Retromuscular drain output at removal does not influence adverse outcome rate in open ventral hernia repairs.

BACKGROUND: Retromuscular drains are commonly placed during retromuscular hernia repair (RHR) to decrease postoperative wound complications and help mesh in-growth. Drains are traditionally removed when output is low but the relationship between drain output at the time of removal and postoperative complications has yet to be delineated. This study aimed to investigate outcomes of RHR patients with drain removal at either high or low output volume. METHODS: An institutional review board-approved retrospective chart review evaluated adult patients undergoing open RHR with retromuscular drain placement between 2013 and 2022 at a single academic medical center. Patients were stratified into low output drainage (LOD, < 50 mL/day) or high output drainage (HOD, ≥ 50 mL/day) groups based on volume on the day of drain removal. RESULTS: We identified 336 patients meeting inclusion criteria: 58% LOD (n = 195) and 42% HOD (n = 141). Demographics and risk factors pertaining to hernia complexity were similar between cohorts. Low-drain output at the time of removal was associated with a significantly longer drain duration (6.3 ± 4.5 vs. 4.4 ± 1.6 days, p < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stay (5.9 ± 3.6 vs. 4.8 ± 2.8 days, p < 0.001). With a 97% 30-day follow-up, incidence of surgical site occurrence (SSO) was not statistically different between groups (29.2% LOD, 26.2% HOD, p = 0.63). Surgical site infection and SSO requiring procedural intervention was also not statistically significant between cohort. At 1-year follow-up, hernia recurrence rates were the same between groups (4.2% LOD, 1.4% HOD, p = 0.25). CONCLUSION: Following open ventral hernia repair with retromuscular mesh placement, the rate of postoperative wound complications was not statistically different based on volume of drain output day of removal. These results suggest that removing drains earlier despite higher output is safe and has no effect on short- or long-term hernia outcomes.

Management of Male Patients With Occult Breast Cancer: Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

INTRODUCTION: Occult breast cancer (OBC) consists of <0.1% of breast cancer cases in the United States. Male occult breast cancer (mOBC) has not been well-studied outside of case reports, and management is largely based on female OBC (fOBC) studies. We aim to examine the prevalence of mOBC among those in the National Cancer Database with breast cancer and describe treatment modalities received by mOBC compared to fOBC. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with OBC from 2004 to 2018. Chi-Square test and Fisher's exact tests compared patient, clinical, and facility characteristics by sex. Treatment modalities [systemic therapy, radiation therapy, axillary lymph node dissection, modified radical mastectomy (MRM)] were compared. A subgroup analysis examined pathologic upstaging in patients who underwent MRM. RESULTS: Of 23,374 male patients with breast cancer, 0.13% were identified to have mOBC [versus 0.09% in fOBC]. cN2/N3 disease was significantly more prevalent in the mOBC cohort (61.3%) than in the fOBC cohort (30.7%, P < 0.001). Receipt of axillary lymph node dissection or MRM was not significantly different by sex. Male OBC (mOBC) patients were less likely to receive trimodality treatment than fOBC patients. In patients who underwent MRM, more mOBC patients [75%] were pathologically upstaged as T+ after mastectomy than fOBC patients [30%, P < 0.001], questioning the adequacy of diagnostic workup for mOBC compared to fOBC. CONCLUSIONS: This review confirms mOBC as an extremely rare disease. Multimodal treatments have been highly utilized to optimize care in this patient population. Further investigation is warranted to examine the survival benefit of treatment regimens for mOBC.

Disparities in Surgical Treatment of Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma at Minority Serving Hospitals.

INTRODUCTION: Minority serving hospitals (MSH) are those serving a disproportionally high number of minority patients. Previous research has demonstrated that treatment at MSH is associated with worse outcomes. We hypothesize that patients treated at MSH are less likely to undergo surgical resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma compared to patients treated at non-MSH. METHODS: Patients with resectable pancreatic cancer were identified using the National Cancer Database. Institutions treating Black and Hispanic patients in the top decile were categorized as an MSH. Factors associated with the primary outcome of definitive surgical resection were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Univariate and multivariable survival analysis was performed. RESULTS: Of the 75,513 patients included in this study, 7.2% were treated at MSH. Patients treated at MSH were younger, more likely to be uninsured, and higher stage compared to those treated at non-MSH (P < 0.001). Patients treated at MSH underwent surgical resection at lower rates (MSH 40% versus non-MSH 44.5%, P < 0.001). On multivariable logistic regression, treatment at MSH was associated with decreased likelihood of undergoing definitive surgery (odds ratio 0.91, P = 0.006). Of those who underwent surgical resection, multivariable survival analysis revealed that treatment at an MSH was associated with increased morality (hazard ratio 1.12, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated at MSH are less likely to undergo surgical resection compared to those treated at non-MSH. Targeted interventions are needed to address the unique barriers facing MSH facilities in providing care to patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

The Association of Guideline-Concordant Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Melanoma at Minority-Serving Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Minority-serving hospitals (MSHs) have been associated with lower guideline adherence and worse outcomes for various cancers. However, the relationship among MSH status, concordance with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) guidelines, and overall survival (OS) for patients with cutaneous melanoma is not well studied. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients diagnosed with T1a*, T2, and T3 melanoma between 2012 and 2017. MSHs were defined as the top decile of institutions ranked by the proportion of minorities treated for melanoma. Based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, guideline-concordant care (GCC) was defined as not undergoing SLNB if thickness was < 0.76 mm without ulceration, mitosis ≥ 1/mm2, or lymphovascular invasion (T1a*), and performing SLNB for patients with intermediate thickness melanomas between 1.0 and 4.0 mm (T2/T3). Multivariable logistic regressions examined associations with GCC. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests were used to evaluate OS between MSH and non-MSH facilities. RESULTS: Overall, 5.9% (N = 2182/36,934) of the overall cohort and 37.8% of minorities (n = 199/527) were managed at MSHs. GCC rates were 89.5% (n = 33,065/36,934) in the overall cohort and 85.4% (n = 450/527) in the minority subgroup. Patients in the overall cohort (odds ratio [OR] 0.85; p = 0.02) and the minority subgroup (OR 0.55; p = 0.02) were less likely to obtain GCC if they received their care at MSHs compared with non-MSHs. Minority patients receiving care at MSHs had a decreased survival compared with those treated at non-MSHs (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to SLNB guidelines for melanoma was lower at MSHs. Continued focus is needed on equity in melanoma care for minority patients in the United States.

Comparison of Tumescent Anesthesia Versus Pectoral Nerve Block in Bilateral Reduction Mammaplasty.

INTRODUCTION: With an increasing focus on multimodal pain control to reduce opioid requirements, regional and local anesthesia techniques have been investigated in bilateral reduction mammaplasty with variable results. The purpose of this study is to compare tumescent anesthesia with pectoral nerve block II (PECS II) in patients undergoing bilateral reduction mammaplasty with respect to postoperative pain and nausea, opioid consumption, length of stay, and cost. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing bilateral reduction mammaplasty for macromastia between November 2020 and December 2021 was performed. Demographic information, operative and anesthesia times, antiemetic and morphine equivalent requirements, postoperative numeric pain rating scales, and time until hospital discharge were compared between groups. χ2 and Fisher exact tests examined subgroup differences in categorical variables. Two-sample t test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test evaluated differences in continuous parametric and nonparametric variables, respectively. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients underwent bilateral reduction mammaplasty by 3 surgeons, 71.7% (n = 38) with tumescent anesthesia infiltrated by the operating surgeon before the start of the procedure and 28.3% (n = 15) with bilateral PECS II blocks performed by anesthesia before the start of the procedure. There was no difference in age, body mass index, weight resected, intraoperative medication, or immediate postoperative complications. Postoperative pain scores and opioid requirements were similar between the 2 groups. Twenty-one percent (n = 8) of tumescent patients compared with 66.7% (n = 10) of block patients required 1 or more doses of postoperative antiemetics ( P = 0.002). Patients who received blocks spent longer in the postoperative recovery area (5.3 vs 7.1 hours, P < 0.01). However, this did not translate to a significant increase in overnight stays. The block group had significantly higher hospitalization cost by an average of $4000, driven by pharmacy and procedural cost ( P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: In this cohort of multimodal perioperative pain-controlled reduction mammaplasty patients, tumescent anesthesia was associated with decreased antiemetic requirements, less time in recovery before discharge, and lower cost compared with PECS II blocks. Therefore, tumescent anesthesia may be favored over PECS II blocks when considering multimodal pain control strategies in reduction mammaplasty patients.

Cost and outcomes of intercostal nerve cryoablation versus thoracic epidural following the Nuss procedure.

BACKGROUND: Pectus excavatum is the most common congenital chest wall abnormality, with the Nuss procedure being the most commonly performed repair. Pain control is the predominant factor in the postoperative treatment of these patients. This study aims to compare the cost and outcomes of intercostal nerve cryoablation (INC) and thoracic epidural (TE) in patients undergoing the Nuss procedure. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted at our institution for all patients who underwent the Nuss procedure for pectus excavatum from 2002 to 2020. Patients were stratified by pain management strategy, INC vs. TE. Chi-square and Fisher's exact were used to compare categorical variables. Wilcoxon tests were used to evaluate continuous variables and costs. RESULTS: A total of 158 patients were identified. Of these, 80.4% (N = 127) were treated with epidural, while 19.6% (N = 31) were treated with intercostal nerve cryoablation. The INC group had lower rates of PCA use (35.5% vs. 93.7%, p < 0.001), lower total morphine milligram equivalent requirement (27.0 vs. 290.8, p < 0.001), and shorter length of stay (3.2 days vs. 5.3 days, p < 0.001) compared to the TE group. INC was also associated with longer operative times (153.0 min vs. 89.0 min, p < 0.001). The total hospitalization cost for the INC group was higher compared to the TE group ($24,742.5 vs $21,621.9, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing the Nuss procedure, compared to thoracic epidural, INC was associated with lower opioid use and shorter length of stay but at the cost of longer operative time and increased hospitalization cost. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Treatment Study, Level III.

Outcomes after sublobar resection versus lobectomy in non-small cell carcinoma in situ.

OBJECTIVE: Guidelines for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer identify patients with tumors ≤2 cm and pure carcinoma in situ histology as candidates for sublobar resection. Although the merits of lobectomy, sublobar resection, and lymphoid (LN) sampling, have been investigated in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer, evaluation of these modalities in patients with IS disease can provide meaningful clinical information. This study aims to compare these operations and their relationship with regional LN sampling in this population. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer clinical Tis N0 M0 with a tumor size ≤2 cm from 2004 to 2017. The χ2 tests were used to examine subgroup differences by type of surgery. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard model were used to compare overall survival. RESULTS: Of 707 patients, 56.7% (401 out of 707) underwent sublobar resection and 43.3% (306 out of 707) underwent lobectomy. There was no difference in 5-year overall survival in the sublobar resection group (85.1%) compared with the lobectomy group (88.9%; P = .341). Multivariable survival analyses showed no difference in overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.044; P = .885) in the treatment groups. LN sampling was performed in 50.9% of patients treated with sublobar resection. In this group, LN sampling was not associated with improved survival (84.9% vs 85.0%; P = .741). CONCLUSIONS: We observed no difference in overall survival between sublobar resection and lobectomy in patients with cTis N0 M0 non-small cell lung cancer with tumors ≤2 cm. Sublobar resection may be an appropriate surgical option for this population. LN sampling was not associated with improved survival in patients treated with sublobar resection.

Management of Clinical T2N0 Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: What Is the Optimal Treatment?

BACKGROUND: The current standard of care for locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma includes neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery. The optimal treatment for clinical T2N0M0 (cT2N0) disease is debated. This study aims to determine the optimal treatment in these patients. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients who underwent surgery for cT2N0 esophageal and GEJ adenocarcinoma from 2004 to 2017. Patients were grouped into surgery-alone, neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), and adjuvant therapy (AT) groups. Subgroups of high-risk patients (tumor ≥ 3 cm, poor differentiation, or lymphovascular invasion) and patients upstaged after upfront surgery were identified. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard ratios were used to compare overall survival. RESULTS: Of 2160 patients included, 957 (44.3%) underwent surgery-alone, 821 (38.0%) underwent NAT and surgery, and 382 (17.7%) underwent surgery and AT. One thousand six hundred nineteen (75.0%) patients had high-risk features. Six hundred fourteen (45.9%) patients were upstaged after upfront surgery. In the overall cohort, AT was associated with improved survival compared to NAT (HR 0.618, p < 0.001) and surgery-alone (HR 0.699, p < 0.001). There was no difference in survival between NAT and surgery-alone (HR 1.132, p = 0.112). Similar results were observed in high-risk patients. Patients upstaged after upfront surgery who received AT had improved survival compared to those initially treated with NAT (HR 0.613, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This analysis suggests that cT2N0 esophageal and GEJ adenocarcinomas may not benefit from the intensive multimodality therapy utilized in locally advanced disease. Selective use of AT for patients who are upstaged pathologically, or have high-risk features, is associated with improved outcomes.

Racial Differences in Bariatric Surgical Approach: a Cross-Sectional National Inpatient Sample Analysis.

PURPOSE: Although racial inequalities in referral and access to bariatric surgical care have been well reported, racial difference in the selection of surgical techniques is understudied. This study examined factors associated with the utilization of the two main bariatric surgical techniques: laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample database was queried for patients who underwent elective LSG or LRYGB for the treatment of severe obesity. Chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression assessed associations of surgical approach with patient and facility characteristics. Sensitivity analyses examined the following body mass index (BMI) subgroups: < 40.0 kg/m2, 40.0-44.9 kg/m2, 45.0-49.9 kg/m2, and ≥ 50.0 kg/m2. RESULTS: Within the final cohort (N = 86,053), 73.0% (N = 62,779) underwent LSG, and 27.0% (N = 23,274) underwent LRYGB. Patients with BMI 45.0-49.9 kg/m2 (OR = 0.85) and BMI ≥ 50.0 kg/m2 (OR = 0.80) were less likely to undergo LSG than patients with BMI 40.0-45.0 kg/m2 (all p < 0.001). However, Black (OR = 1.74) and White Hispanic patients (OR = 1.30) were more likely to undergo LSG than White non-Hispanic patients (all p < 0.005). In the BMI ≥ 50.0 kg/m2 group, Black patients were still more likely to undergo LSG compared to White non-Hispanic patients (OR = 1.69, p < 0.001), while Asians/Pacific Islanders were less likely to receive LSG than White non-Hispanic patients (OR = 0.41, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In this observational study, we identified racial differences in the selection of common bariatric surgical approaches across various BMI categories. Future investigations are warranted to study and to promote awareness of the racial/ethnic influence in attitudes on obesity, weight loss, financial support, and surgical risks during bariatric discussions with minorities.

Predictors of Conversion During Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy for Malignancy.

INTRODUCTION: Implementation of minimally invasive gastrectomy (MIG) for malignancy is increasing. However, risk factors for conversion to open surgery during laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomy are poorly understood. This study aimed to determine the risk factors for, and impact of, conversion during oncologic resection. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was used to identify patients with clinical stage I-III gastric cancer from 2010 to 2017. Chi-squared test and t-test were used to compare the robotic versus laparoscopic groups. Propensity score weighted multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate factors associated with conversion to open surgery. RESULTS: Of 6990 patients identified, 5702 (81.6%) underwent a laparoscopic resection and 1288 (18.4%) underwent robotic-assisted resection. Conversion rates were 14.7% and 7.8% for laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomy, respectively. The robotic approach was associated with lower likelihood of conversion compared to laparoscopic approach (odds ratio [OR] = 0.470, P < 0.001). Other factors predictive of conversion included tumor size >5 cm compared to <2 cm (OR 1.714, P = 0.010), total gastrectomy compared to partial gastrectomy (OR 2.019, P < 0.001), antrum/pylorus (OR 2.345, P < 0.001), and body (OR 2.152, P < 0.001) tumors compared to cardia tumors. Compared to those treated with laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomy, patients who underwent conversion experienced significantly longer hospital length of stay and higher rates of positive surgical margins. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic gastrectomy was associated with a higher conversion rate compared to robotic gastrectomy. Conversion to open surgery was associated with a significantly longer length of stay and higher rates of positive margins. Identification of risk factors for conversion can aid in appropriate modality selection.

The cost of treatments for retained traumatic hemothorax: A decision analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Early video-assisted thorascopic surgery (VATS) is the recommended intervention for retained hemothorax in trauma patients. Alternative options, such as lytic therapy, to avoid surgery remain controversial. The purpose of this decision analysis was to assess expected costs associated with treatment strategies. METHODS: A decision tree analysis estimated the expected costs of three initial treatment strategies: 1) VATS, 2) intrapleural tissue plasminogen activator (TPA) lytic therapy, and 3) intrapleural non-TPA lytic therapy. Probability parameters were estimated from published literature. Costs were based on National Inpatient Sample data and published estimates. Our model compared overall expected costs of admission for each strategy. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of parameter uncertainty on the optimal strategy. RESULTS: In the base case analysis, using TPA as the initial approach had the lowest total cost (U.S. $37,007) compared to VATS ($38,588). TPA remained the optimal initial approach regardless of the probability of complications after VATS. TPA was an optimal initial approach if TPA success rate was >83% regardless of the failure rate with VATS. VATS was the optimal initial strategy if its total cost of admission was <$33,900. CONCLUSION: Lower treatment costs with lytic therapy does not imply significantly lower total cost of trauma admission. However, an initial approach with TPA lytic therapy may be preferred for retained traumatic hemothorax to lower the total cost of admission given its high probability of avoiding the operating room with its resultant increased costs. Future studies should identify differences in quality of life after recovery from competing interventions.

Albumin-bilirubin score is superior to platelet-albumin-bilirubin score and model for end-state liver disease sodium for predicting posthepatectomy liver failure.

BACKGROUND: Risk stratification for patients undergoing hepatectomy can be attempted using established models. This study compares the platelet-albumin-bilirubin (PALBI) score with albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) and model for end-stage liver disease sodium (MELD-Na) for predicting posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) and 30-day mortality. METHODS: The 2014-2018 NSQIP database was queried for patients who underwent elective hepatectomy. Multivariable logistic regressions assessed associations of posthepatectomy outcomes with patient and clinical characteristics. Predictive accuracy of the grading systems was evaluated using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves and calculating area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: Severe PHLF (Grade B/C) and mortality were present in 2.58% (N = 369) and 1.2% (N = 171) of patients who underwent hepatectomy (N = 13 925), respectively. ALBI Grade 2/3 had a stronger association with severe PHLF (odds ratio [OR] = 1.62, p < 0.01) and mortality (OR = 2.06, p < 0.005) than PALBI Grade 2/3 (OR = 1.14, p = 0.43 for PHLF and OR = 2.01, p < 0.005 for mortality) or MELD-Na ≥10 (OR = 1.29, p = 0.25 for PHLF and OR = 1.84, p < 0.03). ALBI had a higher AUC (0.671) than PALBI (0.625) and MELD-Na (0.627) for predicting severe PHLF. ALBI had a higher AUC (0.695) than PALBI (0.642) for predicting 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: ALBI was a more accurate predictor of severe PHLF and 30-day mortality than MELD-Na and PALBI for patients who underwent hepatectomy.

Is preoperative biliary stenting associated with increased rate of postoperative complications for patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy? A review of national surgical quality improvement program data.

BACKGROUND: Jaundice in the setting of periampullary neoplasms is often treated with biliary stenting. Level 1 data demonstrated an increase in perioperative complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients undergoing stent placement. However, the impact of this data on practice patterns in the US remains unknown. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Pancreatectomy Targeted Participant Use Data File was used to identify patients from 2014 to 2017 undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy. Chi-square test and multivariable logistic regression were used to compare outcomes between those with biliary stent and those without. RESULTS: Of the 5524 patients, 3321 (60.1%) had biliary stent placement. The stent group was older, had a higher ASA class, and had preoperative weight loss compared to the group without biliary stenting (all p < 0.05). When adjusting for demographic and operative characteristics, the non-stent group had lower associated overall complications and postoperative infections. There was no significant difference in mortality and pancreatic fistula rate between groups. CONCLUSION: Preoperative biliary stenting is still common prior to pancreaticoduodenectomy. With a trend toward increased utilization of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, stenting will likely remain a common practice. Recognition of increased rates of complications associated with stent placement allows for appropriate risk-benefit analysis.

Predictors and Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Surgery for Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumors : Minimally Invasive Surgery for SBNETs.

BACKGROUND: Open surgical resection with regional lymphadenectomy is the standard of care for small bowel neuroendocrine tumors (SBNETs). There is no consensus on the role of minimally invasive surgery (MIS). This study aims to evaluate the current national trends for MIS in treating SBNETs and its association with lymph node (LN) yield. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with Stage I-III SBNETs who underwent surgery from 2010-2017. Time trends were examined using the Cochran-Armitage test. Chi-square tests, t test, and multivariable logistic regression assessed associations of surgical approach with patient, clinical, and facility characteristics. Kaplan-Meier curves and propensity score weighted Cox proportional hazards model were used to examine survival. RESULTS: Of the 11,367 patients with Stage I-III SBNETs, 46.5% (N = 5,298) underwent MIS. From 2010-2017, the proportion of MIS increased from 35.6% to 57.7% (P < 0.001). Patients of Stage I disease (OR = 1.23), Caucasian race (OR = 1.18), private insurance (OR = 1.29), and higher volume centers (OR = 1.29) were more likely to undergo MIS (all P < 0.02). The average number of LN harvested in the MIS cohort was greater than in the open surgery cohort (13.3 vs 11.8 LN, P < 0.001). MIS patients had shorter length of stay by 2 days compared to open surgery (5.4 vs 7.6 days, P < 0.001). LN yield ≥ 8 was associated with better survival (HR = 0.77, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The utilization of a MIS approach to treat Stage I-III SBNETs has increased, especially at higher volume centers. We did not observe an inferior LN harvest with the MIS cohort compared to the open surgery cohort.