OBJECTIVE: To describe case mix-Adjusted hospital level utilization of minimally invasive surgery for hysterectomy in the treatment of early-stage endometrial cancer. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed the proportion of patients who had a minimally invasive compared with open hysterectomy for nonmetastatic endometrial cancer using the U.S. Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, 2007-2011. Hospitals were stratified by endometrial cancer case volumes (low5less than 10; medium511-30; high5greater than 30 cases). Hierarchical logistic regression models were used to evaluate hospital and patient variables associated with minimally invasive utilization, complications, and costs. RESULTS: Overall, 32,560 patients were identified; 33.6% underwent a minimally invasive hysterectomy with an increase of 22.0-50.8% from 2007 to 2011. Low-volume cancer centers demonstrated the lowest minimally invasive utilization rate (23.6%; P,.001). After multivariable adjustment, minimally invasive surgery was less likely to be performed in patients with Medicaid compared with private insurance (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.72), black and Hispanic compared with white patients (adjusted OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.41-0.46 for black and 0.77, 95% CI 0.72-0.82 for white patients), and more likely to be performed in highcompared with low-volume hospitals (adjusted OR 4.22, 95% CI 2.15-8.27). Open hysterectomy was associated with a higher risk of surgical site infection (adjusted OR 6.21, 95% CI 5.11-7.54) and venous thromboembolism (adjusted OR 3.65, 95% CI 3.12-4.27). Surgical cases with complications had higher mean hospitalization costs for all hysterectomy procedure types (P,.001). CONCLUSION: Hospital utilization of minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of endometrial cancer varies considerably in the United States, representing a disparity in the quality and cost of surgical care delivered nationwide.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Obstetrics and Gynecology