Surgical Fire in the United States: 2000-2020.

BACKGROUND: Despite fire prevention protocols and perioperative staff training, surgical fires continue to cause patient harm, disability, and death. METHODS: We identified surgical fires that were reported to the Food and Drug Administration's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database between 2000 and 2020 that resulted in patient or surgical personnel harm. Quantitative and descriptive content analyses were performed on free-text responses to identify contributing factors of surgical fire patient and personnel harm events. RESULTS: We identified 565 surgical fire events resulting in patient or surgical personnel harm over a 20-year study period (median 25 events/year; range, 8-53). Surgical fires were significantly more likely to occur during upper aerodigestive tract (unadjusted odds ratio 15.96; 95% confidence interval, 11.93-21.34) and head and neck (unadjusted odds ratio 5.47; confidence interval 4.14-7.22) procedures compared with abdomen and pelvis procedures. Upper aerodigestive tract and head and neck procedures had the highest incidence of life-threatening injury (41% and 21%, respectively). An electrosurgical device was the ignition source in 82% of events. Content analysis revealed 7 common categories identified as root causes of surgical fires: preparation of surgical site (n = 55, 29%); device malfunction (n = 51, 26%), surgical accident (n = 47, 24%), medical judgement (n = 44 reports, 23%), equipment care and handling (n = 18, 9%), patient factors (n = 10, 5%), and communication (n = 3, 2%). CONCLUSION: Surgical fires resulting in harm to patient and surgical personnel continue to occur. The common themes identified in this study will prepare and empower surgeons and surgical personnel to prevent surgical fires in the future.

Surgical salvage of human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal cancer: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Survival outcomes are generally better for human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPV+ OPSCC) than other forms of head and neck cancer. However, less is known about oncologic outcomes, late adverse events, and gastrostomy tube dependence associated with salvage surgery after the failure of definitive chemoradiation in patients with HPV+ OPSCC. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 1016 randomized trial, which compared radiotherapy plus cetuximab to radiotherapy plus cisplatin in patients with HPV+ OPSCC, was performed. The oncologic and adverse event outcomes for patients who underwent salvage surgery were examined. RESULTS: Among the 805 patients who were assigned to treatment and were eligible for analysis, 198 developed treatment failure. Salvage surgery was required for 61 patients (7.6%), with 33 patients undergoing salvage surgery after locoregional failure (LRF) and 28 patients undergoing salvage neck dissection within the 20 weeks after treatment. Patients with LRF who underwent salvage surgery experienced improved overall survival in comparison with patients with LRF who did not undergo surgery (45% vs. 17% at 5 years after treatment; hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23-0.74). Surgical salvage after LRF was associated with similar frequencies of late grade 3/4 dysphagia in comparison with LRF without surgery (24% [95% CI, 13%-41%] vs. 20% [95% CI, 12%-32%]; p = .64) and with similar gastrostomy tube dependence at 2 years (29% [95% CI, 15%-49%] vs. 13% [95% CI, 5%-28%]; p = .12). CONCLUSIONS: Salvage surgery in patients with HPV+ OPSCC is associated with favorable survival and adverse event outcomes.

Incidence of Head and Neck Cancer With Lung Cancer Screening: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate the incidence of head and neck cancers (HNC) in high-risk current and/or former smokers with screening low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) chest versus chest x-ray (CXR). STUDY DESIGN: Second analysis of randomized clinical trial. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis examining the incidence of HNC in the National Lung Screening Trial. This was a randomized trial comparing LDCT versus CXR screening for lung cancer detection in high-risk individuals (30 pack-year smokers who currently smoke or quit within the last 15 years, aged 55-74). We compared the incidence of HNC in participants screened with LDCT versus CXR. We performed subgroup analyses in participants with mucosal HNC (oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx, hypopharynx, nasal/sinus cavity, or nasopharynx) or nonmucosal HNC (thyroid or salivary gland) and examined survival in the two screening arms. RESULTS: This trial enrolled 53,452 participants with a median follow-up of 6.2 years after randomization. The incidence of HNC was 111.8 cases per 100,000 person-years in the LDCT group versus 87.1 cases per 100,000 person-years in the CXR group (rate ratio 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.61). There were 11.7 deaths from HNC per 100,000 person-years in the LDCT group and 12.9 deaths per 100,000 person-years in the CXR group (hazard ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.42-1.52). CONCLUSIONS: Participants screened with LDCT had a modestly higher incidence of HNC. As uptake and adherence of lung cancer screening guidelines improve, clinicians should recognize that incidental findings from screening may lead to increased detection of HNC. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 132:1609-1614, 2022.

Development of a self-directed sinonasal surgical anatomy video curriculum: Phase 1 validation.

BACKGROUND: Sinusitis is a common outpatient diagnosis made by physicians and is a reason for referral to otolaryngologists. A foundation in basic sinonasal anatomy is critical in understanding sinus pathophysiology and avoiding complications. Our objective in this study was to develop and to validate a self-directed surgical anatomy video for medical students. METHODS: Two multimedia videos were developed highlighting sinonasal anatomy. In Video 1 we included audio narration and radiologic imaging. Video 2 incorporated highlighted images from a sinus surgery video. An assessment was developed to test sinonasal anatomy landmarks, spatial recognition of structures, and their clinical relevance. An expert panel of rhinologists scored face and content validity of the curriculum videos and assessment. Factor analysis was used to separate questions into face and content validity domains, and a one-sample t test was performed. RESULTS: The panel scored face validity (Videos 1 and 2: 4.4/5) and content validity (Video 1: 4.5/5, 0.83; Video 2: 4.3/5, 0.75) significantly higher than a neutral response. There were no statistical differences for face or content validity between videos. The assessment was rated suitable (29%) or very suitable (57%) for testing basic sinonasal surgical anatomy, and the majority (71%) of respondents agreed (14%) or strongly agreed (57%) that the assessment thoroughly covered the sinus anatomy content with which medical students should be familiar. CONCLUSION: We have developed two videos and an assessment that highlight and test sinonasal anatomy. Future studies will aim to identify whether the use of a self-directed video curriculum improves sinonasal anatomy awareness and whether incorporation of surgical endoscopic videos augments training.