Segmentectomy versus lobectomy in the United States: Outcomes after resection for first primary lung cancer and treatment patterns for second primary lung cancers.

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to identify whether the results of JCOG0802 could be generalized to US clinical settings. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with clinical stage IA (≤2 cm) non-small cell lung cancer who underwent segmentectomy versus lobectomy (2004-2017) in the National Cancer Database were identified. Overall survival of patients in the National Cancer Database was assessed using propensity score-matched analysis. A separate analysis of the Surveillance Epidemiology End Results database was conducted to evaluate treatment patterns of second primary lung cancers among patients who underwent segmentectomy versus lobectomy for a first primary lung cancer. RESULTS: Of the 23,286 patients in the National Cancer Database meeting inclusion criteria, 1397 (6.0%) underwent segmentectomy and 21,889 (94.0%) underwent lobectomy. In a propensity score-matched analysis of all patients in the study cohort, there were no significant differences in overall survival between patients undergoing segmentectomy versus lobectomy (5-year overall survival: 79.9% [95% CI, 76.7%-82.0%] vs 81.8% [95% CI, 78.7%-84.4%], log-rank: P = .72). In subgroup analyses by tumor grade and histologic subtype, segmentectomy was associated with similar overall survival compared with lobectomy in all subgroups evaluated. In a propensity score-matched analysis of patients in the Surveillance Epidemiology End Results database, there were no significant differences in treatment patterns of second primary lung cancers between patients who underwent segmentectomy and patients who underwent lobectomy for their first primary lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: In this national analysis of US patients diagnosed with stage IA (≤2 cm) non-small cell lung cancer, there were no significant differences in overall survival between segmentectomy and lobectomy in the overall cohort or in subgroup analyses by tumor grade or histologic subtype.

A national survey of occupational musculoskeletal injuries in cardiothoracic surgeons.

OBJECTIVE: There is growing concern that surgeons are at increased risk for work-related orthopedic injuries due to poor ergonomics. We conducted a survey of North American cardiothoracic surgeons to evaluate the prevalence of occupational injury, as well as perceptions and use of ergonomic techniques. METHODS: Cardiothoracic surgeons identified through the Cardiothoracic Surgery Network were asked to complete a 33-question survey assessing their musculoskeletal health, as well as their perceptions and use of ergonomic techniques in the operating room and office. RESULTS: Among 600 cardiothoracic surgeons, the prevalence of occupational musculoskeletal injuries was 64%, with 30% of affected surgeons requiring time away from work and 20% requiring surgery or the use of narcotics. Cervical spine injury (35%, n = 216) was the most common injury due to operating, followed by lumbar spine injury (30%, n = 180). In multivariable-adjusted analysis, cardiac surgeons were more likely than thoracic surgeons to experience occupational musculoskeletal injuries (adjusted odds ratio, 1.8 [1.2-2.8], P < .01). Notably, 90% of surgeons (n = 536) reported thinking that their institution did not provide sufficient ergonomics education or support, and only 35% (n = 205) thought that the cardiothoracic surgical community is supportive of implementing ergonomics techniques in the operating room and office. CONCLUSIONS: In this survey analysis, cardiothoracic surgeons reported experiencing work-related orthopedic injuries at an alarmingly high rate, leading to significant time away from work and for many to retire from surgery over a decade early. These findings underline a critical need for institutions to prioritize ergonomics education and implement ergonomics-directed techniques in the operating room and office.

Clinical outcomes of a community clinic-based lifestyle change program for prevention and management of metabolic syndrome: Results of the 'Vida Sana/Healthy Life' program.

INTRODUCTION: As US Hispanic populations are at higher risk than non-Hispanics for cardiovascular disease and Type 2 diabetes targeted interventions are clearly needed. This paper presents the four years results of the Vida Sana Program (VSP), which was developed and is implemented by a small clinic serving mostly Spanish-speaking, limited literacy population. METHODS: The eight-week course of interactive two-hour sessions taught by Navegantes, bilingual/cultural community health workers, was delivered to participants with hypertension, or high lipids, BMI, waist circumference, glucose or hemoglobin A1C (A1C). Measures, collected by Navegantes and clinic nurses, included blood chemistries, blood pressure, anthropometry, and an assessment of healthy food knowledge. RESULTS: Most participants (67%) were female, Hispanic (95%), and all were 18 to 70 years of age. At baseline, close to half of participants were obese (48%), had high waist circumference (53%), or elevated A1C (52%), or fasting blood glucose (57%). About one third had high blood pressure (29%) or serum cholesterol (35%), and 22% scored low on the knowledge assessment. After the intervention, participants decreased in weight (-1.0 lb), BMI (-0.2 kg/m2), WC (-0.4 inches), and cholesterol (-3.5 mg/dl, all p<0.001). Systolic blood pressure decreased (-1.7 mm Hg, p<0.001), and the knowledge score increased (6.8 percent, p<0.001). DISCUSSION: VSP shows promising improvements in metabolic outcomes, similar to other programs with longer duration or higher intensity interventions. VSP demonstrates an important model for successful community-connected interventions.

Lessons Learned from a Rhode Island Academic Out-Patient Lyme and Tick-Borne Disease Clinic.

Although the prevalence of Lyme and tick-borne diseases (TBDs) continues to rise, there is conflicting information regarding the best approach to management. The Lifespan Lyme Disease Clinic (LDC) is an academic out- patient clinic for Lyme and other TBDs. A chart review of 218 new patients between March and November 2018 was conducted. Symptoms most commonly reported included fatigue (66.5%), joint pain (58.2%), cognitive difficulty (32.1%), and headaches (27.9%). Most (87.1%) patients had received TBD-directed antibiotic treatment prior to their first appointment. Of the 136 patients who had experienced more than 6 months of symptoms attributed to Lyme, 55.1% had positive two-tiered serologies. Many patients characterized themselves as having "chronic Lyme" or had a diagnosis of "post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome," a condition for which there is no clear consensus on pathophysiology or treatment. Outlined here are some lessons learned and practical approaches used by LDC physicians in caring for this patient population.