5%, P < 0.01) and fewer patients with prolonged LOS (17.0% versus 23.5%, P < 0.01) but had similar rates of individual complications, similar mortality, and equivalent median LOS as low-volume hospitals. High-volume hospitals also had higher costs by $1132 per patient ($5494 versus $4362, P < 0.01). Regional variations in outcomes and costs exist with higher complication rates in the West and lower costs in the South. There was no association between mortality or LOS with hospital volume or region. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with pyloric stenosis treated at high-volume hospitals had no clinically significant difference in outcomes despite having higher costs. Although high-volume hospitals offer improved outcomes after complex pediatric surgeries, they may not provide a significant advantage over low-volume hospitals in managing common pediatric procedures, such as pyloromyotomy for congenital HPS.

Drivers of Cost for Pancreatic Surgery: It's Not About Hospital Volume.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes for pancreatic resection have been studied extensively due to the high morbidity and mortality rates, with high-volume centers achieving superior outcomes. Ongoing investigations include healthcare costs, given the national focus on reducing expenditures. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the relationships between pancreatic surgery costs with perioperative outcomes and volume status. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 27,653 patients who underwent elective pancreatic resections from October 2013 to June 2017 using the Vizient database. Costs were calculated from charges using cost-charge ratios and adjusted for geographic variation. Generalized linear modeling adjusting for demographic, clinical, and operation characteristics was performed to assess the relationships between cost and length of stay, complications, in-hospital mortality, readmissions, and hospital volume. High-volume centers were defined as hospitals performing ≥ 19 operations annually. RESULTS: The unadjusted mean cost for pancreatic resection and corresponding hospitalization was $20,352. There were no differences in mean costs for pancreatectomies performed at high- and low-volume centers [- $1175, 95% confidence interval (CI) - $3254 to $904, p = 0.27]. In subgroup analysis comparing adjusted mean costs at high- and low-volume centers, there was no difference among patients without an adverse outcome (- $99, 95% CI - $1612 to 1414, p = 0.90), one or more adverse outcomes (- $1586, 95% CI - $4771 to 1599, p = 0.33), or one or more complications (- $2835, 95% CI - $7588 to 1919, p = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: While high-volume hospitals have fewer adverse outcomes, there is no relationship between surgical volume and costs, which suggests that, in itself, surgical volume is not an indicator of improved healthcare efficiency reflected by lower costs. Patient referral to high-volume centers may not reduce overall healthcare expenditures for pancreatic operations.

Effect of hospital volume on outcomes of percutaneous peripheral atherectomy - An observational analysis from National Inpatient Sample.

BACKGROUND: Although the published literature has reported an inverse association between hospital volume and outcomes of coronary interventions, sparse data are available for percutaneous peripheral atherectomy (PPA). The aim of our study was to examine the effect of hospital volume on outcomes of PPA. METHODS: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database of the year 2012, PPA with ICD-9 code of 17.56 was identified. The primary outcomes were mortality and amputation rates; secondary outcomes were peri-procedural complications, cost, and length of hospitalization and discharge disposition of the patient. Multivariate models were generated for predictors of the outcomes. RESULTS: We identified a total of 21,015 patients with mean age of 69.53 years, with 56% males. Higher hospital volume centers were associated with a significantly lower mortality (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.30-0.57, p < 0.0001), amputation rates (5.34% vs. 9.32%, p < 0.0001), combined endpoint of mortality and complications (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.49-0.58, p < 0.0001), shorter length of hospital stay (LOS) (4.86 vs. 6.79 days, p < 0.0001) and lower hospitalization cost ($23,062 vs. $30,794, p < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis for acute and chronic limb ischemia showed similar results. CONCLUSION: Hospital procedure volume is an independent predictor of mortality, amputation rates, complications, LOS, and costs in patients undergoing PPA with an inverse relationship.

The Cost of Failure: Assessing the Cost-Effectiveness of Rescuing Patients from Major Complications After Liver Resection Using the National Inpatient Sample.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost of rescue and cost of failure and determine cost-effectiveness of rescue from major complications at high-volume (HV) and low-volume (LV) centers METHODS: Ninety-six thousand one hundred seven patients undergoing liver resection were identified from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) between 2002 and 2011. The incremental cost of rescue and cost of FTR were calculated. Using propensity-matched cohorts, a cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between HV and LV hospitals. RESULTS: Ninety-six thousand one hundred seven patients were identified in NIS. The overall mortality was 2.3% and was lowest in HV centers (HV 1.4% vs. MV 2.1% vs. LV 2.6%; p < 0.001). Major complications occurred in 14.9% of hepatectomies and were comparable regardless of volume (HV 14.2% vs. MV 14.3% vs. LV 15.4%; p < 0.001). The FTR rate was substantially lower among HV centers (HV 7.7%, MV 11%, LV 12%; p < 0.001). At a willingness to pay benchmark of $50,000 per year of life saved, both HV (ICER = $3296) and MV (ICER = $4182) centers were cost-effective at rescuing patients from a major complication compared to LV hospitals. CONCLUSION: Not only was FTR less common at HV hospitals, but the management of most major complications was cost-effective at higher volume centers.

The Impact of Surgical Volume on Outcomes and Cost in Cleft Repair: A Kids' Inpatient Database Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Centralization of specialist services, including cleft service delivery, is occurring worldwide with the aim of improving the outcomes. This study examines the relationship between hospital surgical volume in cleft palate repair and outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the Kids' Inpatient Database was undertaken. Children 3 years or younger undergoing cleft palate repair in 2012 were identified. Hospital volume was categorized by cases per year as low volume (LV; 0-14), intermediate volume (IV; 15-46), or high volume (HV; 47-99); differences in complications, hospital costs, and length of stay (LOS) were determined by hospital volume. RESULTS: Data for 2389 children were retrieved: 24.9% (n = 595) were LV, 50.1% (n = 1196) were IV, and 25.0% (n = 596) were HV. High-volume centers were more frequently located in the West (71.9%) compared with LV (19.9%) or IV (24.5%) centers (P < 0.001 for hospital region). Median household income was more commonly highest quartile in HV centers compared with IV or LV centers (32.3% vs 21.7% vs 18.1%, P < 0.001). There was no difference in complications between different volume centers (P = 0.74). Compared with HV centers, there was a significant decrease in mean costs for LV centers ($9682 vs $,378, P < 0.001) but no significant difference in cost for IV centers ($9260 vs $9682, P = 0.103). Both IV and LV centers had a significantly greater LOS when compared with HV centers (1.97 vs 2.10 vs 1.74, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite improvement in LOS in HV centers, we did not find a reduction in cost in HV centers. Further research is needed with analysis of outpatient, long-term outcomes to ensure widespread cost-efficiency.

Surgeon volume and hospital volume in endocrine neck surgery: how many procedures are needed for reaching a safety level and acceptable costs? A systematic narrative review.

The relationship between quality of care and provider's experience is well known in all fields of surgery. Even in thyroidectomies and parathyroidectomies, the emphasis on positive volume-outcome relationships is believed. It led us to an evaluation of volume activity's impact in terms of quality of care. A systematic narrative review was performed. According to the PRISMA criteria, we selected 87 paper and, after the study selection was performed, 22 studies were finally included in this review. All articles included were unanimous in attributing to activity volume of surgeons as well as centers a substantial importance. Some differences in outcomes between these investigated categories have been found: best results of the high volume surgeon is evident expecially in terms of complications, on the contrary best outcomes of a high volume center are mainly economics, such as hospital stay and general costs of the procedures. A cut-off of 35-40 thyroidectomies per year for single surgeon, and 90-100 thyroidectomies for single center appears reasonable for identifying an adequate activity. Concerning parathyroidectomy, we can consider reasonable a cut off at 10-12 operations/year. More studies are needed in a European or more circumscribed perspective.

Superior 3-Year Value of Open and Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm with High-Volume Providers.

BACKGROUND: Conflicting literature exists regarding resource utilization for cardiovascular care when stratified by provider volume. This study investigates the differences in value of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair by high- and low-volume providers. The hypothesis of this study is that high-volume providers will provide superior value AAA repairs when compared to low-volume providers. METHODS: Using the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database and its linked death database, patients undergoing intact open and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) were identified over a 10-year period. Charge data were normalized to year 2016 dollars and the data stratified by repair modality and annual surgeon volume. Univariate technique was used to compare the 2 groups over a 3-year follow-up period. RESULTS: Nine hundred eleven surgeons performed open AAA repairs and 615 performed EVAR. For both repair modalities, and despite a patient population with more vascular risk factors, the cumulative adjusted charge for all aneurysm-related care was significantly less for high-volume providers than low-volume providers. The calculated 3-year value-patient life years per cumulative charge-was also superior for high-volume providers compared to low-volume providers. This difference in charge and value persisted after propensity score matching for race, sex, insurance status, and common vascular comorbidities including hypertension, dyslipidemia, and a history of smoking. CONCLUSIONS: High-volume surgeons performing repair of aortic aneurysms provide superior value when compared to low-volume providers. The improved value margin is driven by both lower charge and improved survival, despite an increased incidence of cardiovascular comorbidities. This study adds support for the regionalization of care for patients with aortic aneurysm.

Antireflux Surgery in the USA: Influence of Surgical Volume on Perioperative Outcomes and Costs-Time for Centralization?

BACKGROUND: Few studies have analyzed the relationship between surgical volume and outcomes after antireflux procedures. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of surgical volume on postoperative results and costs for patients undergoing surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease. METHODS: We analyzed the National Inpatient Sample (period 2000-2013). Adult patients (≥18 years old) with gastroesophageal reflux disease who underwent fundoplication were included. Hospital surgical volume was determined using the 30th and 60th percentile cut points using weighted discharges and categorized as low (<10 operations/year), intermediate (10-25 operations/year), or high (>25 operations/year). We performed multivariable logistic regression models to assess the effect of surgical volume on patient outcomes. RESULTS: The studied cohort comprised 75,544 patients who had antireflux surgery. When operations performed at low-volume hospitals, postoperative bleeding, cardiac failure, renal failure, respiratory failure, and inpatient mortality were more common. In intermediate-volume hospitals, patients were more likely to have postoperative infection, esophageal perforation, bleeding, cardiac failure, renal failure, and respiratory failure. The length of hospital stay was longer at low- and intermediate-volume hospitals (1.08 and 0.55 days longer, respectively). There was an increase in charges of 5120 dollars per patient at low-volume centers, and 4010 dollars per patient at intermediate-volume centers. CONCLUSIONS: When antireflux surgery is performed at high-volume hospitals, morbidity is lower, length of hospital stay is shorter, and costs for the healthcare system are decreased.

Craniosynostosis Surgery: Does Hospital Case Volume Impact Outcomes or Cost?

BACKGROUND: The relationships between hospital/surgeon characteristics and operative outcomes and cost are being scrutinized increasingly. In patients with craniosynostosis specifically, the relationship between hospital volume and outcomes has yet to be characterized. METHODS: Subjects undergoing craniosynostosis surgery between 2004 and 2015 were identified in the Pediatric Health Information System. Outcomes were compared between two exposure groups, those undergoing treatment at a high-volume institution (>40 cases per year), and those undergoing treatment at a low-volume institution (40 cases per year). Primary outcomes were any complication, prolonged length of stay, and increased total cost. RESULTS: Over 13,000 patients (n = 13,112) from 49 institutions met inclusion criteria. In multivariate regression analyses, subjects treated in high-volume centers were less likely to experience any complication (OR, 0.764; p < 0.001), were less likely to have an extended length of stay (OR, 0.624; p < 0.001), and were less likely to have increased total cost (OR, 0.596; p < 0.001). Subjects undergoing strip craniectomy in high-volume centers were also less likely to have any complication (OR, 0.708; p = 0.018) or increased total cost (OR, 0.51; p < 0.001). Subjects undergoing midvault reconstruction in high-volume centers were less likely to experience any complications (OR, 0.696; p = 0.002), have an extended length of stay (OR, 0.542; p < 0.001), or have increased total cost (OR, 0.495; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In hospitals performing a high volume of craniosynostosis surgery, subjects had significantly decreased odds of experiencing a complication, prolonged length of stay, or increased total cost compared with those undergoing treatment in low-volume institutions. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.