Contemporary outcomes of surgical resection for chest wall chondrosarcoma.

Objective: Chondrosarcoma is the most common primary malignant chest wall tumor and is historically associated with poor prognosis. Recommendations regarding surgical excision are on the basis of small, single-institution studies. We used a large national database to assess outcomes of surgery for chest wall chondrosarcoma (CWC) hypothesizing that surgical excision remains standard of care. Methods: The National Cancer Databases for bone and soft tissue were merged to identify patients with chondrosarcoma from 2004 to 2018. Clinical and demographic characteristics of CWC were compared with chondrosarcoma from other sites. The primary outcome was overall survival described using Kaplan-Meier estimate. Univariable and multivariable Cox analysis was used to determine risk factors for poor survival among CWC patients who underwent surgery. Multivariable analysis of predictors of margin status was performed because of worse prognosis associated with positive margins. Results: Among 11,925 patients with chondrosarcoma, 1934 (16.2%) had a CWC. Relative to other sites, CWC was associated with older age, male sex, White race, surgical resection, and care at a nonacademic institution. CWC was associated with 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year survival of 91.5%, 82.0%, 75.5%, and 62.7%, respectively. In univariable analysis, survival was associated with surgery (hazard ratio, 0.02; P < .001) and adversely affected by positive margins (hazard ratio, 2.66; P < .001). Multivariable analysis showed larger tumor size was independently associated with increased risk for positive margins (odds ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.011-1.075). Conclusions: CWC represents a different cohort of patients relative to chondrosarcoma from other sites. Surgical excision remains the optimal treatment, and positive margins are associated with poor prognosis.

Surgical subspecialization is associated with higher rate of rib fracture stabilization: a retrospective database analysis.

Background: Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) is performed on only a small subset of patients who meet guideline-recommended indications for surgery. Although previous studies show that provider specialization was associated with SSRF procedural competency, little is known about the impact of provider specialization on SSRF performance frequency. We hypothesize that provider specialization would impact performance of SSRF. Methods: The Premier Hospital Database was used to identify adult patients with rib fractures from 2015 and 2019. The outcome of interest was performance of SSRF, defined using International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision Procedure Coding System coding. Patients were categorized as receiving their procedures from a thoracic, general surgeon, or orthopedic surgeon. Patients with missing or other provider types were excluded. Multivariate modeling was performed to evaluate the effect of surgical specialization on outcomes of SSRF. Given a priori assumptions that trauma centers may have different practice patterns, a subgroup analysis was performed excluding patients with 'trauma center' admissions. Results: Among 39 733 patients admitted with rib fractures, 2865 (7.2%) received SSRF. Trauma center admission represented a minority (1034, 36%) of SSRF procedures relative to other admission types (1831, 64%, p=0.15). In a multivariable analysis, thoracic (OR 6.94, 95% CI 5.94-8.11) and orthopedic provider (OR 2.60, 95% CI 2.16-3.14) types were significantly more likely to perform SSRF. In further analyses of trauma center admissions versus non-trauma center admissions, this pattern of SSRF performance was found at non-trauma centers. Conclusion: The majority of SSRF procedures in the USA are being performed by general surgeons and at non-trauma centers. 'Subspecialty' providers in orthopedics and thoracic surgery are performing fewer total SSRF interventions, but are more likely to perform SSRF, especially at non-trauma centers. Provider specialization as a barrier to SSRF may be related to competence in the SSRF procedures and requires further study. Type: Therapeutic/care management. Level of evidence: IV.

Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansion is Associated With Increased Utilization of Minimally Invasive Lung Resection for Early Stage Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Minimally invasive lung resection (MILR) is underutilized in the United States. Under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), 39 states adopted Medicaid expansion, while 12 did not. Although Medicaid expansion has been associated with improved access to cancer care, its effect on utilization of MILR is unclear. We hypothesize that MILR would increase in Medicaid expansion states. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for adult patients from 2010 to 2018 with cT1/2N0M0 non-small cell lung cancer who received surgical resection by wedge, segmentectomy, or lobectomy. Patients were grouped by whether they received care in a state without Medicaid expansion vs expansion in January 2014. The outcome of interest was MILR (defined as video-assisted or robotic-assisted thoracoscopy) relative to open. Multivariable difference in differences (DID) cross-sectional analysis was used to estimate the average treatment effect (ATE) of Medicaid expansion. RESULTS: There were 41,439 patients who met inclusion criteria: 20,446 (49.3%) in expansion states and 20,993 (50.7%) in non-expansion states. Multivariable DID analysis showed that Medicaid expansion was associated with an increase in Medicaid insurance type with an ATE of 7.4% (95% CI 7.1-7.7%, P = .002). Medicaid expansion was also associated with increased MILR utilization in unadjusted analysis (10,278/20,446 (50.3%) vs 9,953/20,993 (47.4%), p < .001) and in multivariable DID analysis (ATE 0.6%, 95% CI 0.3-0.8%, P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Although Medicaid expansion was associated with increased utilization of MILR for early stage lung cancer, the treatment effect was modest. This suggests that barriers in access to MILR are larger than simply access to care.

Statin-Induced Rhabdomyolysis Associated With Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Placement.

Rhabdomyolysis is a known rare and potentially lethal complication of statin use. This toxic effect is potentiated by alterations in hepatic physiology in patients with cirrhosis. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement has the potential to further compound this effect; yet, examples of this have not previously been described in the literature. We present a case of a patient who experienced statin-induced rhabdomyolysis likely as a direct consequence of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement.

Presence of any degree of coronary artery disease among liver transplant candidates is associated with increased rate of post-transplant major adverse cardiac events.

The impact of coronary artery disease (CAD) among liver transplant candidates (LTC) on post-LT clinical outcomes remains unclear. The aim of this study is to determine association of presence and severity of CAD on post-LT major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including cardiac-associated mortality. We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 231 patients who underwent diagnostic coronary angiogram (DCA) during their LT evaluation at a tertiary medical center from 2012-2017. Patients were analyzed based on degree of CAD (no CAD, non-obstructive CAD [< 50% stenosis], obstructive CAD [≥50% stenosis]) per DCA results. MACE were noted at 30 days, 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years post-LT, and Kaplan-Meier curves were used to determine post-LT MACE-free probability. LTC with any CAD, including non-obstructive CAD, had lower MACE-free probability at all post-LT time points (0.94 vs 0.65 at 30 days, P = .001; 0.87 vs 0.59 at 1 year, P = .002; 0.87 vs 0.41 at 3 years, P < .001; 0.87 vs 0.37 at 5 years, P < .001). Identification of and medical intervention for non-obstructive CAD should be considered in all LTC, though further studies are necessary to determine optimal medical interventions to mitigate MACE risk in this cohort.

Optimal Surgical Timing After Neoadjuvant Therapy for Stage IIIa Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with clinically/pathologically diagnosed stage IIIa non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) considered for surgery are recommended to undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiation. The timing of an operation after therapy is not standardized; therefore, we investigated the timing of intervention after neoadjuvant therapy and the impact on outcomes in this demographic. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried between 2010 and 2015 for patients with clinical/pathologic stage IIIa NSCLC. Patients were then divided into short (<77 days), mid (77-114 days), and long delay (>114 days) groups based on interquartile values. These groups were then compared for age, race, gender, insurance type, Charlson-Deyo score, length of stay, readmission rate, and overall survival based on timing of operation. RESULTS: There were 31,357 patients with clinical/pathologic stage IIIa NSCLC, and 5946 patients underwent surgical intervention. Preoperatively 3593 patients underwent chemoradiotherapy, 2185 underwent chemotherapy only, and 168 received radiation alone. The short, mid, and long delay groups were clinically and statistically similar in age, gender, insurance type, comorbidity index, treating facility type, and distance from home. Long delay groups had larger tumor size compared with other groups. Postoperative length of stay, rates of 30-day readmission, and 30- and 90-day mortality were similar across all groups. Cox modeling demonstrated a significant difference in survival when patients underwent earlier operative intervention compared with late operative intervention and when patients received chemoradiation compared with chemotherapy alone. Short, mid, and long delay group 1-year survivals were 82%, 83%, and 80% and 3-year survival 59%, 58%, and 52%, respectively (P = .0003). CONCLUSIONS: The delay in surgical resection of stage IIIa NSCLC is not associated increased early mortality; however, it is associated with worse 3-year postresection survival.

Single Versus Double Lung Retransplantation Does Not Affect Survival Based on Previous Transplant Type.

BACKGROUND: Survival following retransplantation with a single lung is worse than after double lung transplant. We sought to characterize survival of patients who underwent lung retransplantation based on the type of their initial transplant, single or double. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried for adult patients who underwent lung retransplantation from 2005 onward. Patients were excluded if they underwent more than one retransplantation. The patient population was divided into 4 groups based on first followed by second transplant type, respectively: single then single, double then single, double then double, and single then double. Descriptive analysis and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were performed. A p value less than 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 410 patients underwent retransplantation in the study time period. Overall mean survival for all patients who underwent retransplantation was 1,213 days. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated no difference in graft survival between the 4 study groups (p = 0.146). CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in graft survival between recipients of retransplant with single or double lungs when stratified by previous transplant type. These results suggest that when retransplantation is performed, single lung retransplantation should be considered, regardless of previous transplant type, in an effort to maximize organ resources.

A Highly Predictive Model for Diagnosis of Colorectal Neoplasms Using Plasma MicroRNA: Improving Specificity and Sensitivity.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a plasma-based microRNA (miRNA) diagnostic assay specific for colorectal neoplasms, building upon our prior work. BACKGROUND: Colorectal neoplasms [colorectal cancer (CRC) and colorectal advanced adenoma (CAA)] frequently develop in individuals at ages when other common cancers also occur. Current screening methods lack sensitivity, specificity, and have poor patient compliance. METHODS: Plasma was screened for 380 miRNAs using microfluidic array technology from a "Training" cohort of 60 patients, (10 each) control, CRC, CAA, breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, and lung cancer. We identified uniquely dysregulated miRNAs specific for colorectal neoplasia (P < 0.05, false discovery rate: 5%, adjusted α = 0.0038). These miRNAs were evaluated using single assays in a "Test" cohort of 120 patients. A mathematical model was developed to predict blinded sample identity in a 150 patient "Validation" cohort using repeat-sub-sampling validation of the testing dataset with 1000 iterations each to assess model detection accuracy. RESULTS: Seven miRNAs (miR-21, miR-29c, miR-122, miR-192, miR-346, miR-372, and miR-374a) were selected based upon P value, area under the curve (AUC), fold change, and biological plausibility. Area under the curve (±95% confidence interval) for "Test" cohort comparisons were 0.91 (0.85-0.96) between all neoplasia and controls, 0.79 (0.70-0.88) between colorectal neoplasia and other cancers, and 0.98 (0.96-1.0) between CRC and colorectal adenomas. In our "Validation" cohort, our mathematical model predicted blinded sample identity with 69% to 77% accuracy, 67% to 76% accuracy, and 86% to 90% accuracy for each comparison, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our plasma miRNA assay and prediction model differentiate colorectal neoplasia from patients with other neoplasms and from controls with higher sensitivity and specificity compared with current clinical standards.