Socioeconomically Distressed Communities Associated With Long-term Mortality After Bariatric Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgical outcomes are affected by socioeconomic status, yet these factors are poorly accounted for in clinical databases. We sought to determine if the Distressed Communities Index (DCI), a composite ranking by zip code that quantifies socioeconomic risk, was associated with long-term survival after bariatric surgery. METHODS: All patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (1985-2004) at a single institution were paired with DCI. Scores range from 0 (no distress) to 100 (severe distress) and account for unemployment, education, poverty, median income, housing vacancies, job growth, and business establishment growth. Distressed communities, defined as DCI ≥75, were compared with all other patients. Regression modeling was used to evaluate the effect of DCI on 10-year bariatric outcomes, whereas Cox Proportional Hazards and Kaplan-Meier analysis examined long-term survival. RESULTS: Gastric bypass patients (n = 681) come from more distressed communities compared with the general public (DCI 60.5 ± 23.8 versus 50 ± 10; P < 0.0001). A total of 221 (32.3%) patients came from distressed communities (DCI ≥75). These patients had similar preoperative characteristics, including BMI (51.5 versus 51.7 kg/m2; P = 0.63). Socioeconomic status did not affect 10-year bariatric outcomes, including percent reduction in excess body mass index (57% versus 58%; P = 0.93). However, patients from distressed communities had decreased risk-adjusted long-term survival (hazard ratio, 1.38; P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with low socioeconomic status, as determined by the DCI, have equivalent outcomes after bariatric surgery despite worse long-term survival. Future quality improvement efforts should focus on these persistent disparities in health care.

Ten-year outcomes of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass are equivalent in patients with Medicare disability and non-Medicare patients.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery is the most effective intervention for achieving durable weight loss and improvement of comorbidities in patients with obesity. Limited data exist on the impact of Medicare status in patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. We hypothesized that there is no difference in outcomes between Medicare beneficiaries and non-Medicare patients at the 10-year follow-up. METHODS: All patients who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with 10-year follow-up at a single medical center from 1985 to 2005 were stratified by Medicare insurance status. Outcomes included 10-year percent reduction in excess body mass index and comorbidity resolution. RESULTS: Of 617 patients who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with 10-year follow-up, 117 (19%) were insured under Medicare. Medicare patients were older (43 vs 40 years, P = .01) and had a greater preoperative body mass index (53.2 vs 51.0 kg/m2, P = .03) than non-Medicare patients, but there were no differences in preoperative median comorbidity index scores (3 [interquartile range 1-4] vs 2 [interquartile range 1-5], P = .33). At 10 years, weight loss (58.3% vs 57.0 percent reduction in excess body mass index, P = .16) and the decrease in median comorbidity index (1 [interquartile range 0-3] vs 1 [interquartile range 0-3], P = .85) were equivalent between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is equally beneficial in Medicare Disability and non-Medicare patients at 10 years. These findings support the continued and expanded coverage of bariatric surgery operations by Medicare.

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is safe in elderly patients: a propensity-score matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have established the effectiveness of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for weight loss and co-morbidity amelioration. However, its safety and efficacy in elderly patients remains controversial. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate outcomes in patients aged ≥60 years who underwent RYGB compared with nonsurgical controls with the hypothesis that RYGB provides weight loss benefits without differences in survival. SETTING: University-affiliated tertiary center. METHODS: All patients who underwent RYGB from 1985 to 2015 were identified and divided into elderly (age ≥60) and nonelderly (age <60) groups. A nonsurgical elderly control population was identified using a clinical data repository of outpatient visits to propensity match elderly patients 4:1 on demographic characteristics, co-morbidities, and relevant preoperative substance/medication use. Unpaired appropriate univariate analyses compared each stratified group. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were fitted based on social security death data. RESULTS: A total of 2306 patients underwent RYGB. The 107 elderly patients had lower median body mass index (47.0 versus 49.9; P = .007) and higher rates of co-morbidities. Rates of complications did not differ between elderly and nonelderly patients. Elderly surgical patients were propensity matched 4:1 (10,044 controls) yielding 428 well-matched nonsurgical controls. The elderly group demonstrated significant percent reduction in excess body mass index compared with the control group (81.8% versus 10.3%; P < .001). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with log-rank test demonstrated no difference in midterm survival (P = .63). CONCLUSIONS: A significant weight reduction benefit was identified after RYGB in elderly patients without a difference in midterm survival compared with propensity-matched controls, suggesting RYGB is a safe and efficacious weight loss strategy in the elderly.

Adoption of robotics in a general surgery residency program: at what cost?

BACKGROUND: Robotic technology is increasingly being utilized by general surgeons. However, the impact of introducing robotics to surgical residency has not been examined. This study aims to assess the financial costs and training impact of introducing robotics at an academic general surgery residency program. METHODS: All patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair (VHR), and inguinal hernia repair (IHR) at our institution from 2011-2015 were identified. The effect of robotic surgery on laparoscopic case volume was assessed with linear regression analysis. Resident participation, operative time, hospital costs, and patient charges were also evaluated. RESULTS: We identified 2260 laparoscopic and 139 robotic operations. As the volume of robotic cases increased, the number of laparoscopic cases steadily decreased. Residents participated in all laparoscopic cases and 70% of robotic cases but operated from the robot console in only 21% of cases. Mean operative time was increased for robotic cholecystectomy (+22%), IHR (+55%), and VHR (+61%). Financial analysis revealed higher median hospital costs per case for robotic cholecystectomy (+$411), IHR (+$887), and VHR (+$1124) as well as substantial associated fixed costs. CONCLUSIONS: Introduction of robotic surgery had considerable negative impact on laparoscopic case volume and significantly decreased resident participation. Increased operative time and hospital costs are substantial. An institution must be cognizant of these effects when considering implementing robotics in departments with a general surgery residency program.

General surgery residency inadequately prepares trainees for fellowship: results of a survey of fellowship program directors.

OBJECTIVE: To assess readiness of general surgery graduate trainees entering accredited surgical subspecialty fellowships in North America. METHODS: A multidomain, global assessment survey designed by the Fellowship Council research committee was electronically sent to all subspecialty program directors. Respondents spanned minimally invasive surgery, bariatric, colorectal, hepatobiliary, and thoracic specialties. There were 46 quantitative questions distributed across 5 domains and 1 or more reflective qualitative questions/domains. RESULTS: There was a 63% response rate (n = 91/145). Of respondent program directors, 21% felt that new fellows arrived unprepared for the operating room, 38% demonstrated lack of patient ownership, 30% could not independently perform a laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and 66% were deemed unable to operate for 30 unsupervised minutes of a major procedure. With regard to laparoscopic skills, 30% could not atraumatically manipulate tissue, 26% could not recognize anatomical planes, and 56% could not suture. Furthermore, 28% of fellows were not familiar with therapeutic options and 24% were unable to recognize early signs of complications. Finally, it was felt that the majority of new fellows were unable to conceive, design, and conduct research/academic projects. Thematic clustering of qualitative data revealed deficits in domains of operative autonomy, progressive responsibility, longitudinal follow-up, and scholarly focus after general surgery education.

Minimally invasive surgery fellowship does not adversely affect general surgery resident case volume: a decade of experience.

BACKGROUND: With the advent of clinical fellowships in general surgery, there has been a continual debate over the effect on general surgical resident training. Will a fellowship interfere with a chief resident's experience or case volume? The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that the presence of an advanced laparoscopic fellow in a tertiary care hospital and residency has had no deleterious effect on chief resident laparoscopic case volume. METHODS: The operative case logs of graduating residents and fellows from 2001 to 2011 were reviewed, focusing on laparoscopic basic and complex cases and comparing between those 2 groups and comparing residents' case numbers with the national average published by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. RESULTS: Residents graduating from 2001 to 2011 (4-6 chief residents per year) performed an average of 989 ± 76.2 laparoscopic cases per graduating chief class, with each chief averaging 207.7 ± 10.7. The average number of laparoscopic basic cases per graduating chief year was 555.3 ± 42.1, with each chief averaging 116.2 ± 4.9. The average number of laparoscopic complex cases per graduating chief year was 434.4 ± 39.2, with each chief averaging 91.5 ± 7.2. Over the same period of time (1 or 2 fellows per year), fellows performed an average of 336 ± 23.3 cases per year. When comparing residents' total average cases with the national data, the residents performed a similar number of cases (209.9 ± 11.9 vs 195.0 ± 19.5, P = .53). When comparing years when there were 2 clinical fellows vs years with 1 fellow, there was no change in the total number of laparoscopic cases per chief (224.2 vs 195.6, P = .26) and no change in the number of complex laparoscopic cases (97.1 vs 88.7, P = .63). There was a significant difference for basic laparoscopic cases, with a slight decrease when there were 2 fellows (127.8 vs 106.9, P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: A laparoscopic fellowship has not had an adverse impact on the complex or basic laparoscopic case experience of surgical residents. In a busy academic practice, laparoscopic fellowships and general surgical residency can coexist.

Primary payer status affects mortality for major surgical operations.

OBJECTIVES: Medicaid and Uninsured populations are a significant focus of current healthcare reform. We hypothesized that outcomes following major surgical operations in the United States is dependent on primary payer status. METHODS: From 2003 to 2007, 893,658 major surgical operations were evaluated using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database: lung resection, esophagectomy, colectomy, pancreatectomy, gastrectomy, abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, hip replacement, and coronary artery bypass. Patients were stratified by primary payer status: Medicare (n = 491,829), Medicaid (n = 40,259), Private Insurance (n = 337,535), and Uninsured (n = 24,035). Multivariate regression models were applied to assess outcomes. RESULTS: Unadjusted mortality for Medicare (4.4%; odds ratio [OR], 3.51), Medicaid (3.7%; OR, 2.86), and Uninsured (3.2%; OR, 2.51) patient groups were higher compared to Private Insurance groups (1.3%, P < 0.001). Mortality was lowest for Private Insurance patients independent of operation. After controlling for age, gender, income, geographic region, operation, and 30 comorbid conditions, Medicaid payer status was associated with the longest length of stay and highest total costs (P < 0.001). Medicaid (P < 0.001) and Uninsured (P < 0.001) payer status independently conferred the highest adjusted risks of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid and Uninsured payer status confers increased risk-adjusted mortality. Medicaid was further associated with the greatest adjusted length of stay and total costs despite risk factors or operation. These differences serve as an important proxy for larger socioeconomic and health system-related issues that could be targeted to improve surgical outcomes for US Patients.