Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 21, No. 4, 2004
Issue release date: 2004
Dig Surg 2004;21:253–261

Impact of Volume and Specialization for Cancer Surgery

Weitz J. · Koch M. · Friess H. · Büchler M.W.
Department of Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password

Contact Information

I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in


Background/Aims: The so-called volume/outcome relationship postulates that a higher caseload and specialization results in an improved outcome. The existence of such a relationship, however, is still debated in the literature. The objective of this review is to discuss the available data on this relationship in surgical oncology. Methods: A Medline analysis was performed using the following terms: volume, outcome, cancer, and surgery. The bibliography of each relevant article was screened for further studies. Results: For most malignancies a volume/outcome relationship was demonstrated in recent years. Components of this improved outcome are decreased perioperative morbidity and mortality, higher quality of life after surgery, improved economic outcome, and a better long-term prognosis for patients with cancer. The magnitude of this relationship, however, varies greatly among different malignancies. The exact reason for the volume/outcome relationship is still unknown. Conclusion: Concentrating high-risk procedures in high-volume hospitals might prevent thousands of perioperative deaths per year. This concept seems feasible for rare and high-risk diseases; however, it is unclear what threshold should be used for the definition of a high-volume provider. For common and low-risk diagnoses, it seems more realistic to educate the medical community in order to improve the outcome for the patients.

Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.


  1. Luft HS, Bunker JP, Enthoven AC: Should operations be regionalized? The empirical relation between surgical volume and mortality. N Engl J Med 1979;301:1364–1369.
  2. Hillner BE, Smith TJ, Desch CE: Hospital an physician volume or specialization and outcomes in cancer treatment: Importance in quality of cancer care. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:2327–2340.
  3. Dudley RA, Johansen KL, Brand R, Rennie DJ, Milstein A: Selective referral to high-volume hospitals: Estimating potentially avoidable deaths. JAMA 2000;283:1159–1166.
  4. Begg CB, Cramer LD, Hoskins WJ, Brennan MF: Impact of hospital volume on operative mortality for major cancer surgery. JAMA 1998;280:1747–1751.
  5. Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EVA, Stukel TA, Lucas FL, Batista I, Welch G, Wennberg DE: Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med 2002;346:1128–1137.
  6. Harmon J, Tang D, Gordon T, Bowman H, Choti M, Kaufman H, Bender J, Duncan M, Magnuson T, Lillemoe K, Cameron J: Hospital volume can serve as a surrogate for surgeon volume for achieving excellent outcomes in colorectal resection. Ann Surg 1999;230:404–411.
  7. Choti MA, Bowman H, Pitt HA, Sosa JA, Sitzmann JV, Cameron JL, Gordon T: Should hepatic resections be performed at high-volume referral centers? J Gastrointest Surg 1998;2:11–20.
  8. Dimick JB, Pronovost PJ, Cowan JA, Lipsett PA: Postoperative complication rates after hepatic resection in Maryland hospitals. Arch Surg 2003;138:41–46.
  9. Bachmann MO, Alderson D, Edwards D, Wotton S, Bedford C, Peters TJ, Harvey IM: Cohort study in South and West England of the influence on specialization on the management and outcome of patients with esophageal and gastric cancers. Br J Surg 2002;89:914–922.
  10. Yao SL, Lu-Yao G: Population-based study of relationships between hospital volume of prostatectomies, patient outcomes, and length of hospital stay. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999;91:1950–1956.
  11. Karakiewicz PI, Bazinet M, Aprikian AG, Tanguay S, Elhilali MM: Thirty-day mortality rates and cumulative survival after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 1998;52:1041–1046.
  12. Thorpe AC, Cleary R, Coles J, Vernon S, Reynolds J, Neals DE: Deaths and complications following prostatectomy in 1400 men in the northern region of England. Br J Urol 1994;74:559–565.
  13. Hu JC, Gold KF, Pashos CL, Mehta SS, Litwin MS: Role of surgeon volume in radical prostatectomy outcomes. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:401–405.
  14. Luft HS, Hunt SS, Maerki SC: The volume-outcome relationship: Practice-makes-perfect or selective-referral patterns? Health Serv Res 1987;22:157–182.
  15. McArdle CS, Hole D: Impact of variability among surgeons on postoperative morbidity and mortality and ultimate survival. BMJ 1991;302:1501–1505.
  16. Riley G, Lubitz J: Outcomes of surgery among the Medicare aged. Health Care Financ Rev 1985;7:37–47.
  17. Hannan EL, O’Donell JF, Kilburn H, Bernard HR, Yazici A: Investigation of the relationship between volume and mortality for surgical procedures performed in New York State hospitals. JAMA 1989;262:503–510.
  18. Hughes RG, Hunt SS, Luft HS: Effects of surgeon volume and hospital volume on quality of care in hospitals. Med Care 1987;25:489–503.
  19. Kelly JV, Hellinger FJ: Physician and hospital factors associated with mortality of surgical patients. Med Care 1986;24:785–800.
  20. Maerki SC, Luft HS, Hunt SS: Selecting categories of patients for regionalization. Med Care 1986;24:148–158.
  21. Rosen L, Stasik JJ, Reed JF: Variations in colon and rectal surgical mortality: Comparison of specialties with a state-legislated database. Dis Colon Rectum 1996;39:129–135.
  22. Schrag D, Cramer LD, Bach PB, Cohen AM, Warren JL, Begg CB: Influence of hospital procedure volume on outcomes following surgery for colon cancer. JAMA 2000;284:3028–3035.
  23. Callahan MA, Christos PJ, Gold HT, Mushlin AI, Daley J: Influence of surgical subspecialty training on in-hospital mortality for gastrectomy and colectomy patients. Ann Surg 2003;238:629–639.
  24. Schrag D, Panageas KS, Riedel E, Bach PB, Guillem JG, Begg CB: Surgeon volume compared to hospital volume as a predictor of outcome following primary colon cancer resection. J Surg Oncol 2003;83:68–78.
  25. Dimick JB, Cowan JA, Upchurch GR, Colletti LM: Hospital volume and surgical outcomes for elderly patients with colorectal cancer in the United States. J Surg Res 2003;114:50–56.
  26. Sosa JA, Bowman HM, Tielsch J, Powe NR, Gordon T, Udelsman R: The importance of surgeon experience for clinical and economic outcomes from thyroidectomy. Ann Surg 1998;228:320–330.
  27. Romano PS, Mark DH: Patient and hospital characteristics related to in-hospital mortality after lung cancer resection. Chest 1992;101:1332–1337.
  28. Silvestri GA, Handy J, Lackland D, Corvey E, Reed CE: Specialists achieve better outcomes than generalists for lung cancer surgery. Chest 1998;114:675–680.
  29. Marusch F, Koch A, Schmidt U, Pross M, Gastinger I, Lippert H: Hospital caseload and the results achieved in patients with rectal cancer. Br J Surg 2001;88:1397–1402.
  30. Hodgson DC, Zhang W, Zaslavsky AM, Fuchs CS, Wright WE, Ayanian JZ: Relation of hospital volume to colostomy rates and survival for patients with rectal cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:708–716.
  31. Simunovic M, To T, Baxter N, Balshem A, Ross E, Cohen Z, McLeod R, Engstrom P, Sigurdson E: Hospital procedure volume and teaching status do not influence treatment and outcome measures of rectal cancer surgery in a large general population. J Gastrointest Surg 2000;4:324–330.
  32. Parry JM, Collins S, Mathers J, Scott NA, Woodman C: Influence of volume of work on the outcome of treatment for patients with colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 1999;86:475–481.
  33. Dimick JB, Cattaneo SM, Lipsett PA, Pronovost PJ, Heitmiller RF: Hospital volume is related to clinical and economic outcomes of esophageal resection in Maryland. Ann Thorac Surg 2001;72:334–339.
  34. Sosa JA, Bowman HM, Gordon T, Bass E, Yeo CJ, Lillemoe KD, Pitt HA, Tielsch JM, Cameron JL: Importance of hospital volume in the overall management of pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg 1998;228:429–438.
  35. Gordon T, Burleyson G, Tielsch J, Cameron J: The effects of regionalization on cost and outcome for one general high-risk surgical procedure. Ann Surg 1995;221:43–49.
  36. Hermanek P, Wiebelt H, Riedl S, Staimmer D, Hermanek P: Langzeitergebnisse der chirurgischen Therapie des Coloncarcinoms. Chirurg 1994;65:287–297.
  37. Hermanek P, Wiebelt H, Staimmer D, Riedl S: Prognostic factors of rectum carcinoma: Experience of the German multicentre study SGCRC. Tumori 1995;81(suppl):60–64.

    External Resources

  38. Portner GA, Soskolne CL, Yakimets WW, Newman SC: Surgeon-related factors and outcome in rectal cancer. Ann Surg 1998;227:157–167.
  39. Holm T, Johansson H, Cedermark B, Ekelund G, Rutqvist LE: Influence of hospital and surgeon-related factors on outcome of rectal cancer with or without preoperative radiotherapy. Br J Surg 1997;84:657–663.
  40. Sainsbury R, Haward B, Rider L, Johnston C, Round C: Influence of clinician workload and patterns of treatment on survival form breast cancer. Lancet 1995;345:1265–1270.
  41. Bonett A, Roder D, Esterman A: Case-survival rates for infiltrating ductal carcinomas by category of hospital at diagnosis in South Australia. Med J Aust 1991;154:695–697.
  42. Roohan PJ, Bickell NA, Baptiste MS, Therriault GD, Ferrara EP, Siu AL: Hospital volume differences and five-year survival from breast cancer. Am J Publ Hlth 1998;88:454–457.
  43. Nguyen HN, Averette HE, Hoskins W, Penalver M, Servin BU, Steren A: National survey of ovarian carcinoma. V. The impact of physician’s specialty on patients’ survival. Cancer 1993;72:3663–3670.
  44. Kehoe S, Powell J, Wilson S, Woodman C: The influence of the operating surgeon’s specialisation on patient survival in ovarian carcinoma. Br J Surg 1994;70:1014–1017.
  45. Woodman C, Baghdady A, Collins S, Clyma JA: What changes in the organisation of cancer services will improve the outcome for women with ovarian cancer? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997;104:135–139.
  46. Junor EJ, Hole DJ, Gillis CR: Management of ovarian cancer: Referral to a multidisciplinary team matters. Br J Cancer 1994;70:363–370.
  47. Munoz KA, Harlan LC, Trimble EL: Patterns of care for women with ovarian cancer in the United States. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:3408–3415.
  48. Birkmeyer JD, Warshaw AL, Finlayson SR, Grove MR, Tosteson AN: Relationship between hospital volume and late survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery 1999;126:178–183.
  49. Finlayson EVA, Birkmeyer JD: Effect of hospital volume on life expectancy after selected cancer operations in older adults: A decision analysis. J Am Coll Surg 2003;196:410–417.
  50. Martling L, Cedermark B, Johansson H, Rutquist LE, Holm T: The surgeon as a prognostic factor after the introduction of total mesorectal excision in the treatment of rectal cancer. Br J Surg 2002;89:1008–1013.
  51. Schrag D, Panageas KS, Riedel E, Cramer LD, Guillem JG, Bach PB, Begg CB: Hospital and surgeon procedure volume as predictors of outcome following rectal cancer resection. Ann Surg 2002;236:583–592.
  52. Skinner KA, Helsper JT, Deapen D, Ye W, Sposto R: Breast cancer: Do specialists make a difference? Ann Surg Oncol 2003;10:606–615.
  53. Mikeljevic JS, Haward RA, Johnston C, Sainsbury R, Forman D: Surgeon workload and survival from breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2003;89:487–491.
  54. Davis S, Dahlberg S, Myers MH, Chen A, Steinhorn SC: Hodgkin’s disease in the United States: a comparison of patient characteristics and survival in the Centralized Cancer Patient Data System and the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program. J Natl Cancer Inst 1987;78:471–478.
  55. Feuer EJ, Frey CM, Brawley OW, Nayfield SG, Cunningham JB, Geller NL, Bosl GJ, Kramer BS: After a treatment breakthrough: A comparison of trial and population-based data for advanced testicular cancer. J Clin Oncol 1994;12:368–377.
  56. Harding MJ, Paul J, Gillis CR, Kaye SB: Management of malignant teratoma: Does referral to a specialist unit matter? Lancet 1993;341:999–1002.
  57. Collette L, Sylvester RJ, Stenning SP, Fossa SD, Mead GM, de Witt R, de Mulder PH, Neymark N, Lallemand E, Kaye SB: Impact of the treating institution on survival of patients with poor-prognosis metastatic nonseminoma: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Genito-Urinary Tract Cancer Collaborative Group and the Medical Research Council Testicular Cancer Working Party. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999;91:839–846.
  58. Aass N, Klepp O, Cavallin-Stahl E, Dahl O, Wicklund H, Unsgaard B, Baldetorp L, Ahlstrom S, Fossa SD: Prognostic factors in unselected patients with nonseminomatous metastatic testicular cancer: A multicenter experience. J Clin Oncol 1991;9:818–826.
  59. Horowitz MM, Przepiorka D, Champlin RE, Gale RP, Gratwohl A, Herzig RH, Prentice HG, Rimm AA, Ringden O, Bortin MM: Should HLA-identical sibling bone marrow transplants for leukemia be restricted to large centers? Blood 1992;79:2771–2774.
  60. Sowden AJ, Deeks JJ, Sheldon TA: Volume and outcome in coronary artery bypass graft surgery: True association or artefact? BMJ 1995;311:151–155.
  61. Hannan EL: The relation between volume and outcome in health care. N Engl J Med 1999;340:1677–1679.
  62. Johnson PM, Malatjalian D, Porter GA: Adequacy of nodal harvest in colorectal cancer: A consecutive cohort study. J Gastrointest Surg 2002;6:883–890.
  63. Mella J, Biffin A, Radcliffe AG: Population-based audit of colorectal cancer management in two UK health regions: Colorectal Cancer Working Group, Royal College of Surgeons of England Clinical Epidemiology and Audit Group. Br J Surg 1997;84:1731–1736.
  64. Kingston RD, Walsch S, Jeacock J: Curative resection: the major determinant of survival in patient with large bowel cancer. J R Coll Surg Edinb 1991;36:298–302.
  65. Kee F, Wilson RH, Harper C: Influence of hospital clinician workload on survival from colorectal cancer. BMJ 1999;318:1381–1385.
  66. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson J: Relation of surgical volume to outcome in eight common operations: Results from the VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Ann Surg 1999;230:414–429.
  67. Dowdall JF, Maguire D, McAnena OJ: Experience of surgery for rectal cancer with total mesorectal excision in a general practice. Br J Surg 2002;89:1014–1019.
  68. Laine C, Sox HC: Does practice really make perfect? Ann Intern Med 2003;139:696–698.
  69. Meyerhardt JA, Catalano PJ, Schrag D, Ayanian JZ, Haller DG, Mayer RJ, Macdonald JS, Benson AB, Fuchs CS: Association of hospital volume and outcomes in patients with colon cancer at high risk for recurrence. Ann Intern Med 2003;139:649–657.
  70. Halm E, Lee C, Chassin MR: Is volume related to outcome in health care? A systematic review and methodologic critique of the literature. Ann Intern Med 2002;137:511–520.
  71. Panageas KS, Schrag D, Riedel E, Bach PB, Begg CB: The effect of clustering of outcomes on the association of procedure volume and surgical outcomes. Ann Intern Med 2003;139:658–665.
  72. Wade TP, Halabay IA, Stapleton DR, Virgo KS, Johnson FE: Population-based analysis of treatment of pancreatic cancer and Whipple resection: Department of Defense hospitals, 1984–1994. Surgery 1996;120:680–685.
  73. Gordon T, Bowman H, Tielsch J, Bass E, Burleyson G, Cameron JL: Statewide regionalization of pancreaticoduodenectomy and its effect on in-house mortality. Ann Surg 1998;228:71–78.
  74. Birkmeyer JD, Finlayson EVA, Birkmeyer CM: Volume standards for high-risk surgical procedures: Potential benefits of the leapfrog initiative. Surgery 2001;130:415–422.
  75. Birkmeyer JD, Skinner JS, Wennberg DE: Will volume-based referral strategies reduce costs or just save lives? Health Affairs 2002;21:234–241.
  76. Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Marth NJ, Goodmann DC: Regionalization of high-risk surgery and implications for patient travel times. JAMA 2003;290:2703–2708.
  77. Christian CK, Gustafson ML, Betensky RA, Daley J, Zinner MJ: The leapfrog volume criteria may fall short in identifying high-quality surgical centers. Ann Surg 2003;238:447–457.
  78. Martling L, Holm T, Rutquist LE, Moran BJ, Heald RJ, Cedermark B: Effect of a surgical training programme on outcome of rectal cancer in the county of Stockholm. Lancet 2000;356:93–96.
  79. Dimick JB, Cowan JA, Ailawadi G, Wainess RM, Upchurch GR: National variation in operative mortality rates for esophageal resection and the need for quality improvement. Arch Surg 2003;138:1305–1309.
  80. Patti MG, Corvera CU, Glasgow RE, Way LW: A hospital’s annual rate of esophagectomy influences the operative mortality rate. J Gastrointest Surg 1998;2:186–192.
  81. Dimick JB, Pronovost PJ, Cowan JA, Lipsett PA: Surgical volume and quality of care for esophageal resection: Do high volume hospitals have fewer complications? Ann Thorac Surg 2003;75:337–341.
  82. Dimick JB, Pronovost PJ, Cowan JA, Lipsett PA, Stanley JC, Upchurch GR: Variations in postoperative complication rates after high-risk surgery in the United States. Surgery 2003;134:534–541.
  83. Birkmeyer JD, Finlayson SR, Tosteson AN, Sharp SM, Warshaw AL, Fisher ES: Effect of hospital volume on in-hospital mortality with pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery 1999;125:250–256.
  84. Ho V, Heslin MJ: Effect of hospital volume and experience on in-hospital mortality for pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 2003;237:509–514.
  85. Janes RH, Niederhuber JE, Chmiel JS, Winchester DP, Ocwieja K, Karnell JH, Clive RE, Menck HR: National patterns of care for pancreatic cancer: Results of a survey by the commission on cancer. Ann Surg 1996;223:261–272.
  86. Lieberman MD, Kilburn H, Lindsey M: Relation of perioperative deaths to hospital volume among patients undergoing pancreatic resection for malignancy. Ann Surg 1995;222:638–645.
  87. Neoptolemos JP, Russel RC, Bramhall S, Theis B: Low mortality following resection for pancreatic and periampullary tumours in 1,026 patients. Br J Surg 1997;84:1370–1376.
  88. Simunovic M, To T, Theriault M, Langer B: Relation between hospital surgical volume and outcome for pancreatic resection for neoplasm in a publicly funded health care system. CMAJ 1999;160:643–648.

Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 38.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 26.50