Abstract:Background: A large body of evidence supports regionalization of complex oncologic surgery to high-volume surgeons at high-volume hospitals. However, whether there is heterogeneity of outcomes among high-volume surgeons at high-volume hospitals remains unknown. Methods: Patients who underwent esophagectomy, lung resection, pancreatectomy, or proctectomy for primary cancer were identified within the Medicare 100% Standard Analytic File (2013-2017). Mixed-effects analyses assessed the association between Leapfrog annual volume standards for surgeons (esophagectomy ≥7, lung resection ≥15, pancreatectomy ≥10, proctectomy ≥6) and hospitals (esophagectomy ≥20, lung resection ≥40, pancreatectomy ≥20, proctectomy ≥16) relative to postoperative complications and 90-day mortality. Additional analyses using New York's all-payer Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (2004-2015) were performed. Results: Among 112,154 Medicare beneficiaries, high-volume surgeons at high-volume hospitals were associated with lower adjusted odds of complications (esophagectomy: odds ratio [OR], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.61-0.86]; lung resection: OR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.82-0.94]; pancreatectomy: OR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.66-0.80]; proctectomy: OR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99]) and 90-day mortality (esophagectomy: OR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.44-0.76]; lung resection: OR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.73-0.93]; pancreatectomy: OR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.56-0.76]; proctectomy: OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.65-0.85]). For the average patient at the average high-volume hospital, there was a 2-fold difference in the adjusted complication rate between the best-performing and worst-performing high-volume surgeon for all operations (esophagectomy, 28%-55%; lung resection, 7%-21%; pancreatectomy, 16%-35%; proctectomy, 16%-28%). Wide variation was also present in adjusted 90-day mortality for esophagectomy (3.5%-9.3%). Results from New York's all-payer database were similar. Conclusions: Even among high-volume surgeons meeting the Leapfrog volume standards, wide variation in postoperative outcomes exists. These findings suggest that volume alone should not be used as a quality indicator, and quality metrics should be continuously evaluated across all surgeons and hospital systems. Lay summary: Previous studies have demonstrated a surgical volume-outcome relationship for high-risk operations-that is high-volume surgeons and hospitals that perform a specific surgical procedure more frequently have better outcomes for that operation. Although most high-volume surgeons had better outcomes, this study demonstrated that some high-volume surgeons did not have better outcomes. Therefore, volume is an important factor but should not be the only factor considered when assessing the quality of a surgeon and a hospital for cancer surgery.

Characteristics of High-Volume Lung Segmentectomy Hospitals: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Early Outcomes of Robotic Versus Thoracoscopic Segmentectomy for Early-Stage Lung Cancer: A Multi-Institutional Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Impact of Facility Surgical Volume on Survival in Patients With Cancer

Variation in outcomes across surgeons meeting the Leapfrog volume standard for complex oncologic surgery

A Propensity Score Matching Analysis of Survival Following Segmentectomy or Wedge Resection in Early-Stage Lung Invasive Adenocarcinoma or Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Comprehensive value implications of surgeon volume for lung cancer surgery: Use of an analytic framework within a regional health system

Survival Rates after Lobectomy, Segmentectomy, and Wedge Resection for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Sublobectomy Versus Lobectomy for Long-Term Survival Outcomes of Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with a Tumor Size ≤2 Cm Accompanied by Visceral Pleural Invasion: a SEER Population-Based Study

The Extent of Mediastinal Lymph Node Dissection Correlates with Survival of Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients after Resection: a Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study Analysis.

Survival and Long-Term Cause-Specific Mortality Associated with Stage IA Lung Adenocarcinoma after Wedge Resection Vs. Segmentectomy: A Population-Based Propensity Score Matching and Competing Risk Analysis

Impact of facility volume on outcomes in patients with pancreatic cancer treated with radiotherapy.

Comparing Robotic, Thoracoscopic, and Open Segmentectomy: A National Cancer Database Analysis

Segmentectomy versus lobectomy for deep clinical T1a-bN0M0 non-small cell lung cancer

Impact of facility volume on survival in primary endoscopic surgery for sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma

Association Between Surgical Quality and Long-Term Survival in Lung Cancer

Comparison of surgical outcomes and prognosis between wedge resection and simple Segmentectomy for GGO diameter between 2 cm and 3 cm in non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter and propensity score matching analysis

Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes of Uniportal Versus Three-Port Thoracoscopic Segmentectomy for Lung Cancer: a Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

Association of Hospital Procedure Volume and Outcomes in Patients with Colon Cancer at High Risk for Recurrence

European multicentre study evaluating the prognosis of peripheral early-stage lung adenocarcinoma patients operated on by segmentectomy or lobectomy

Segmentectomy versus Lobectomy in the United States

A Retrospective Study of Effectiveness of Thoracoscopic Lobectomy and Segmentectomy in Patients with Early-Stage Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer