Empiric flap coverage for the pneumonectomy stump: How protective is it? A single-institution cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of empiric tissue flaps on bronchopleural fistula (BPF) rates after pneumonectomy. METHODS: Patients who underwent pneumonectomy between January 2001 and December 2019 were included. Primary end point was development of BPF. Secondary end points were impact of flap type on BPF rates, time to BPF development, and perioperative mortality. RESULTS: During the study period, 383 pneumonectomies were performed; 93 were extrapleural pneumonectomy. Most pneumonectomy cases had empiric flap coverage, with greater use in right-sided operations (right: 97%, 154/159; left: 80%, 179/224, P < .001). Empiric flaps harvested included intercostal, latissimus dorsi, serratus anterior, omentum, pectoralis major, pericardial fat/thymus, pericardium, and pleura. BPF occurred in 10.4% of the entire cohort but decreased to 6.6% when extrapleural pneumonectomy cases were excluded; 90% (36/40) of BPFs occurred on the right side (P < .001). Median time to develop BPF was 63 days, and 90-day mortality was greater in patients with BPF (12.5% BPF vs 7.4% non-BPF, P < .0001). Intercostal muscle had the lowest rate of BPF (4.5%), even in right-sided operations (8.7%). In contrast, larger muscle flaps such as latissimus dorsi (21%) and serratus anterior (33%) had greater rates of BPF, but the sample size was small in these cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Empiric bronchial stump coverage should be performed in all right pneumonectomy cases due to greater risk of BPF. In our series, intercostal muscle flaps had low BPF rates, even in right-sided operations. Coverage of the left pneumonectomy stump is unnecessary due to low incidence of BPF in these cases.

Understanding Opioid Prescribing Practices of Resident Physicians.

BACKGROUND: To compare opioid prescribing practices of resident physicians across a variety of surgical and nonsurgical specialties; to identify factors which influence prescribing practices; and to examine resident utilization of best practice supplemental resources. METHODS: An anonymous survey which assessed prescribing practices was completed by residents from one of several different subspecialties, including internal medicine, obstetrics and gynecology, general surgery, neurosurgery, orthopedic surgery, and urology. Fisher's exact test assessed differences in prescribing practices between specialties. RESULTS: Only 35% of residents reported receiving formal training in safe opioid prescribing. Overall, the most frequently reported influences on prescribing practices were the use of standardized order sets for specific procedures, attending preference, and patient's history of prescribed opioids. Resident physicians significantly underutilize best practice supplemental resources, such as counseling patients on pain expectations prior to prescribing opioid medication; contacting established pain specialists; screening patients for opioid abuse; referring to the Prescription Monitoring Program; and counseling patients on safe disposal of unused pills (P < .001). DISCUSSION: The incorporation of comprehensive prescribing education into resident training and the utilization of standardized order sets can promote safe opioid prescribing.

Surgical Management of Bronchobiliary Fistula After Thoracoabdominal Trauma.

Bronchobiliary fistulas are exceedingly rare pathological connections between the biliary and the bronchial systems, which result from hepatobiliary neoplasms, abscesses, or thoracoabdominal trauma. Prompt recognition, diagnosis, and intervention is essential in order to prevent the high morbidity and mortality associated with this disease process. Multiple management strategies have been described in the literature; however, the optimal course has not been well defined. We present a case of a 31-year-old male who developed a bronchobiliary fistula 1 month after thoracoabdominal trauma. After conservative management with biliary stenting failed, he successfully underwent latissimus sparing right posterolateral thoracotomy, complete fistulectomy, right lower lobe wedge resection, and diaphragmatic reconstruction with subsequent resolution of his symptoms.

Trends in Antibiotic Duration for Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infections : Adaptation to Current Guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: The 2017 surgical infection society (SIS) guidelines recommend 4 days of antibiotic therapy after source control for complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs). Inappropriate exposure to antibiotics has a negative impact on outcomes in individual patients and populations. The goal of this study was to evaluate our institution's practice patterns and adherence to current antibiotic guidelines. METHODS: Medical records from 2010 to 2018 for cIAIs were examined. Complicated appendicitis and complicated diverticulitis cases were included. Exclusion criteria included other etiologies of IAIs, pediatric cases, and cancer operations. RESULTS: Fifty-nine complicated appendicitis cases and 96 complicated diverticulitis cases were identified. For all cases, antibiotic duration prior to publication of the SIS guidelines was significantly longer than post-SIS duration (appendicitis: 12.6 ± 1.1 days pre-SIS [n = 37] vs 9.0 ± 1.1 days post-SIS [n = 22], P = .01; diverticulitis: 15.1 ± 0.8 days pre-SIS [n = 49] vs 11.2 ± 0.5 post-SIS [n = 47], P = .04). Surgical management (SM) was associated with shorter duration of postsource control antibiotic exposure compared with percutaneous drainage (PD) for both appendicitis (SM 10.0 ± 1.2 days vs PD 13.4 ± 1.0 days, P = .02) and diverticulitis (SM 12.8 ± 1.5 days vs PD 16.0 ± 1.5, P = .07). Patients with complicated appendicitis received shorter duration of antibiotics when managed by acute care surgeons compared to general surgeons (8.4 ± 1.1 vs 11.9 ± 0.8, P = .02). CONCLUSION: Despite improvements after the SIS guidelines' publication, the antibiotic duration is still longer than recommended. Surgical intervention and management by acute care specialists were associated with a shorter duration of antibiotic exposure.

"Are We Gonna Talk About It or Not?" Thoracic Oncology Provider Perspectives on Smoking Cessation.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use is the greatest preventable cause of death and disease in the United States. Despite recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, United States Preventive Task Force, and major professional societies that all health-care providers provide smoking-cessation counseling, smoking-cessation interventions are not consistently delivered in clinical practice. We sought to identify important barriers and facilitators to the utilization of smoking-cessation interventions in a thoracic oncology program. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted 14 semistructured interviews with providers including thoracic surgeons (n = 3), interventional pulmonologists (n = 1), medical oncologists (n = 3), radiation oncologists (n = 2), and nurses (n = 5). Interviewees were asked about prior and current smoking-cessation efforts, their perspectives on barriers to successful smoking cessation, and opportunities for improvement. Responses were analyzed inductively to identify common themes. RESULTS: All interviewees report discussing smoking cessation with their patients and realize the importance of a smoking-cessation counseling; however, smoking-cessation interventions are inconsistent and often lacking. Providers emphasized five domains that impact their delivery of smoking-cessation interventions: patient willingness and motivation to quit, clinical engagement and follow-up, documentation of smoking history, provider education in smoking cessation, and the availability of additional smoking-cessation resources. CONCLUSIONS: Providers recognize the need for more efficient and consistent smoking-cessation interventions. Therefore, the development of interventions that address this need would not only be easily taught to providers and delivered to patients but also be welcomed into clinics.

Understanding barriers to lung cancer screening in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) scan for lung cancer screening is underutilized. Studies suggest that up to one-third of providers do not know the current lung cancer screening guidelines. Thus, identifying the barriers to utilization of LDCT scan is essential. METHODS: Primary care providers in three different healthcare settings in the United States were surveyed to assess provider knowledge of LDCT scan screening criteria, lung cancer screening practices, and barriers to the utilization of LDCT scan screening. Fisher's Exact, Chi-Squared, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare provider responses. Multivariable logistic regression was used to test the association between provider characteristics and the likelihood of utilizing LDCT scan for lung cancer screening. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 614 providers, with a 15.7% response rate. Overall, 29.2% of providers report never ordering LDCT scans for eligible patients. Providers practicing at a community or academic hospital more frequently order LDCT scans than those practicing at a safety net hospital. Academic- and community-based providers received a significantly higher mean knowledge score than safety net-based providers [academic 6.84 (SD 1.33), community 6.72 (SD 1.46), safety net 5.85 (SD 1.38); P<0.01]. Overall, only 6.2% of respondents correctly identified all six Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services eligibility criteria when challenged with three incorrect criteria. Common barriers to utilization of LDCT scan included failure of the electronic medical record (EMR) to notify providers of eligible patients (54.7%), patient refusal (37%), perceived high false-positive rate leading to unnecessary procedures (18.9%), provider time constraints (16.8%), and lack of insurance coverage (13.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Provider knowledge of lung cancer screening guidelines varies, perhaps contributing to underutilization of LDCT scan for lung cancer screening. Improved provider education at safety net hospitals and improving EMR-based best practice alerts may improve the rate of lung cancer screening.

Survival of Primary Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Compared With Surgery for Operable Stage I/II Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is an accepted primary treatment option for inoperable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The role of SBRT in the treatment of operable disease remains unclear. We retrospectively evaluated patients with operable early-stage NSCLC who elected to receive primary SBRT, examined factors associated with SBRT, and compared overall survival after surgical resection and SBRT. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with stage I/II, N0 NSCLC from 2004 to 2016. The proportion of patients who refused recommended surgery and were treated with SBRT was calculated. A propensity score predicting the probability of refusing surgery and receiving SBRT was generated and used to match SBRT and resected patients. Long-term overall survival was compared in the matched cohort using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression. RESULTS: We identified 1359 patients (0.98%) who refused recommended surgery and elected SBRT. This proportion increased annually, from 0.1% in 2004 to 1.7% in 2016. Factors associated with SBRT were older age, black race, Medicaid coverage, lower T stage, and more recent diagnosis year. Propensity matching resulted in 1315 well-balanced pairs. Surgery was associated with higher median survival (74 vs 47 months, P < .01) in the matched cohort. Survival benefit persisted after adjusting for covariates on Cox regression (hazard ratio, 1.69; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Median survival was significantly higher after surgery compared with SBRT in a risk-adjusted matched cohort of patients judged to be surgical candidates. Operable patients considering primary SBRT should be educated regarding this difference in survival.

Preoperative patient education and patient preparedness are associated with less postoperative use of opioids.

BACKGROUND: Because many patients are first exposed to opioids after general surgery procedures, surgical stewardship for the use of opioids is critical in addressing the opioid crisis. We developed a multi-component opioid reduction program to minimize the use of opioids after surgery. Our objectives were to assess patient exposure to the intervention and to investigate the association with postoperative use and disposal of opioids. METHODS: We implemented a multi-component intervention, including patient education, the settings of expectations, the education of the providers, and an in-clinic disposal box in our large, academic, general surgery clinic. From April to December 2018, patients were surveyed by phone 30 to 60 days after their operation regarding their experience with postoperative pain management. The association between patient education and preparedness to manage pain was assessed using χ2 tests. Education, preparedness, and clinical factors were evaluated for association with quantity of pills used using ANOVA and multivariable linear regression. RESULTS: Of the 389 eligible patients, 112 responded to the survey (28.8%). Patients receiving both pre and postoperative education were more likely to feel prepared to manage pain than those who only received the education pre or postoperatively (91% vs 68%, P = .01). Patients who felt prepared to manage their pain used 9.1 fewer pills on average than those who did not (P = .01). Fourteen patients (24%) with excess pills disposed of them. Preoperative education was associated with disposal of excess pills (30% vs 0%, P < .05). CONCLUSION: Exposure to clinic-based interventions, particularly preoperatively, can increase patient preparedness to manage postoperative pain and decrease the quantity of opioids used. Additional strategies are needed to increase appropriate disposal of unused opioids.

Survival after adjuvant radiation therapy in localized small cell lung cancer treated with complete resection.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether there is an overall survival (OS) benefit to the addition of thoracic radiation therapy (RT) following R0 resection of pathologic (p) T1 or pT2 N0 M0 small cell lung cancer. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database, we performed a retrospective cohort analysis. Patients who underwent R0 resection for pT1 or p2 N0 M0 small cell lung cancer, stratified by receipt of adjuvant thoracic RT, were compared on the basis of OS using hierarchical Cox Proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Of 4969 patients diagnosed with pT1or pT2 N0 M0 SCLC from 2004 to 2014, 1617 (33%) underwent R0 resection of their primary tumor; of these resected patients, 146 (9.0%) had adjuvant thoracic RT. In unadjusted analysis, there was no significant difference in OS between groups (median survival: surgery alone, 62.2 months vs surgery+RT, 43.8 months; P = .1436). In multivariable analysis, RT was not associated with improved survival (P = .099). There was no significant difference in unadjusted or adjusted survival associated with receipt of RT in both a young and healthy cohort (P = .647 for unadjusted and P = .858 for adjusted) and a matched cohort (P = .867 and P = .954). In the matched cohort, improved OS was associated with younger patient age (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.10; P < .001), female sex (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.68, 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.97; P = .035), and smaller tumors (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.03; P = .005). Having 2 or more comorbidities was associated with worse OS (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-3.86; P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Although complete resection was accomplished in a minority of patients, for these patients, survival was good. The addition of thoracic RT to complete resection does not appear to confer additional survival benefit.

Minimizing Opioid Prescribing in Surgery (MOPiS) Initiative: An Analysis of Implementation Barriers.

BACKGROUND: The United States is in the midst of an opioid epidemic. In response, our institution developed the Minimizing Opioid Prescribing in Surgery (MOPiS) initiative. MOPiS is a multicomponent intervention including: (1) patient education on opioid safety and pain management expectations; (2) clinician education on safe opioid prescribing; (3) prescribing data feedback; (4) patient risk screening to assess for addictive behavior; and (5) optimizations to the electronic health record (EHR). We conducted a preintervention formative evaluation to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted 22 semistructured interviews with key stakeholders (surgeons, nurses, pharmacists, and administrators) at six hospitals within a single health care system. Interviewees were asked about perceived barriers and facilitators to the components of the intervention. Responses were analyzed to identify common themes using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: We identified common themes of potential implementation barriers and classified them under 12 Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains and three intervention domains. Time and resource constraints (needs and resources), the modality of educational material (design quality and packaging), and prescribers' concern for patient satisfaction scores (external policy and incentives) were identified as the most significant structural barriers. Resident physicians, pharmacists, and pain specialists were identified as potential key facilitating actors to the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: We identified specific barriers to successful implementation of an opioid reduction initiative in a surgical setting. In our MOPiS initiative, a preintervention formative evaluation enabled the design of strategies that will overcome implementation barriers specific to the components of our initiative.