Quantifying Patient Risk Threshold in Managing Pancreatic Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to better understand patients' treatment preferences and quantify the level of cancer risk at which treatment preferences change (risk threshold) to inform better counseling of patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The complexity of IPMN management provides an opportunity to align treatment with individual preference. METHODS: We surveyed a sample of healthy volunteers simulating a common scenario: undergoing an imaging study that incidentally identifies an IPMN. In the scenario, the estimated risk of cancer in the IPMN was 5%. Patients were asked their treatment preference (surgery or surveillance), to quantify the level of cancer risk in the IPMN at which their treatment preference would change (i.e. risk threshold), and their level of cancer anxiety as measured on a 5-point Likert scale. We examined associations between participant characteristics, treatment preferences, and risk threshold using multivariable linear regression. RESULTS: The median risk threshold among the 520 participants was 25% (IQR 2.3-50%). The risk threshold had a bimodal distribution: 40% of participants had a risk threshold between 0-10% and 47% had a risk threshold above 30%. When informed that the risk of cancer was 5%, 62% of participants (n=323) preferred surveillance, and the remaining 38% (n=197) preferred surgery. After adjusting for potential confounders, participants who expressed "worry" or "extreme worry" about the malignancy risk of IPMN had significantly lower risk thresholds than participants who were "not at all worried" (Coefficient -12, 95%CI -21 to -2, P=0.015 and Coefficient -18, 95%CI -29 to -8, P<0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Participants varied in treatment preference and risk threshold of incidentally identified IPMNs. Given the uncertainty in estimating the true malignant potential of IPMNs, a better understanding of a patient's risk threshold, as influenced by patient concern about malignancy, will help inform the shared decision-making process.

The impact of metastatic sites on survival Rates and predictors of extended survival in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the role of site-specific metastatic patterns over time and assess factors associated with extended survival in metastatic PDAC. Half of all patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) present with metastatic disease. The site of metastasis plays a crucial role in clinical decision making due to its prognostic value. METHODS: We examined 56,757 stage-IV PDAC patients from the National Cancer Database (2016-2019), categorizing them by metastatic site: multiple, liver, lung, brain, bone, carcinomatosis, or other. The site-specific prognostic value was assessed using log-rank tests while time-varying effects were assessed by Aalen's linear hazards model. Factors associated with extended survival (>3years) were assessed with logistic regression. RESULTS: Median overall survival (mOS) in patients with distant lymph node-only metastases (9.0 months) and lung-only metastases (8.1 months) was significantly longer than in patients with liver-only metastases (4.6 months, p < 0.001). However, after six months, the metastatic site lost prognostic value. Logistic regression identified extended survivors (3.6 %) as more likely to be younger, Hispanic, privately insured, Charlson-index <2, having received chemotherapy, or having undergone primary or distant site surgery (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: While synchronous liver metastases are associated with worse outcomes than lung-only and lymph node-only metastases, this predictive value is diminished after six months. Therefore, treatment decisions beyond this time should not primarily depend on the metastatic site. Extended survival is possible in a small subset of patients with favorable tumor biology and good conditional status, who are more likely to undergo aggressive therapies.

Natural History of Stage IV Pancreatic Cancer. Identifying Survival Benchmarks for Curative-intent Resection in Patients With Synchronous Liver-only Metastases.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term oncologic outcomes of patients with stage IV pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and to identify survival benchmarks for comparison when considering resection in these patients. BACKGROUND: Highly selected cohorts of patients with liver-oligometastatic pancreas cancer have reported prolonged survival after resection. The long-term impact of surgery in this setting remains undefined because of a lack of appropriate control groups. METHODS: We identified patients with clinical stage IV pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with synchronous liver metastases within our cancer registry. We estimated overall survival (OS) among various patient subgroups using the Kaplan-Meier method. To mitigate immortal time bias, we analyzed long-term outcomes of patients who survived beyond 12 months (landmark time) from diagnosis. RESULTS: We identified 241 patients. Median OS was 7 months (95% CI, 5-9), both overall and for patients with liver-only metastasis (n=144). Ninety patients (38% of liver only; 40% of whole cohort) survived at least 12 months; those who received chemotherapy in this subgroup had a median OS of 26 months (95% CI, 17-39). Of these patients, those with resectable or borderline resectable primary tumors and resectable liver-only metastasis (n=9, 4%) had a median OS of 39 months (95% CI, 13-NR). CONCLUSIONS: The 4% of our cohort that were potentially eligible for surgery experienced a prolonged survival compared with all-comers with stage IV disease. Oncologic outcomes of patients undergoing resection of metastatic pancreas cancer should be assessed in the context of the expected survival of patients potentially eligible for surgery and not relative to all patients with stage IV disease.

The Influence of Patient Preference on Surgeons' Treatment Recommendations in the Management of Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine whether surgeon variation in management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) is driven by differences in risk perception and quantify surgeons' risk threshold for changing their recommendations. BACKGROUND: Surgeons vary widely in management of IPMN. METHODS: We conducted a survey of members of the Americas HepatoPancreatoBiliary Association, presented participants with 2 detailed clinical vignettes and asked them to choose between surgical resection and surveillance. We also asked them to judge the likelihood that the IPMN harbors cancer and that the patient would have a serious complication if surgery was performed. Finally, we asked surgeons to rate the level of cancer risk at which they would change their treatment recommendation. We examined the association between surgeons' treatment recommendations and their risk perception and risk threshold. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty surgeons participated in the study. Surgeons varied in their recommendations for surgery [19% for vignette 1 (V1) and 12% for V2] and in their perception of the cancer risk (interquartile range: 2%-10% for V1 and V2) and risk of surgical complications (V1 interquartile range: 10%-20%, V2 20%-30%). After adjusting for surgeon characteristics, surgeons who were above the median in cancer risk perception were 22 percentage points (27% vs. 5%) more likely to recommend resection than those who were below the median (95% CI: 11.34%; P <0.001). The median risk threshold at which surgeons would change their recommendation was 15% (V1 and V2). Surgeons who recommended surgery had a lower risk threshold for changing their recommendation than those who recommended surveillance (V1: 10.0 vs. 15.0, P =0.06; V2: 7.0 vs. 15.0, P =0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The treatment that patients receive for IPMNs depends greatly on how their surgeons perceive the risk of cancer in the lesion. Efforts to improve cancer risk prediction for IPMNs may lead to decreased variations in care.

Risk Perceptions and Risk Thresholds Among Surgeons in the Management of Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine whether surgeon variation in management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) is driven by differences in risk perception and quantify surgeons' risk threshold for changing their recommendations. BACKGROUND: Surgeons vary widely in management of IPMN. METHODS: We conducted a survey of members of the Americas HepatoPancreatoBiliary Association, presented participants with 2 detailed clinical vignettes and asked them to choose between surgical resection and surveillance. We also asked them to judge the likelihood that the IPMN harbors cancer and that the patient would have a serious complication if surgery was performed. Finally, we asked surgeons to rate the level of cancer risk at which they would change their treatment recommendation. We examined the association between surgeons' treatment recommendations and their risk perception and risk threshold. RESULTS: One hundred fifty surgeons participated in the study. Surgeons varied in their recommendations for surgery [19% for vignette 1 (V1) and 12% for V2] and in their perception of the cancer risk (interquartile range: 2%-10% for V1 and V2) and risk of surgical complications (V1 interquartile range: 10%-20%, V2 20-30%). After adjusting for surgeon characteristics, surgeons who were above the median in cancer risk perception were 22 percentage points (27% vs 5%) more likely to recommend resection than those who were below the median (95% CI: 11%-4%; P <0.001). The median risk threshold at which surgeons would change their recommendation was 15% (V1 and V2). Surgeons who recommended surgery had a lower risk threshold for changing their recommendation than those who recommended surveillance (V1: 10.0 vs 15.0, P =0.06; V2: 7.0 vs 15.0, P =0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The treatment that patients receive for IPMNs depends greatly on how their surgeons perceive the risk of cancer in the lesion. Efforts to improve cancer risk prediction for IPMNs may lead to decreased variations in care.

Progression of Site-Specific Recurrence of Pancreatic Cancer and Implications for Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze post-recurrence progression in context of recurrence sites and assess implications for post-recurrence treatment. BACKGROUND: Most patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) recur within two years. Different survival outcomes for location-specific patterns of recurrence are reported, highlighting their prognostic value. However, a lack of understanding of post-recurrence progression and survival remains. METHODS: This retrospective analysis included surgically treated PDAC patients at the NYU-Langone Health (2010-2021). Sites of recurrence were identified at time of diagnosis and further follow-up. Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank test, and Cox-regression analyses were applied to assess survival outcomes. RESULTS: Recurrence occurred in 57.3% (196/342) patients with a median time to recurrence of 11.3 months (95%CI:12.6 to 16.5). First site of recurrence was local in 43.9% patients, liver in 23.5%, peritoneal in 8.7%, lung in 3.6%, while 20.4% had multiple sites of recurrence. Progression to secondary sites was observed in 11.7%. Only lung involvement was associated with significantly longer survival after recurrence compared to other sites (16.9 months vs. 8.49 months, P=0.003). In local recurrence, 21 (33.3%) patients were alive after one year without progression to secondary sites. This was associated with a CA19-9 of <100U/ml at time of primary diagnosis (P=0.039), nodal negative disease (P=0.023), and well-moderate differentiation (P=0.042) compared to patients with progression. CONCLUSION: Except for lung recurrence, post-recurrence survival after PDAC resection is associated with poor survival. A subset of patients with local-only recurrence do not quickly succumb to systemic spread. This is associated with markers for favorable tumor biology, making them candidates for potential curative re-resections when feasible.

Regional Patterns of Hospital-Level Guideline Adherence in Gastric Cancer: An Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to evidence-based guidelines for gastric cancer is low, particularly at the hospital level, despite a strong association with improved overall survival (OS). We aimed to evaluate patterns of hospital and regional adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for gastric cancer. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database (2004-2015), we identified patients with stage I-III gastric cancer. Hospital-level guideline adherence was calculated by dividing the patients who received guideline adherent care by the total patients treated at that hospital. OS was estimated for each hospital. Associations between adherence, region, and survival were compared using mixed-effects, hierarchical regression. RESULTS: Among 576 hospitals, the median hospital guideline adherence rate was 25% (range 0-76%) and varied significantly by region (p = 0.001). Adherence was highest in the Middle Atlantic (29%) and lowest in the East South Central region (19%); hospitals in the New England, Middle Atlantic, and East North Central regions were more likely to be guideline adherent than those in the East South Central region (all p < 0.05), after adjusting for patient and hospital mix. Most (35%) of the adherence variation was attributable to the hospital. Median 2-year OS varied significantly by region. After adjusting for hospital and patient mix, hazard of mortality was 17% lower in the Middle Atlantic (hazard ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.90) relative to the East South Central region, with most of the variation (54%) attributable to patient-level factors. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital-level guideline adherence for gastric cancer demonstrated significant regional variation and was associated with longer OS, suggesting that efforts to improve guideline adherence should be directed toward lower-performing hospitals.

Outcomes after primary tumor resection of metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: An analysis of the National Cancer Database.

INTRODUCTION: There is no consensus regarding the role of primary tumor resection for patients with metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (panNET). We assessed surgical treatment patterns and evaluated the survival impact of primary tumor resection in patients with metastatic panNET. METHODS: Patients with synchronous metastatic nonfunctional panNET in the National Cancer Database (2004-2016) were categorized based on whether they underwent primary tumor resection. We used logistic regressions to assess associations with primary tumor resection. We performed survival analyses with Kaplan-Meier survival functions, log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazard regression within a propensity score matched cohort. RESULTS: In the overall cohort of 2613 patients, 68% (n = 839) underwent primary tumor resection. The proportion of patients who underwent primary tumor resection decreased over time from 36% (2004) to 16% (2016, p < 0.001). After propensity score matching on age at diagnosis, median income quartile, tumor grade, size, liver metastasis, and hospital type, primary tumor resection was associated with longer median overall survival (OS) (65 vs. 24 months; p < 0.001) and was associated with lower hazard of mortality (HR: 0.39, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Primary tumor resection was significantly associated with improved OS, suggesting that, if feasible, surgical resection can be considered for well-selected patients with panNET and synchronous metastasis.

Outcomes After Surgical Palliation of Patients With Gastric Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Surgery is an option for symptom palliation in patients with metastatic gastric cancer. Operative outcomes after palliative interventions are largely unknown. Herein, we assess the trends of surgical palliation use for patients with gastric cancer and describe outcomes of patients undergoing surgical palliation compared to nonsurgical palliation. METHODS: Patients with clinical Stage IV gastric cancer in the National Cancer Database (2004-2015) who received surgical or nonsurgical palliation were selected. We identified factors associated with palliative surgery. Survival differences were assessed by Kaplan-Meier estimate, Cox proportional hazard regression, and log rank test. RESULTS: Six thousand eight hundred twenty nine patients received palliative care for gastric cancer. Most patients (87%, n = 5944) received nonsurgical palliation: 29% radiation therapy, 57% systemic treatment, and 14% pain management. The number of patients receiving palliative care increased between 2004 and 2015; however, use of surgical palliation declined significantly (22% in 2004, 8% in 2015; P < 0.001). Median overall survival (OS) for the cohort was 5.65 mo (95% confidence interval 5.45-5.85); 1-year and 2-year OS were 24% and 9%, respectively. Older age at diagnosis and diagnosis between 2004 and 2006 were significantly associated with undergoing surgical palliation. Patients who underwent surgical palliation had significantly shorter median OS and a 20% higher hazard of mortality than those who received nonsurgical palliation. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with metastatic gastric cancer experience very short survival. While palliative surgery is used infrequently, the observed association with shorter median OS underscores the importance of careful patient selection. Palliative surgery should be offered judiciously and expectations about outcomes clearly established.

Perception of risk and treatment decisions in the management of differentiated thyroid cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The recent de-escalation of care for differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) has broadened the range of initial treatment options. We examined the association between physicians' perception of risk and their management of DTC. METHODS: Thyroid specialists were surveyed with four clinical vignettes: (1) indeterminate nodule (2) tall cell variant papillary thyroid cancer (PTC), (3) papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (mPTC), and (4) classic PTC. Participants judged the operative risks and likelihood of structural cancer recurrence associated with more versus less aggressive treatments. A logistic mixed effect model was used to predict treatment choice. RESULTS: Among 183 respondents (13.4% response rate), 44% were surgical and 56% medical thyroid specialists. Risk estimates and treatment recommendation varied markedly in each case. Respondents' estimated risk of 10-year cancer recurrence after lobectomy for a 2.0-cm PTC ranged from 1% to 53% (interquartile range [IQR]: 3%-12%), with 66% recommending lobectomy and 34% total thyroidectomy. Respondents' estimated 5-year risk of metastastic disease during active surveillance of an 0.8-cm mPTC ranged from 0% to 95% (IQR: 4%-15%), with 36% choosing active surveillance. Overall, differences in perceived risk reduction explained 10.3% of the observed variance in decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the variation in thyroid cancer treatment aggressiveness is unrelated to perceived risk of cancer recurrence.

The Association Between Risk Aversion of Surgeons and Their Clinical Decision-Making.

BACKGROUND: The extent to which a surgeon's risk aversion influences their clinical decisions remains unknown. We assessed whether a surgeon's attitude toward risk ("risk aversion") influences their surgical decisions and whether the relationship can be explained by differences in surgeons' perception of treatment risks and benefits. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We presented a series of detailed clinical vignettes to a national sample of surgeons (n = 1,769; 13.4% adjusted response rate) and asked them to complete an instrument that measured how risk averse they are within their clinical practice (scale 6-36; higher number indicates greater risk aversion). For each vignette, participants rated their likelihood of recommending an operation and judged the likelihood of complications or full recovery. We examined whether differences in perceived likelihood of complications versus recovery could explain why risk-averse surgeons may be less likely to recommend an operation. RESULTS: Surgeons varied in their self-reported risk aversion score (median = 25, interquartile range[22,28]). Scores did not differ by level of surgeon experience or gender. Risk-averse surgeons were significantly less likely to recommend an operation for patients with exactly the same condition (65.5% for surgeons in highest quartile of risk aversion versus 62.3% for lowest quartile; P = 0.02). However, after controlling for surgeons' perception of the likelihood of complications versus recovery, there was no longer a significant association between surgeons' risk aversion and the decision to recommend an operation (64.7% versus 64.8%; P = 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons vary widely in their self-reported risk aversion. Risk-averse surgeons were significantly less likely to recommend an operation, a finding that was explained by a higher perceived probability of post-operative complications than their colleagues.

Impact of a Risk Calculator on Risk Perception and Surgical Decision Making: A Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether exposure to data from a risk calculator influences surgeons' assessments of risk and in turn, their decisions to operate. BACKGROUND: Little is known about how risk calculators inform clinical judgment and decision-making. METHODS: We asked a national sample of surgeons to assess the risks (probability of serious complications or death) and benefits (recovery) of operative and nonoperative management and to rate their likelihood of recommending an operation (5-point scale) for 4 detailed clinical vignettes wherein the best treatment strategy was uncertain. Surgeons were randomized to the clinical vignettes alone (control group; n = 384) or supplemented by data from a risk calculator (risk calculator group; n = 395). We compared surgeons' judgments and decisions between the groups. RESULTS: Surgeons exposed to the risk calculator judged levels of operative risk that more closely approximated the risk calculator value (RCV) compared with surgeons in the control group [mesenteric ischemia: 43.7% vs 64.6%, P < 0.001 (RCV = 25%); gastrointestinal bleed: 47.7% vs 53.4%, P < 0.001 (RCV = 38%); small bowel obstruction: 13.6% vs 17.5%, P < 0.001 (RCV = 14%); appendicitis: 13.4% vs 24.4%, P < 0.001 (RCV = 5%)]. Surgeons exposed to the risk calculator also varied less in their assessment of operative risk (standard deviations: mesenteric ischemia 20.2% vs 23.2%, P = 0.01; gastrointestinal bleed 17.4% vs 24.1%, P < 0.001; small bowel obstruction 10.6% vs 14.9%, P < 0.001; appendicitis 15.2% vs 21.8%, P < 0.001). However, averaged across the 4 vignettes, the 2 groups did not differ in their reported likelihood of recommending an operation (mean 3.7 vs 3.7, P = 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to risk calculator data leads to less varied and more accurate judgments of operative risk among surgeons, and thus may help inform discussions of treatment options between surgeons and patients. Interestingly, it did not alter their reported likelihood of recommending an operation.

Surgeon Perception of Risk and Benefit in the Decision to Operate.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how surgeons' perceptions of treatment risks and benefits influence their decisions to operate. BACKGROUND: Little is known about what makes one surgeon choose to operate on a patient and another chooses not to operate. METHODS: Using an online study, we presented a national sample of surgeons (N = 767) with four detailed clinical vignettes (mesenteric ischemia, gastrointestinal bleed, bowel obstruction, appendicitis) where the best treatment option was uncertain and asked them to: (1) judge the risks (probability of serious complications) and benefits (probability of recovery) for operative and nonoperative management and (2) decide whether or not they would recommend an operation. RESULTS: Across all clinical vignettes, surgeons varied markedly in both their assessments of the risks and benefits of operative and nonoperative management (narrowest range 4%-100% for all four predictions across vignettes) and in their decisions to operate (49%-85%). Surgeons were less likely to operate as their perceptions of operative risk increased [absolute difference (AD) = -29.6% from 1.0 standard deviation below to 1.0 standard deviation above mean (95% confidence interval, CI: -31.6, -23.8)] and their perceptions of nonoperative benefit increased [AD = -32.6% (95% CI: -32.8,--28.9)]. Surgeons were more likely to operate as their perceptions of operative benefit increased [AD = 18.7% (95% CI: 12.6, 21.5)] and their perceptions of nonoperative risk increased [AD = 32.7% (95% CI: 28.7, 34.0)]. Differences in risk/benefit perceptions explained 39% of the observed variation in decisions to operate across the four vignettes. CONCLUSIONS: Given the same clinical scenarios, surgeons' perceptions of treatment risks and benefits vary and are highly predictive of their decisions to operate.

Using Both Clinical Registry and Administrative Claims Data to Measure Risk-adjusted Surgical Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the validity of hybrid quality measures that use both clinical registry and administrative claims data, capitalizing on the strengths of each data source. BACKGROUND: Previous studies demonstrate substantial disagreement between clinical registry and administrative claims data on the occurrence of postoperative complications. Clinical data have greater validity than claims data for quality measurement but can be burdensome for hospitals to collect. METHODS: American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program records were linked to Medicare inpatient claims (2005-2008). National Quality Forum-endorsed risk-adjusted measures of 30-day postoperative complications or death assessed hospital quality for patients undergoing colectomy, lower extremity bypass, or all surgical procedures. Measures use hierarchical multivariable logistic regression to identify statistical outliers. Measures were applied using clinical data, claims data, or a hybrid of both data sources. Kappa statistics assessed agreement on determinations of hospital quality. RESULTS: A total of 111,984 patients participated from 206 hospitals. Agreement on hospital quality between clinical and claims data was poor. Hybrid models using claims data to risk-adjust complications identified by clinical data had moderate agreement with all clinical data models, whereas hybrid models using clinical data to risk-adjust complications identified by claims data had routinely poor agreement with all clinical data models. CONCLUSIONS: Assessments of hospital quality differ substantially when using clinical registry versus administrative claims data. A hybrid approach using claims data for risk adjustment and clinical data for complications may be a valid alternative with lower data collection burden. For quality measures focused on postoperative complications to be meaningful, such policies should require, at a minimum, collection of clinical outcomes data.

Variation in Hospital Use of Postacute Care After Surgery and the Association With Care Quality.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about hospital use of postacute care after surgery and whether it is related to measures of surgical quality. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used data merged between a national surgery registry, Medicare inpatient claims, the Area Resource File, and the American Hospital Association Annual Survey (2005-2008). Using bivariate and multivariate analyses, we calculated hospital-level, risk-adjusted rates of postacute care use for both inpatient facilities (IF) and home health care (HHC), and examined the association of these rates with hospital quality measures, including mortality, complications, readmissions, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of 112,620 patients treated at 217 hospitals, 18.6% were discharged to an IF, and 19.9% were discharged with HHC. Even after adjusting for differences in patient and hospital characteristics, hospitals varied widely in their use of both IF (mean, 20.3%; range, 2.7%-39.7%) and HHC (mean, 22.3%; range, 3.1%-57.8%). A hospital's risk-adjusted postoperative mortality rate or complication rate was not significantly associated with its use of postacute care, but higher 30-day readmission rates were associated with higher use of IF (24.1% vs. 21.2%, P=0.03). Hospitals with longer average length of stay used IF less frequently (19.4% vs. 24.4%, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals vary widely in their use of postacute care. Although hospital use of postacute care was not associated with risk-adjusted complication or mortality rates, hospitals with high readmission rates and shorter lengths of stay used inpatient postacute care more frequently. To reduce variations in care, better criteria are needed to identify which patients benefit most from these services.

Are primary care providers prepared to care for survivors of breast cancer in the safety net?

BACKGROUND: With the growing number of survivors of breast cancer outpacing the capacity of oncology providers, there is pressure to transition patients back to primary care. Primary care providers (PCPs) working in safety-net settings may have less experience treating survivors, and little is known about their knowledge and views on survivorship care. The current study was performed to determine the knowledge, attitudes, and confidence of PCPs in the safety net at delivering care to survivors of breast cancer. METHODS: A modified version of the National Cancer Institute's Survey of Physician Attitudes Regarding Care of Cancer Survivors was given to providers at 2 county hospitals and 5 associated clinics (59 providers). Focus groups were held to understand barriers to survivorship care. RESULTS: Although the majority of providers believed PCPs have the skills necessary to provide cancer-related follow-up, the vast majority were not comfortable providing these services themselves. Providers were adherent to American Society of Clinical Oncology recommendations for mammography (98%) and physical examination (87%); less than one-third were guideline-concordant for laboratory testing and only 6 providers (10%) met all recommendations. PCPs universally requested additional training on clinical guidelines and the provision of written survivorship care plans before transfer. Concerns voiced in qualitative sessions included unfamiliarity with the management of endocrine therapy and confusion regarding who would be responsible for certain aspects of care. CONCLUSIONS: Safety-net providers currently lack knowledge of and confidence in providing survivorship care to patients with breast cancer. Opportunities exist for additional training in evidence-based guidelines and improved coordination of care between PCPs and oncology specialists.

General surgical services at an urban teaching hospital in Mozambique.

BACKGROUND: As surgery becomes incorporated into global health programs, it will be critical for clinicians to take into account already existing surgical care systems within low-income countries. To inform future efforts to expand the local system and systems in comparable regions of the developing world, we aimed to describe current patterns of surgical care at a major urban teaching hospital in Mozambique. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all general surgery patients treated between August 2012 and August 2013 at the Hospital Central Maputo in Maputo, Mozambique. We reviewed emergency and elective surgical logbooks, inpatient discharge records, and death records to report case volume, disease etiology, and mortality. RESULTS: There were 1598 operations (910 emergency and 688 elective) and 2606 patient discharges during our study period. The most common emergent surgeries were for nontrauma laparotomy (22%) followed by all trauma procedures (18%), whereas the most common elective surgery was hernia repair (31%). The majority of lower extremity amputations were above knee (69%). The most common diagnostic categories for inpatients were infectious (31%), trauma (18%), hernia (12%), neoplasm (10%), and appendicitis (5%). The mortality rate was 5.6% (146 deaths), approximately half of which were related to sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate the general surgery caseload of a large, academic, urban training and referral center in Mozambique. We describe resource limitations that impact operative capacity, trauma care, and management of amputations and cancer. These findings highlight challenges that are applicable to a broad range of global surgery efforts.

Surgical salvage of acquired lung lesions in extremely premature infants.

Acquired neonatal lung lesions including pneumatoceles, cystic bronchopulmonary dysplasia, and pulmonary interstitial emphysema can cause extrinsic mediastinal compression, which may impair pulmonary and cardiac function. Acquired lung lesions are typically managed medically. Here we report a case series of three extremely premature infants with acquired lung lesions. All three patients underwent aggressive medical management and ultimately required tube thoracostomies. These interventions were unsuccessful and emergency thoracotomies were performed in each case. Two infants with acquired pneumatoceles underwent unroofing of the cystic structure and primary repair of a bronchial defect. The third infant with pulmonary interstitial emphysema, arising from cystic bronchopulmonary dysplasia, required a middle lobectomy for severe and diffuse cystic disease. When medical management fails, tube thoracostomy can be attempted, leaving surgical intervention for refractory cases. Surgical options include oversewing a bronchial defect in the setting of a bronchopleural fistula or lung resection in cases of an isolated expanding lobe.

Contemporary Surgical Management of Colorectal Liver Metastases.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in the United States and the second most common cause of cancer-related death. Approximately 20-30% of patients will develop hepatic metastasis in the form of synchronous or metachronous disease. The treatment of colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) has evolved into a multidisciplinary approach, with chemotherapy and a variety of locoregional treatments, such as ablation and portal vein embolization, playing a crucial role. However, resection remains a core tenet of management, serving as the gold standard for a curative-intent therapy. As such, the input of a dedicated hepatobiliary surgeon is paramount for appropriate patient selection and choice of surgical approach, as significant advances in the field have made management decisions extremely nuanced and complex. We herein aim to review the contemporary surgical management of colorectal liver metastasis with respect to both perioperative and operative considerations.