You have accessJournal of UrologyGeneral & Epidemiological Trends & Socioeconomics: Practice Patterns, Cost Effectiveness III1 Apr 2015MP24-04 USE OF RPLND IN TESTICULAR CANCER IN THE UNITED STATES: RESULTS FROM THE NATIONAL CANCER DATA BASE (1998-2011) Brian Hu, Claudio Jeldres, Katherine Odem-Davis, Claire Sadler, Craig Nichols, Christopher Porter, and Siamak Daneshmand Brian HuBrian Hu More articles by this author , Claudio JeldresClaudio Jeldres More articles by this author , Katherine Odem-DavisKatherine Odem-Davis More articles by this author , Claire SadlerClaire Sadler More articles by this author , Craig NicholsCraig Nichols More articles by this author , Christopher PorterChristopher Porter More articles by this author , and Siamak DaneshmandSiamak Daneshmand More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.1146AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Management of testicular cancer has evolved worldwide and indications for local therapies, such as retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) are currently more limited. Differences in patterns of care and utilization of RPLND may exist between different types of hospital and may also reflect accessibility to this treatment modality and/or compliance to national guidelines. Since there are no population-based reports in the US that measure the utilization of RPLND, we sought to characterize its use and stratify according to the type of hospital. METHODS The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) was queried for patients with seminoma or non-seminoma (includes mixed histology) testicular cancer, between 1998 and 2011. The rates of RPLND were calculated for each stage of the disease and were later stratified according to the treatment facility type, namely, community, comprehensive and academic centers. Results were obtained by cross-tabulation, proportions were compared with the chi-square test, and trends were assessed with the Cochran-Armitage test. RESULTS Within the NCDB, of 59,652 patients with testicular cancer, 5475 (9.2%) underwent RPLND. The utilization of RPLND varied significantly different between the types of facility across all stages of non-seminoma (Figure) with the highest rates of use recorded in academic centers (all p<0.001). For example, in Stage III non-seminoma, RPLND rates for community, comprehensive and academic centers were 8, 10 and 25%, respectively. There was no significant difference in the utilization of RPLND among hospital types in seminoma. Trends over time have shown an increase use of RPLND in academic centers and a significant decrease in community centers, especially for stage I and stage III non-seminoma (p=0.032 and p<0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS In the US, use of RPLND varies significantly according to type of treatment facility, and these differences increased during the last decade. Further studies are needed to address the potential effect of these differences on survival outcomes. © 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 193Issue 4SApril 2015Page: e276-e277 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Brian Hu More articles by this author Claudio Jeldres More articles by this author Katherine Odem-Davis More articles by this author Claire Sadler More articles by this author Craig Nichols More articles by this author Christopher Porter More articles by this author Siamak Daneshmand More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...