The Relevance of Radial Margin Status in Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A State-of-the-Art Narrative Review.

BACKGROUND: Prognosis of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHCC) is poor, and curative-intent resection is the most effective treatment associated with long-term survival. Surgery is technically demanding since it involves a major hepatectomy with en bloc resection of the caudate lobe and extrahepatic bile duct. Furthermore, to achieve negative margins, it may be necessary to perform concomitant vascular resection or pancreatoduodenectomy. Despite this aggressive approach, recurrence is often observed, considering 5-year recurrence-free survival below 15% and 5-year overall survival that barely exceeds 40%. SUMMARY: The literature reports that survival rates are better in patients with negative margins, and surprisingly, R0 resections range between 19% and 95%. This variability is probably due to different surgical strategies and the pathologist's expertise with specimens. In fact, a proper pathological examination of residual disease should take into consideration both the ductal and the radial margin (RM) status. Currently, detailed pathological reports are lacking, and there is a likelihood of misinterpreting residual disease status due to the missing of RM description and the utilization of various definitions for surgical margins. KEY MESSAGES: The aim of PHCC surgery is to achieve negative margins including RM. More clarity in reporting on RM is needed to define true radical resection and consistent design of oncological studies for adjuvant treatments.

Comparison of tumor response and outcomes of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after multimodal treatment including immune checkpoint inhibitors - a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE), and radiotherapy to treat hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has not been well-defined. We performed a meta-analysis to characterize tumor response and survival associated with multimodal treatment of HCC. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Medline, Scopus, and CINAHL databases were searched (1990-2022). Random-effect meta-analysis was conducted to compare efficacy of treatment modalities. Odds ratios (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were reported. RESULTS: Thirty studies (4170 patients) met inclusion criteria. Triple therapy regimen (ICI + TKI + TACE) had the highest overall disease control rate (DCR) (87%, 95% CI 83-91), while ICI + radiotherapy had the highest objective response rate (ORR) (72%, 95% CI 54%-89%). Triple therapy had a higher DCR than ICI + TACE (OR 4.49, 95% CI 2.09-9.63), ICI + TKI (OR 3.08, 95% CI 1.63-5.82), and TKI + TACE (OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.61-5.20). Triple therapy demonstrated improved overall survival versus ICI + TKI (SMD 0.72, 95% CI 0.37-1.07) and TKI + TACE (SMD 1.13, 95% CI 0.70-1.48) (both p < 0.05). Triple therapy had a greater incidence of adverse events (AEs) compared with ICI + TKI (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.29-0.91; p = 0.02), but no difference in AEs versus ICI + TACE or TKI + TACE (both p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The combination of ICIs, TKIs and TACE demonstrated superior tumor response and survival and should be considered for select patients with advanced HCC.

Portal vein stenting in recurrent or locally advanced peri-hilar cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent or locally advanced peri-hilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHCC) usually involves the portal vein (PV) leading to significant stenosis. With disease progression, clinical symptoms such as ascites, bleeding, and hepatic insufficiency are usually observed. Little is know about the benefit of PV stenting in relieving the symptoms associated to portal hypertension and allowing anticancer therapies. The aim of this study is to review our experience in PV stenting for PHCC patients. METHODS: From 2014 to 2022, data from PHCC patients underwent PV stenting at Verona University Hospital, Italy, were reviewed. The indications were: gastrointestinal bleeding from esophagus-gastric varices, ascites not responsive to medical therapy, severe thrombocytopenia, liver insufficiency (hepatic jaundice, coagulopathy, and/or hyperammoniemia), or asymptomatic high-grade PV stenosis. Cavernous transformation and intrahepatic thrombosis in both sides of the liver were considered contraindication. Systematic anticoagulation therapy was not administered. RESULTS: Technical success was achieved in all 16 (100 %) patients. The improvement of clinical symptoms were observed in 12 (75 %) patients. Anticancer therapy was administrated in 11 (69 %) patients. 2 (13 %) complications were observed: 1 biliary injury and 1 recurrent cholangitis that required a percutaneous trans-hepatic biliary drainage placement. Stent occlusion for tumor progression occurred in 1 patient and a re-stenting procedure was successfully performed. No case of thrombotic stent occlusion was observed during follow up. The 1-year stent patency was 86 % and the median patency period was 8 months (IQR, 4-12). CONCLUSION: PV stenting is a feasible and safe palliative treatment that improves clinical condition, allow anticancer therapies, and provide a better quality of life.

The Role of Three-Dimensional Modeling to Improve Comprehension of Liver Anatomy and Tumor Characteristics for Medical Students and Surgical Residents.

OBJECTIVE: Studying liver anatomy can be challenging for medical students and surgical residents due to its complexity. Three-dimensional visualization technology (3DVT) allows for a clearer and more precise view of liver anatomy. We sought to assess how 3DVT can assist students and surgical residents comprehend liver anatomy. DESIGN: Data from 5 patients who underwent liver resection for malignancy at our institution between September 2020 and April 2022 were retrospectively reviewed and selected following consensus among the investigators. Participants were required to complete an online survey to investigate their understanding of tumor characteristics and vascular variations based on patients' computed tomography (CT) and 3DVT. SETTING: The study was carried out at the General and Hepato-Biliary Surgery Department of the University of Verona. PARTICIPANTS: Among 32 participants, 13 (40.6%) were medical students, and 19 (59.4%) were surgical residents. RESULTS: Among 5 patients with intrahepatic lesions, 4 patients (80.0%) had at least 1 vascular variation. Participants identified number and location of lesions more correctly when evaluating the 3DVT (84.6% and 80.9%, respectively) compared with CT scans (61.1% and 64.8%, respectively) (both p ≤ 0.001). The identification of any vascular variations was more challenging using the CT scans, with only 50.6% of correct answers compared with 3DVT (72.2%) (p < 0.001). Compared with CT scans, 3DVT led to a 23.5%, 16.1%, and 21.6% increase in the correct definition of number and location of lesions, and vascular variations, respectively. 3DVT allowed for a decrease of 50.8 seconds (95% CI 23.6-78.0) in the time needed to answer the questions. All participants agreed on the usefulness of 3DVT in hepatobiliary surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The 3DVT facilitated a more precise preoperative understanding of liver anatomy, tumor location and characteristics.

Benchmarks in Liver Resection for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Benchmarking in surgery has been proposed as a means to compare results across institutions to establish best practices. We sought to define benchmark values for hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) across an international population. METHODS: Patients who underwent liver resection for ICC between 1990 and 2020 were identified from an international database, including 14 Eastern and Western institutions. Patients operated on at high-volume centers who had no preoperative jaundice, ASA class <3, body mass index <35 km/m2, without need for bile duct or vascular resection were chosen as the benchmark group. RESULTS: Among 1193 patients who underwent curative-intent hepatectomy for ICC, 600 (50.3%) were included in the benchmark group. Among benchmark patients, median age was 58.0 years (interquartile range [IQR] 49.0-67.0), only 28 (4.7%) patients received neoadjuvant therapy, and most patients had a minor resection (n = 499, 83.2%). Benchmark values included ≥3 lymph nodes retrieved when lymphadenectomy was performed, blood loss ≤600 mL, perioperative blood transfusion rate ≤42.9%, and operative time ≤339 min. The postoperative benchmark values included TOO achievement ≥59.3%, positive resection margin ≤27.5%, 30-day readmission ≤3.6%, Clavien-Dindo III or more complications ≤14.3%, and 90-day mortality ≤4.8%, as well as hospital stay ≤14 days. CONCLUSIONS: Benchmark cutoffs targeting short-term perioperative outcomes can help to facilitate comparisons across hospitals performing liver resection for ICC, assess inter-institutional variation, and identify the highest-performing centers to improve surgical and oncologic outcomes.

A Prognostic Model To Predict Survival After Recurrence Among Patients With Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to develop and validate a preoperative model to predict survival after recurrence (SAR) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). BACKGROUND: Although HCC is characterized by recurrence as high as 60%, models to predict outcomes after recurrence remain relatively unexplored. METHODS: Patients who developed recurrent HCC between 2000 and 2020 were identified from an international multi-institutional database. Clinicopathologic data on primary disease and laboratory and radiologic imaging data on recurrent disease were collected. Multivariable Cox regression analysis and internal bootstrap validation (5000 repetitions) were used to develop and validate the SARScore. Optimal Survival Tree analysis was used to characterize SAR among patients treated with various treatment modalities. RESULTS: Among 497 patients who developed recurrent HCC, median SAR was 41.2 months (95% CI 38.1-52.0). The presence of cirrhosis, number of primary tumors, primary macrovascular invasion, primary R1 resection margin, AFP>400 ng/mL on the diagnosis of recurrent disease, radiologic extrahepatic recurrence, radiologic size and number of recurrent lesions, radiologic recurrent bilobar disease, and early recurrence (≤24 months) were included in the model. The SARScore successfully stratified 1-, 3- and 5-year SAR and demonstrated strong discriminatory ability (3-year AUC: 0.75, 95% CI 0.70-0.79). While a subset of patients benefitted from resection/ablation, Optimal Survival Tree analysis revealed that patients with high SARScore disease had the worst outcomes (5-year AUC; training: 0.79 vs. testing: 0.71). The SARScore model was made available online for ease of use and clinical applicability ( https://yutaka-endo.shinyapps.io/SARScore/ ). CONCLUSION: The SARScore demonstrated strong discriminatory ability and may be a clinically useful tool to help stratify risk and guide treatment for patients with recurrent HCC.

Is surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma at high-volume centers worth the additional cost?

BACKGROUND: Case volume has been associated with improved outcomes for patients undergoing treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma, often with higher hospital expenditures. We sought to define the cost-effectiveness of hepatocellular carcinoma treatment at high-volume centers. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma from 2013 to 2017 were identified from Medicare Standard Analytic Files. High-volume centers were defined as the top decile of facilities performing hepatectomies in a year. A multivariable generalized linear model with gamma distribution and a restricted mean survival time model were used to estimate costs and survival differences relative to high-volume center status. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was used to define the additional cost incurred for a 1-year incremental gain in survival. RESULTS: Among 13,666 patients, 8,467 (62.0%) were treated at high-volume centers. Median expenditure was higher ($19,148, interquartile range $15,280-$29,128) among patients treated at high-volume centers versus low-volume centers ($18,209, interquartile range $14,959-$29,752). Despite similar median length-of-stay (6 days, interquartile range 4-9), a slightly higher proportion of patients were discharged to home from high-volume centers (n = 4,903, 57.9%) versus low-volume centers (n = 2,868, 55.2%) (P = .002). A 0.14-year (95% confidence interval 0.06-0.22) (1 month and 3 weeks) survival benefit was associated with an incremental cost of $1,070 (95% confidence interval $749-$1,392) among patients undergoing surgery at high-volume centers. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for treatment at a high-volume center was $7,951 (95% confidence interval $4,236-$21,217) for an additional year of survival, which was below the cost-effective threshold of $21,217. CONCLUSION: Surgical care at high-volume centers offers the potential to deliver cancer care in a more cost-effective and value-based manner.

Postoperative morbidity after simultaneous versus staged resection of synchronous colorectal liver metastases: Impact of hepatic tumor burden.

BACKGROUND: We sought to characterize the risk of postoperative complications relative to the surgical approach and overall synchronous colorectal liver metastases tumor burden score. METHODS: Patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases who underwent curative-intent resection between 2000 and 2020 were identified from an international multi-institutional database. Propensity score matching was employed to control for heterogeneity between the 2 groups. A virtual twins analysis was performed to identify potential subgroups of patients who might benefit more from staged versus simultaneous resection. RESULTS: Among 976 patients who underwent liver resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases, 589 patients (60.3%) had a staged approach, whereas 387 (39.7%) patients underwent simultaneous resection of the primary tumor and synchronous colorectal liver metastases. After propensity score matching, 295 patients who underwent each surgical approach were analyzed. Overall, the incidence of postoperative complications was 34.1% (n = 201). Among patients with high tumor burden scores, the surgical approach was associated with a higher incidence of postoperative complications; in contrast, among patients with low or medium tumor burden scores, the likelihood of complications did not differ based on the surgical approach. Virtual twins analysis demonstrated that preoperative tumor burden score was important to identify which subgroup of patients benefited most from staged versus simultaneous resection. Simultaneous resection was associated with better outcomes among patients with a tumor burden score <9 and a node-negative right-sided primary tumor; in contrast, staged resection was associated with better outcomes among patients with node-positive left-sided primary tumors and higher tumor burden score. CONCLUSION: Among patients with high tumor burden scores, simultaneous resection of the primary tumor and liver metastases was associated with an increased incidence of postoperative complications.

Optimal policy tree to assist in adjuvant therapy decision-making after resection of colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Although systemic postoperative therapy after surgery for colorectal liver metastases is generally recommended, the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy has been debated. We used machine learning to develop a decision tree and define which patients may benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy after hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases. METHODS: Patients who underwent curative-intent resection for colorectal liver metastases between 2000 and 2020 were identified from an international multi-institutional database. An optimal policy tree analysis was used to determine the optimal assignment of the adjuvant chemotherapy to subgroups of patients for overall survival and recurrence-free survival. RESULTS: Among 1,358 patients who underwent curative-intent resection of colorectal liver metastases, 1,032 (76.0%) received adjuvant chemotherapy. After a median follow-up of 28.7 months (interquartile range 13.7-52.0), 5-year overall survival was 67.5%, and 3-year recurrence-free survival was 52.6%, respectively. Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with better recurrence-free survival (3-year recurrence-free survival: adjuvant chemotherapy, 54.4% vs no adjuvant chemotherapy, 46.8%; P < .001) but no overall survival significant improvement (5-year overall survival: adjuvant chemotherapy, 68.1% vs no adjuvant chemotherapy, 65.7%; P = .15). Patients were randomly allocated into 2 cohorts (training data set, n = 679, testing data set, n = 679). The random forest model demonstrated good performance in predicting counterfactual probabilities of death and recurrence relative to receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy. According to the optimal policy tree, patient demographics, secondary tumor characteristics, and primary tumor characteristics defined the subpopulation that would benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: A novel artificial intelligence methodology based on patient, primary tumor, and treatment characteristics may help clinicians tailor adjuvant chemotherapy recommendations after colorectal liver metastases resection.

Liver transplantation access and outcomes: Impact of variations in liver-specific specialty care.

BACKGROUND: We sought to characterize the impact access to gastroenterologists/hepatologists has on liver transplantation listing, as well as time on the liver transplantation waitlist and post-transplant outcomes. METHODS: Liver transplantation registrants aged >18 years between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2019 were identified from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients Standard Analytic Files. The liver transplantation registration ratio was defined as the ratio of liver transplant waitlist registrations in a given county per 1,000 liver-related deaths. RESULTS: A total of 150,679 liver transplantation registrants were included. Access to liver transplantation centers and liver-specific specialty physicians varied markedly throughout the United States. Of note, the liver transplantation registration ratio was lower in counties with poor access to liver-specific care versus counties with adequate access (poor access 137.2, interquartile range 117.8-163.2 vs adequate access 157.6, interquartile range 127.3-192.2, P < .001). Among patients referred for liver transplantation, the cumulative incidence of waitlist mortality and post-transplant graft survival was comparable among patients with poor versus adequate access to liver-specific care (both P > .05). Among liver transplantation recipients living in areas with poor access, after controlling for recipient and donor characteristics, cold ischemic time, and model for end-stage liver disease score, the area deprivation index predicted graft survival (referent, low area deprivation index; medium area deprivation index, hazard ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.03-12.23; high area deprivation index, 1.45, 95% confidence interval 1.01-12.09, both P < .05). CONCLUSION: Poor access to liver-specific care was associated with a reduction in liver transplantation registration, and individuals residing in counties with high social deprivation had worse graft survival among patients living in counties with poor access to liver-specific care.

Mediators of racial disparities in postoperative outcomes among patients undergoing complex surgery.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to quantify the direct and indirect effects of race on postoperative outcomes after complex surgery. METHODS: Medicare patients who underwent abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), lung resection or colectomy were identified (2014-2018). Generalized structural equation modelling was utilized to quantify the direct and indirect effects of race on Textbook outcome (TO). RESULTS: Among 930,033 patients, 46.8% of patients achieved a TO, with Black patients less likely to achieve a TO (referent: White; Black: OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.70-0.73). Notably, 32.3% of the disparities in TO were attributable to race itself, while 67.7% was explained by other factors. Specifically, residential segregation accounted for 39.4% of the lower TO rates among Black patients, while 21.0% was attributable to a high comorbidity burden. CONCLUSIONS: These data highlight the need to target structural racism as a policy priority to promote a more equitable healthcare system.

The Association of Food Insecurity and Surgical Outcomes Among Patients Undergoing Surgery for Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Food insecurity predisposes individuals to suboptimal nutrition, leading to chronic disease and poor outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the impact of county-level food insecurity on colorectal surgical outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database was merged with county-level food insecurity obtained from the Feeding America: Mapping the Meal Gap report. Multiple logistic and Cox regression adjusted for patient-level covariates were implemented to assess outcomes. PATIENTS: Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with colorectal cancer between 2010 and 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Surgical admission type (nonelective and elective admission), any complication, extended length of stay, discharge disposition (discharged to home and nonhome discharge), 90-day readmission, 90-day mortality, and textbook outcome. Textbook outcome was defined as no extended length of stay, postoperative complications, 90-day readmission, and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Among 72,354 patients with colorectal cancer, 46,296 underwent resection. Within the surgical cohort, 9091 (19.3%) were in low, 27,716 (59.9%) were in moderate, and 9,489 (20.5%) were in high food insecurity counties. High food insecurity patients had greater odds of nonelective surgery (OR: 1.17; 95% CI, 1.09-1.26; p < 0.001), 90-day readmission (OR: 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04-1.19; p = 0.002), extended length of stay (OR: 1.32; 95% CI, 1.21-1.44; p < 0.001), and complications (OR: 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03-1.19; p = 0.002). High food insecurity patients also had decreased odds of home discharge (OR: 0.85; 95% CI, 0.79-0.91; p < 0.001) and textbook outcomes (OR: 0.81; 95% CI, 0.75-0.87; p < 0.001). High food insecurity minority patients had increased odds of complications (OR 1.59; 95% CI, 1.43-1.78) and extended length of stay (OR 1.89; 95% CI, 1.69-2.12) compared with low food insecurity white patients (all, p < 0.001). Notably, high food insecurity minority patients had 31% lower odds of textbook outcomes (OR: 0.69; 95% CI, 0.62-0.76; p < 0.001) compared with low food insecurity White patients ( p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited to Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older; hence, it may not be generalizable to younger populations or those without insurance or with private insurance. CONCLUSIONS: County-level food insecurity was associated with suboptimal outcomes, demonstrating the importance of interventions to mitigate these inequities. See Video Abstract. LA ASOCIACIN DE INSEGURIDAD ALIMENTARIA Y RESULTADOS QUIRRGICOS ENTRE PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A CIRUGA DE CNCER COLORRECTAL: ANTECEDENTES:La inseguridad alimentaria predispone a las personas a una nutrición subóptima, lo que conduce a enfermedades crónicas y malos resultados.OBJETIVO:Intentamos evaluar el impacto de la inseguridad alimentaria a nivel de condado en resultados de la cirugía colorrectal.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ENTORNO CLINICO:La base de datos SEER-Medicare fusionada con la inseguridad alimentaria a nivel de condado obtenida del informe Feeding America: Mapping the Meal Gap. Para evaluar los resultados se implementaron regresiones logísticas múltiples y de Cox ajustadas según las covariables a nivel de paciente.PACIENTES:Beneficiarios de Medicare diagnosticados con cáncer colorrectal entre 2010 y 2015.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Tipo de ingreso quirúrgico (ingreso no electivo y electivo), cualquier complicación, duración prolongada de la estancia hospitalaria, disposición del alta (alta al domicilio y alta no domiciliaria), reingreso a los 90 días, mortalidad a los 90 días y resultado del libro de texto. El resultado de los libros de texto se definió como ausencia de estancia hospitalaria prolongada, complicaciones postoperatorias, reingreso a los 90 días y mortalidad a los 90 días.RESULTADOS:Entre 72.354 pacientes con cáncer colorrectal, 46.296 se sometieron a resección. Dentro de la cohorte quirúrgica, 9.091 (19,3%) tenían inseguridad alimentaria baja, 27.716 (59,9%) eran moderadas y 9.489 (20,5%) tenían inseguridad alimentaria alta. Los pacientes con alta inseguridad alimentaria tuvieron mayores probabilidades de cirugía no electiva (OR: 1,17, IC 95%: 1,09-1,26, p <0,001), reingreso a los 90 días (OR: 1,11, IC95%: 1,04-1,19, p = 0,002), duración prolongada de la estancia hospitalaria (OR: 1,32; IC95%: 1,21-1,44, p < 0,001) y complicaciones (OR: 1,11; IC95%: 1,03-1,19, p = 0,002). Los pacientes con alta inseguridad alimentaria también tuvieron menores probabilidades de ser dados de alta a domicilio (OR: 0,85, IC del 95%: 0,79-0,91, p <0,001) y resultados de los libros de texto (OR: 0,81, IC del 95%: 0,75-0,87, p <0,001). Los pacientes minoritarios con alta inseguridad alimentaria tuvieron mayores probabilidades de complicaciones (OR 1,59, IC 95%, 1,43-1,78) y duración prolongada de la estadía (OR 1,89, IC 95%, 1,69-2,12) en comparación con los individuos blancos con baja inseguridad alimentaria (todos, p < 0,001). En particular, los pacientes minoritarios con alta inseguridad alimentaria tenían un 31% menos de probabilidades de obtener resultados según los libros de texto (OR: 0,69, IC del 95%, 0,62-0,76, p <0,001) en comparación con los pacientes blancos con baja inseguridad alimentaria ( p <0,001).LIMITACIONES:Limitado a beneficiarios de Medicare mayores de 65 años, por lo tanto, puede no ser generalizable a poblaciones más jóvenes o a aquellos sin seguro o con seguro privado.CONCLUSIONES:La inseguridad alimentaria a nivel de condado se asoció con resultados subóptimos, lo que demuestra la importancia de las intervenciones para mitigar estas desigualdades. (Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon ).

Immigrant Doctors and Their Role in US Healthcare.

BACKGROUND: The composition of the US healthcare workforce relative to citizenship status remains ill-defined. We sought to characterize practice patterns among US doctors relative to citizenship status. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were extracted from the 2008-2019 American Community Surveys, and citizenship was stratified as: citizens by birth, naturalized citizens for ≥ 10 years or < 10 years, and non-citizens. Multinomial logistic regression models and inverse probability weighting were employed. The data were reported as differences in proportions/means with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Among 97,775,606 respondents, 113,638 were identified as doctors (0.12%). Among the surveyed doctors, 72.4% (95% CI 72.1-72.8%) were citizens by birth, followed by naturalized citizens ≥ 10 years [14.4% (95% CI 14.1-14.6%)], non-citizens [7.2% (95% CI 7.0-7.4%)], and naturalized citizens < 10 years [6.0% (95% CI 5.8-6.1%)]. Naturalized citizens ≥ 10 and < 10 years worked 40.4 (95% CI 12.6-68.2) and 38.2 (95% CI 4.8-71.6) more hours annually compared with citizens by birth, respectively (both p < 0.05). While 22.7% of doctors who were citizens by birth worked in high socially vulnerable counties, immigrant doctors were more likely to work in these areas (difference (95% CI); naturalized citizens ≥ 10 years, 7.7% (6.1-9.4) vs. naturalized citizens < 10 years, 8.0% (5.9-10.1) vs. non-citizens, 4.1% (2.0-6.1)). Furthermore, naturalized citizens ≥ 10 years and < 10 years worked in lower physician density counties that had 29.6 (14.4-44.8) and 59.9 (42.3-77.5) more people, respectively, relative to doctors (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Immigrant doctors play a vital role in addressing US healthcare needs. Policies that encourage the increased integration and utilization of immigrant doctors and physicians-in-training may help to foster a sustainable healthcare workforce over the coming decades.

An attempt to establish and apply global benchmarks for liver resection of malignant hepatic tumors.

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking is a process of continuous self-evaluation and comparison with best-in-class hospitals to guide quality improvement initiatives. We sought to define global benchmarks relative to liver resection for malignancy and to assess their achievement in hospitals in the United States. METHODS: Patients who underwent curative-intent liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, or colorectal or neuroendocrine liver metastases between 2000 and 2019 were identified from an international multi-institutional database. Propensity score matching was conducted to balance baseline characteristics between open and minimally invasive approaches. Best-in-class hospitals were defined relative to the achievement rate of textbook oncologic outcomes and case volume. Benchmark values were established relative to best-in-class institutions. The achievement of benchmark values among hospitals in the National Cancer Database was then assessed. RESULTS: Among 2,624 patients treated at 20 centers, a majority underwent liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 1,609, 61.3%), followed by colorectal liver metastases (n = 650, 24.8%), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (n = 299, 11.4%), and neuroendocrine liver metastases (n = 66, 2.5%). Notably, 1,947 (74.2%) patients achieved a textbook oncologic outcome. After propensity score matching, 6 best-in-class hospitals with the highest textbook oncologic outcome rates (≥75.0%) were identified. Benchmark values were calculated for margin positivity (≤11.7%), 30-day readmission (≤4.1%), 30-day mortality (≤1.6%), minor postoperative complications (≤24.7%), severe complications (≤12.4%), and failure to achieve the textbook oncologic outcome (≤22.8%). Among the National Cancer Database hospitals, global benchmarks for margin positivity, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, severe complications, and textbook oncologic outcome failure were achieved in 62.9%, 27.1%, 12.1%, 7.1%, and 29.3% of centers, respectively. CONCLUSION: These global benchmarks may help identify hospitals that may benefit from quality improvement initiatives, aiming to improve patient safety and surgical oncologic outcomes.

Liver transplantation for elderly patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Although liver resection is a viable option for patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), liver transplantation is the optimal treatment. The aim of this study was to identify characteristics of liver transplantation for elderly patients, and to assess the therapeutic benefit derived from liver transplantation over liver resection. METHODS: This was a population-based study of patients undergoing liver transplantation for HCC in the USA between 2004 and 2018. Data were retrieved from the National Cancer Database. Elderly patients were defined as individuals aged 70 years and over. Propensity score overlap weighting was used to control for heterogeneity between the liver resection and liver transplantation cohorts. RESULTS: Among 4909 liver transplant recipients, 215 patients (4.1 per cent) were classified as elderly. Among 5922 patients who underwent liver resection, 1907 (32.2 per cent) were elderly. Elderly patients who underwent liver transplantation did not have a higher hazard of dying during the first 5 years after transplantation than non-elderly recipients. After propensity score weighting, liver transplantation was associated with a lower risk of death than liver resection. Other factors associated with overall survival included diagnosis during 2016-2018, non-white/non-African American race, and α-fetoprotein level over 20 ng/dl. CONCLUSION: Elderly patients with HCC should not be excluded from liver transplantation based on age only. Transplantation leads to favourable survival compared with liver resection.

Modified integrated tumor burden, liver function, systemic inflammation, and tumor biology score to predict long-term outcomes after resection for hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: A preoperative predictive score for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) can help stratify patients who undergo resection relative to long-term outcomes and tailor treatment strategies. METHODS: Patients who underwent curative-intent hepatectomy for HCC between 2000 and 2020 were identified from an international multi-institutional database. A risk score (mFIBA) was developed using an Eastern cohort and then validated using a Western cohort. RESULTS: Among 957 patients, 443 and 514 patients were included from the Eastern and Western cohorts, respectively. On multivariable analysis, alpha-feto protein (HR1.97, 95%CI 1.42-2.72), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (HR1.74, 95%CI 1.28-2.38), albumin-bilirubin grade (HR1.66, 95%CI 1.21-2.28), and imaging tumor burden score (HR1.25, 95%CI 1.12-1.40) were associated with OS. The c-index in the Eastern test and Western validation cohorts were 0.69 and 0.67, respectively. Notably, mFIBA score outperformed previous HCC staging systems. 5-year OS incrementally decreased with an increase in mFIBA. On multivariable Cox regression analysis, the mFIBA score was associated with worse OS (HR1.18, 95%CI 1.13-1.23) and higher risk of recurrence (HR1.16, 95%CI 1.11-1.20). An easy-to-use calculator of the mFIBA score was made available online (https://yutaka-endo.shinyapps.io/mFIBA_score/). DISCUSSION: The online mFIBA calculator may help surgeons with clinical decision-making to individualize perioperative treatment strategies for patients undergoing resection of HCC.