Association Between Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities and Hospital Performance in Treatment and Outcomes for Patients with Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Disparities in colon cancer care and outcomes by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), and insurance are well recognized; however, the extent to which inequalities are driven by patient factors versus variation in hospital performance remains unclear. We sought to compare disparities in care delivery and outcomes at low- and high-performing hospitals. METHODS: We identified patients with stage I-III colon adenocarcinoma from the 2012-2017 National Cancer Database. Adequate lymphadenectomy and timely adjuvant chemotherapy administration defined hospital performance. Multilevel regression models evaluated disparities by race/ethnicity, SES, and insurance at the lowest- and highest-performance quartile hospitals. RESULTS: Of 92,573 patients from 704 hospitals, 45,982 (49.7%) were treated at 404 low-performing hospitals and 46,591 (50.3%) were treated at 300 high-performing hospitals. Low-performing hospitals treated more non-Hispanic (NH) Black, Hispanic, low SES, and Medicaid patients (all p < 0.01). Among low-performing hospitals, patients with low versus high SES (odds ratio [OR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-0.92), and Medicare (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85-0.96) and Medicaid (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80-0.96) versus private insurance, had decreased odds of receiving high-quality care. At high-performing hospitals, NH Black versus NH White patients (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72-0.95) had decreased odds of receiving high-quality care. Low SES, Medicare, Medicaid, and uninsured patients had worse overall survival at low- and high-performing hospitals (all p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Disparities in receipt of high-quality colon cancer care occurred by SES and insurance at low-performing hospitals, and by race at high-performing hospitals. However, survival disparities by SES and insurance exist irrespective of hospital performance. Future steps include improving low-performing hospitals and identifying mechanisms affecting survival disparities.

Access, Outcomes, and Costs Associated with Surgery for Malignancy Among People Experiencing Homelessness.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about surgery for malignancy among people experiencing homelessness (PEH). Poor healthcare access may lead to delayed diagnosis and need for unplanned surgery. This study aimed to (1) characterize access to care among PEH, (2) evaluate postoperative outcomes, and (3) assess costs associated with surgery for malignancy among PEH. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) who underwent surgery in Florida, New York, or Massachusetts for gastrointestinal or lung cancer from 2016 to 2017. PEH were identified using HCUP's "Homeless" variable and ICD-10 code Z59. Multivariable regression models controlling patient and hospital variables evaluated associations between homelessness and postoperative morbidity, length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission, and hospitalization costs. RESULTS: Of 67,034 patients at 566 hospitals, 98 (0.2%) were PEH. Most PEH (44.9%) underwent surgery for colorectal cancer. PEH more frequently underwent unplanned surgery than housed patients (65.3% vs 23.7%, odds ratio (OR) 5.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.00-8.92) and less often were treated at cancer centers (66.0% vs 76.2%, p=0.02). Morbidity rates were similar between groups (20.4% vs 14.5%, p=0.10). However, PEH demonstrated higher odds of facility discharge (OR 5.89, 95% CI 3.50-9.78) and readmission (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.07-3.05) as well as 67.7% longer adjusted LOS (95% CI 42.0-98.2%). Adjusted costs were 32.7% higher (95% CI 14.5-53.9%) among PEH. CONCLUSIONS: PEH demonstrated increased odds of unplanned surgery, longer LOS, and increased costs. These results underscore a need for improved access to oncologic care for PEH.

Establishing the clinical relevance of grade A post-hepatectomy liver failure.

INTRODUCTION: The International Study Group of Liver Surgery's criteria stratifies post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) into grades A, B, and C. The clinical significance of these grades has not been fully established. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) hepatectomy-targeted database was analyzed. Outcomes between patients without PHLF, with grade A PHLF, and grade B or C PHLF were compared. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression were performed. RESULTS: Six thousand two hundred seventy-four adults undergoing elective major hepatectomy were included in the analysis. The incidence of grade A PHLF was 4.3% and grade B or C was 5.3%. Mortality was similar between patients without PHLF (1.2%) and with grade A PHLF (1.1%), but higher in those with grades B or C PHLF (25.4%). Overall morbidities rates were 19.3%, 41.7%, and 72.8% in patients without PHLF, with grade A PHLF, and with grade B or C PHLF, respectively (p < 0.001). Grade A PHLF was associated with increased morbidity (grade A: odds ratios [OR] 2.7 [95% CI: 2.0-3.5]), unplanned reoperation (grade A: OR 3.4 [95% CI: 2.2-5.1]), nonoperative intervention (grade A: OR 2.6 [95% CI: 1.9-3.6]), length of stay (grade A: OR 3.1 [95% CI: 2.3-4.1]), and readmission (grade A: OR 1.8 [95% CI: 1.3-2.5]) compared to patients without PHLF. CONCLUSIONS: Although mortality was similar between patients without PHLF and with grade A PHLF, other postoperative outcomes were notably inferior. Grade A PHLF is a clinically distinct entity with relevant associated postoperative morbidity.

Safety and feasibility of establishing an adjuvant hepatic artery infusion program.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic artery infusion (HAI) is less frequently used in the adjuvant setting for resectable colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) due to concerns regarding toxicity. Our objective was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of establishing an adjuvant HAI program. METHODS: Patients who underwent HAI pump placement between January 2019 and February 2023 for CRLM were identified. Complications and HAI delivery were compared between patients who received HAI in the unresectable and adjuvant settings. RESULTS: Of 51 patients, 23 received HAI for unresectable CRLM and 28 in the adjuvant setting. Patients with unresectable CRLM more commonly had bilobar disease (n = 23/23 vs n = 18/28, p < 0.01) and more preoperative liver metastases (median 10 [IQR 6-15] vs 4 [IQR 3-7], p < 0.01). Biliary sclerosis was the most common complication (n = 2/23 vs n = 4/28); however, there were no differences in postoperative or HAI-specific complications. In the most recent two years, 0 patients in the unresectable group vs 2 patients in the adjuvant group developed biliary sclerosis. All patients were initiated on HAI with no difference in treatment times or dose reductions. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant HAI is safe and feasible for patients with resectable CRLM. HAI programs can carefully consider including patients with resectable CRLM if managed by an experienced multidisciplinary team with quality assurance controls in place.

Current Practices in Hepatic Artery Infusion (HAI) Chemotherapy: An International Survey of the HAI Consortium Research Network.

BACKGROUND: An increasing number of hepatic artery infusion (HAI) programs have been established worldwide. Practice patterns for this complex therapy across these programs have not been reported. This survey aimed to identify current practice patterns in HAI therapy with the long-term goal of defining best practices and performing prospective studies. METHODS: Using SurveyMonkeyTM, a 28-question survey assessing current practices in HAI was developed by 12 HAI Consortium Research Network (HCRN) surgical oncologists. Content analysis was used to code textual responses, and the frequency of categories was calculated. Scores for rank-order questions were generated by calculating average ranking for each answer choice. RESULTS: Thirty-six (72%) HCRN members responded to the survey. The most common intended initial indications for HAI at new programs were unresectable colorectal liver metastases (uCRLM; 100%) and unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (uIHC; 56%). Practice patterns evolved such that uCRLM (94%) and adjuvant therapy for CRLM (adjCRLM; 72%) have become the most common current indications for HAI at established centers. Referral patterns for pump placement differed between uCRLM and uIHC, with most patients referred while receiving second- and first-line therapy, respectively, with physicians preferring to evaluate patients for HAI while receiving first-line therapy for CRLM. Concern for extrahepatic disease was ranked as the most important factor when considering a patient for HAI. CONCLUSIONS: Indication and patient selection factors for HAI therapy are relatively uniform across most HCRN centers. The increasing use of adjuvant HAI therapy and overall consistency of practice patterns among HCRN centers provides a robust environment for prospective data collection and randomized clinical trials.

Evaluation of Nationwide Trends in Nodal Sampling Guideline Adherence for Gastric Cancer: 2005-2017.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical resection is the primary curative treatment for localized gastric cancer. A multitude of research supports surgical nodal sampling guidelines. Though there are known disparities in adherence to nodal sampling, it is unclear how hospital program-level disparities have changed over time. The purpose of this study is to evaluate trends in program-level disparities in adherence to gastric cancer nodal sampling guidelines. METHODS: Patients who underwent resection of gastric cancer from 2005 to 2017 were identified in the National Cancer Database. Patients treated at academic programs were compared to those treated at nonacademic programs, and rates and trends of adherence to nodal sampling guidelines (defined as ≥15 lymph nodes) were determined. Adjusted multivariable analysis was used to determine likelihood of nodal sampling adherence while controlling for sociodemographic, clinical, hospital, and travel distance characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 55,421 patients were included with 27,201 (49.1%) of patients meeting adherence criteria for lymph node sampling. Academic programs treated 44.4% of the total cohort. Overall, lymph node sampling criteria were met in 59.2% of patients treated at high-volume academic programs and 37.0% of patients treated at low-volume nonacademic programs (incidence rate ratios 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.63-0.72 versus high-volume academic programs). Adherence rates improved from 2005 to 2017 for both low-volume nonacademic programs (27.8% in 2005 to 50.1% in 2017) and high-volume academic programs (46.0% in 2005 to 69.8% in 2017, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Though adherence rates have improved from 2005 to 2017, high-volume academic programs were more likely to adhere to lymph node sampling guidelines for gastric cancer.

Rural-Urban Disparities in Receipt of Surgery for Potentially Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Access to cancer care, especially surgery, is limited in rural areas. However, the specific reasons rural patient populations do not receive surgery for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unknown. We investigated geographic disparities in reasons for failure to receive guideline-indicated surgical treatment for patients with potentially resectable NSCLC. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with clinical stage I-IIIA (N0-N1) NSCLC between 2004 and 2018. Patients from rural areas were compared to urban areas, and the reason for nonreceipt of surgery was evaluated. Adjusted odds of (1) primary nonsurgical management, (2) surgery being deemed contraindicated due to risk, (3) surgery being recommended but not performed, and (4) overall failure to receive surgery were determined. RESULTS: The study included 324,785 patients with NSCLC with 42,361 (13.0%) from rural areas. Overall, 62.4% of patients from urban areas and 58.8% of patients from rural areas underwent surgery (P < 0.001). Patients from rural areas had increased odds of (1) being recommended primary nonsurgical management (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.23), (2) surgery being deemed contraindicated due to risk (aOR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.07-1.33), (3) surgery being recommended but not performed (aOR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.01-1.26), and (4) overall failure to receive surgery (aOR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.13-1.29; all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There are geographic disparities in the management of NSCLC. Rural patient populations are more likely to fail to undergo surgery for potentially resectable disease for every reason examined.

Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing Patient-Reported Outcome Monitoring in Gastrointestinal Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: More than 30% of patients experience complications after major gastrointestinal (GI) surgery, many of which occur after discharge when patients and families must assume responsibility for monitoring. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have been proposed as a tool for remote monitoring to identify deviations in recovery, and recognize and manage complications earlier. This study's objective was to characterize barriers and facilitators to the use of PROs as a patient monitoring tool following GI surgery. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with GI surgery patients and clinicians (surgeons, nurses, and advanced practitioners). Patients and clinicians were asked to describe their experience using a PRO monitoring system in three surgical oncology clinics. Using a phenomenological approach, research team dyads independently coded the transcripts using an inductively developed codebook and the constant comparative approach with differences reconciled by consensus. RESULTS: Ten patients and five clinicians participated in the interviews. We identified four overarching themes related to functionality, workflow, meaningfulness, and actionability. Functionality refers to barriers faced by clinicians and patients in using the PRO technology. Workflow represents problematic integration of PROs into the clinical workflow and need for setting expectations with patients. Meaningfulness refers to lack of patient and clinician understanding of the impact of PROs on patient care. Finally, actionability reflects barriers to follow-up and practical use of PRO data. CONCLUSIONS: While use of PRO systems for postoperative patient monitoring have expanded, significant barriers persist for both patients and clinicians. Implementation enhancements are needed to optimize functionality, workflow, meaningfulness, and actionability.

Disparities in treatment and survival in early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma in California.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Curative intent therapy is the standard of care for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, these therapies are under-utilized, with several treatment and survival disparities. We sought to demonstrate whether the type of facility and distance from treatment center (with transplant capabilities) contributed to disparities in curative-intent treatment and survival for early-stage HCC in California. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the California Cancer Registry for patients diagnosed with stage I or II primary HCC between 2005 and 2017. Primary and secondary outcomes were receipt of treatment and overall survival, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression and Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression were used to evaluate associations. RESULTS: Of 19 059 patients with early-stage HCC, only 36% (6778) received curative-intent treatment. Compared to Non-Hispanic White patients, Hispanic patients were less likely, and Asian/Pacific Islander patients were more likely to receive curative-intent treatment. Our results showed that rural residence, public insurance, lower neighborhood SES, and care at non-National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center were associated with not receiving treatment and decreased survival. CONCLUSIONS: Although multiple factors influence receipt of treatment for early-HCC, our findings suggest that early intervention programs should target travel barriers and access to specialist care to help improve oncologic outcomes.

Neoadjuvant therapy use and association with postoperative outcomes and overall survival in patients with extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Evidence for neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (eCCA) is limited. Our objectives were to: (1) characterize treatment trends, (2) identify factors associated with receipt of NAT, and (3) evaluate associations between NAT and postoperative outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of the National Cancer Database (2004-2017). Multivariable logistic regression assessed associations between NAT and postoperative outcomes. Stratified analysis evaluated differences between surgery first, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT). RESULTS: Among 8040 patients, 417 (5.2%) received NAT. NAT increased during the study period 2.9%-8.4% (p < 0.001). Factors associated with receipt of NAT included age <50 (vs. >75, odds ratio [OR] 4.32, p < 0.001) and stage 3 disease (vs. 1, OR 1.68, p = 0.01). Compared with surgery first, patients who received NAT had higher odds of R0 resection (OR 1.49, p = 0.01) and lower 30-day mortality (OR 0.51, p = 0.04). On stratified analysis, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with differences in any outcomes. However, neoadjuvant CRT was associated with improvement in R0 resection (OR 3.52, <0.001) and median survival (47.8 vs. 25.3 months, log-rank < 0.001) compared to surgery first. CONCLUSIONS: NAT, particularly neoadjuvant CRT, was associated with improved postoperative outcomes. These data suggest expanding the use of neoadjuvant CRT for eCCA.

Evaluation of emergency department treat-and-release encounters after major gastrointestinal surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) utilization after gastrointestinal cancer operations is poorly characterized. Our study objectives were to determine the incidence of, reasons for, and predictors of ED treat-and-release encounters after gastrointestinal cancer operations. METHODS: Patients who underwent elective esophageal, hepatobiliary, gastric, pancreatic, small intestinal, or colorectal operations for cancer were identified in the 2015-2017 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient and State Emergency Department Databases for New York, Maryland, and Florida. The primary outcomes were the incidence of ED treat-and-release encounters and readmissions within 30 days of discharge. RESULTS: Among 51 527 patients at 406 hospitals, 4047 (7.9%) had an ED treat-and-release encounter, and 5573 (10.8%) had an ED encounter with readmission. In total, 40.7% of ED encounters were treat-and-release encounters. ED treat-and-release encounters were most frequently for pain (12.0%), device/ostomy complaints (11.7%), or wound complaints (11.4%). ED treat-and-release encounters predictors included non-Hispanic Black race/ethnicity (odds ratio [OR] 1.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-1.37) and Medicare (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.16-1.40) or Medicaid (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.62-2.40) coverage. CONCLUSIONS: ED treat-and-release encounters are common after major gastrointestinal operations, making up nearly half of postdischarge ED encounters. The reasons for ED treat-and-release encounters differ from those for ED encounters with readmissions.

Hepatic Artery Infusion Pumps: A Surgical Toolkit for Intraoperative Decision-Making and Management of Hepatic Artery Infusion-Specific Complications.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic artery infusion (HAI) is a liver-directed therapy that delivers high-dose chemotherapy to the liver through the hepatic arterial system for colorectal liver metastases and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Utilization of HAI is rapidly expanding worldwide. OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: This review describes the conduct of HAI pump implantation, with focus on common technical pitfalls and their associated solutions. Perioperative identification and management of common postoperative complications is also described. RESULTS: HAI therapy is most commonly performed with the surgical implantation of a subcutaneous pump, and placement of its catheter into the hepatic arterial system for inline flow of pump chemotherapy directly to the liver. Intraoperative challenges and abnormal hepatic perfusion can arise due to aberrant anatomy, vascular disease, technical or patient factors. However, solutions to prevent or overcome technical pitfalls are present for the majority of cases. Postoperative HAI-specific complications arise in 22% to 28% of patients in the form of pump pocket (8%-18%), catheter (10%-26%), vascular (5%-10%), or biliary (2%-8%) complications. The majority of patients can be rescued from these complications with early identification and aggressive intervention to continue to deliver safe and effective HAI therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This HAI toolkit provides the HAI team a reference to manage commonly encountered HAI-specific perioperative obstacles and complications. Overcoming these challenges is critical to ensure safe and effective pump implantation and delivery of HAI therapy, and key to successful implementation of new programs and expansion of HAI to patients who may benefit from such a highly specialized treatment strategy.

Are Kids More Than Just Little Adults? A Comparison of Surgical Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: While complication rates have been well described using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and National Surgical Quality Improvement Program-Pediatric registries, there have been no direct comparisons of outcomes between adults and children. Our objective was to describe differences in postoperative outcomes between children and adults undergoing common surgical procedures. METHODS: Using data from 2013 to 2017, we identified patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, thyroidectomy, and colectomy. Propensity score matching on gender, race, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, surgical indication, and procedure type was performed. Outcomes included surgical site infection (SSI), readmission rates, mortality/serious morbidity, and hospital length of stay and were analyzed using χ2 and student's t-test with statistical significance defined as P < 0.05. RESULTS: We matched 79,866 patients from 812 hospitals. Compared to adults, children had higher rates of SSI following appendectomy (4.12% versus 1.40%, P < 0.01) and cholecystectomy (0.96% versus 0.66%, P = 0.04), readmission following appendectomy (4.26% versus 2.47%, P < 0.01), and longer length of stay in all procedures. In adults, 30-day mortality/serious morbidity was higher for all procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to adults, children demonstrate unique surgical complication and outcome profiles. Quality improvement efforts such as SSI prevention bundles and enhanced recovery protocols used in adults should be expanded to children.

Quality assurance and quality control in surgical oncology.

Even though surgery has remained a key component within multi-disciplinary cancer care, the expectations have changed. Instead of serving as a modality to free a patient of a mass at all means and at the risk of high morbidity, modern cancer surgery is expected to provide adequate tumor clearance with lowest invasiveness. This review summarizes the evidence on quality assurance in surgical oncology and gives a comprehensive overview of quality improvement tools.

Management of colorectal cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: Recommendations from a statewide multidisciplinary cancer collaborative.

COVID-19 has resulted in significant disruptions in cancer care. The Illinois Cancer Collaborative (ILCC), a statewide multidisciplinary cancer collaborative, has developed expert recommendations for triage and management of colorectal cancer when disruptions occur in usual care. Such recommendations would be applicable to future outbreaks of COVID-19 or other large-scale disruptions in cancer care.

Association of Surgical Resident Wellness With Medical Errors and Patient Outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to: (1) measure the prevalence of self-reported medical error among general surgery trainees, (2) assess the association between general surgery resident wellness (ie, burnout and poor psychiatric well-being) and self-reported medical error, and (3) examine the association between program-level wellness and objectively measured patient outcomes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Poor wellness is prevalent among surgical trainees but the impact on medical error and objective patient outcomes (eg, morbidity or mortality) is unclear as existing studies are limited to physician and patient self-report of events and errors, small cohorts, or examine few outcomes. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered immediately following the January 2017 American Board of Surgery In-training Examination to clinically active general surgery residents to assess resident wellness and self-reported error. Postoperative patient outcomes were ascertained using a validated national clinical data registry. Associations were examined using multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Over a 6-month period, 22.5% of residents reported committing a near miss medical error, and 6.9% reported committing a harmful medical error. Residents were more likely to report a harmful medical error if they reported frequent burnout symptoms [odds ratio 2.71 (95% confidence interval 2.16-3.41)] or poor psychiatric well-being [odds ratio 2.36 (95% confidence interval 1.92-2.90)]. However, there were no significant associations between program-level resident wellness and any of the independently, objectively measured postoperative American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality improvement Program outcomes examined. CONCLUSIONS: Although surgical residents with poor wellness were more likely to self-report a harmful medical error, there was not a higher rate of objectively reported outcomes for surgical patients treated at hospitals with higher rates of burnout or poor psychiatric well-being.

Barriers to Post-Discharge Monitoring and Patient-Clinician Communication: A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: As postoperative length of stay has decreased for many operations, the proportion of complications occurring post-discharge is increasing. Early identification and management of these complications requires overcoming barriers to effective post-discharge monitoring and communication. The aim of this study was to identify barriers to post-discharge monitoring and patient-clinician communication through a qualitative study of surgical patients and clinicians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were held with gastrointestinal surgery patients and clinicians. Participants were asked about barriers to post-discharge monitoring and communication. Each transcript was coded by 2 of 4 researchers, and recurring themes related to communication and care barriers were identified. RESULTS: A total of 15 patients and 17 clinicians participated in interviews and focus groups. Four themes which encompassed barriers to post-discharge monitoring and communication were identified from patient interviews, and 4 barriers were identified from clinician interviews and focus groups. Patient-identified barriers included education and expectation setting, technology access and literacy, availability of resources and support, and misalignment of communication preferences, while clinician-identified barriers included health education, access to clinical team, healthcare practitioner time constraints, and care team experience and consistency. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple barriers exist to effective post-discharge monitoring and patient-clinician communication among surgical patients. These barriers must be addressed to develop an effective system for post-discharge care after surgery.

Necessity of posttreatment surveillance for low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (LAMNs) are generally treated by surgical resection, but posttreatment surveillance protocols are not well-established. The objectives of this study were to characterize posttreatment surveillance and determine the risk of recurrence following surgical resection of LAMN. METHODS: Patients who underwent surgical resection of localized LAMNs in an 11-hospital regional healthcare system from 2000 to 2019 were identified. Posttreatment surveillance regimens were characterized, and rates of disease recurrence were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients with LAMNs were identified. T-category was pTis for 92 patients (80.7%), pT3 for 7 (6.1%), pT4a for 14 (12.3%), and pT4b for 1 (0.9%). Two patients (1.8%) had a positive resection margin. Posttreatment surveillance was performed for 39 (34.2%) patients and consisted of office visits for 32 (82%) patients, computerized tomography imaging for 30 (77%), magnetic resonance imaging for 5 (13%), colonoscopy for 15 (38%), and serum tumor marker measurement for 12 (31%). After a mean follow-up duration of 4.7 years, no patients experienced tumor recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Posttreatment surveillance is common among patients with LAMNs. However, no patients experienced tumor recurrence, regardless of T-category or margin status, suggesting that routine surveillance following surgical resection of LAMN may be unnecessary.

Development and validation of a risk calculator for post-discharge venous thromboembolism following hepatectomy for malignancy.

BACKGROUND: Post-discharge venous thromboembolism (VTE) chemoprophylaxis decreases VTEs following cancer surgery, however identifying high-risk patients remains difficult. Our objectives were to (1) identify factors available at hospital discharge associated with post-discharge VTE following hepatectomy for malignancy and (2) develop and validate a post-discharge VTE risk calculator to evaluate patient-specific risk. METHODS: Patients who underwent hepatectomy for malignancy from 2014 to 2017 were identified from the ACS NSQIP hepatectomy procedure targeted module. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with post-discharge VTE. A post-discharge VTE risk calculator was constructed, and predicted probabilities of post-discharge VTE were calculated. RESULTS: Among 11 172 patients, 95 (0.9%) developed post-discharge VTE. Post-discharge VTE was associated with obese BMI (OR 2.29 vs. normal BMI [95%CI 1.31-3.99]), right hepatectomy/trisegmentectomy (OR 1.63 vs. partial/wedge [95%CI 1.04-2.57]), and several inpatient postoperative complications: renal insufficiency (OR 5.29 [95%CI 1.99-14.07]), transfusion (OR 1.77 [95%CI 1.12-2.80]), non-operative procedural intervention (OR 2.97 [95%CI 1.81-4.86]), and post-hepatectomy liver failure (OR 2.22 [95%CI 1.21-4.08]). Post-discharge VTE risk ranged from 0.3% to 30.2%. Twenty iterations of 10-fold cross validation identified internal validity. CONCLUSIONS: Risk factors from all phases of care, including inpatient complications, are associated with post-discharge VTE following hepatectomy. Identifying high-risk patients may allow for personalized risk-based post-discharge chemoprophylaxis prescribing.

Adequate Lymphadenectomy as a Quality Measure in Esophageal Cancer: Is there an Association with Treatment Approach?

BACKGROUND: The national comprehensive cancer network defines adequate lymphadenectomy as evaluation of ≥ 15 lymph nodes in esophageal cancer. However, varying thresholds have been suggested following neoadjuvant therapy. OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to (1) explore trends in adequate lymphadenectomy rates over time; (2) evaluate unadjusted lymphadenectomy yield by treatment characteristics; and (3) identify independent factors associated with adequate lymphadenectomy. METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base was used to identify patients who underwent esophagectomy for cancer from 2004 to 2015. Adequate lymphadenectomy trends over time were evaluated using the Cochrane-Armitage test, and lymph node yield by treatment approach was compared using the Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Associations with treatment factors were assessed by multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 24,413 patients, 9919 (40.6%) had adequate lymphadenectomy. Meeting the nodal threshold increased over time (52.6% in 2015 vs. 26.0% in 2004; p < 0.01). Lymph node yield did not differ based on neoadjuvant therapy (median 12 [interquartile range 7-19] with and without neoadjuvant therapy; p = 0.44). Adequate lymphadenectomy was not associated with neoadjuvant therapy (40.5% vs. 40.8%, odds ratio [OR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-1.07), but was associated with surgical approach (52.7% of laparoscopic cases, OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.06-1.56; 61.2% of robotic cases, OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.34-2.19, vs. 43.5% of open cases), and increasing annual esophagectomy volume (55.6% in the fourth quartile vs. 32.6% in the first quartile; OR 3.57, 95% CI 2.35-5.43). CONCLUSIONS: Despite increases over time, only 50% of patients undergo adequate lymphadenectomy during esophageal cancer resection. Adequate lymphadenectomy was not associated with neoadjuvant therapy. Focusing on surgical approach and esophagectomy volume may further improve adequate lymphadenectomy rates.