Male breast cancer: a closer look at patient and tumor characteristics and factors that affect survival using the National Cancer Database.

OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively describe the tumor and clinical characteristics of breast cancer in a cohort of male patients and to assess the factors that affect survival. BACKGROUND: Much of the standard care of male breast cancer is based on the diagnosis and treatment strategies of female breast cancer. However, important clinical differences between the two have been elucidated, which suggests the need for unique attention to male breast cancer. METHODS: We evaluated the records of male patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer between 2004 and 2015 using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Data obtained were demographic characteristics, clinical and tumor data, type of therapy, as well as survival data. We used descriptive statistics to characterize our study population. We then performed a survival and Cox proportional hazards analysis. RESULTS: We identified 16,498 patients (median age: 63 years). Several treatment modalities were used, of which surgery was the most common (14,882 [90.4%]). The total follow-up time was 13 years (156 months). Five-year survival was 77.7% (95% CI 76.9-78.4) and 10-year survival was 60.7%. In a Cox proportional hazards model, mastectomy was associated with the greatest survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.49; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We report what is to our knowledge the largest national population-based cohort of male breast cancer patients. Importantly, our data suggests that similar to female patients, several treatment modalities are significantly associated with improved survival in male patients, particularly surgery. Increasing age, black race, government insurance, more comorbidities, and higher tumor stages are associated with decreased survival.

Increased Healthcare Utilization for Medical Comorbidities Prior to Surgery Improves Postoperative Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of optimization of preoperative comorbidities by nonsurgical clinicians on short-term postoperative outcomes. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Preoperative comorbidities can have substantial effects on operative risk and outcomes. The modifiability of these comorbidity-associated surgical risks remains poorly understood. METHODS: We identified patients with a major comorbidity (eg, diabetes, heart failure) undergoing an elective colectomy in a multipayer national administrative database (2010-2014). Patients were included if they could be matched to a preoperative surgical clinic visit within 90 days of an operative intervention by the same surgeon. The explanatory variable of interest ("preoperative optimization") was defined by whether the patient was seen by an appropriate nonsurgical clinician between surgical consultation and subsequent surgery. We assessed the impact of an optimization visit on postoperative complications with use of propensity score matching and multilevel, multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 4531 colectomy patients with a major potentially modifiable comorbidity (propensity weighted and matched effective sample size: 6037). After matching, the group without an optimization visit had a higher rate of complications (34.6% versus 29.7%, P = 0.001). An optimization visit conferred a 31% reduction in the odds of a complication (P < 0.001) in an adjusted analysis. Median preoperative costs increased by $684 (P < 0.001) in the optimized group, and a complication increased total costs of care by $14,724 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We demonstrated an association between use of nonsurgical clinician visits by comorbid patients prior to surgery and a significantly lower rate of complications. These findings support the prospective study of preoperative optimization as a potential mechanism for improving postoperative outcomes.

Factors associated with switching between low and super utilization in the surgical population: A study in medicare expenditure.

BACKGROUND: Considered the top 5% of healthcare utilizers, "super-utilizers" are estimated to consume as much as 40-55% of all healthcare costs. The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with switching between low- and super-utilization. METHODS: Low and super-utilizers who underwent abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair, coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), colectomy, total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), or lung resection between 2013 and 2015 were identified from 100% Medicare Inpatient Standard Analytic Files. RESULTS: Among 1,049,160 patients, 788,488 (75.1%) and 21,700 (2.1%) patients were low- or super-utilizers prior to surgery, respectively. Among patients who were super-utilizers before surgery, 23% remained super-utilizers post-operatively, yet 26.8% patients became low-utilizers after surgery. Factors associated with moving from low-to super-utilization in the pre-versus post-operative setting included AAA repair, higher Charlson, and pulmonary failure. In contrast, pre-operative super-utilizers who became low-utilizers in the post-operative setting were less likely to be African American or have undergone CABG. CONCLUSION: While 3% of pre-operative low-utilizers became super-utilizers likely due to complications, nearly one quarter of all pre-operative super-utilizers became low-utilizers following surgery suggesting success of the surgery to resolve underlying conditions associated with preoperative super-utilization.

Characterizing and Assessing the Impact of Surgery on Healthcare Spending Among Medicare Enrolled Preoperative Super-utilizers.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to characterize preoperative super-utilizers and examine the effect of surgery on service utilization among patients undergoing major elective surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Rising healthcare costs are becoming increasingly burdensome for Medicare. Super-utilizers have been increasingly identified and studied as this subset of patients consume a disproportionate amount of healthcare services compared with the majority of the population. METHODS: Patients aged 65 or older who underwent any of the following general elective surgeries: abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (AAA), coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), colectomy, or hip replacement were identified using 100% Medicare Inpatient and Outpatient Standard Analytic Files (SAFs) from years 2012 to 2016. Medicare inpatient and outpatient expenditures the year before surgery, around the time of surgery, and the year after surgery were examined. RESULTS: Among 603,105 Medicare beneficiaries, 32,145 patients (5.3%) were categorized as super-utilizers. Compared with low-utilizers, super-utilizers were more likely to be male (low-utilizer vs super-utilizer: 47.9% vs 54.2%) and African American (4.0% vs 7.2%), whereas 58.8% (n = 208,080) of low-utilizers presented without any comorbidity [Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) = 0] and 49.8% (n = 16,007) of super-utilizers presented with a CCI score of ≥3. Total preoperative spending among super-utilizers was approximately $1.7 billion with a median of $3,159 [interquartile range (IQR): $554-$15,181] per beneficiary. Spending among super-utilizers accounted for 39.6% of total spending for all Medicare beneficiaries versus only 8.4% among low-utilizers. Although the median spending per Medicare beneficiary in the year after surgery was higher for super-utilizers compared with low-utilizers [$1,837 (IQR: $341-$11,390) vs $18,223 (IQR: $3,466-$43,356)], super-utilizers accounted for 13.5% of total postoperative spending. The reduction in adjusted average annual Medicare expenditure ranged from >$15,000 per year for patients undergoing CABG to approximately $30,000 per year for patients undergoing a hip replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Although super-utilizers accounted for only 5.3% of patients, these patients accounted for 39.6% of total Medicare expenditures in the year before surgery. Among a subset of super-utilizers, surgical intervention was associated with a reduction in annual Medicare expenditure in the year after surgery.

A national assessment of the utilization, quality and cost of laparoscopic liver resection.

BACKGROUND: Despite recent enthusiasm for the use of laparoscopic liver resection, data evaluating costs associated with laparoscopic liver resections are lacking. We sought to examine the use of laparoscopic liver surgery, and investigate variations in cost among hospitals performing these procedures. METHODS: A nationally representative sample of 12,560 patients who underwent a liver resection in 2012 was identified. Multivariable analyses were performed to compare outcomes associated with liver resection. RESULTS: Among the 12,560 patients who underwent liver resection, 685 (5.4%) underwent a laparoscopic liver resection. The proportion of liver resections performed laparoscopically varied among hospitals ranging from 4.6% to 20.0%; the median volume of laparoscopic liver resections was 10 operations/year. Although laparoscopic surgery was associated with lower postoperative morbidity (aOR = 0.60, 95%CI: 0.36-0.99) and shorter lengths of stay [(LOS) aIRR = 0.83, 95%CI: 0.70-0.97], it was not associated with inpatient mortality (p = 0.971) or hospital costs (p = 0.863). Costs associated with laparoscopic liver resection varied ranging from $5,907 (95%CI: $5,140-$6,674) to $67,178 (95%CI: $66,271-$68,083). The observed variations between hospitals were due to differences in morbidity (coefficient: $20,415, 95%CI: $16,000-$24,830) and LOS (coefficient: $24,690, 95%CI: $21,688-$27,692). CONCLUSIONS: Although laparoscopic liver resection was associated with improved short-term perioperative clinical outcomes, utilization of laparoscopic liver resection remains low.

Population level outcomes and costs of single stage colon and liver resection versus conventional two-stage approach for the resection of metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the current study was to compare outcomes among patients combined colon (CR) and liver resection (LR) for the treatment of simultaneous colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) versus patients undergoing two-stage CR and LR. METHODS: Patients undergoing surgery for CRLM between 2004 and 2014 were identified using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS). Propensity-score matching was used to compare patients undergoing CR + LR with patients undergoing two-stage CR and LR. RESULTS: Among 83,410 patients, CR + LR was performed in 5659 (6.7%), stage C + LR was performed in 5659 (6.7%), while isolated CR and LR was performed in 70,177 (84.0%) and 7574 (9.3%) patients, respectively. The number of patients undergoing CR + LR increased from 423 in 2004 to 580 in 2014 (Δ = +37%). Patients undergoing CR + LR had lower postoperative morbidity (CR + LR vs. two-staged CR and LR: 38.5% vs. 61.2%), shorter LOS (median LOS: 8 days [IQR: 7-12] vs. 14 days [IQR: 10-21]), and lower postoperative mortality (3.1% vs. 5.9%) versus patients undergoing two-stage CR and LR. Compared with patients undergoing two-staged CR and LR, median hospital costs were $13,093 lower for patients undergoing CR + LR (median costs: $36,775 [IQR: 26,416-54,245] vs. $23,682 [IQR: 16,299-32,996]). CONCLUSION: CR + LR was increasingly performed for treatment of CRLM. Compared with two-staged CR and LR, CR + LR was associated with improved outcomes and lower costs.

The relationship of hospital market concentration, costs, and quality for major surgical procedures.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to determine the association between indicators of surgical quality - incidence of major complications and failure-to-rescue - and hospital market concentration in light of differences in costs of care. METHODS: Patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), colon resection, pancreatic resection, or liver resection in the 2008-2011 Nationwide Inpatient Sample were identified. The effect of hospital market concentration on major complications, failure-to-rescue, and inpatient costs was estimated at the lowest and highest mortality hospitals using multivariable regression techniques. RESULTS: A weighted total of 527,459 patients were identified. Higher market concentration was associated with between 4% and 6% increased odds of failure-to-rescue across all four procedures. Across procedures, more concentrated markets had decreased inpatient costs (average marginal effect ranging from -$3064 (95% CI: -$5812 - -$316) for CABG to -$4876 (-$7773 - -$1980) for liver resection. CONCLUSION: In less competitive (more concentrated) hospital markets, higher overall risk of failure-to-rescue after complications was accompanied by lower inpatient costs, on average. These data suggest that market controls may be leveraged to influence surgical quality and costs.

Assessing coding practices for gastrointestinal surgery over time in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Variations in hospital billing practices may reflect differences in patient risk or may represent the "upcoding" of patients in response to payer incentives/policies. The current study sought to assess whether coding practices for gastrointestinal surgery have changed over time and to evaluate the association between upcoding and in-hospital costs. METHODS: A total of 1,344,152 patients aged >18 years undergoing a gastrointestinal operation between 2001 and 2011 were identified using the National Inpatient Sample. Coding practices were compared by hospital and patient characteristics. Multivariable analysis was performed to evaluate the association between coding practices and in-hospital costs. RESULTS: The mean and median number of codes per admission were 8.8 (standard deviation = 4.58) and 9 (interquartile range: 5-11), respectively. Over time, the proportion of admissions being upcoded (>9 codes/admission) increased from 14.1% to 32.9% (∆ = +133.3%, P < .001). This trend was observed for each gastrointestinal operation and was greatest for hepatectomy (∆ = +73.3%). Although admissions that were upcoded were more likely to be for patients with greater comorbidity and Medicare enrollees, an increase in the proportion of patients upcoded was also observed regardless of the primary payer, among patients presenting without comorbidity, and among patients undergoing an elective operation (all P < .001). On adjusted analysis, admissions that were upcoded were independently associated with a $13,754 (95% confidence interval: $13,638-$13,870) greater in-hospital cost. CONCLUSION: The number of "upcoded" patients was observed to increase with time. Greater education, regulation, and scrutiny are required of coding practices.

Assessing the Financial Burden Associated With Treatment Options for Resectable Pancreatic Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the financial burden associated with treatment options for resectable pancreatic cancer. BACKGROUND: As the volume of cancer care increases in the United States, there is growing interest among both clinicians and policy-makers to reduce its financial impact on the healthcare system. However, costs relative to the survival benefit for differing treatment modalities used in practice have not been described. METHODS: Patients undergoing resection for pancreatic cancer were identified in the Truven Health MarketScan database. Associations between chemoradiation therapies and survival were performed using parameterized multivariable accelerated failure time models. Median payments over time were calculated for surgery, chemoradiation, and subsequent hospitalizations. RESULTS: A total of 2408 patients were included. Median survival among all patients was 21.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 19.8-22.5 months], whereas median follow-up time was 25.1 months (95% CI: 23.5-26.5 months). After controlling for comorbidity, receipt of neoadjuvant therapy, and nodal involvement, a longer survival was associated with undergoing combination gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel [time ratio (TR) = 1.26, 95% CI: 1.02-1.57, P = 0.035) or capecitabine and radiation (TR = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.04-1.51, P = 0.018). However, median cumulative payments for gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel were highest overall [median $74,051, interquartile range (IQR): $38,929-$133,603). CONCLUSIONS: Total payments for an episode of care relative to improvement in survival vary significantly by treatment modality. These data can be used to inform management decisions about pursuing further care for pancreatic cancer. Future investigations should seek to refine estimates of the cost-effectiveness of different treatments.

The site of care matters: An examination of the relationship between high Medicaid burden hospitals and the use, cost, and complications of immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: Diminished use and worse outcomes after immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) have been documented for Medicaid beneficiaries. However, to the authors' knowledge, the contribution of patient clustering at hospitals with a high percentage of Medicaid patients to these inequalities in IBR delivery is unknown. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of patients undergoing IBR after mastectomy using the 2007 to 2011 Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was performed. Hospital Medicaid status was calculated as the percentage of all patients with Medicaid as a primary payer. Tertile groupings were generated to enable statistical analysis. Hierarchical regression models were used to investigate the link between Medicaid status and IBR use, outcomes, and costs. A subgroup of patients undergoing IBR for noninvasive cancer or those with increased genetic risk were used to study IBR use. RESULTS: A total of 30,086 IBR cases in 1199 hospitals were analyzed. Hierarchical regression analysis demonstrated an association between high Medicaid burden hospitals and significantly decreased odds of IBR among patients with in situ disease and/or an elevated risk of cancer (odds ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.507-0.806). Increasing age, obesity, being nonwhite, having more comorbid conditions, and having government insurance were found to be associated with diminished odds of IBR (P<.001 in all instances). In-hospital surgical and medical complication rates were comparable across the 3 strata of hospital Medicaid status. Log-adjusted costs of care were found to be positively associated with a higher hospital Medicaid burden status (coefficient of 0.038 [95% CI, 0.011-0.066] for medium Medicaid burden hospitals and coefficient of 0.053 [95% CI, 0.015-0.093] for high Medicaid burden hospitals). CONCLUSIONS: High Medicaid burden hospital status is associated with an attenuation of IBR use and increased total inpatient costs. Structures of care such as hospital resources partially explain disparities in IBR delivery. Cancer 2018;124:346-55. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Palliative Care Utilization among Patients Admitted for Gastrointestinal and Thoracic Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Although a growing body of literature recommends the early initiation of palliative care (PC), the use of PC remains variable. OBJECTIVE: The current study sought to describe the use of PC and to identify factors associated with the use of inpatient PC. DESIGN: Retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of data from the National Inpatient Sample. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: Patients admitted with a primary diagnosis of gastrointestinal and/or thoracic cancer from 2012 to 2013. MEASUREMENTS: In-hospital length of stay (LOS), morbidity, mortality, and total charges. RESULTS: A total of 282,899 patients were identified who met inclusion criteria of whom, 24,100 (8.5%) patients received a PC consultation during their inpatient admission. Patients who received PC were more likely to have a longer LOS (LOS >14 days: 5.4% vs. 9.4%) and were more likely to develop a postoperative complication (28.3% vs. 45.9%, both p < 0.001). Inpatient mortality was significantly higher among patients who had received PC than those who did not (5.4% vs. 44.1%, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, patient age (age ≥75 years: Odds Ratio [OR] = 2.54, 95% CI: 2.33-2.78), comorbidity (CCI >6: OR = 2.60, 95% CI: 2.48-2.74), and admission to larger hospitals (reference small: OR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.14-1.25) were associated with greater odds of receiving PC (all p < 0.05). Patients who underwent a major operation during their inpatient admission demonstrated 79% lower odds of receiving PC (OR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.20-0.22, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients admitted for cancer, PC services were used in 8.5% of patients during their inpatient admission with surgical patients being 79% less likely to receive a PC consultation. Further research is required to delineate the barriers to the use of PC so as to promote the use of PC among high-risk patients.

Financial Impact of Acute Kidney Injury After Cardiac Operations in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) after major cardiac operations is a potentially avoidable complication associated with increased morbidity, death, and costly long-term treatment. The financial impact of AKI at the population level has not been well defined. We sought to determine the incremental index hospital cost associated with the development of AKI. METHODS: All patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or valve replacement operations, or both (clinical classification software codes 43 and 44), between 2008 and 2011 were identified from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. AKI was identified using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes (584.xx); patients with chronic renal failure were excluded. Mean total index hospitalization costs were compared between patients with and without AKI. RESULTS: At the population level, 1,078,036 individuals underwent major cardiac procedures from 2008 to 2011, with AKI developing in 105,648 (9.8%). Specifically, AKI developed in 8.0% of CABG, 11.4% of valve replacement, and 17.0% of CABG plus valve replacement patients (p < 0.001). Death was more common among patients with AKI vs those without (13.9% vs 1.3%, p < 0.001). Mean total index hospitalization cost was $77,178 for patients with AKI vs $38,820 for those without (p < 0.001). At the national level, the overall incremental annual index hospitalization cost associated with AKI was $1.01 billion. CONCLUSIONS: AKI developed in 1 in every 10 patients nationwide after a cardiac operation. Achieving a 10% reduction in AKI in this population would likely result in an annual savings of approximately $100,000,000 in index-hospital costs alone. Support for research on mechanisms to detect impending damage and prevent AKI may lead to reduced patient morbidity and death and to substantial health care cost savings.

Defining payments associated with the treatment of colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: While bundled payments aim to reduce variations in health care spending across the continuum of care, data reporting on variations in payments for privately insured patients undergoing treatment for colon cancer (CC) are lacking. The current study sought to characterize variations in payments received for the treatment of CC using a cohort of commercially insured patients. METHODS: Patients who underwent a colectomy for CC were identified using the MarketScan Database for 2010-2014. Multivariable regression analysis was used to calculate and compare risk-adjusted payments between patients. RESULTS: A total of 18,337 patients were identified who met inclusion criteria. The median risk-adjusted payment for surgery was $26,408 (IQR: $19,193-$38,037) ranging from $19,762 (IQR: $15,595-$25,636) among patients in the lowest quartile of payments to $33,809 (IQR: $24,783-$48,254) for patients in the highest (+△71.1%). The median risk-adjusted payment for chemotherapy was $70,090 (IQR: $57,813-$83,216); compared with patients in the lowest quartile of payments, payments associated with chemotherapy were 40.4% higher among patients in the highest quartile of payments (Q1 versus Q4: $56,827 [IQR: 49,173-65,353] versus $79,801 [IQR: 67,270-90,999]). When stratified by treatment type, patients in the highest two quartiles of risk-adjusted payments accounted for a total of 58.5% of all payments, whereas patients in the lower two quartiles of risk-adjusted payments accounted for only 41.5% of all payments. A younger patient age, increasing patient comorbidity and undergoing an open operation were associated with higher overall payments. CONCLUSIONS: Wide variations in payments exist for the treatment for colon cancer. Episode-based bundle payments for surgery and chemotherapy may differentially impact reimbursement for CC.

Emergency Department Visits For Firearm-Related Injuries In The United States, 2006-14.

Firearm-related deaths are the third leading cause of injury-related deaths in the United States. Yet limited data exist on contemporary epidemiological trends and risk factors for firearm-related injuries. Using data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample, we report epidemiological trends and quantify the clinical and financial burden associated with emergency department (ED) visits for firearm-related injuries. We identified 150,930 patients-representing a weighted total of 704,916 patients nationally-who presented alive to the ED in the period 2006-14 with firearm-related injuries. Such injuries were approximately nine times more common among male than female patients and highest among males ages 20-24. Of the patients who presented alive to the ED, 37.2 percent were admitted to inpatient care, while 8.3 percent died during their ED visit or inpatient admission. The mean per person ED and inpatient charges were $5,254 and $95,887, respectively, resulting in an annual financial burden of approximately $2.8 billion in ED and inpatient charges. Although future research is warranted to better understand firearm-related injuries, policy makers might consider implementing universal background checks for firearm purchases and limiting access to firearms for people with a history of violence or previous convictions to reduce the clinical and financial burden associated with these injuries.

Hospital Volume and the Costs Associated with Surgery for Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Data evaluating the financial implications of volume-based referral are lacking. This study sought to compare in-hospital costs for pancreatic surgery by annual hospital volume. METHODS: Eleven thousand and eighty-one patients aged ≥18 years undergoing an elective pancreatic resection for cancer were identified using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample 2002-2011. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to compare length-of-stay (LOS), postoperative morbidity and mortality, failure-to-rescue (FTR), and inpatient costs by annual hospital volume group. RESULTS: Patients undergoing surgery at high-volume hospitals (HVH) demonstrated 23% lower odds (odds ratio [OR] = 0.77, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 0.63-0.95) of developing a postoperative complication, 59% lower odds of experiencing an LOS > 14 days (OR = 0.41, 95%CI 0.34-0.50), 51% lower odds of postoperative mortality (OR = 0.49, 95%CI 0.34-0.71), and 47% lower odds of FTR (OR = 0.53, 95%CI 0.37-0.76; all p<0.05). The overall mean in-hospital cost was $39,012 (SD = $15,214) with minimal differences observed across hospital volume groups. Rather, postoperative complications (no complication vs. complication $26,686 [SD = $5762] vs. $44,633 [SD = $11,637]) and FTR (rescue vs. FTR $42,413 [SD = $8481] vs. $69,546 [SD = $13,131]) were determinant of higher in-hospital costs. While this pattern was observed at all hospital volume groups, costs varied minimally between hospital volume groups after this stratification. CONCLUSIONS: Annual hospital surgical volume was not associated with in-hospital costs among patients undergoing pancreatic surgery.

Frailty as a Risk Predictor of Morbidity and Mortality Following Liver Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Given the increasing number of elderly and comorbid patients undergoing surgery, there is increased interest in preoperatively identifying patients at high risk of morbidity and mortality following liver resection. We sought to develop and validate the use of a frailty index (FI) to predict poor postoperative outcomes following liver surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing a liver resection were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Hepatectomy-targeted database for 2014 and randomized into a training or validation cohort. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to develop a revised frailty index (rFI) to predict adverse postoperative clinical outcomes. Leave one out cross-validation was performed to validate the proposed rFI. RESULTS: A total of 2714 patients were identified who met the inclusion criteria. Postoperatively, 826 patients (30.4%) developed a postoperative complication, while 39 patients died within 30 days of surgery. Five preoperative variables (ASA class, BMI, serum albumin, hematocrit, underlying pathology, and type of liver resection) were used to develop the rFI. The rFI demonstrated good discrimination (AUROC = 0.68) and outperformed the previously proposed modified frailty index (mFI; AUROC = 0.53, p < 0.001) when evaluated among patients included in the training cohort. On validation, the rFI demonstrated good model discrimination (AUROC = 0.68) and was accurately able to risk-stratify patients within the validation cohort at risk for developing a postoperative complication, prolonged length-of-stay, and postoperative mortality (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Frailty, as measured by the rFI, was predictive of increased risk of morbidity and mortality following liver surgery and can be used to guide patient decision-making.

Variations in hospitals costs for surgical procedures: inefficient care or sick patients?

BACKGROUND: Reducing unwanted variations has been identified as an avenue for cost containment. We sought to characterize variations in hospital costs after major surgery and quantitate the variability attributable to the patient, procedure, and provider. METHODS: A total of 22,559 patients undergoing major surgical procedure at a tertiary-care center between 2009 and 2013 were identified. Hierarchical linear regression analysis was performed to calculate risk-adjusted fixed, variable and total costs. RESULTS: The median cost of surgery was $23,845 (interquartile ranges, 13,353 to 43,083). Factors associated with increased costs included insurance status (Medicare vs private; coefficient: 14,934; 95% CI = 12,445.7 to 17,422.5, P < .001), preoperative comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index = 1; coefficient: 10,793; 95% CI = 8,412.7 to 13,174.2; Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥2; coefficient: 24,468; 95% CI = 22,552.7 to 26,383.6; both P < .001) and the development of a postoperative complication (coefficient: 58,624.1; 95% CI = 56,683.6 to 60,564.7; P < .001). Eighty-six percent of total variability was explained by patient-related factors, whereas 8% of the total variation was attributed to surgeon practices and 6% due to factors at the level of surgical specialty. CONCLUSIONS: Although inpatient costs varied markedly between procedures and providers, the majority of variation in costs was due to patient-level factors and should be targeted by future cost containment strategies.

A comparison of trends in operative approach and postoperative outcomes for colorectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Data-assessing trends and perioperative outcomes relative to surgical approach for colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery are lacking. We report national trends of CRC surgery and compare postoperative outcomes by surgical approach. METHODS: A total of 261,886 patients undergoing surgery for CRC were identified using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2009 to 2012. Trends in surgical approach were assessed using the Cochrane-Armitage test of trends. Multivariable logistic and linear regression analyses were performed to compare length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications, and cost by surgical approach. RESULTS: At the time of surgery, 57.5% underwent an open procedure, whereas 42.4% underwent either a laparoscopic (39.9%) or robotic (2.5%) colorectal surgery. The use of minimally invasive surgery increased over time (2009 versus 2012: 37.3% versus 46.8%; P < 0.001). Postoperative morbidity was 15.9% and was higher after open surgery (open versus laparoscopic versus robotic: 18.4% versus 12.4% versus 13.3%; P < 0.001). Patients who underwent a minimally invasive surgery had shorter LOS (laparoscopic: OR, 0.55, 95% CI, 0.52-0.58; robotic: OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.49-0.69; both P < 0.001). Robotic surgery was consistently associated with the highest mean costs followed by laparoscopic and open surgery (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing minimally invasive colorectal surgery had a lower postoperative morbidity and shorter LOS compared with patients undergoing open colorectal surgery.

The price of surgery: markup of operative procedures in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Despite cost containment efforts, the price for surgery is not subject to any regulations. We sought to characterize and compare variability in pricing for commonly performed major surgical procedures across the United States. METHODS: Medicare claims corresponding to eight major surgical procedures (aortic aneurysm repair, aortic valvuloplasty, carotid endartectomy, coronary artery bypass grafting, esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, liver resection, and colectomy) were identified using the Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File for 2013. For each procedure, total charges, Medicare-allowable costs, and total payments were recorded. A procedure-specific markup ratio (MR; ratio of total charges to Medicare-allowable costs) was calculated and compared between procedures and across states. Variation in MR was compared using a coefficient of variation (CoV). RESULTS: Among all providers, the median MR was 3.5 (interquartile range: 3.1-4.0). MR was noted to vary by procedure; ranging from 3.0 following colectomy to 6.0 following carotid endartectomy (P < 0.001). MR also varied for the same procedure; varying the least after liver resection (CoV = 0.24), while coronary artery bypass grafting pricing demonstrated the greatest variation in MR (CoV = 0.53). Compared with the national average, MR varied by 36% between states ranging from 1.8 to 13.0. Variation in MR was also noted within the same state varying by 15% within the state of Arkansas (CoV = 0.15) compared with 51% within the state of Wisconsin (CoV = 0.51). CONCLUSIONS: Significant variation was noted for the price of surgery by procedure as well as between and within different geographical regions. Greater scrutiny and transparency in the price of surgery is required to promote cost containment.