Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Outcomes in oncologic surgery: does volume make a difference?

David J Bentrem1, Murray F Brennan

  • 1Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10021, USA.

World Journal of Surgery
|September 2, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Dynamic Prognostic Nutritional Index With Circulating Tumor DNA Predicts Survival in Localized Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

Journal of surgical oncology·2026
Same author

Hospital Volume and Post-Hepatectomy Liver Failure After Major Hepatectomy.

Journal of surgical oncology·2026
Same author

Contemporary Microhematuria Evaluation in Veterans: Cancer Detection and Resource Utilization.

Urology·2026
Same author

Follow-Up for Node-Negative Patients After Resection for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor.

JAMA surgery·2025
Same author

MRI Utilization Rates for Veterans at Risk of Prostate Cancer.

JAMA network open·2025
Same author

Association of Postoperative Complication and Lymph Node Sampling Criteria in Lung Cancer Resection.

Journal of the American College of Surgeons·2025
Same journal

Prediction Models for Sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis in Clinically Node-Negative Breast Cancer: Validation of Existing Nomograms, Model Development, and Ensemble Evaluation.

World journal of surgery·2026
Same journal

Indicators for Monitoring Recovery From Surgery to Discharge Using Accelerometer in Patients With Esophageal Cancer.

World journal of surgery·2026
Same journal

The Safety of In-Hospital Delay and the Utility of dNLR in Elderly Patients With Acute Appendicitis.

World journal of surgery·2026
Same journal

Feasibility of Post-Operative Telehealth for Pediatric Surgical Patients in Malawi-A Mixed Methods Analysis.

World journal of surgery·2026
Same journal

Surgical Infrastructure and Workforce Readiness in Rwanda's District and Level 2 Teaching Hospitals: A Nationwide Facility-Based Survey.

World journal of surgery·2026
Same journal

From General Preparedness to Injury-Pattern-Specific Trauma Resource Planning.

World journal of surgery·2026
See all related articles

Surgical procedure volume impacts patient outcomes. Higher institutional volume and surgeon specialization, including fellowship training, correlate with improved operative mortality for alimentary tract surgeries.

Area of Science:

  • Surgical Outcomes Research
  • Health Services Research

Background:

  • Elective surgical procedures on the alimentary tract are common in the U.S.
  • While most procedures have low morbidity and mortality, less frequent complex procedures carry higher risks.
  • Patient outcomes are influenced by various factors in surgical care.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the relationship between surgical procedure volume and patient outcomes.
  • To determine the impact of surgeon and institutional volume on operative mortality.
  • To explore the role of specialization and training as potential modifiers of volume-outcome relationships.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of surgical procedure data, focusing on the alimentary tract.
  • Statistical evaluation of operative mortality rates in relation to procedure frequency.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Comparison of outcomes based on surgeon experience and institutional case volume.

    • Main Results:

    • Higher institutional volume is associated with improved outcomes, even with lower surgeon volume.
    • Procedure complexity and frequency significantly influence outcome differences.
    • Specialization and fellowship training can partially substitute for high surgeon volume, improving outcomes.

    Conclusions:

    • Surgical volume, both institutional and surgeon-specific, is a critical factor for patient safety.
    • High-volume institutions can mitigate risks associated with lower surgeon volume.
    • Investing in specialist training and credentials enhances surgical outcomes for complex alimentary tract procedures.