Survival after radiation for stage I and II non-small cell lung cancer with positive margins.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data guiding treatment for positive margins following lobectomy for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Using data from the National Cancer Data Base, we sought to determine whether radiation therapy following lobectomy for stage I or II NSCLC was associated with improved overall survival in patients with positive margins. METHODS: Patients who underwent lobectomy without induction therapy for stage I or II NSCLC (1998-2006) with positive resection margins were selected. Patients were stratified by administration of radiation therapy following surgery, and overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The association between radiation therapy and survival was adjusted for nonrandom treatment selection using Cox proportional hazards regression modeling. RESULTS: Positive margins were recorded in 1934 of 49,563 (3.9%) patients who underwent lobectomy for stage I or II NSCLC. Positive margin status was associated with significantly worse 5-year survival (34.5% versus 57.2%, P < 0.001). After selection of patients with positive margins and known radiation status and exclusion of patients who had upstaged disease or received radiation therapy for palliative indications, radiation therapy was used in 579 of 1579 patients (38.2%) but was not associated with a significant difference in the likelihood of death during subsequent follow-up (hazard ratio: 1.10, 95% confidence interval: 0.90, 1.35). CONCLUSIONS: Positive margins following lobectomy for stage I or II NSCLC are associated with reduced 5-year survival. Postsurgical radiation is not strongly associated with an improvement in overall survival among these patients.

Survival after lung transplantation in recipients with alpha-1-antitrypsin deficiency compared to other forms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a national cohort study.

Alpha-1-antitrypsin deficiency (AATD) is grouped with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, this may not be appropriate. This study assessed whether AATD confers a different prognosis than COPD following lung transplantation. We employed the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database, grouping patients by diagnoses of AATD or COPD. Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox modeling were performed to determine the association of diagnosis and overall survival. Of 9569 patients, 1394 (14.6%) had a diagnosis of AATD. Patients with AATD who received a single-lung transplant had reduced 1-year survival [adjusted hazard ratio (AHR): 1.68, 95% CI: 1.26, 2.23]. Among patients who received a bilateral lung transplant, there was no significant difference in survival by diagnosis (AHR for AATD as compared to COPD: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.82, 1.12). After the implementation of the lung allocation score (LAS), there was no significant difference in survival among patients who received a single (AHR: 1.15, 95% CI: 0.69, 1.95) or bilateral (AHR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.73, 1.34) lung transplant by diagnosis. Lung transplantation is increasingly employed in the care of the patient with COPD. Although recipients undergoing LTX for AATD are at increased risk of both acute rejection and airway dehiscence post-transplant, in the post-LAS era, survival rates are similar for recipients with AATD in comparison with COPD.

Going the Extra Mile: Improved Survival for Pancreatic Cancer Patients Traveling to High-volume Centers.

OBJECTIVE: This study compares outcomes following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for patients treated at local, low-volume centers and those traveling to high-volume centers. BACKGROUND: Although outcomes for PD are superior at high-volume institutions, not all patients live in proximity to major medical centers. Theoretical advantages for undergoing surgery locally exist. METHODS: The 1998 to 2012 National Cancer Data Base was queried for T1-3N0-1M0 pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients who underwent PD. Travel distances to treatment centers were calculated. Overlaying the upper and lower quartiles of travel distance with institutional volume established short travel/low-volume (ST/LV) and long travel/high-volume (LT/HV) cohorts. Overall survival was evaluated. RESULTS: Of 7086 patients, 773 ST/LV patients traveled ≤6.3 (median 3.2) miles to centers performing ≤3.3 PDs yearly, and 758 LT/HV patients traveled ≥45 (median 97.3) miles to centers performing ≥16 PDs yearly. LT/HV patients had higher stage disease (P < 0.001), but lower margin positivity (20.5% vs 25.9%, P = 0.01) and improved lymphadenectomy (16 vs 11 nodes, P < 0.01). Moreover, LT/HV patients had shorter hospitalizations (9 vs 12 days, P < 0.01) and lower 30-day mortality (2.0% vs 6.3%, P < 0.01) with similar 30-day readmission rates (10.1% vs 9.8%, P = 0.83). Despite more advanced disease, LT/HV patients had superior unadjusted survival (20.3 vs 15.7 months). After adjustment, travel to a high-volume center remained associated with reduced long-term mortality (hazard ratio 0.75, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Despite an increased travel burden, patients treated at high-volume centers had improved perioperative outcomes, short-term mortality, and overall survival. These data support ongoing efforts to centralize care for patients undergoing PD.

Traveling to a High-volume Center is Associated With Improved Survival for Patients With Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: An association between volume and outcomes has been observed for esophagectomy, though little is known about why or how patients choose low- or high-volume centers. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how travel burden and hospital volume influence treatment and outcomes of patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. METHODS: Predictors of receiving esophagectomy for patients with T1-3N1M0 mid or distal esophageal cancer in the National Cancer Data Base from 2006 to 2011 were identified using multivariable logistic regression. Survival was compared using propensity score-matched groups: patients in the bottom quartile of travel distance who underwent treatment at low-volume facilities (Local) and patients in the top quartile of travel distance who underwent treatment at high-volume facilities (Travel). RESULTS: Of 4979 patients who met inclusion criteria, we identified 867 Local patients who traveled 2.7 [interquartile range (IQR): 1.6-4 miles] miles to centers that treated 2.6 (IQR: 1.9-3.3) esophageal cancers per year, and 317 Travel patients who traveled 107.1 (IQR: 65-247) miles to centers treating 31.9 (IQR: 30.9-38.5) cases. Travel patients were more likely to undergo esophagectomy (67.8% vs 42.9%, P < 0.001) and had significantly better 5-year survival (39.8% vs 20.6%, P < 0.001) than Local patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who travel longer distances to high-volume centers have significantly different treatment and better outcomes than patients who stay close to home at low-volume centers. Strategies that support patient travel for treatment at high-volume centers may improve esophageal cancer outcomes.

The association of donor age and survival is independent of ischemic time following deceased donor lung transplantation.

PURPOSE: Early research suggests prolonged ischemic time in older donor lungs is associated with decreased survival following lung transplantation. The purpose of this study was to determine whether this association holds in the post-lung allocation score era. METHODS: We analyzed the United Network for Organ Sharing database 2005-2013 for adult recipients of cadaveric lung transplants. Cox proportional hazards modeling was utilized to determine the association of donor age, ischemic time, and the interaction of donor age and ischemic time with transplant-free survival. RESULTS: Eleven thousand eight hundred thirty-five patients met criteria. Median donor age was 32 years, and median ischemic time was 4.9 hours. Cox modeling demonstrated that donor age 50-60 (adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.11) and ≥60 (adjusted HR: 1.42) were associated with reduced overall survival. Neither ischemic time nor interaction of ischemic time and donor age were significantly associated with overall survival. Subanalysis demonstrated that this finding held true for patients undergoing either single or bilateral lung transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged ischemic time is not associated with decreased overall survival in patients undergoing lung transplantation regardless of the donor's age. However, donor age >50 is independently associated with decreased survival. The lack of an association between ischemic time and survival should encourage broader geographic allocation of pulmonary allografts.

Lung transplantation delays gastric motility in patients without prior gastrointestinal surgery-A single-center experience of 412 consecutive patients.

PURPOSE: To examine the impact of lung transplantation on gastric motility. METHODS: Adult recipients at a large, single center, who were retrospectively evaluated with solid gastric emptying (SGE) study post-lung transplantation, but had no history of gastrointestinal intervention (ie, pyloroplasty or fundoplication), were selected between June 2005 and August 2013. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine risk factors associated with delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after transplantation. RESULTS: Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) was noted in 236 patients (57%) after transplantation. On multivariable logistic regression, an underlining diagnosis of cystic fibrosis (CF)/bronchiectasis (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 3.26, P < .01) was a significant risk factor in predicting DGE after lung transplantation. There was no survival difference between patients with postoperative DGE vs those without (log-rank test P = .53). CONCLUSIONS: Delayed gastric emptying is very common following lung transplantation, occurring in over half of all lung transplant recipients with increased prevalence in patients with CF. The association with cystic fibrosis could be secondary to extra-pulmonary manifestations of the underlying disease or indicative of increased intraoperative vagal nerve injury. We speculate that DGE may play a substantial role in the increased reflux-induced allograft injury seen after lung transplantation. Further prospective studies are needed to validate this hypothesis.

Long-term survival following kidney transplantation in previous lung transplant recipients-An analysis of the unos registry.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation has been advocated as a therapeutic option in lung recipients who develop end-stage renal disease (ESRD). This analysis outlines patterns of allograft survival following kidney transplantation in previous lung recipients (KAL). METHODS: Data from the UNOS lung and kidney transplantation registries (1987-2013) were cross-linked to identify lung recipients who were subsequently listed for and/or underwent kidney transplantation. Time-dependent Cox models compared the survival rates in KAL patients with those waitlisted for renal transplantation who never received kidneys. Survival analyses compared outcomes between KAL patients and risk-matched recipients of primary, kidney-only transplantation with no history of lung transplantation (KTx). RESULTS: A total of 270 lung recipients subsequently underwent kidney transplantation (KAL). Regression models demonstrated a lower risk of post-listing mortality for KAL patients compared with 346 lung recipients on the kidney waitlist who never received kidneys (P<.05). Comparisons between matched KAL and KTx patients demonstrated significantly increased risk of death and graft loss (P<.05), but not death-censored graft loss, for KAL patients (P = .86). CONCLUSIONS: KAL patients enjoy a significant survival benefit compared with waitlisted lung recipients who do not receive kidneys. However, KAL patients do poorly compared with KTx patients. Decisions about KAL transplantation must be made on a case-by-case basis considering patient and donor factors.

Transplant size mismatch in restrictive lung disease.

To maximize the benefit of lung transplantation, the effect of size mismatch on survival in lung transplant recipients with restrictive lung disease (RLD) was examined. All single and bilateral RLD lung transplants from 1987 to 2011 in the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) Database were identified. Donor predicted total lung capacity (pTLC):Recipient pTLC ratio (pTLCr) quantified mismatch. pTLCr was segregated into five strata. A Cox proportional hazards model evaluated the association of pTLCr with mortality hazard. To identify a critical pTLCr, a Cox model using a restricted cubic spline for pTLCr was used. A total of 6656 transplants for RLD were identified. Median pTLCr for single orthotopic lung transplant (SOLT) and bilateral orthotopic lung transplant (BOLT) was 1.0 (0.69-1.47) and 0.98 (0.66-1.45). Examination of pTLCr as a categorical variable revealed that undersizing (pTLCr <0.8) for SOLT and moderate oversizing (pTLCr = 1.1-1.2) for SOLT and BOLT had a harmful survival effect [for SOLT pTLC <0.8: HR 1.711 (95% CI 1.146-2.557), P = 0.01 and for BOLT pTLC 1.1-1.2: HR 1.717 (95% CI 1.112-2.651), P = 0.02]. Spline analysis revealed significant changes in SOLT mortality by variation of pTLCr between 0.8-0.9 and 1.1-1.2. RLD patients undergoing SOLT are susceptible to detriments of an undersized lung. RLD patients undergoing BOLT have higher risk of mortality when pTLCr falls between 1.1 and 1.2.

Subtotal cholecystectomy for the hostile gallbladder: failure to control the cystic duct results in significant morbidity.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes following the inability to control the cystic duct due to a hostile triangle of Calot during cholecystectomy remain unknown. The purpose of this study was to analyze the safety and efficacy of subtotal cholecystectomy, with attention to the necessity for secondary interventions. METHODS: Sixteen thousand five hundred ninety six cholecystectomies from January 2002 to August 2014 were reviewed, identifying patients managed with subtotal cholecystectomy, defined as the inability to isolate/transect the cystic duct. After propensity matching, we investigated surgical indications, perioperative outcomes, and the necessity for secondary ERCP, percutaneous drainage, and completion cholecystectomy. RESULTS: 65 (0.39%) patients underwent subtotal cholecystectomy; 54 (83.1%) began laparoscopically, of which 30 (55.6%) required conversion to laparotomy. Subtotal cholecystectomy, performed more frequently for acute cholecystitis (70.8% vs 34.6%), was associated with extended hospitalizations (4 d vs 2 d) and frequent surgical site infections (20% vs 4.6%). 25 (38.5%) subtotal cholecystectomy patients required ≥1 secondary intervention, and compared to standard cholecystectomy, underwent higher rates postoperative ERCP (30.8% vs 5.4%), percutaneous drainage (9.2% vs 1.5%), and completion cholecystectomy (6.2% vs 0%) [all P < 0.05]. DISCUSSION: Subtotal cholecystectomy fails to control the cystic duct, resulting in significant morbidity. Most do not require completion cholecystectomy; however, patients demand close observation and, frequently, secondary interventions.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Low Anterior Resection: Equivalent Survival in a National Analysis of 14,033 Patients With Rectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To examine survival of patients who underwent minimally invasive versus open low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer. BACKGROUND: Utilization of laparoscopic and robotic LAR for rectal cancer has steadily increased. Short-term outcomes between these techniques and open surgery have shown equivalent results; however, survival outcomes are unknown. METHODS: Adults from the National Cancer Data Base undergoing LAR for rectal adenocarcinoma were identified. Patients were stratified by intent-to-treat into open (OLAR) or minimally invasive LAR (MI-LAR). Multivariable modeling was used to compare short-term outcomes and survival between MI-LAR and OLAR and between laparoscopic (LLAR) and robotic LAR (RLAR). RESULTS: Among 14,033 patients included, 57.8% underwent OLAR and 42.2% MI-LAR. After adjustment, MI-LAR was associated with shorter length of stay (P < 0.001), but similar rates of positive margins, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, and use of adjuvant therapies (all P > 0.05). At 36 months, there was no difference in adjusted risk of mortality between MI-LAR and OLAR (hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, P = 0.089). In a subgroup analysis of LLAR versus RLAR, there were no differences in lymph node harvest, margin positivity, length of stay, readmission rate, 30-day mortality, or overall survival after adjustment (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive LAR for rectal cancer is associated with similar overall survival with the benefit of shorter hospitalization. Although the conversion rate is lower, robotic LAR is not associated with superior oncologic outcomes compared to laparoscopic LAR. Our findings support the ongoing adoption of minimally invasive techniques for rectal adenocarcinoma.

Feeding jejunostomy tube placement during resection of gastric cancers.

BACKGROUND: Feeding tube placement is common among patients undergoing gastrectomy, and national guidelines currently recommend consideration of a feeding jejunostomy tube (FJT) for all patients undergoing resection for gastric cancer. However, data are limited regarding the safety of FJT placement at the time of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. METHODS: The 2005-2011 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant User Files were queried to identify patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Subjects were classified by the concomitant placement of an FJT. Groups were then propensity matched using a 1:1 nearest neighbor algorithm, and outcomes were compared between groups. The primary outcomes of interest were overall 30-d overall complications and mortality. Secondary end points included major complications, surgical site infection, and early reoperation. RESULTS: In total, 2980 subjects underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer, among whom 715 (24%) also had an FJT placed. Patients who had an FJT placed were more likely to be male (61.6% versus 56.6%, P = 0.02), have recent weight loss (21.0% versus 14.8%, P < 0.01), and have undergone recent chemotherapy (7.9% versus 4.2%, P < 0.01) and radiation therapy (4.2% versus 1.3%, P < 0.01). They were also more likely to have undergone total (compared with partial) gastrectomy (66.6% versus 28.6%, P < 0.01) and have concomitant resection of an adjacent organ (40.4 versus 24.1%, P < 0.01). After adjustment with propensity matching, however, all baseline characteristics and treatment variables were highly similar. Between groups, there were no statistically significant differences in 30-d overall complications (38.8% versus 36.1%, P = 0.32) or mortality (5.8 versus 3.7%, P = 0.08). There were also no differences in major complications, surgical site infection, or early reoperation. Operative time was slightly longer among patients with feeding tubes placed (median, 248 versus 233 min, P = 0.01), but otherwise there were no significant differences in any outcomes between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant placement of FJT at the time of gastrectomy may result in slightly increased operative times but does not appear to lead to increased perioperative morbidity or mortality. Further investigation is needed to identify the patients most likely to benefit from FJT placement.

Robotic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer: A National Perspective on Short-term Oncologic Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study examines short-term outcomes and pathologic surrogates of oncologic results among patients undergoing robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. A total of 6403 patients met inclusion criteria. Although the robotic approach required significantly fewer conversions to open, surrogates for proper oncologic surgery were nearly identical between the 2 approaches. BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopic low anterior resection (LLAR) has gained popularity as an acceptable approach, the robotic low anterior resection (RLAR) remains largely unproven. We compared short-term oncologic outcomes between rectal cancer patients undergoing either RLAR or LLAR. STUDY DESIGN: All patients with rectal cancer in the National Cancer Data Base undergoing RLAR or LLAR from 2010 to 2011 were included. Predictors of RLAR were modeled with multivariable logistic regression. Groups were matched on propensity to undergo RLAR. Primary endpoints included lymph node retrieval and margin status, whereas secondary 30-day outcomes were mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), and unplanned readmission rates. RESULTS: A total of 6403 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 956 (14.9%) underwent RLAR. RLAR patients were more likely to be treated at academic centers, receive neoadjuvant therapy, and have higher T-stage and longer time to surgery (all P < 0.001). Neoadjuvant therapy and treatment at an academic/research center remained the only significant predictors of robotic use after multivariable adjustment. After propensity matching, RLAR was associated with lower conversion (9.5 vs 16.4%, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in lymph node retrieval, margin status, 30-day mortality, readmission, or hospital LOS. CONCLUSIONS: In this largest series to date, we demonstrated equivalent perioperative safety and patient outcomes for robotic compared to LLAR in the setting of rectal cancer. Although the robotic approach required significantly fewer conversions to open, surrogates for proper oncologic surgery were nearly identical between the 2 approaches, suggesting that a robotic approach may be a suitable alternative. Further studies comparing long-term cancer recurrence and survival should be performed.

Long-term Oncologic Outcomes After Neoadjuvant Radiation Therapy for Retroperitoneal Sarcomas.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term survival among patients undergoing radiation therapy (RT), followed by surgical resection of retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS). BACKGROUND: Despite a lack of level 1 evidence supporting neoadjuvant RT for RPS, its use has increased substantially over the past decade. METHODS: The 1998-2011 National Cancer Data Base was queried to identify patients who underwent resection of RPS. Subjects were grouped by use of neoadjuvant RT. Perioperative variables and outcomes were compared. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess predictors of neoadjuvant RT. Groups were propensity matched using a 2:1 nearest neighbor algorithm and short-term outcomes were compared. Finally, long-term survival was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method, with comparisons based on the log-rank test. RESULTS: A total of 11,324 patients were identified. Neoadjuvant RT was administered to 696 patients (6.1%). During the study period, preoperative RT use increased from 4% to nearly 15%. Male sex, tumor size larger than 5 cm, treatment at an academic/research program, and higher tumor grade all predicted neoadjuvant RT administration. After propensity matching, the only difference in baseline characteristics was the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Although neoadjuvant RT was associated with a higher rate of negative margins (77.5% vs 73.0%; P = 0.014), there was no corresponding improvement in 5-year survival (53.2% vs 54.2%; P = 0.695). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the increasing use of neoadjuvant RT for patients with RPS, the survival benefit associated with this treatment modality remains unclear. Continued investigation is needed to better define the role of RT among patients with RPS.

Quality of life after isolated limb infusion for in-transit melanoma of the extremity.

BACKGROUND: Isolated limb infusion (ILI) has been associated with persistent edema, numbness, pain, and functional impairment of the treated limb. However, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) has not yet been assessed using a validated questionnaire. METHODS: Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma (FACT-M) questionnaires were collected from subjects enrolled a phase I ILI trial with temozolomide at baseline and 2, 6 weeks, and 3 months post-ILI. Of 28 enrolled patients, 19 patients received maximum tolerated dose of temozolomide and are included in the HRQOL analysis. Clinical and operative variables and treatment response data also were collected. RESULTS: HRQOL scores showed a trend of improvement from baseline through 3-months post-ILI as measured by FACT-M and the melanoma surgery scores. There were no differences in HRQOL when patients were stratified by disease burden, clinical toxicity level, and 3-month disease response. Additionally, fewer patients complained of pain, numbness, and swelling of the affected limb at 3 months post-ILI compared to baseline, and also these symptoms were improved at the immediate postoperative visit compared with baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the known morbidity of ILI, we have demonstrated with a validated HRQOL questionnaire that HRQOL is not adversely impacted at therapeutic doses of temozolomide delivered intra-arterially from baseline through 3 months posttreatment. Patient centered-outcomes should be evaluated as a standard part of all future regional therapy trials using standardized melanoma-specific HRQOL questionnaires to more completely evaluate the utility of this type of treatment strategy.

The use of radiation therapy in localized high-grade soft tissue sarcoma and potential impact on survival.

BACKGROUND: It is a consensus that radiation therapy (RT) should be applied for all large, deep, high-grade soft tissue sarcomas (STS). Therefore, we investigated the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to study how these guidelines are being followed, to determine what factors may be associated with the decision not to use RT, and to see whether there was an association of RT use and survival. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed localized high-grade STS patients in the NCDB from 1998 through 2006. They were further stratified into two groups: no radiation (NRT) group and radiation (RT) group. Then, long-term survival between the two groups was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier (KM) method with comparisons based on the log-rank test. Multiple variables were analyzed between the two groups. Propensity matching was performed secondarily to minimize the influence of confounding variables. RESULTS: A total of 3982 of 10,290 patients (37.8 %) did not receive RT and 6,308 patients (62.2 %) did receive RT. Patients in the NRT group were more likely to have a below-median education level (median 58.2 % vs. 60.7 %; p = 0.015) and a below-median income level (65.1 % vs. 68.6 %; p < 0.001). In addition, these patients lived farther from their treatment centers (20.2 vs. 14.8 miles, p = 0.002) and were more likely to be uninsured (5.3 % vs. 3.5 %, p < 0.001). They were less likely to receive a radical excision (55.2 % vs. 70.1 %; p < 0.001) and more likely to receive amputation (20.9 % vs. 3.3 %; p < 0.001). The 30-day mortality (1.2 % vs. 0.2 %; p < 0.001) and readmission rate (3.8 % vs. 2.8 %; p = 0.031) were higher for the NRT group. KM analysis showed that long-term survival for patients who did not receive RT was significantly lower, even after propensity score matching (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This large database review reveals a striking lack of utilization of RT to treat high-grade STS, which correlates with poorer survival even after propensity matching. Lower education and income levels and diminished access to medical care (insurance and distance to the facility) are associated with failing to receive RT.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy After Lobectomy for T1-2N0 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Are the Guidelines Supported?

BACKGROUND: Evidence guiding adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) use after lobectomy for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is limited. This study evaluated the impact of AC use and tumor size on outcomes using a large, nationwide cancer database. METHODS: The effect of AC on long-term survival among patients who underwent lobectomy for margin-negative pathologic T1-2N0M0 NSCLC in the National Cancer Data Base from 2003 to 2006 was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The specific tumor size threshold at which AC began providing benefit was estimated with multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: Overall 3,496 of 34,360 patients (10.2%) who met inclusion criteria were treated with AC, although AC use increased over time from 2003, when only 2.7% of patients with tumors less than 4 cm and 6.2% of patients with tumors of 4 cm or larger received AC. In unadjusted survival analysis, AC was associated with a significant 5-year survival benefit for patients with tumors less than 4 cm (74.3% vs 66.9%; P<.0001) and 4 cm or greater (64.8% vs 49.8%; P<.0001). In subanalyses of patients grouped by strata of 0.5-cm increments in tumor size, AC was associated with a survival advantage for tumor sizes ranging from 3.0 to 8.5 cm. CONCLUSIONS: Use of AC among patients with stage I NSCLC has increased over time but remains uncommon. The results of this study support current treatment guidelines that recommend AC use after lobectomy for stage I NSCLC tumors larger than 4 cm. These results also suggest that AC use is associated with superior survival for patients with tumors ranging from 3.0 to 8.5 cm in diameter.

Gangrenous cholecystitis: a contemporary review.

BACKGROUND: Despite the established superiority of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for acute cholecystitis, gangrenous cholecystitis (GC) is commonly treated with open cholecystectomy (OC). This study aimed to characterize outcomes of GC in the modern era and between LC or OC surgical approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of GC were identified using the 2005-2011 National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Participant User File. Baseline patient and operative characteristics and 30-d outcomes were established for all patients. Patients were stratified by surgical approach (LC or OC), and groups were propensity matched with a nearest-neighbor matching algorithm. Primary outcomes were 30-d mortality and any 30-d complication. A nonparsimonious multiple logistic regression model was used in the matched subset to adjust for patient comorbidities, demographics, and laboratory values. RESULTS: A total of 141,970 cholecystectomies were identified with 7017 having a diagnosis of GC. Overall 30-d mortality for the entire cohort was 0.8% (n = 239) and overall 30-d complication rate was 8.0% (n = 2485). For GC patients, the 30-d mortality was 1.2% (n = 84) and overall complication rate was 10.8% (n = 761). The multivariate logistic regression model demonstrated a significant decrease in overall (odds ratio = 0.46; P < 0.001) complication rates for LC patients but did not reveal a significant difference in 30-d mortality (odds ratio = 0.59; P = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: GC is associated with increased morbidity and mortality compared with that of acute cholecystitis. A LC approach is a safe option for patients with GC and is associated with decreased 30-d morbidity. Although LC should be used when possible for GC to minimize postoperative complications, OC should not be avoided if necessary to ensure patient safety.

Impact of mesothelioma histologic subtype on outcomes in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database.

BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to determine how malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) histology was associated with the use of surgery and survival. METHODS: Overall survival of patients with stage I-III epithelioid, sarcomatoid, and biphasic MPM in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 2004-2010 was evaluated using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Of 1183 patients who met inclusion criteria, histologic subtype was epithelioid in 811 patients (69%), biphasic in 148 patients (12%), and sarcomatoid in 224 patients (19%). Median survival was 14 mo in the epithelioid group, 10 mo in the biphasic group, and 4 mo in the sarcomatoid group (P < 0.01). Cancer-directed surgery was used more often in patients with epithelioid (37%, 299/811) and biphasic (44%, 65/148) histologies as compared with patients with sarcomatoid histology (26%, 58/224; P < 0.01). Among patients who underwent surgery, median survival was 19 mo in the epithelioid group, 12 mo in the biphasic group, and 4 mo in the sarcomatoid group (P < 0.01). In multivariate analysis, surgery was associated with improved survival in the epithelioid group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.72; P < 0.01) but not in biphasic (HR 0.73; P = 0.19) or sarcomatoid (HR 0.79; P = 0.18) groups. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer-directed surgery is associated with significantly improved survival for MPM patients with epithelioid histology, but patients with sarcomatoid and biphasic histologies have poor prognoses that may not be favored by operative treatment. The specific histology should be identified before treatment, so that surgery can be offered to patients with epithelioid histology, as these patients are most likely to benefit.

A standardized care plan is associated with shorter hospital length of stay in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: In this retrospective review, we evaluate a standardized care plan (SCP) for patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy, which included selective placement of feeding jejunostomy tubes (FJTs) and a perioperative fast-track recovery pathway (FTRP). METHODS: A review of 242 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy was completed. Patients treated pre- and post-SCP implementation were compared. Univariate comparison followed by multivariable linear regression were performed to identify predictors of hospital length of stay (HLOS). RESULTS: SCP patients (n = 100) were slightly older but otherwise similar to pre-SCP patients (n = 142). FJT placement occurred less frequently in SCP patients (38 versus 94%, P < 0.001). All SCP patients were initiated on the FTRP. Among SCP patients, an oral diet was introduced earlier (5 versus 8.5 d, P < 0.001) and HLOS was shorter (11 versus 13 d, P = 0.015). Readmission rates were similar. Following adjustment with linear regression, we confirmed SCP status as a predictor of HLOS. To assess SCP components, HLOS was evaluated separately based on FTRP status and FJT placement. Although both were highly associated with HLOS, neither was independently predictive in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an SCP resulted in shorter HLOS without an increase in readmissions. Future studies are necessary to identify specific components of SCPs that most influence outcomes.

Neoadjuvant radiation therapy does not increase perioperative morbidity among patients undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant radiation therapy (RT) as a component of the multimodality treatment of gastric cancer has demonstrated promising results. Data regarding its effect on perioperative safety are limited. METHODS: Adults undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer in the 2005-2011 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program were included. Groups were defined by neoadjuvant RT use, and then propensity-matched based on preoperative variables. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess neoadjuvant RT as an independent predictor of outcomes. RESULTS: Among 2,764 patients identified, 55 (2.0%) were treated with neoadjuvant RT. Patients who received neoadjuvant RT were more likely to have received preoperative chemotherapy and steroids, and experienced weight loss (all P < 0.01). After matching, however, there were no preoperative differences. At time of surgery, total (vs. partial) gastrectomy was more common among patients who underwent neoadjuvant RT (70.9 vs. 46.7%, P < 0.01), and operative time was longer (290 vs. 236 min, P < 0.01). There were no differences in overall complications (23.6 vs. 29.7%, P = 0.49) or 30-day mortality (3.6 vs. 3.6%, P = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant RT was not associated with increased morbidity or mortality following resection for gastric cancer. These findings support the ongoing investigation of neoadjuvant RT as part of the multidisciplinary management of resectable gastric cancer.