Volume, specialty background, practice pattern, and outcomes in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: an analysis of the national inpatient sample

Jac Cooper, Sapan Desai, Steve Scaife, Chad Gonczy, John Mellinger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a complex endoscopic procedure performed by both gastroenterologists and surgeons. There has been recent controversy regarding training paradigms for gastrointestinal endoscopy. No prior studies have evaluated comparative outcomes for ERCP in relation to specialty training background. This study utilized the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to assess ERCP outcomes as a function of training background, practice pattern, and individual provider volume. Methods: NIS data was queried from 2007 to 2009. Gastroenterologists and surgeons were identified by procedural profiles and unique physician identifiers. Comorbidity was assessed via Charlson Score. Outcomes including cost, length of stay (LOS), and mortality were analyzed, with and without propensity score matching (PSM). Analysis of outcomes as a function of provider procedural volume was also performed. Comparison for statistical significance was accomplished via t test. Results: A total of 110,811 ERCP’s were identified, of which 42,025 (37.9%) were performed by surgeons. Surgeons exhibited longer LOS (8.7 vs. 7.2 days), overall cost ($24,739 vs. $16,960), and mortality (3.9 vs. 1.2%, odds ratio 3.3), with p < 0.001 for all measures. 71.6% of surgical patients, versus 19.6% of gastroenterologic, underwent subsequent inpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy or laparotomy. Outcome differences persisted when PSM included performance of subsequent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Evaluation of minimum performance standards revealed up to a fivefold increased mortality for providers who performed less than 5 ERCP’s/year, irrespective of specialty background. Conclusions: Gastroenterologists demonstrate favorable gross outcomes compared to surgeons performing ERCP. Differences may correlate in part with more frequent subsequent surgical management of comorbid conditions by surgical providers. Lower volume providers achieve inferior outcomes regardless of specialty background. Analyses of this type may help inform discussions on optimal training and proficiency paradigms, including maintenance of proficiency, for therapeutic endoscopic procedures.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2953-2958
Number of pages6
JournalSurgical endoscopy
Volume31
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2017

Fingerprint

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography
Inpatients
Propensity Score
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
Mortality
Length of Stay
Costs and Cost Analysis
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Laparotomy
Comorbidity
Odds Ratio
Maintenance
Surgeons
Physicians
Gastroenterologists

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery

Cite this

Cooper, Jac ; Desai, Sapan ; Scaife, Steve ; Gonczy, Chad ; Mellinger, John. / Volume, specialty background, practice pattern, and outcomes in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography : an analysis of the national inpatient sample. In: Surgical endoscopy. 2017 ; Vol. 31, No. 7. pp. 2953-2958.
@article{40a85e7d6c8b4b1cad667eff30f6b94c,
title = "Volume, specialty background, practice pattern, and outcomes in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: an analysis of the national inpatient sample",
abstract = "Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a complex endoscopic procedure performed by both gastroenterologists and surgeons. There has been recent controversy regarding training paradigms for gastrointestinal endoscopy. No prior studies have evaluated comparative outcomes for ERCP in relation to specialty training background. This study utilized the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to assess ERCP outcomes as a function of training background, practice pattern, and individual provider volume. Methods: NIS data was queried from 2007 to 2009. Gastroenterologists and surgeons were identified by procedural profiles and unique physician identifiers. Comorbidity was assessed via Charlson Score. Outcomes including cost, length of stay (LOS), and mortality were analyzed, with and without propensity score matching (PSM). Analysis of outcomes as a function of provider procedural volume was also performed. Comparison for statistical significance was accomplished via t test. Results: A total of 110,811 ERCP’s were identified, of which 42,025 (37.9{\%}) were performed by surgeons. Surgeons exhibited longer LOS (8.7 vs. 7.2 days), overall cost ($24,739 vs. $16,960), and mortality (3.9 vs. 1.2{\%}, odds ratio 3.3), with p < 0.001 for all measures. 71.6{\%} of surgical patients, versus 19.6{\%} of gastroenterologic, underwent subsequent inpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy or laparotomy. Outcome differences persisted when PSM included performance of subsequent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Evaluation of minimum performance standards revealed up to a fivefold increased mortality for providers who performed less than 5 ERCP’s/year, irrespective of specialty background. Conclusions: Gastroenterologists demonstrate favorable gross outcomes compared to surgeons performing ERCP. Differences may correlate in part with more frequent subsequent surgical management of comorbid conditions by surgical providers. Lower volume providers achieve inferior outcomes regardless of specialty background. Analyses of this type may help inform discussions on optimal training and proficiency paradigms, including maintenance of proficiency, for therapeutic endoscopic procedures.",
author = "Jac Cooper and Sapan Desai and Steve Scaife and Chad Gonczy and John Mellinger",
year = "2017",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00464-016-5312-0",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "31",
pages = "2953--2958",
journal = "Surgical Endoscopy",
issn = "0930-2794",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "7",

}

Volume, specialty background, practice pattern, and outcomes in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography : an analysis of the national inpatient sample. / Cooper, Jac; Desai, Sapan; Scaife, Steve; Gonczy, Chad; Mellinger, John.

In: Surgical endoscopy, Vol. 31, No. 7, 01.07.2017, p. 2953-2958.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Volume, specialty background, practice pattern, and outcomes in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

T2 - an analysis of the national inpatient sample

AU - Cooper, Jac

AU - Desai, Sapan

AU - Scaife, Steve

AU - Gonczy, Chad

AU - Mellinger, John

PY - 2017/7/1

Y1 - 2017/7/1

N2 - Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a complex endoscopic procedure performed by both gastroenterologists and surgeons. There has been recent controversy regarding training paradigms for gastrointestinal endoscopy. No prior studies have evaluated comparative outcomes for ERCP in relation to specialty training background. This study utilized the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to assess ERCP outcomes as a function of training background, practice pattern, and individual provider volume. Methods: NIS data was queried from 2007 to 2009. Gastroenterologists and surgeons were identified by procedural profiles and unique physician identifiers. Comorbidity was assessed via Charlson Score. Outcomes including cost, length of stay (LOS), and mortality were analyzed, with and without propensity score matching (PSM). Analysis of outcomes as a function of provider procedural volume was also performed. Comparison for statistical significance was accomplished via t test. Results: A total of 110,811 ERCP’s were identified, of which 42,025 (37.9%) were performed by surgeons. Surgeons exhibited longer LOS (8.7 vs. 7.2 days), overall cost ($24,739 vs. $16,960), and mortality (3.9 vs. 1.2%, odds ratio 3.3), with p < 0.001 for all measures. 71.6% of surgical patients, versus 19.6% of gastroenterologic, underwent subsequent inpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy or laparotomy. Outcome differences persisted when PSM included performance of subsequent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Evaluation of minimum performance standards revealed up to a fivefold increased mortality for providers who performed less than 5 ERCP’s/year, irrespective of specialty background. Conclusions: Gastroenterologists demonstrate favorable gross outcomes compared to surgeons performing ERCP. Differences may correlate in part with more frequent subsequent surgical management of comorbid conditions by surgical providers. Lower volume providers achieve inferior outcomes regardless of specialty background. Analyses of this type may help inform discussions on optimal training and proficiency paradigms, including maintenance of proficiency, for therapeutic endoscopic procedures.

AB - Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a complex endoscopic procedure performed by both gastroenterologists and surgeons. There has been recent controversy regarding training paradigms for gastrointestinal endoscopy. No prior studies have evaluated comparative outcomes for ERCP in relation to specialty training background. This study utilized the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to assess ERCP outcomes as a function of training background, practice pattern, and individual provider volume. Methods: NIS data was queried from 2007 to 2009. Gastroenterologists and surgeons were identified by procedural profiles and unique physician identifiers. Comorbidity was assessed via Charlson Score. Outcomes including cost, length of stay (LOS), and mortality were analyzed, with and without propensity score matching (PSM). Analysis of outcomes as a function of provider procedural volume was also performed. Comparison for statistical significance was accomplished via t test. Results: A total of 110,811 ERCP’s were identified, of which 42,025 (37.9%) were performed by surgeons. Surgeons exhibited longer LOS (8.7 vs. 7.2 days), overall cost ($24,739 vs. $16,960), and mortality (3.9 vs. 1.2%, odds ratio 3.3), with p < 0.001 for all measures. 71.6% of surgical patients, versus 19.6% of gastroenterologic, underwent subsequent inpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy or laparotomy. Outcome differences persisted when PSM included performance of subsequent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Evaluation of minimum performance standards revealed up to a fivefold increased mortality for providers who performed less than 5 ERCP’s/year, irrespective of specialty background. Conclusions: Gastroenterologists demonstrate favorable gross outcomes compared to surgeons performing ERCP. Differences may correlate in part with more frequent subsequent surgical management of comorbid conditions by surgical providers. Lower volume providers achieve inferior outcomes regardless of specialty background. Analyses of this type may help inform discussions on optimal training and proficiency paradigms, including maintenance of proficiency, for therapeutic endoscopic procedures.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84994384374&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84994384374&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00464-016-5312-0

DO - 10.1007/s00464-016-5312-0

M3 - Article

C2 - 27815746

AN - SCOPUS:84994384374

VL - 31

SP - 2953

EP - 2958

JO - Surgical Endoscopy

JF - Surgical Endoscopy

SN - 0930-2794

IS - 7

ER -