RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To investigate contemporary trends in the use of midurethral sling procedures for the surgical correction of female stress urinary incontinence over the past decade. METHODS: Annualized case log data for female incontinence surgeries from certifying and recertifying urologists were obtained from the American Board of Urology. Descriptive analysis of the number and type of cases per year was performed. Associations between surgeon characteristics and the use of female incontinence procedures were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 6355 nonpediatric urologists applied for certification or recertification between 2003 and 2012. Two-thirds (4185) reported performing any procedures for female incontinence. Procedures sharply increased from 4632 in 2003 to 7548 in 2004, then remained relatively stable between 2005 and 2012 (range, 8014-10,238 cases). Traditional procedures decreased from 17% of female incontinence procedures in 2003 to 5% in 2004 to <1% since 2010 (P <.0005). Midurethral sling procedures have risen sharply from 3210 procedures in 2003 to 7200 in 2012 (P <.0005). Endoscopic injection treatments have remained stable. CONCLUSION: Midurethral slings have been widely adopted by urologists over the last decade. Increase in sling usage coincided with a drastic decline in traditional repairs, implying that the newer midurethral slings were replacing these traditional procedures for the treatment of female incontinence. In addition, the fact that the use of periurethral injections did not change significantly during this time period indicates that increased sling usage is responsible for most of the decline in traditional repairs.
Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ginecológicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Cabestrillo Suburetral/estadística & datos numéricos , Incontinencia Urinaria de Esfuerzo/cirugía , Certificación/estadística & datos numéricos , Current Procedural Terminology , Femenino , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ginecológicos/tendencias , Humanos , Cabestrillo Suburetral/tendencias , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: We describe current trends in robotic and open radical prostatectomy in the United States after examining case logs for American Board of Urology certification. MATERIALS AND METHODS: American urologists submit case logs for initial board certification and recertification. We analyzed logs from 2004 to 2010 for trends and used logistic regression to assess the impact of urologist age on robotic radical prostatectomy use. RESULTS: A total of 4,709 urologists submitted case logs for certification between 2004 and 2010. Of these logs 3,374 included 1 or more radical prostatectomy cases. Of the urologists 2,413 (72%) reported performing open radical prostatectomy only while 961 (28%) reported 1 or more robotic radical prostatectomies and 308 (9%) reported robotic radical prostatectomy only. During this 7-year period we observed a large increase in the number of urologists who performed robotic radical prostatectomy and a smaller corresponding decrease in those who performed open radical prostatectomy. Only 8% of patients were treated with robotic radical prostatectomy by urologists who were certified in 2004 while 67% underwent that procedure in 2010. Median age of urologists who exclusively performed open radical prostatectomy was 43 years (IQR 38-51) vs 41 (IQR 35-46) for those who performed only robotic radical prostatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: While the rate was not as high as the greater than 85% industry estimate, 67% of radical prostatectomies were done robotically among urologists who underwent board certification or recertification in 2010. Total radical prostatectomy volume almost doubled during the study period. These data provide nonindustry based estimates of current radical prostatectomy practice patterns and further our understanding of the evolving surgical treatment of prostate cancer.