Curative rectal cancer surgery in a low-volume hospital: a quality assessment

Abstract

Aims: Hospital volume or caseload is often used as a surrogate measure for quality of care in rectal cancer treatment. The aim of this study was to assess outcome in a low-volume hospital and secondly to examine the impact of surgeon volume on the results.

Methods: A retrospective review of 131 patients' charts identified 102 patients receiving apparently curative resections for rectal cancer in the period 1993-2002. Our study population did not differ significantly from the national average except for shift towards more advanced Dukes stage (p=0.00) and a higher rate of node positive patients at time of diagnosis (p=0.00).

Results: There were no significant differences from the national outcome results, neither in perioperative mortality or complications, nor 5-year survival or local recurrences. Thirteen different on-staff surgeons performed rectal cancer surgery in our hospital in the decade, and median annual caseload was four. We detect a difference in 5-year survival when grouping the surgeons by annual caseload, but the significance is inconclusive. It is, however, interesting that in 85% of the resections, two or more certified gastrointestinal surgeons with specific training were involved. A relatively high number (9%) of discrepancies between the Norwegian Rectal Cancer Registry (NRCR) database and the local hospital database were identified.

Conclusion: Adequate results for surgical outcome can be achieved in a low-volume hospital. Surgeon volume showed inconclusive impact for our results of outcome. A local quality initiative is justified in addition to national registries.