MP14-14 TRENDS IN RESIDENT INVOLVEMENT IN BPH PROCEDURES

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyTechnology & Instruments: Surgical Education & Skills Assessment II1 Apr 2014MP14-14 TRENDS IN RESIDENT INVOLVEMENT IN BPH PROCEDURES Mark Ball, Max Kates, Hiten Patel, and Brian Matlaga Mark BallMark Ball More articles by this author , Max KatesMax Kates More articles by this author , Hiten PatelHiten Patel More articles by this author , and Brian MatlagaBrian Matlaga More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.642AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the historic gold standard surgical treatment for men suffering from symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). In recent years, though, novel BPH therapies such as photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) have become increasingly adopted. Indeed, epidemiologic evidence suggests that the utilization of TURP is declining and laser vaporization has become the fastest growing treatment modality. Consequently, there is concern that urology residents are not being trained in TURP techniques to the extent they once were – an issue of particular importance given the well described learning curve associated with TURP. We performed a study to characterize resident participation in TURP and PVP procedures. METHODS The American College of Surgeons’ National Surgical Quality Improvement Database (NSQIP) is a prospectively maintained, validated database of pre-operative to 30-day postoperative surgical outcomes that was designed to improve surgical care. We queried NSQIP for the years 2007-2011, using CPT codes 52601 (TURP) and 52648 (PVP) to identify the study cohort. Resident involvement was assessed and compared, both overall and then stratified by year as a proportion of total BPH cases. RESULTS A total of 6,077 BPH procedures were captured in NSQIP during the study period. Residents were involved in 1,378 procedures (22.7%). TURP was performed 3,764 times, with residents involved in 826 cases (21.9%). PVP was performed 2,313 times, with residents involved in 552 (23.8%). When stratified by year, both the total number of cases and the proportion of cases with resident involvement were higher for TURP than for PVP in each year (Figure 1).Pairwise comparison for each year were all statistically significant (p values 0.03 or less). CONCLUSIONS TURP is more commonly performed than PVP among institutions participating in NSQIP. With regards to surgical training, residents are more likely to participate in a TURP procedure than a PVP procedure. © 2014FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 191Issue 4SApril 2014Page: e173 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2014MetricsAuthor Information Mark Ball More articles by this author Max Kates More articles by this author Hiten Patel More articles by this author Brian Matlaga More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...