Decision analysis in cardiac surgery: a scoping review and methodological primer.

OBJECTIVES: Randomized controlled trials are the gold standard for evidence generation in medicine but are limited by their real-world generalizability, resource needs, shorter follow-up durations and inability to be conducted for all clinical questions. Decision analysis (DA) models may simulate trials and observational studies by using existing data and evidence- and expert-informed assumptions and extend analyses over longer time horizons, different study populations and specific scenarios, helping to translate population outcomes to patient-specific clinical and economic outcomes. Here, we present a scoping review and methodological primer on DA for cardiac surgery research. METHODS: A scoping review was performed using the PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science databases for cardiac surgery DA studies published until December 2021. Articles were summarized descriptively to quantify trends and ascertain methodological consistency. RESULTS: A total of 184 articles were identified, among which Markov models (N = 92, 50.0%) were the most commonly used models. The most common outcomes were costs (N = 107, 58.2%), quality-adjusted life-years (N = 96, 52.2%) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (N = 89, 48.4%). Most (N = 165, 89.7%) articles applied sensitivity analyses, most frequently in the form of deterministic sensitivity analyses (N = 128, 69.6%). Reporting of guidelines to inform the model development and/or reporting was present in 22.3% of articles. CONCLUSION: DA methods are increasing but remain limited and highly variable in cardiac surgery. A methodological primer is presented and may provide researchers with the foundation to start with or improve DA, as well as provide readers and reviewers with the fundamental concepts to review DA studies.

Clinical Trial Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: Roadmap of the Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network.

BACKGROUND: There is a recognized lack of diversity among patients enrolled in cardiovascular interventional and surgical trials. Diverse patient representation in clinical trials is necessary to enhance generalizability of findings, which may lead to better outcomes across broader populations. The Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network (CTSN) recently developed a plan of action to increase diversity among participating investigators and trial participants and is the focus of this review. METHODS: A review of literature and enrollment data from CTSN trials was conducted. RESULTS: CTSN completed more than a dozen major clinical trials (2008-2022), enrolling >4000 patients, of whom 30% were women, 11% were non-White, and 5.6% were Hispanic. CTSN also completed trials of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019, wherein enrollment was more diverse, with 42% women, and 58% were Asian, Black, Hispanic, or from another underrepresented racial group. The discrepancy in diversity of enrollment between cardiac surgery trials and coronavirus disease trials highlights the need for a more comprehensive understanding of (1) the prevalence of underlying disease requiring cardiac interventions across broad populations, (2) differences in access to care and referral for cardiac surgery, and (3) barriers to enrollment in cardiac surgery trials. CONCLUSIONS: Committed to diversity, CTSN's multifaceted action plan includes developing site-specific enrollment targets, collecting social determinants of health data, understanding reasons for nonparticipation, recruiting sites that serve diverse populations, emphasizing greater diversity among clinical trial teams, and implicit bias training. The CTSN will prospectively assess how these interventions influence enrollment as we work to ensure trial participants are more representative of the communities we serve.

Ross procedure or mechanical aortic valve, which is the best lifetime option for an 18-year-old? A decision analysis.

Objectives: Identifying the optimal solution for young adults requiring aortic valve replacement (AVR) is challenging, given the variety of options and their lifetime complication risks, impacts on quality of life, and costs. Decision analytic techniques make comparisons incorporating these measures. We evaluated lifetime valve-related outcomes of mechanical aortic valve replacement (mAVR) versus the Ross procedure (Ross) using decision tree microsimulations modeling. Methods: Transition probabilities, utilities, and costs derived from published reports were entered into a Markov model decision tree to explore progression between health states for hypothetical 18-year-old patients. In total, 20,000 Monte Carlo microsimulations were performed to model mortality, quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs), and health care costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated. Sensitivity analyses was performed to identify transition probabilities at which the preferred strategy switched from baseline. Results: From modeling, average 20-year mortality was 16.3% and 23.2% for Ross and mAVR, respectively. Average 20-year freedom from stroke and major bleeding was 98.6% and 94.6% for Ross, and 90.0% and 82.2% for mAVR, respectively. Average individual lifetime (60 postoperative years) utility (28.3 vs 23.5 QALYs) and cost ($54,233 vs $507,240) favored Ross over mAVR. The average ICER demonstrated that each QALY would cost $95,345 more for mAVR. Sensitivity analysis revealed late annual probabilities of autograft/left ventricular outflow tract disease and homograft/right ventricular outflow tract disease after Ross, and late death after mAVR, to be important ICER determinants. Conclusions: Our modeling suggests that Ross is preferred to mAVR, with superior freedom from valve-related morbidity and mortality, and improved cost-utility for young adults requiring aortic valve surgery.

One-time screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm in Ontario, Canada: a model-based cost-utility analysis.

BACKGROUND: Screening programs for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) are not available in Canada. We sought to determine the effectiveness and costutility of AAA screening in Ontario. METHODS: We compared one-time ultrasonography-based AAA screening for people aged 65 years to no screening using a fully probabilistic Markov model with a lifetime horizon. We estimated life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), AAA-related deaths, number needed to screen to prevent 1 AAA-related death and costs (in Canadian dollars) from the perspective of the Ontario Ministry of Health. We retrieved model inputs from literature, Statistics Canada, and the Ontario Case Costing Initiative. RESULTS: Screening reduced AAA-related deaths by 84.9% among males and 81.0% among females. Compared with no screening, screening resulted in 0.04 (18.96 v. 18.92) additional life-years and 0.04 (14.95 v. 14.91) additional QALYs at an incremental cost of $80 per person among males. Among females, screening resulted in 0.02 (21.25 v. 21.23) additional life-years and 0.01 (16.20 v. 16.19) additional QALYs at an incremental cost of $11 per person. At a willingness-to-pay of $50 000 per year, screening was cost-effective in 84% (males) and 90% (females) of model iterations. Screening was increasingly cost-effective with higher AAA prevalence. INTERPRETATION: Screening for AAA among people aged 65 years in Ontario was associated with fewer AAA-related deaths and favourable cost-effectiveness. To maximize QALY gains per dollar spent and AAA-related deaths prevented, AAA screening programs should be designed to ensure that populations with high prevalence of AAA participate.

Redefining global cardiac surgery through an intersectionality lens.

Although cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, six billion people lack access to safe, timely and affordable cardiac surgical care when needed. The burden of cardiovascular disease and disparities in access to care vary widely based on sociodemographic characteristics, including but not limited to geography, sex, gender, race, ethnicity, indigeneity, socioeconomic status and age. To date, the majority of cardiovascular, global health and global surgical research has lacked intersectionality lenses and methodologies to better understand access to care at the intersection of multiple identities and traditions. As such, global (cardiac) surgical definitions and health system interventions have been rooted in reductionism, focusing, at most, on singular sociodemographic characteristics. In this article, we evaluate barriers in global access to cardiac surgery based on existing intersectionality themes and literature. We further examine intersectionality methodologies to study access to cardiovascular care and cardiac surgery and seek to redefine the definition of 'global cardiac surgery' through an intersectionality lens.

Do the Few Dictate Care for the Many? Revascularisation Considerations That Go Beyond the Guidelines.

The burden of coronary artery disease (CAD) is large and growing, commonly presenting with comorbidities and older age. Patients may benefit from coronary revascularisation with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), yet half of patients with CAD who would benefit from revascularisation fall outside the eligibility criteria of trials to date. As such, the choice of revascularisation procedures varies depending on the CAD anatomy and complexity, surgical risk and comorbidities, the patient's preferences and values, and the treating team's expertise. The recent American guidelines on coronary revascularisation are comprehensive in describing recommendations for PCI, CABG, or conservative management in patients with CAD. However, individual challenging patient presentations cannot be fully captured in guidelines. The aim of this narrative review is to summarise common clinical scenarios that are not sufficiently described by contemporary clinical guidelines and trials in order to inform heart team members and trainees about the nuanced considerations and available evidence to manage such cases. We discuss clinical cases that fall beyond the current guidelines and summarise the relevant evidence evaluating coronary revascularisation for these patients. In addition, we highlight gaps in knowledge based on a lack of research (eg, ineligibility of certain patient populations), underrepresentation in research (eg, underenrollment of female and non-White patients), and the surge in newer minimally invasive and hybrid techniques. We argue that ultimately, evidence-based medicine, patient preference, shared decision making, and effective heart team communications are necessary to best manage complex CAD presentations potentially benefitting from revascularisation with CABG or PCI.

Hemiarch versus extended arch repair for acute type A dissection: Results from a multicenter national registry.

OBJECTIVE: We compared perioperative outcomes of patients with acute type A aortic dissection undergoing hemiarch (HA) versus extended arch (EA) repair with or without descending aortic intervention. METHODS: Nine hundred twenty-nine patients underwent acute type A aortic dissection repair (2002-2021, 9 centers) including open distal repair (HA) with or without additional EA repair. EA with intervention on the descending aorta (EAD) included elephant trunk, antegrade thoracic endovascular aortic replacement, or uncovered dissection stent. EA with no descending intervention (EAND), included unstented suture-only methods. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, permanent neurologic deficit, computed tomography malperfusion resolution, and a composite. Multivariable logistic regression was also performed. RESULTS: Mean age was 66 ± 18 years, 30% (278 out of 929) were women, and HA was performed more frequently (75% [n = 695]) than EA (25% [n = 234]). EAD techniques included: dissection stent (39 out of 234 [17%]), thoracic endovascular aortic replacement (18 out of 234 [7.7%]), and elephant trunk (87 out of 234 [37%]). In-hospital mortality (EA: n = 49 [21%] and HA: n = 129 [19%]; P = .42), and neurological deficit (EA: n = 43 [18%] and HA: n = 121 [17%]; P = .74) were similar. EA was not independently associated with death (EA vs HA odds ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.77-1.54; P = .63) or neurologic deficit (EA vs HA odds ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.47-1.55; P = .59). Composite adverse events differed significantly (EA vs HA odds ratio, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.16-1.87; P = .001). Malperfusion resolved more frequently after EAD (EAD: n = 32 [80%], EAND: n = 18 [56%], HA: n = 71 [50%]; P = .004), although multivariable analysis was not significant (EAD vs HA odds ratio, 2.17; 95% CI, 0.83-5.66; P = .10). CONCLUSIONS: Extended arch interventions pose similar perioperative mortality and neurologic risks as Hemiarch. Descending aortic reinforcement may promote malperfusion restoration. Extended techniques should be approached with caution in acute dissection due to increased risk of adverse events.

Race and Ethnicity in Cardiac Surgery: A Missed Opportunity?

BACKGROUND: Patients' race and/or ethnicity are increasingly being associated with differential surgical access and outcomes in cardiac surgery. However, deriving evidence-based conclusions that can inform surgical care has been difficult because of poor diversity in study populations and conflicting research methodology and findings. Using a fictional patient example, this review identifies areas of concern in research engagement, methodology, and analyses, as well as potential steps to improve race and ethnicity considerations in cardiac surgical research. METHODS: A narrative literature review was performed using the PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases, with a combination of cardiac surgery, race, ethnicity, and disparities keywords. RESULTS: Less than half of the published cardiac surgery randomized control trials report the race and/or ethnicity of research participants. Racial and/or ethnic minorities make up <20% of most study populations and are significantly underrepresented relative to their proportions of the general population. Further, race and/or ethnicity of research participants is variably categorized based on ancestry, geographic regions, cultural similarities, or minority status. There is growing consideration of analyzing interrelated and confounding variables, such as socioeconomic status, geographic location, or hospital quality, to better elucidate racial and/or ethnic disparities; however, intersectionality considerations remain limited in cardiac surgery research. CONCLUSIONS: Racial and/or ethnic disparities are increasingly being reported in research engagement, cardiac pathologies, and surgical outcomes. To promote equitable surgical care, tangible efforts are needed to recruit racially and/or ethnically minoritized patients to research studies, be transparent and consistent in their groupings, and elucidate the impact of their intersectional social identities.

The Call for the "Interventional/Hybrid" Aortic Surgeon: Open, Endovascular, and Hybrid Therapies of the Aortic Arch.

Aortic arch pathology is relatively rare but potentially highly fatal and associated with considerable comorbidity. Operative mortality and complication rates have improved over time but remain high. In response, aortic arch surgery is one of the most rapidly evolving areas of cardiac surgery in terms of surgical volume and improved outcomes. Moreover, there has been a surge in novel devices and techniques, many of which have been developed by or codeveloped with vascular surgeons and interventional radiologists. Nevertheless, the extent of arch surgery, the choice of nadir temperature, cannulation, and perfusion strategies, and the use of open, endovascular, or hybrid options vary according to country, centre, and surgeon. In this review article, we provide a technical overview of the surgical, total endovascular, and hybrid repair options for aortic arch pathology through historical developments and contemporary results. We highlight key information for surgeons, cardiologists, and trainees to understand the management of patients with aortic arch pathology. We conclude by discussing training paradigms, the role of aortic teams, and gaps in knowledge, arguing for the need for wire skills for the future "interventional aortic surgeon" and increased research into techniques and novel devices to continue improving outcomes for aortic arch surgery.

Barriers to Accessing Congenital Heart Surgery in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Congenital heart disease (CHD) is the most common major congenital anomaly. Ninety percent of children with CHD are born in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where over 90% of patients lack access to necessary treatments. Reports on barriers to accessing CHD care are limited. Accordingly, it is difficult to design evidence-based interventions to increase access to congenital cardiac surgical care in LMICs. OBJECTIVE: We performed a qualitative systematic review to understand barriers to accessing congenital cardiac surgical care in LMICs. METHODS: We conducted a search of Ovid MEDLINE and CINAHL databases to identify relevant articles from January 2000 to May 2021. We then used a thematic analysis to summarize qualitative data into a framework of preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative barriers. RESULTS: Our search yielded 1,585 articles, of which 67 satisfied the inclusion criteria. Notable preoperative barriers included delayed diagnosis, insufficient caregiver education, financial constraints, difficulty reaching treatment centers, sociocultural stigma of CHD, sex-based discrimination of patients with CHD, and Indigeneity. Perioperative barriers included lack of hospital resources and workforce, need for prolonged hospitalization, and strained physician-patient relationships. Many patients faced barriers postoperatively and into adulthood due to a shortage of critical care resources, inadequate caregiver counseling and patient education, lack of follow-up, and debt from hospital bills and missed work. CONCLUSION: Reducing neonatal and childhood mortality begins with recognizing barriers to accessing health care. Our systematic review identifies and classifies challenges in accessing CHD in LMICs and suggests solutions to major barriers.

A Global Systematic Review of Open Heart Valvular Surgery in Resource-Limited Settings.

BACKGROUND: Many obstacles challenge the establishment and expansion of cardiac surgery in low- and middle-income countries, despite the unmet cardiac surgical needs. One challenge has been providing adequate follow-up care to monitor anticoagulation, manage morbidity, and prevent mortality. This systematic review describes outcomes after valvular cardiac surgery and focuses on strategies for prolonged follow-up care in resource-constrained settings. METHODS: Studies published between 2012 and 2022 were collected from Embase and the Cochrane Library. Article inclusion criteria were adolescent and adult patients, open heart valvular surgery, and analysis of at least 1 postoperative outcome at least 30 days postoperatively. Studies that focused on pediatric patients, pregnant patients, transcatheter procedures, in-hospital outcomes, and nonvalvular surgical procedures were excluded. Descriptive statistics were assessed, and articles were summarized after abstract screening, full-text review, and data extraction. RESULTS: Sixty-seven relevant publications were identified after screening. The most commonly studied regions were Asia (46%), Africa (36%), and Latin America (9%). Rheumatic heart disease was the most commonly studied valvular disease (70%). Reported outcomes included mortality, surgical reintervention, and thrombotic events. Follow-up duration ranged from 30 days to 144 months; 11 studies reported a follow-up length of 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing the unmet cardiac care needs requires a multifaceted approach that leverages telemedicine technology, enhances medical infrastructure, and aligns advocacy efforts. Learning from the cost-effective establishment of cardiac surgery in low- and middle-income countries, we can apply past innovations to foster sustainable cardiac surgical capacity.

Respect Versus Resect Approaches for Mitral Valve Repair: A Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data.

Mitral valve repair (MVr) has been associated with superior long-term survival and freedom from valve-related complications compared with mitral valve replacement for primary mitral regurgitation (MR). The 2 main approaches for MVr are chordal replacement ("respect approach") and leaflet resection ("resect approach"). We performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis using 3 search databases to compare the long-term end points between both approaches. The primary end point was long-term survival. The secondary end points were long-term MR recurrence and reoperation. After reconstruction of time-to-event data for the individual survival analysis, pooled Kaplan-Meier curves for the end points were generated. A total of 14 studies (5,565 patients) were included in the analysis. The respect approach was associated with superior survival compared with the resect approach in the overall sample (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56 to 0.96, p = 0.024, n = 3,901 patients) but not in the risk-adjusted sample (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.82, p = 0.991, n = 620 patients). There was no difference between the approaches in the rate of MR recurrence in the overall sample (HR 1.39, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.08, p = 0.116, n = 1,882 patients) or in the risk-adjusted sample (HR 1.62, 95% CI 0.76 to 3.47, p = 0.211, n = 288 patients). The data for reoperation were only available in the overall sample and did not reveal a difference (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.35, p = 0.663, n = 3,505 patients). In conclusion, the current evidence suggests no difference in long-term mortality, MR recurrence, or reoperation between the resect and respect approaches for MVr after adjusting for patient risk factors. More long-term follow-up data are warranted.

Barriers to Access to Cardiac Surgery: Canadian Situation and Global Context.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Cardiovascular care spans primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention and care, whereby tertiary care is particularly prone to disparities in care. Challenges in access to care especially affect low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), however, multiple barriers also exist and persist across high-income countries. Canada is lauded for its universal health coverage but is faced with health care system challenges and substantial geographic barriers. Canada possesses 203 active cardiac surgeons, or 5.02 per million population, ranging from 3.70 per million in Newfoundland and Labrador to 7.48 in Nova Scotia. As such, Canada possesses fewer cardiac surgeons per million population than the average among high-income countries (7.15 per million), albeit more than the global average (1.64 per million) and far higher than the low-income country average (0.04 per million). In Canada, adult cardiac surgeons are active across 32 cardiac centres, representing 0.79 cardiac centres per million population, which is just above the global average (0.73 per million). In addition to centre and workforce variations, barriers to care exist in the form of waiting times, sociodemographic characteristics, insufficient virtual care infrastructure and electronic health record interoperability, and health care governance fragmentation. Meanwhile, Canada has highly favourable surgical outcomes, well established postacute cardiac care infrastructure, considerable spending on health, robust health administrative data, and effective health technology assessment agencies, which provides a foundation for continued improvements in care. In this narrative review, we describe successes and challenges surrounding access to cardiac surgery in Canada and globally.

Tertiary prevention and treatment of rheumatic heart disease: a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute working group summary.

Although entirely preventable, rheumatic heart disease (RHD), a disease of poverty and social disadvantage resulting in high morbidity and mortality, remains an ever-present burden in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) and rural, remote, marginalised and disenfranchised populations within high-income countries. In late 2021, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened a workshop to explore the current state of science, to identify basic science and clinical research priorities to support RHD eradication efforts worldwide. This was done through the inclusion of multidisciplinary global experts, including cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular specialists as well as health policy and health economics experts, many of whom also represented or closely worked with patient-family organisations and local governments. This report summarises findings from one of the four working groups, the Tertiary Prevention Working Group, that was charged with assessing the management of late complications of RHD, including surgical interventions for patients with RHD. Due to the high prevalence of RHD in LMICs, particular emphasis was made on gaining a better understanding of needs in the field from the perspectives of the patient, community, provider, health system and policy-maker. We outline priorities to support the development, and implementation of accessible, affordable and sustainable interventions in low-resource settings to manage RHD and related complications. These priorities and other interventions need to be adapted to and driven by local contexts and integrated into health systems to best meet the needs of local communities.

Impact of sarcopenia on outcomes in surgical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons have historically used age as a preoperative predictor of postoperative outcomes. Sarcopenia, the loss of skeletal muscle mass due to disease or biological age, has been proposed as a more accurate risk predictor. The prognostic value of sarcopenia assessment in surgical patients remains poorly understood. Therefore, the authors aimed to synthesize the available literature and investigate the impact of sarcopenia on perioperative and postoperative outcomes across all surgical specialties. METHODS: The authors systematically assessed the prognostic value of sarcopenia on postoperative outcomes by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, searching the PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception to 1st October 2022. Their primary outcomes were complication occurrence, mortality, length of operation and hospital stay, discharge to home, and postdischarge survival rate at 1, 3, and 5 years. Subgroup analysis was performed by stratifying complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system. Sensitivity analysis was performed by focusing on studies with an oncological, cardiovascular, emergency, or transplant surgery population and on those of higher quality or prospective study design. RESULTS: A total of 294 studies comprising 97 643 patients, of which 33 070 had sarcopenia, were included in our analysis. Sarcopenia was associated with significantly poorer postoperative outcomes, including greater mortality, complication occurrence, length of hospital stay, and lower rates of discharge to home (all P <0.00001). A significantly lower survival rate in patients with sarcopenia was noted at 1, 3, and 5 years (all P <0.00001) after surgery. Subgroup analysis confirmed higher rates of complications and mortality in oncological (both P <0.00001), cardiovascular (both P <0.00001), and emergency ( P =0.03 and P =0.04, respectively) patients with sarcopenia. In the transplant surgery cohort, mortality was significantly higher in patients with sarcopenia ( P <0.00001). Among all patients undergoing surgery for inflammatory bowel disease, the frequency of complications was significantly increased among sarcopenic patients ( P =0.007). Sensitivity analysis based on higher quality studies and prospective studies showed that sarcopenia remained a significant predictor of mortality and complication occurrence (all P <0.00001). CONCLUSION: Sarcopenia is a significant predictor of poorer outcomes in surgical patients. Preoperative assessment of sarcopenia can help surgeons identify patients at risk, critically balance eligibility, and refine perioperative management. Large-scale studies are required to further validate the importance of sarcopenia as a prognostic indicator of perioperative risk, especially in surgical subspecialties.

Financial Barriers to Surgical Conferences: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Registration Fees.

BACKGROUND: Scientific meetings provide much educational value to participants of all career stages. There is a paucity of literature surrounding the costs of attending scientific meetings and how this may affect participation, especially among trainees. The objective of this study is to assess the accessibility of surgical conferences for attendees by analyzing costs related to surgical society membership and conference registration. METHODS: Societal membership and conference registration fee data were collected according to career stage (i.e., student, resident, fellow, and staff) for the fourteen surgical specialties recognized by the American College of Surgeons (ACS). Fees for participants from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and for virtual-only attendance options were also collected when available. RESULTS: Overall, we included data from 46 surgical societies (32 North American, 14 European or global). The median conference fees for students in the member and non-member categories were 191.55 USD (IQR 42.22-320.99) and 452.40 USD (IQR 294.06-555.00), respectively, representing a 136.2% price increase if not a member. Median conference fees for residents, fellows, and staff in the member category were 65.5%, 66.9%, and 230.9% greater than that for students, respectively. Median prices for residents, fellows, and staff in the non-member category were 49.9%, 54.9%, and 49.9% greater than that for member trainees of the same category, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the substantial costs associated with attending surgical conferences, especially for trainees, representing a significant barrier to already financially burdened trainees, especially those from LMICs, smaller institutions, or less well-off backgrounds.