Utilization of minimally invasive colectomy at safety-net hospitals in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Prior literature has reported inferior surgical outcomes and reduced access to minimally invasive procedures at safety-net hospitals. However, this relationship has not yet been elucidated for elective colectomy. We sought to characterize the association between safety-net hospitals and likelihood of minimally invasive resection, perioperative outcomes, and costs. METHODS: All adult (≥18 years) hospitalization records entailing elective colectomy were identified in the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Centers in the top quartile of safety-net burden were considered safety-net hospitals (others: non-safety-net hospitals). Multivariable regression models were developed to assess the impact of safety-net hospitals status on key outcomes. RESULTS: Of ∼532,640 patients, 95,570 (17.9%) were treated at safety-net hospitals. The safety-net hospitals cohort was younger and more often of Black race or Hispanic ethnicity. After adjustment, care at safety-net hospitals remained independently associated with reduced odds of minimally invasive surgery (adjusted odds ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.87-0.97). The interaction between safety-net hospital status and race was significant, such that Black race remained linked with lower odds of minimally invasive surgery at safety-net hospitals (reference: White race). Additionally, safety-net hospitals was associated with greater likelihood of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.34, confidence interval 1.04-1.74) and any perioperative complication (adjusted odds ratio 1.15, confidence interval 1.08-1.22), as well as increased length of stay (ß+0.26 days, confidence interval 0.17-0.35) and costs (ß+$2,510, confidence interval 2,020-3,000). CONCLUSION: Care at safety-net hospitals was linked with lower odds of minimally invasive colectomy, as well as greater complications and costs. Black patients treated at safety-net hospitals demonstrated reduced likelihood of minimally invasive surgery, relative to White patients. Further investigation is needed to elucidate the root causes of these disparities in care.

Nationwide Trends in Utilization of Minimally Invasive Techniques for Blunt Abdominal Trauma.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing use of minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques for trauma, limited large-scale studies have evaluated trends, outcomes, and resource utilization at centers that utilize MIS modalities for blunt abdominal trauma. METHODS: Operative adult admissions after blunt assault, falls, or vehicular collisions were tabulated from the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Patients who received diagnostic laparoscopy or other laparoscopic and robotic intervention were classified as MIS. Institutions with at least one MIS trauma operation in a year were defined as an MIS Performing Institution (MPI; rest: non-MPI). The primary endpoint was mortality, with secondary outcomes of reoperation, complication, postoperative length of stay (LOS), and hospitalization costs. Mixed regression models were used to determine the association of MPI status on the outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Throughout the study period, the proportion of MIS operations and MPI significantly increased from 22.6 to 29.8% and 45.9 to 58.8%, respectively. Of an estimated 77,480 patients, 66.7% underwent care at MPI. After adjustment, MPI status was not associated with increased odds of mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] [.96,1.24]), reoperation (AOR 1.02, CI [.87,1.19]), or any of the tabulated complications. There was additionally no difference in adjusted LOS (ß-.18, CI [-.85, +.49]) or costs (ß+$1600, CI [-1600, +4800]), between MPI and non-MPI. DISCUSSION: The use of MIS operations in blunt abdominal trauma has significantly increased, with performing centers experiencing no difference in mortality or resource utilization. Prospectively collected data on outcomes following MIS trauma surgery is necessary to elucidate appropriate applications.

Demystifying the association of center-level operative trauma volume and outcomes of emergency general surgery.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have demonstrated a positive volume-outcome relationship in emergency general surgery. Some have advocated for the sub-specialization of emergency general surgery independent from trauma. We hypothesized inferior clinical outcomes of emergency general surgery with increasing center-level operative trauma volume, potentially attributable to overall hospital quality. METHODS: Adults (≥18 years) undergoing complex emergency general surgery operations (large and small bowel resection, repair of perforated peptic ulcer, lysis of adhesions, laparotomy) were identified in the 2016 to 2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Multivariable risk-adjusted models were developed to evaluate the association of treatment at a high-volume trauma center (reference: low-volume trauma center) with clinical and financial outcomes after emergency general surgery. To evaluate hospital quality, mortality among adult hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction was assessed by hospital trauma volume. RESULTS: Of an estimated 785,793 patients undergoing a complex emergency general surgery operation, 223,116 (28.4%) were treated at a high-volume trauma center. Treatment at a high-volume trauma center was linked to 1.19 odds of in-hospital mortality (95% confidence interval 1.12-1.27). Although emergency general surgery volume was associated with decreasing predicted risk of mortality, increasing trauma volume was linked to an incremental rise in the odds of mortality after emergency general surgery. Secondary analysis revealed increased mortality for admissions for acute myocardial infarction with greater trauma volume. CONCLUSION: We note increased mortality for emergency general surgery and acute myocardial infarction in patients receiving treatment at high-volume trauma centers, signifying underlying structural factors to broadly affect quality. Thus, decoupling trauma and emergency general surgery services may not meaningfully improve outcomes for emergency general surgery patients. Our findings have implications for the evolving specialty of emergency general surgery, especially for the safety and continued growth of the acute care surgery model.

Machine learning prediction of hospitalization costs for coronary artery bypass grafting operations.

BACKGROUND: With the steady rise in health care expenditures, the examination of factors that may influence the costs of care has garnered much attention. Although machine learning models have previously been applied in health economics, their application within cardiac surgery remains limited. We evaluated several machine learning algorithms to model hospitalization costs for coronary artery bypass grafting. METHODS: All adult hospitalizations for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting were identified in the 2016 to 2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Machine learning models were trained to predict expenditures and compared with traditional linear regression. Given the significance of postoperative length of stay, we additionally developed models excluding postoperative length of stay to uncover other drivers of costs. To facilitate comparison, machine learning classification models were also trained to predict patients in the highest decile of costs. Significant factors associated with high cost were identified using SHapley Additive exPlanations beeswarm plots. RESULTS: Among 444,740 hospitalizations included for analysis, the median cost of hospitalization in coronary artery bypass grafting patients was $43,103. eXtreme Gradient Boosting most accurately predicted hospitalization costs, with R2 = 0.519 over the validation set. The top predictive features in the eXtreme Gradient Boosting model included elective procedure status, prolonged mechanical ventilation, new-onset respiratory failure or myocardial infarction, and postoperative length of stay. After removing postoperative length of stay, eXtreme Gradient Boosting remained the most accurate model (R2 = 0.38). Prolonged ventilation, respiratory failure, and elective status remained important predictive parameters. CONCLUSION: Machine learning models appear to accurately model total hospitalization costs for coronary artery bypass grafting. Future work is warranted to uncover other drivers of costs and improve the value of care in cardiac surgery.

Association of uninsured status and rurality with risk of financial toxicity after pediatric trauma.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric traumatic injury is associated with long-term morbidity as well as substantial economic burden. Prior work has labeled the catastrophic out-of-pocket medical expenses borne by patients as financial toxicity. We hypothesized uninsured rural patients to be vulnerable to exorbitant costs and thus at greatest risk of financial toxicity. METHODS: Pediatric patients (<18 years) experiencing traumatic injury were identified in the 2016-2019 National Inpatient Sample. Patients were considered to be at risk of financial toxicity if their hospitalization cost exceeded 40% of post-subsistence income. Individual family income was computed using a gamma distribution probability density function with parameters derived from publicly available US Census Bureau data, in accordance with prior work. A multivariable logistic regression was developed to assess factors associated with risk of financial toxicity. RESULTS: Of an estimated 225,265 children identified for study, 34,395 (15.3%) were Rural. Rural patients were more likely to experience risk of financial toxicity (29.1 vs 22.2%, P < .001) compared to Urban patients. After adjustment, rurality (reference: urban status; adjusted odds ratio 1.45, 95% confidence interval 1.36-1.55) and uninsured status (reference: private; adjusted odds ratio 1.85, 95% confidence interval 1.67-2.05) remained linked to increased odds of risk of financial toxicity. Specifically among those with private insurance, Rural patients experienced markedly higher predicted risk of financial toxicity, relative to Urban. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a complex interplay between rural status and insurance type in the prediction of risk of financial toxicity after pediatric trauma. To target policy interventions, future studies should characterize the patients and communities at greatest risk of financial devastation among rural pediatric trauma patients.

Interhospital Transfer for Emergency General Surgery: A Contemporary National Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing emergency general surgery (EGS) often require complex management and transfer to higher acuity facilities, especially given increasing national efforts aimed at centralizing care. We sought to characterize factors and evaluate outcomes associated with interhospital transfer using a contemporary national cohort. METHODS: All adult hospitalizations for EGS (appendectomy, cholecystectomy, laparotomy, lysis of adhesions, small/large bowel resection, and perforated ulcer repair) ≤2 days of admission were identified in the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Patients initially admitted to a different institution and transferred to the operating hospital comprised the Transfer cohort (others: Non-Transfer). Multivariable models were developed to consider the association of Transfer with outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Of ∼1 653 169 patients, 107 945 (6.5%) were considered the Transfer cohort. The proportion of patients experiencing interhospital transfer increased from 5.2% to 7.7% (2016-2020, P < .001). On average, Transfer was older, more commonly of White race, and of a higher Elixhauser comorbidity index. After adjustment, increasing age, living in a rural area, receiving care in the Midwest, and decreasing income quartile were associated with greater odds of interhospital transfer. Following risk adjustment, Transfer remained linked with increased odds of in-hospital mortality (AOR 1.64, CI 1.49-1.80), as well as any perioperative complication (AOR 1.33, CI 1.27-1.38; Reference: Non-Transfer). Additionally, Transfer was associated with significantly longer duration of hospitalization (ß + 1.04 days, CI + .91-1.17) and greater costs (ß+$3,490, CI + 2840-4140). DISCUSSION: While incidence of interhospital transfer for EGS is increasing, transfer patients face greater morbidity and resource utilization. Novel interventions are needed to optimize patient selection and improve post-transfer outcomes.

Association of substance-use disorder with outcomes of major elective abdominal operations: A contemporary national analysis.

Background: Affecting >20million people in the U.S., including 4 % of all hospitalized patients, substance use disorder (SUD) represents a growing public health crisis. Evaluating a national cohort, we aimed to characterize the association of concurrent SUD with perioperative outcomes and resource utilization following elective abdominal operations. Methods: All adult hospitalizations entailing elective colectomy, gastrectomy, esophagectomy, hepatectomy, and pancreatectomy were tabulated from the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Patients with concurrent substance use disorder, comprising alcohol, opioid, marijuana, sedative, cocaine, inhalant, hallucinogen, or other psychoactive/stimulant use, were considered the SUD cohort (others: nSUD). Multivariable regression models were constructed to evaluate the independent association between SUD and key outcomes. Results: Of ∼1,088,145 patients, 32,865 (3.0 %) comprised the SUD cohort. On average, SUD patients were younger, more commonly male, of lowest quartile income, and of Black race. SUD patients less frequently underwent colectomy, but more often pancreatectomy, relative to nSUD.Following risk adjustment and with nSUD as reference, SUD demonstrated similar likelihood of in-hospital mortality, but remained associated with increased odds of any perioperative complication (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 1.17, CI 1.09-1.25). Further, SUD was linked with incremental increases in adjusted length of stay (ß + 0.90 days, CI +0.68-1.12) and costs (ß + $3630, CI +2650-4610), as well as greater likelihood of non-home discharge (AOR 1.54, CI 1.40-1.70). Conclusions: Concurrent substance use disorder was associated with increased complications, resource utilization, and non-home discharge following major elective abdominal operations. Novel interventions are warranted to address increased risk among this vulnerable population and address significant disparities in postoperative outcomes.

Income-Based Disparities in Outcomes Following Pediatric Appendectomy: A National Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Appendectomy remains a common pediatric surgical procedure with an estimated 80,000 operations performed each year. While prior work has reported the existence of racial disparities in postoperative outcomes, we sought to characterize potential income-based inequalities using a national cohort. METHODS: All non-elective pediatric (<18 years) hospitalizations for appendectomy were tabulated in the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Only those in the highest (HI) and lowest income (LI) quartiles were considered for analysis. Multivariable regression models were developed to assess the independent association of income and postoperative major adverse events (MAE). RESULTS: Of an estimated 87,830 patients, 36,845 (42.0%) were HI and 50,985 (58.0%) were LI. On average, LI patients were younger (11 [7-14] vs 12 [8-15] years, P < .001), more frequently insured by Medicaid (70.7 vs 27.3%, P < .05), and more commonly of Hispanic ethnicity (50.8 vs 23.4%, P < .001). Following risk adjustment, the LI cohort was associated with greater odds of MAE (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.30 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.64). Specifically, low-income status was linked with increased odds of infectious (AOR 1.65, 95% CI 1.12-2.42) and respiratory (AOR 1.67, 95% CI 1.06-2.62) complications. Further, LI was associated with a $1670 decrement in costs ([2220-$1120]) and a +.32-day increase in duration of stay (95% CI [.21-.44]). CONCLUSION: Pediatric patients of the lowest income quartile faced increased risk of major adverse events following appendectomy compared to those of highest income. Novel risk stratification methods and standardized care pathways are needed to ameliorate socioeconomic disparities in postoperative outcomes.

Hospital Quality Mediates Impact of Care Fragmentation Following Elective Colectomy.

BACKGROUND: Readmission at a non-index hospital, or care fragmentation (CF), has been previously linked to greater morbidity and resource utilization. However, a contemporary evaluation of the impact of CF on readmission outcomes following elective colectomy is lacking. We additionally sought to evaluate the role of hospital quality in mediating the effect of CF. METHODS: All records for adults undergoing elective colectomy were tabulated from the 2016 to 2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Patients readmitted non-electively within 30 days to a non-index center comprised the CF cohort (others: Non-CF). Hierarchical mixed-effects models were constructed to ascertain risk-adjusted rates of major adverse events (MAEs, a composite of in-hospital mortality and any complication) attributable to center-level effects. Hospitals with risk-adjusted MAE rates ≥50th percentile were considered Low-Quality Hospitals (LQHs) (others: High-Quality Hospitals [HQHs]). RESULTS: Of 68,185 patients readmitted non-electively within 30 days, 8968 (13.2%) were categorized as CF. On average, CF was older, of greater comorbidity burden, and more often underwent colectomy for cancer, relative to Non-CF. Following risk adjustment, CF remained independently associated with greater likelihood of MAE (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.16, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.05-1.27) and per-patient expenditures (ß+$2,280, CI +$1080-3490). Further, readmission to non-index LQH was linked with significantly increased odds of MAE, following initial care at HQH (AOR 1.43, CI 1.03-1.99) and LQH (AOR 1.72, CI 1.30-2.28; Reference: Non-CF). CONCLUSIONS: Care fragmentation was associated with greater morbidity and resource utilization at readmission following elective colectomy. Further, rehospitalization at non-index LQH conferred significantly inferior outcomes. Novel efforts are needed to improve continuity of care.

Open Versus Minimally Invasive Emergent Colectomy for Diverticulitis.

BACKGROUND: The role of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in the acute management of diverticulitis remains controversial. Using a national cohort, we examined the relationship between operative approaches with acute clinical and financial outcomes. METHODS: Adults undergoing emergent colectomy for diverticulitis were tabulated from the 2015-2020 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Regression models were developed to analyze the association between open and MIS approaches with major adverse events (MAE), as well as secondary endpoints. A subgroup analysis was conducted to compare outcomes between open and MIS requiring conversion to open (CTO). RESULTS: Of 9194 patients, 1580 (17.3%) underwent MIS colectomy. The proportion of MIS resection increased from 15.1% in 2015 to 19.1% in 2020 (nptrend<.001). Compared to Open, MIS patients were younger, equally likely to be female, had a lower proportion of patients with ASA class ≥3, and a higher BMI. Preoperatively, MIS patients were less frequently diagnosed with sepsis. Following adjustment with open as reference, MIS approach had reduced odds of MAE (AOR .56), ostomy creation (AOR .12), shorter postoperative length of stay (LOS; ß -1.63), and a lower likelihood of nonhome discharge (AOR .45, all P < .001). Additionally, CTO was linked to decreased likelihood of MAE (AOR .78, P = .01), ostomy creation (AOR .02, P < .001), comparable LOS (ß -.46, P = .41), and reduced odds of nonhome discharge (AOR .58, P < .001), relative to open. DISCUSSION: Compared to planned open colectomy, MIS resection was associated with improved clinical and financial outcomes, even in cases of CTO. Our findings suggest that whenever possible, MIS should be attempted first in emergent colectomy for diverticulitis. Nevertheless, future prospective studies are likely needed to further elucidate specific patient and clinical factors.

Machine learning based predictive modeling of readmissions following extracorporeal membrane oxygenation hospitalizations.

Background: Despite increasing utilization and survival benefit over the last decade, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) remains resource-intensive with significant complications and rehospitalization risk. We thus utilized machine learning (ML) to develop prediction models for 90-day nonelective readmission following ECMO. Methods: All adult patients receiving ECMO who survived index hospitalization were tabulated from the 2016-2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) models were developed to identify features associated with readmission following ECMO. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC), mean Average Precision (mAP), and the Brier score were calculated to estimate model performance relative to logistic regression (LR). Shapley Additive Explanation summary (SHAP) plots evaluated the relative impact of each factor on the model. An additional sensitivity analysis solely included patient comorbidities and indication for ECMO as potential model covariates. Results: Of ∼22,947 patients, 4495 (19.6 %) were readmitted nonelectively within 90 days. The XGBoost model exhibited superior discrimination (AUROC 0.64 vs 0.49), classification accuracy (mAP 0.30 vs 0.20) and calibration (Brier score 0.154 vs 0.165, all P < 0.001) in predicting readmission compared to LR. SHAP plots identified duration of index hospitalization, undergoing heart/lung transplantation, and Medicare insurance to be associated with increased odds of readmission. Upon sub-analysis, XGBoost demonstrated superior disclination compared to LR (AUROC 0.61 vs 0.60, P < 0.05). Chronic liver disease and frailty were linked with increased odds of nonelective readmission. Conclusions: ML outperformed LR in predicting readmission following ECMO. Future work is needed to identify other factors linked with readmission and further optimize post-ECMO care among this cohort.

Prior bariatric surgery is associated with lower mortality and resource utilization following small bowel obstruction.

Background: Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is a complication of bariatric surgery. However, outcomes of surgical intervention for SBO among patients with prior bariatric surgery remain ill-defined. We used a nationally representative cohort to characterize the outcomes of the SBO management approach in patients with a prior bariatric operation. Methods: All adult hospitalizations for SBO were tabulated from the 2018-2020 National Readmissions Database. Patients with a prior history of bariatric surgery comprised the Bariatric cohort (others: Non-Bariatric). Multivariable models were subsequently developed to evaluate the association of prior bariatric surgery with outcomes of interest. Results: Of an estimated 299,983 hospitalizations for SBO, 15,788 (5.3 %) had a history of prior bariatric surgery. Compared to Non-Bariatric, Bariatric patients were younger (54 [46-62] vs 57 [47-64] years, P < 0.001) and were more frequently privately insured (45.1 vs 39.4 %, P < 0.001). On average, the Bariatric more frequently underwent operative management, relative to Non-Bariatric (44.8 vs 29.7 %, P < 0.001). Following risk adjustment, among those surgically managed, Bariatric demonstrated lower odds of mortality (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 0.69, 95 % Confidence Interval [CI] 0.55-0.87) compared to Non-Bariatric. Bariatric also demonstrated lower odds of infectious and renal complications. Furthermore, the Bariatric cohort had lower costs, length of stay, and non-home discharge. Conclusions: Patients with prior bariatric surgery demonstrated a lower likelihood of mortality, decreased complications, and reduced resource utilization, relative to others. As the incidence of bariatric surgery continues to rise, future work is needed to minimize the incidence of SBO among these patients, especially in the current era of value-based healthcare.

Trends, outcomes, and factors associated with in-hospital opioid overdose following major surgery.

Background: With the growing opioid epidemic across the US, in-hospital utilization of opioids has garnered increasing attention. Using a national cohort, this study sought to characterize trends, outcomes, and factors associated with in-hospital opioid overdose (OD) following major elective operations. Methods: We identified all adult (≥18 years) hospitalizations entailing select elective procedures in the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Patients who experienced in-hospital opioid overdose were characterized as OD (others: Non-OD). The primary outcome of interest was in-hospital OD. Multivariable logistic and linear regression models were developed to evaluate the association between in-hospital OD and mortality, length of stay (LOS), hospitalization costs, and non-home discharge. Results: Of an estimated 11,096,064 hospitalizations meeting study criteria, 5375 (0.05 %) experienced a perioperative OD. Compared to others, OD were older (66 [57-73] vs 64 [54-72] years, p < 0.001), more commonly female (66.3 vs 56.7 %, p < 0.001), and in the lowest income quartile (26.4 vs 23.2 %, p < 0.001). After adjustment, female sex (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 1.68, 95 % Confidence Interval [CI] 1.47-1.91, p < 0.001), White race (AOR 1.19, CI 1.01-1.42, p = 0.04), and history of substance use disorder (AOR 2.51, CI 1.87-3.37, p < 0.001) were associated with greater likelihood of OD. Finally, OD was associated with increased LOS (ß +1.91 days, CI [1.60-2.21], p < 0.001), hospitalization costs (ß +$7500, CI [5900-9100], p < 0.001), and greater odds of non-home discharge (AOR 2.00, CI 1.61-2.48, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Perioperative OD remains a rare but costly complication after elective surgery. While pain control remains a priority postoperatively, protocols and recovery pathways must be re-examined to ensure patient safety.

Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Does Not Confer Superior Outcomes Among Frail Patients.

Off-pump coronary revascularization (OPCAB) has been proposed to benefit patients who are at a greater surgical risk because it avoids the use of extracorporeal circulation. Although, historically, older patients were considered high-risk candidates, recent studies implicate frailty as a more comprehensive measure of perioperative fitness. Yet, the outcomes of OPCAB in frail patients have not been elucidated. Thus, using a national cohort of frail patients, we assessed the impact of OPCAB relative to on-pump coronary revascularization (ONCAB). Patients who underwent first-time elective coronary revascularization were tabulated from the 2010 to 2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Frailty was assessed using the previously-validated Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Groups indicator. Multivariable models were used to consider the independent associations between OPCAB and the key outcomes. Of ∼26,529 frail patients, 6,322 (23.8%) underwent OPCAB. After risk adjustment and compared with ONCAB, OPCAB was linked with similar odds of in-hospital mortality but greater likelihood of postoperative cardiac arrest (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.53, confidence interval [CI] 1.13 to 2.07) and myocardial infarction (AOR 1.44, CI 1.23 to 1.69). OPCAB was further associated with greater odds of postoperative infection (AOR 1.22, CI 1.02 to 1.47) but decreased need for blood transfusion (AOR 0.68, CI 0.60 to 0.77). In addition, OPCAB faced a +0.86-day increase in length of stay (CI 0.21 to 1.51) but similar costs (ß $1,610, CI -$1,240 to 4,460) relative to ONCAB. Although OPCAB was associated with no difference in mortality compared with ONCAB, it was linked with greater likelihood of postoperative cardiac arrest and myocardial infarction. Our findings demonstrate that ONCAB remains associated with superior outcomes, even in the growing population of frail patients who underwent coronary revascularization.

National outcomes of expedited discharge following esophagectomy for malignancy.

BACKGROUND: Expedited discharge following esophagectomy is controversial due to concerns for higher readmissions and financial burden. The present study aimed to evaluate the association of expedited discharge with hospitalization costs and unplanned readmissions following esophagectomy for malignant lesions. METHODS: Adults undergoing elective esophagectomy for cancer were identified in the 2014-2019 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Patients discharged by postoperative day 7 were considered Expedited and others as Routine. Patients who did not survive to discharge or had major perioperative complications were excluded. Multivariable regression models were constructed to assess association of expedited discharge with index hospitalization costs as well as 30- and 90-day non-elective readmissions. RESULTS: Of 9,886 patients who met study criteria, 34.6% comprised the Expedited cohort. After adjustment, female sex (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.71, p = 0.001) and increasing Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (AOR 0.88/point, p<0.001) were associated with lower odds of expedited discharge, while laparoscopic (AOR 1.63, p<0.001, Ref: open) and robotic (AOR 1.67, p = 0.003, Ref: open) approach were linked to greater likelihood. Patients at centers in the highest-tertile of minimally invasive esophagectomy volume had increased odds of expedited discharge (AOR 1.52, p = 0.025, Ref: lowest-tertile). On multivariable analysis, expedited discharge was independently associated with an $8,300 reduction in hospitalization costs. Notably, expedited discharge was associated with similar odds of 30-day (AOR 1.10, p = 0.40) and 90-day (AOR 0.90, p = 0.70) unplanned readmissions. CONCLUSION: Expedited discharge after esophagectomy was associated with decreased costs and unaltered readmissions. Prospective studies are necessary to robustly evaluate whether expedited discharge is appropriate for select patients undergoing esophagectomy.

Early discharge following colectomy for colon cancer: A national perspective.

BACKGROUND: Although early discharge after colectomy has garnered significant interest, contemporary, large-scale analyses are lacking. OBJECTIVE: The present study utilized a national cohort of patients undergoing colectomy to examine costs and readmissions following early discharge. METHODS: All adults undergoing elective colectomy for primary colon cancer were identified in the 2016-2019 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Patients with perioperative complications or prolonged length of stay (>8 days) were excluded to enhance cohort homogeneity. Patients discharged by postoperative day 3 were classified as Early, and others as Routine. Entropy balancing and multivariable regression were used to assess the risk-adjusted association of early discharge with costs and non-elective readmissions. Importantly, we compared 90-day stroke rates to examine whether our results were influenced by preferential early discharge of healthier patients. RESULTS: Of an estimated 153,996 patients, 45.5% comprised the Early cohort. Compared to Routine, the Early cohort was younger and more commonly male. Patients in the Early group more commonly underwent left-sided colectomy and laparoscopic operations. Following multivariable adjustment, expedited discharge was associated with a $4,500 reduction in costs as well as lower 30-day (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.74, p<0.001) and 90-day non-elective readmissions (AOR 0.74, p<0.001). However, among those readmitted within 90 days, Early patients were more commonly readmitted for gastrointestinal conditions (45.8 vs 36.4%, p<0.001). Importantly, both cohorts had comparable 90-day stroke rates (2.2 vs 2.1%, p = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: The present work represents the largest analysis of early discharge following colectomy for cancer and supports its relative safety and cost-effectiveness.

Outcomes following major thoracoabdominal cancer resection in adults with congenital heart disease.

BACKGROUND: While advances in medical and surgical management have allowed >97% of congenital heart disease (CHD) patients to reach adulthood, a growing number are presenting with non-cardiovascular malignancies. Indeed, adults with CHD are reported to face a 20% increase in cancer risk, relative to others, and cancer has become the fourth leading cause of death among this population. Surgical resection remains a mainstay in management of thoracoabdominal cancers. However, outcomes following cancer resection among these patients have not been well established. Thus, we sought to characterize clinical and financial outcomes following major cancer resections among adult CHD patients. METHODS: The 2012-2020 National Inpatient Sample was queried for all adults (CHD or non-CHD) undergoing lobectomy, esophagectomy, gastrectomy, pancreatectomy, hepatectomy, or colectomy for cancer. To adjust for intergroup differences in baseline characteristics, entropy balancing was applied to generate balanced patient groups. Multivariable models were constructed to assess outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Of 905,830 patients undergoing cancer resection, 1,480 (0.2%) had concomitant CHD. The overall prevalence of such patients increased from <0.1% in 2012 to 0.3% in 2012 (P for trend<0.001). Following risk adjustment, CHD was linked with greater in-hospital mortality (AOR 2.00, 95%CI 1.06-3.76), as well as a notable increase in odds of stroke (AOR 8.94, 95%CI 4.54-17.60), but no statistically significant difference in cardiac (AOR 1.33, 95%CI 0.69-2.59) or renal complications (AOR 1.35, 95%CI 0.92-1.97). Further, CHD was associated with a +2.39 day incremental increase in duration of hospitalization (95%CI +1.04-3.74) and a +$11,760 per-patient increase in hospitalization expenditures (95%CI +$4,160-19,360). CONCLUSIONS: While a growing number of patients with CHD are undergoing cancer resection, they demonstrate inferior clinical and financial outcomes, relative to others. Novel screening, risk stratification, and perioperative management guidelines are needed for these patients to provide evidence-based recommendations for this complex and unique cohort.

Association of time to resection with survival in patients with colon cancer.

PURPOSE: Colon cancer (CC) remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, for which colectomy represents the standard of care. Yet, the impact of delayed resection on survival outcomes remains controversial. We assessed the association between time to surgery and 10-year survival in a national cohort of CC patients. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study identified all adults who underwent colectomy for Stage I-III CC in the 2004-2020 National Cancer Database. Those who required neoadjuvant therapy or emergent resection < 7 days from diagnosis were excluded. Patients were classified into Early (< 25 days) and Delayed (≥ 25 days) cohorts after an adjusted analysis of the relationship between time to surgery and 10-year survival. Survival at 1-, 5-, and 10-years was assessed via Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional hazard modeling, adjusting for age, sex, race, income quartile, insurance coverage, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index, disease stage, location of tumor, receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, as well as hospital type, location, and case volume. RESULTS: Of 165,991 patients, 84,665 (51%) were classified as Early and 81,326 (49%) Delayed. Following risk adjustment, Delayed resection was associated with similar 1-year [hazard ratio (HR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97-1.04, P = 0.72], but inferior 5- (HR 1.24, CI 1.22-1.26; P < 0.001) and 10-year survival (HR 1.22, CI 1.20-1.23; P < 0.001). Black race [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.36, CI 1.31-1.41; P < 0.001], Medicaid insurance coverage (AOR 1.34, CI 1.26-1.42; P < 0.001), and care at high-volume hospitals (AOR 1.12, 95%CI 1.08-1.17; P < 0.001) were linked with greater likelihood of Delayed resection. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CC who underwent resection ≥ 25 days following diagnosis demonstrated similar 1-year, but inferior 5- and 10-year survival, compared to those who underwent surgery within 25 days. Socioeconomic factors, including race and Medicaid insurance, were linked with greater odds of delayed resection. Efforts to balance appropriate preoperative evaluation with expedited resection are needed to optimize patient outcomes.

Social determinants as predictors of resection and long-term mortality in Black patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Minorities diminished returns theory posits that socioeconomic attainment conveys fewer health benefits for Black than White individuals. The current study evaluates the effects of social constructs on resection rates and survival for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients with potentially resectable NSCLC stage IA to IIIA were identified using the 2004 to 2017 National Cancer Database. Patients were stratified into quartiles based on population-level education and income. Logistic regression was used to predict risk-adjusted resection rates. Mortality was assessed with Cox proportional hazard modeling. RESULTS: Of the 416,025 patients identified, 213,643 (51.4%) underwent resection. Among White patients, the lowest income (adjusted odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.78, P < .01) and education quartiles (adjusted odds ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.79-0.84, P < .01) were associated with decreased odds of resection. The lowest education quartile among Black patients was not associated with lower resection rates. The lowest income quartile (adjusted odds ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.61-0.74, P < .01) was associated with reduced resection. White patients in the lowest education and income quartiles experienced increased hazard of 5-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.11-1.15, P < .01 and adjusted hazard ratio 1.08, 95% CI 1.06-1.11, P < .01 respectively). In Black patients, there were no significant differences in 5-year survival between Black patients in the highest education and income quartiles and those in the lowest quartiles. CONCLUSION: Among Black patients with NSCLC, educational attainment is not associated with increased resection rates. In addition, higher education and income were not associated with improved 5-year survival. The diminished gains experienced by Black patients, compared to Whites patients, illustrate the presence of pervasive race-specific mechanisms in observed inequalities in cancer outcomes.