Surgeon-Level Variation in Outcome following Esophageal Atresia Repair Is Not Explained by Volume
dx.doi.org shows its articles on its own site.
Read the article on dx.doi.org ↗Article · Dec 2020 · 1 min read
In brief
In brief
22-year retrospective study of 190 esophageal atresia repairs found surgeon-level outcome variation that was not explained by case volume or years of experience. Sequential analysis revealed individual surgeon performance patterns, including deterioration in one case, challenging the assumption that centralizing EA surgery would improve outcomes.
Written by the GCMD Library team from the article.
Introduction To assess whether there is a difference in operative outcome for esophageal atresia (EA) depending on a surgeon's seniority as defined by years in consultant practice or number of cases performed. In addition a Clavien–Dindo score was used to sequentially analyze the outcome of each surgeon's EA procedure.
Materials and Methods All repairs performed over 22 years in an English regional center were analyzed. Outcomes were: death, anastomotic leak, need for dilatation, need for more than three dilatations, need for fundoplication, and a Clavien–Dindo adverse outcome of ≥3b. Possible explanatory variables were: number of prior repairs by the surgeon, surgeon's years of consultant experience. We also examined the effect of variables intrinsic to the infant as possible confounding variables and as independent predictors of outcome.
Results A total of 190 repairs were performed or supervised by 12 consultants. There was no significant association between consultant experience and any objective outcome. However, sequential analysis suggests there is variation between surgeons in the incidence of Clavien–Dindo events of ≥3b. Performance showed deterioration in one case. Mortality was explicable by cardiac and renal anomalies.
Conclusion There are surgeon-level variations in outcomes for the procedure of EA repair, but they are not explained by volume. Surgeon performance can deteriorate. Our study would not support the concept that patient outcomes could be improved by concentrating the provision of this surgery to fewer hospitals or surgeons.