ArticleWiener klinische Wochenschrift2025
Does surgeon or hospital volume influence outcome in dedicated colorectal units?-A Viennese perspective.
Article in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveA clear relationship between higher surgeon volume and improved outcomes has not been convincingly established in rectal cancer surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of individual surgeon's caseload and hospital volume on perioperative outcome.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 336 consecutive patients undergoing oncological resection for rectal cancer at two Viennese hospitals between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2020. The effect of baseline characteristics as well as surgeons' caseloads (low volume: 0-5 cases per year, high volume > 5 cases per year) on postoperative complication rates (Clavien-Dindo Classification groups of < 3 and ≥ 3) were evaluated.
resultsNo differences in baseline characteristics were found between centers in terms of sex, smoking status, or comorbidities of patients. Interestingly, only 14.7% of surgeons met the criteria to be classified as high-volume surgeons, while accounting for 66.3% of all operations. There was a significant difference in outcomes depending on the treating center in univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analysis (odds ratio (OR) = 2.403, p = 0.008). Open surgery was associated with lower complication rates than minimally invasive approaches in univariate analysis (OR = 0.417, p = 0.003, 95%CI = 0.232-0.739) but not multivariate analysis. This indicated that the center's policy rather than surgeon volume or mode of surgery impact on postoperative outcomes.
conclusionTreating center standards impacted on outcome, while individual caseload of surgeons or mode of surgery did not independently affect complication rates in this analysis. The majority of rectal cancer resections are performed by a small number of surgeons in Viennese hospitals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.