Preoperative Prediction of Postoperative Infections Using Machine Learning and Electronic Health Record Data.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate preoperative risk of postoperative infections using structured electronic health record (EHR) data. BACKGROUND: Surveillance and reporting of postoperative infections is primarily done through costly, labor-intensive manual chart reviews on a small sample of patients. Automated methods using statistical models applied to postoperative EHR data have shown promise to augment manual review as they can cover all operations in a timely manner. However, there are no specific models for risk-adjusting infectious complication rates using EHR data. METHODS: Preoperative EHR data from 30,639 patients (2013-2019) were linked to the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program preoperative data and postoperative infection outcomes data from 5 hospitals in the University of Colorado Health System. EHR data included diagnoses, procedures, operative variables, patient characteristics, and medications. Lasso and the knockoff filter were used to perform controlled variable selection. Outcomes included surgical site infection, urinary tract infection, sepsis/septic shock, and pneumonia up to 30 days postoperatively. RESULTS: Among >15,000 candidate predictors, 7 were chosen for the surgical site infection model and 6 for each of the urinary tract infection, sepsis, and pneumonia models. Important variables included preoperative presence of the specific outcome, wound classification, comorbidities, and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for each model ranged from 0.73 to 0.89. CONCLUSIONS: Parsimonious preoperative models for predicting postoperative infection risk using EHR data were developed and showed comparable performance to existing American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program risk models that use manual chart review. These models can be used to estimate risk-adjusted postoperative infection rates applied to large volumes of EHR data in a timely manner.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Versus Upfront Surgery for Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: An Updated Nationwide Study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the association of survival with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). BACKGROUND: The early control of potential micrometastases and patient selection using NAC has been advocated for patients with PDAC. However, the role of NAC for resectable PDAC remains unclear. METHODS: Patients with clinical T1 and T2 PDAC were identified in the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2017. Kaplan-Meier estimates, and Cox regression models were used to compare survival. To address immortal time bias, landmark analysis was performed. Interactions between preoperative factors and NAC were investigated in subgroup analyses. A propensity score analysis was performed to compare survival between multiagent NAC and upfront surgery. RESULTS: In total, 4041 patients were treated with upfront surgery and 1,175 patients were treated with NAC (79.4% multiagent NAC, 20.6% single-agent NAC). Using a landmark time of 6 months after diagnosis, patients treated with multiagent NAC had longer median overall survival compared with upfront surgery and single-agent NAC. (35.8 vs 27.1 vs 27.4 mo). Multiagent NAC was associated with lower mortality rates compared with upfront surgery (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.70-0.85), whereas single-agent NAC was not. The association of survival with multiagent NAC were consistent in analyses using the matched data sets. Interaction analysis revealed that the association between multiagent NAC and a lower mortality rate did not significantly differ across age, facility type, tumor location, CA 19-9 levels, and clinical T/N stages. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that multiagent NAC followed by resection is associated with improved survival compared with upfront surgery.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy With or Without Radiotherapy for Resected Pancreatic Cancer After Multiagent Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant therapy is associated with improved pancreatic cancer survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery. However, whether adjuvant treatment should include radiotherapy is unclear in this setting. METHODS: This study queried the National Cancer Database for pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients who underwent curative resection after multiagent neoadjuvant chemotherapy between 2010 and 2019 and received adjuvant treatment. Adjuvant chemotherapy plus radiotherapy (external beam, 45-50.4 gray) was compared with adjuvant chemotherapy alone. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression was used to assess survival associations. Analyses were repeated in a propensity score-matched subgroup. RESULTS: Of 1983 patients who received adjuvant treatment after multiagent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resection, 1502 (75.7%) received adjuvant chemotherapy alone and 481 (24.3%) received concomitant adjuvant radiotherapy (chemoradiotherapy). The patients treated with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy were younger, were treated at non-academic facilities more often, and had higher rates of lymph node metastasis (ypN1-2), positive resection margins (R1), and lymphovascular invasion (LVI+). The median survival was shorter for the chemoradiotherapy-treated patients according to the unadjusted analysis (26.8 vs 33.2 months; p = 0.0017). After adjustment for confounders, chemoradiotherapy was associated with better outcomes in the multivariable model (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.93; p = 0.008). The association between chemoradiotherapy and improved outcomes was stronger for the patients with grade III tumors (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.37-0.74) or LVI+ tumors (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.75). In a subgroup of 396 propensity-matched patients, chemoradiotherapy was associated with a survival benefit only for the patients with LVI+ or grade III tumors. CONCLUSION: After multiagent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resection for pancreatic cancer, additional adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus adjuvant chemotherapy alone is associated with improved survival for patients with LVI+ or grade III tumors.

The deimplementation of laboratory testing in low-risk patients as recommended by the American society of anesthesiologists: An ACS-NSQIP longitudinal analysis.

BACKGROUND: In 2012, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) published guidelines recommending against routine preoperative laboratory testing for low-risk patients to reduce unnecessary medical expenditures. The aim of this study was to assess the change in routine preoperative laboratory testing in low-risk versus higher-risk patients before and after release of these guidelines. METHODS: The ACS-NSQIP database, 2005-2018, was separated into low-risk versus higher-risk patients based upon a previously published stratification. The guideline implementation date was defined as January 2013. Changes in preoperative laboratory testing over time were compared between low- and higher-risk patients. A difference-in-differences model was applied. The primary outcome included any laboratory test obtained ≤90 days prior to surgery. RESULTS: Of 7,507,991 patients, 972,431 (13.0%) were defined as low-risk and 6,535,560 (87.0%) higher-risk. Use of any preoperative laboratory test declined in low-risk patients from 66.5% before to 59.6% after guidelines, a 6.9 percentage point reduction, versus 93.0%-91.9% in higher-risk patients, a 1.1 percentage point reduction (p < 0.0001, comparing percentage point reductions). After risk-adjustment, the adjusted odds ratio for having any preoperative laboratory test after versus before the guidelines was 0.77 (95% CI 0.76-0.78) in low-risk versus 0.93 (0.92-0.94) in higher-risk patients. In low-risk patients, lack of any preoperative testing was not associated with worse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: While a majority of low-risk patients continue to receive preoperative laboratory testing not recommended by the ASA, there has been a decline after implementation of guidelines. Continued effort should be directed at the deimplementation of routine preoperative laboratory testing for low-risk patients.

Impact of COVID-19 on patients undergoing scheduled procedures for chronic venous disease.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has drastically altered the medical landscape. Various strategies have been employed to preserve hospital beds, personal protective equipment, and other resources to accommodate the surges of COVID-19 positive patients, hospital overcapacities, and staffing shortages. This has had a dramatic effect on vascular surgical practice. The objective of this study is to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical delays and adverse outcomes for patients with chronic venous disease scheduled to undergo elective operations. METHODS: The Vascular Surgery COVID-19 Collaborative (VASCC) was founded in March 2020 to evaluate the outcomes of patients with vascular disease whose operations were delayed. Modules were developed by vascular surgeon working groups and tested before implementation. A data analysis of outcomes of patients with chronic venous disease whose surgeries were postponed during the COVID-19 pandemic from March 2020 through February 2021 was performed for this study. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients from 12 institutions in the United States were included in the study. Indications for venous intervention were: 85.3% varicose veins, 10.7% varicose veins with venous ulceration, and 4.0% lipodermatosclerosis. One hundred two surgeries had successfully been completed at the time of data entry. The average length of the delay was 91 days, with a median of 78 days. Delays for venous ulceration procedures ranged from 38 to 208 days. No patients required an emergent intervention due to their venous disease, and no patients experienced major adverse events following their delayed surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions may be safely delayed for patients with venous disease requiring elective surgical intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic. This finding supports the American College of Surgeons' recommendations for the management of elective vascular surgical procedures. Office-based labs may be safe locations for continued treatment when resources are limited. Although the interventions can be safely postponed, the negative impact on quality of life warrants further investigation.

Clinical implications of receptor conversions in breast cancer patients who have undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: In this study, we aimed to determine the incidence of receptor conversions after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for breast cancer and assess the rate at which receptor conversion leads to changes in adjuvant therapy regimens. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of female breast cancer patients treated with NAC at an academic breast center between January 2017 and October 2021. Patients with residual disease on surgical pathology and complete receptor status information for both pre-NAC and post-NAC specimens were included. Incidence of receptor conversions, defined as a change in at least one hormone receptor (HR) or HER2 status compared to preoperative specimens, was tabulated, and adjuvant therapy modalities were reviewed. Factors associated with receptor conversion were analyzed using chi-square tests and a binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 240 patients with residual disease after NAC, 126 (52.5%) had receptor testing repeated. After NAC, 37 specimens (29%) had a receptor conversion. Receptor conversion resulted in the addition or removal of an adjuvant therapy in 8 patients (6%), indicating a number needed to screen of 16. Prior history of cancer, receipt of initial biopsy at an outside site, HR-positive tumors, and a pathologic stage of II or lower were factors associated with receptor conversions. CONCLUSION: HR and HER2 expression profiles frequently change after NAC and drive adjustments in adjuvant therapy regimens. Repeat testing of HR and HER2 expression should be considered in patients who receive NAC, especially in patients with early stage, HR-positive tumors whose initial biopsies were performed externally.

Sounding the Alarm: What Clinicians Need to Know about Physical, Emotional, and Cognitive Recovery After Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

OBJECTIVE: We summarize the existing data on the occurrence of physical, emotional, and cognitive dysfunction associated with postintensive care syndrome (PICS) in adult survivors of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases were searched. STUDY SELECTION: Peer-reviewed studies of adults receiving VA-ECMO for any reason with at least one measure of health-related quality of life outcomes or PICS at long-term follow-up of at least 6 months were included. DATA EXTRACTION: The participant demographics and baseline characteristics, in-hospital outcomes, long-term health outcomes, quality of life outcome measures, and prevalence of PICS were extracted. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-seven studies met inclusion criteria encompassing 3,271 patients who were treated with VA-ECMO. The studies were limited to single- or two-center studies. Outcomes variables and follow-up time points evaluated were widely heterogeneous which limits comprehensive analysis of PICS after VA-ECMO. In general, the longer-term PICS-related outcomes of survivors of VA-ECMO were worse than the general population, and approaching that of patients with chronic disease. Available studies identified high rates of abnormal 6-minute walk distance, depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder that persisted for years. Half or fewer survivors return to work years after discharge. Only 2 of 27 studies examined cognitive outcomes and no studies evaluated cognitive dysfunction within the first year of recovery. No studies evaluated the impact of targeted interventions on these outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors of VA-ECMO represent a population of critically ill patients at high risk for deficits in physical, emotional, and cognitive function related to PICS. This systematic review highlights the alarming reality that PICS and in particular, neurocognitive outcomes, in survivors of VA-ECMO are understudied, underrecognized, and thus likely undertreated. These results underscore the imperative that we look beyond survival to focus on understanding the burden of survivorship with the goal of optimizing recovery and outcomes after these life-saving interventions. Future prospective, multicenter, longitudinal studies in recovery after VA-ECMO are justified.

De-implementation of Axillary Dissection in Women Undergoing Mastectomy for Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Completion axillary lymph node dissection (cALND) was standard treatment for breast cancer with positive sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) until 2011, when data from the Z11 and AMAROS trials challenged its survival benefit in early stage breast cancer. We assessed the contribution of patient, tumor, and facility factors on cALND use in patients undergoing mastectomy and SLN biopsy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database, patients diagnosed from 2012 to 2017 who underwent upfront mastectomy and SLN biopsy with at least one positive SLN were included. A multivariable mixed effects logistic regression model was used to determine the effect of patient, tumor, and facility variables on cALND use. Reference effect measures (REM) were used to compare the contribution of general contextual effects (GCE) to variation in cALND use. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2017, the overall use of cALND decreased from 81.3% to 68.0%. Overall, younger patients, larger tumors, higher grade tumors, and tumors with lymphovascular invasion were more likely to undergo cALND. Facility variables, including higher surgical volume and facility location in the Midwest, were associated with increased use of cALND. However, REM results showed that the contribution of GCE to the variation in cALND use exceeded that of the measured patient, tumor, facility, and time variables. CONCLUSIONS: There was a decrease in cALND use during the study period. However, cALND was frequently performed in women after mastectomy found to have a positive SLN. There is high variability in cALND use, mainly driven by interfacility practice variation rather than specific high-risk patient and/or tumor characteristics.

Preoperative Prediction of Unplanned Reoperation in a Broad Surgical Population.

INTRODUCTION: Unplanned reoperation is an undesirable outcome with considerable risks and an increasingly assessed quality of care metric. There are no preoperative prediction models for reoperation after an index surgery in a broad surgical population in the literature. The Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS) preoperatively predicts 12 postoperative adverse events using 8 preoperative variables, but its ability to predict unplanned reoperation has not been assessed. This study's objective was to determine whether the SURPAS model could accurately predict unplanned reoperation. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program adult database, 2012-2018. An unplanned reoperation was defined as any unintended operation within 30 d of an initial scheduled operation. The 8-variable SURPAS model and a 29-variable "full" model, incorporating all available American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program nonlaboratory preoperative variables, were developed using multiple logistic regression and compared using discrimination and calibration metrics: C-indices (C), Hosmer-Lemeshow observed-to-expected plots, and Brier scores (BSs). The internal chronological validation of the SURPAS model was conducted using "training" (2012-2017) and "test" (2018) datasets. RESULTS: Of 5,777,108 patients, 162,387 (2.81%) underwent an unplanned reoperation. The SURPAS model's C-index of 0.748 was 99.20% of that for the full model (C = 0.754). Hosmer-Lemeshow plots showed good calibration for both models and BSs were similar (BS = 0.0264, full; BS = 0.0265, SURPAS). Internal chronological validation results were similar for the training (C = 0.749, BS = 0.0268) and test (C = 0.748, BS = 0.0250) datasets. CONCLUSIONS: The SURPAS model accurately predicted unplanned reoperation and was internally validated. Unplanned reoperation can be integrated into the SURPAS tool to provide preoperative risk assessment of this outcome, which could aid patient risk education.

Does Work Relative Value Unit Measure Surgical Complexity for Risk Adjustment of Surgical Outcomes?

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the work relative value unit (workRVU) of a patient's operation can be useful as a measure of surgical complexity for the risk adjustment of surgical outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the American College of Surgeon's National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2005-2018). We examined the associations of workRVU of the patient's primary operation with preoperative patient characteristics and associations with postoperative complications. We performed forward selection multiple logistic regression analysis to determine the predictive importance of workRVU. We then generated prediction models using patient characteristics with and without workRVU and compared c-indexes to assess workRVU's additive predictive value. RESULTS: 7,507,991 operations were included. Patients who were underweight, functionally dependent, transferred from an acute care hospital, had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class or who had medical comorbidities had operations with higher workRVU (all P < 0.0001). The subspecialties with the highest workRVU were neurosurgery (mean = 22.2), thoracic surgery (mean = 21.1), and vascular surgery (mean = 18.8) (P < 0.0001). For all postoperative complications, mean workRVU was higher for patients with the complication than those without (all P < 0.0001). For eight of 12 postoperative complications, workRVU entered the logistic regression models as a predictor variable in the 1st to 4th steps. Addition of workRVU as a preoperative predictive variable improved the c-index of the prediction models. CONCLUSIONS: WorkRVU was associated with sicker patients and patients experiencing postoperative complications and was an important predictor of postoperative complications. When added to a prediction model including patient characteristics, it only marginally improved prediction. This is possibly because workRVU is associated with patient characteristics.

Access to Results of Patient Reported Outcome Surveys Does Not Improve Survey Response Rates.

INTRODUCTION: In this embedded substudy of a longitudinal, randomized controlled trial, we sought to evaluate the effects of patient engagement and results feedback on longitudinal patient-reported outcome (PRO) survey completion rates. METHODS: Newly diagnosed stage 0-III breast cancer patients seen at an academic breast center between June 2019 and December 2021 were invited to participate in a longitudinal PRO study. Participants were emailed the BREAST-Q survey, a validated PRO scale, preoperatively and at regular intervals during their postoperative course. Patients were randomized into the intervention group, who received survey results upon completion, or the control group, who received no feedback. The primary endpoint was postoperative survey completion rate. An intention to treat analysis was performed and a quasi-Poisson regression was used to compare rates of longitudinal survey completion between the two groups. RESULTS: Of the 253 patients offered the preoperative survey, 115 were in the intervention group and 138 were in the control group. Postoperative survey completion rate was 54% for the intervention group and 47% for the control group. There was no significant difference in longitudinal postoperative survey completion rate between the two groups (rate ratio 1.10; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93-1.31). CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective randomized controlled study, patients did not complete surveys at a higher rate when their survey results were shared with them, suggesting that viewing these results without appropriate clinical context does not generate significant enhancement in patient engagement. Effective interventions to improve survey response rate must be identified to better evaluate PROs.

Unmeasured factors are associated with the use of completion lymph node dissection (CLND) in melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Completion lymph node dissection (CLND) was the standard treatment for patients with melanoma with positive sentinel lymph nodes (SLN) until 2017 when data from the DeCOG-SLT and MLST-2 randomized trials challenged the survival benefit of this procedure. We assessed the contribution of patient, tumor and facility factors on the use of CLND in patients with surgically resected Stage III melanoma. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database, patients who underwent surgical excision and were found to have a positive SLN from 2012 to 2017 were included. A multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression model with a random intercept for the facility was used to determine the effect of patient, tumor, and facility variables on the risk of CLND. Reference effect measures (REMs) were used to compare the contribution of contextual effects (unknown facility variables) versus measured variables on the variation in CLND use. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2017, the overall use of CLND decreased from 59.9% to 26.5% (p < 0.0001). Overall, older patients and patients with government-based insurance were less likely to undergo CLND. Tumor factors associated with a decreased rate of CLND included primary tumor location on the lower limb, decreasing depth, and mitotic rate <1. However, the contribution of contextual effects to the variation in CLND use exceeded that of the measured facility, tumor, time, and patient variables. CONCLUSIONS: There was a decrease in CLND use during the study period. However, there is still high variability in CLND use, mainly driven by unmeasured contextual effects.

Impact of population based indoor residual spraying with and without mass drug administration with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine on malaria prevalence in a high transmission setting: a quasi-experimental controlled before-and-after trial in northeastern Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Declines in malaria burden in Uganda have slowed. Modelling predicts that indoor residual spraying (IRS) and mass drug administration (MDA), when co-timed, have synergistic impact. This study investigated additional protective impact of population-based MDA on malaria prevalence, if any, when added to IRS, as compared with IRS alone and with standard of care (SOC). METHODS: The 32-month quasi-experimental controlled before-and-after trial enrolled an open cohort of residents (46,765 individuals, 1st enumeration and 52,133, 4th enumeration) of Katakwi District in northeastern Uganda. Consented participants were assigned to three arms based on residential subcounty at study start: MDA+IRS, IRS, SOC. IRS with pirimiphos methyl and MDA with dihydroartemisinin- piperaquine were delivered in 4 co-timed campaign-style rounds 8 months apart. The primary endpoint was population prevalence of malaria, estimated by 6 cross-sectional surveys, starting at baseline and preceding each subsequent round. RESULTS: Comparing malaria prevalence in MDA+IRS and IRS only arms over all 6 surveys (intention-to-treat analysis), roughly every 6 months post-interventions, a geostatistical model found a significant additional 15.5% (95% confidence interval (CI): [13.7%, 17.5%], Z = 9.6, p = 5e-20) decrease in the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) due to MDA for all ages, a 13.3% reduction in under 5's (95% CI: [10.5%, 16.8%], Z = 4.02, p = 5e-5), and a 10.1% reduction in children 5-15 (95% CI: [8.5%, 11.8%], Z = 4.7, p = 2e-5). All ages residents of the MDA + IRS arm enjoyed an overall 80.1% reduction (95% CI: [80.0%, 83.0%], p = 0.0001) in odds of qPCR confirmed malaria compared with SOC residents. Secondary difference-in-difference analyses comparing surveys at different timepoints to baseline showed aOR (MDA + IRS vs IRS) of qPCR positivity between 0.28 and 0.66 (p < 0.001). Of three serious adverse events, one (nonfatal) was considered related to study medications. Limitations include the initial non-random assignment of study arms, the single large cluster per arm, and the lack of an MDA-only arm, considered to violate equipoise. CONCLUSIONS: Despite being assessed at long time points 5-7 months post-round, MDA plus IRS provided significant additional protection from malaria infection over IRS alone. Randomized trials of MDA in large areas undergoing IRS recommended as well as cohort studies of impact on incidence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was retrospectively registered 11/07/2018 with the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (PACTR201807166695568).

Inpatient Versus Outpatient Surgery: A Comparison of Postoperative Mortality and Morbidity in Elective Operations.

BACKGROUND: Operations performed outpatient offer several benefits. The prevalence of outpatient operations is growing. Consequently, the proportion of patients with multiple comorbidities undergoing outpatient surgery is increasing. We compared 30-day mortality and overall morbidity between outpatient and inpatient elective operations. METHODS: Using the 2005-2018 ACS-NSQIP database, we evaluated trends in percent of hospital outpatient operations performed over time, and the percent of operations done outpatient versus inpatient by CPT code. Patient characteristics were compared for outpatient versus inpatient operations. We compared unadjusted and risk-adjusted 30-day mortality and morbidity for inpatient and outpatient operations. RESULTS: A total of 6,494,298 patients were included. The proportion of outpatient operations increased over time, from 37.8% in 2005 to 48.2% in 2018. We analyzed the 50 most frequent operations performed outpatient versus inpatient 25-75% of the time (n = 1,743,097). Patients having outpatient operations were younger (51.6 vs 54.6 years), female (70.3% vs 67.3%), had fewer comorbidities, and lower ASA class (I-II, 69.3% vs. 59.9%). On both unadjusted and risk-adjusted analysis, 30-day mortality and overall morbidity were less likely in outpatient versus inpatient operations. CONCLUSION: In this large multi-specialty analysis, we found that patients undergoing outpatient surgery had lower risk of 30-day morbidity and mortality than those undergoing the same inpatient operation. Patients having outpatient surgery were generally healthier, suggesting careful patient selection occurred even with increasing outpatient operation frequency. Patients and providers can feel reassured that outpatient operations are a safe, reasonable option for selected patients.

Carotid Artery Operation Delay During the Covid-19 Pandemic: Results of a Multicenter International Study.

BACKGROUND: To measure the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of patients with carotid artery stenosis. METHODS: We prospectively collected data from 25 centers (19 centers in the United States and 6 centers internationally) on postponed carotid artery operations between March 2020 and January 2022. We describe the characteristics of these patients and their planned operations, along with outcomes including mortality and neurological deterioration during the period of operative delay due to the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: A total of 1,220 vascular operations were postponed during the pandemic, of them 96 patients presented with significant carotid stenosis (median stenosis of 71%; interquartile range; 70-80) and 80% of them were planned for carotid endarterectomy. Most patients were asymptomatic (69%), and 31% of patients were symptomatic (16% of patients had a stroke, 15% of patients had a transient ischemic attack, and 1% of patients experienced amaurosis fugax). The median length of surgical delay was 71 days (interquartile range: 45.5, 115.5). At the data entry time, 62% of patients had their carotid operations postponed and successfully completed. Most postponements (72%) were due to institutional policies aimed at resource conservation. During the delay, no patient decompensated or required an urgent operation. A total of 5 patients (5%) with carotid stenosis died while awaiting operations due to COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Our study of a cohort of patients with carotid artery stenosis who underwent a median delay of 71 days during the COVID-19 pandemic showed a disparate operation delay between US regions and internationally, most postponements were due to hospital policy, and none of the patients deteriorated or required an emergency surgery during the delay.

A coordinated approach for managing polypharmacy among children with medical complexity: rationale and design of the Pediatric Medication Therapy Management (pMTM) randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Children with medical complexity (CMC) often rely upon the use of multiple medications to sustain quality of life and control substantial symptom burden. Pediatric polypharmacy (≥ 5 concurrent medications) is prevalent and increases the risk of medication-related problems (MRPs). Although MRPs are associated with pediatric morbidity and healthcare utilization, polypharmacy is infrequently assessed during routine clinical care for CMC. The aim of this randomized controlled trial is to determine if a structured pharmacist-led Pediatric Medication Therapy Management (pMTM) intervention reduces MRP counts, as well as the secondary outcomes of symptom burden and acute healthcare utilization. METHODS: This is a hybrid type 2 randomized controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of pMTM compared to usual care in a large, patient-centered medical home for CMC. Eligible patients include all children ages 2-18 years old, with ≥ 1 complex chronic condition, and with ≥ 5 active medications, as well as their English-speaking primary caregivers. Child participants and their primary parental caregivers will be randomized to pMTM or usual care before a non-acute primary care visit and followed for 90 days. Using generalized linear models, the overall effectiveness of the intervention will be evaluated using total MRP counts at 90 days following pMTM intervention or usual care visit. Following attrition, a total of 296 CMC will contribute measurements at 90 days, which provides > 90% power to detect a clinically significant 1.0 reduction in total MRPs with an alpha level of 0.05. Secondary outcomes include Parent-Reported Outcomes of Symptoms (PRO-Sx) symptom burden scores and acute healthcare visit counts. Program replication costs will be assessed using time-driven activity-based scoring. DISCUSSION: This pMTM trial aims to test hypotheses that a patient-centered medication optimization intervention delivered by pediatric pharmacists will result in lower MRP counts, stable or improved symptom burdens, and fewer cumulative acute healthcare encounters at 90 days following pMTM compared to usual care. The results of this trial will be used to quantify medication-related outcomes, safety, and value for a high-utilization group of CMC, and outcomes may elucidate the role of integrated pharmacist services as a key component of outpatient complex care programs for this priority pediatric population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was prospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05761847) on Feb 25, 2023.

Dissemination and Implementation of a Community Health Worker Intervention for Disparities in Palliative Care (DeCIDE PC): a study protocol for a hybrid type 1 randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There are persistent racial and ethnic health disparities in end-of-life health outcomes in the United States. African American patients are less likely than White patients to access palliative care, enroll in hospice care, have documented goals of care discussions with their healthcare providers, receive adequate symptom control, or die at home. We developed Community Health Worker Intervention for Disparities in Palliative Care (DeCIDE PC) to address these disparities. DeCIDE PC is an integrated community health worker (CHW) palliative care intervention that uses community health workers (CHWs) as care team members to enhance the receipt of palliative care for African Americans with advanced cancer. The overall objectives of this study are to (1) assess the effectiveness of the DeCIDE PC intervention in improving palliative care outcomes amongst African American patients with advanced solid organ malignancy and their informal caregivers, and (2) develop generalizable knowledge on how contextual factors influence implementation to facilitate dissemination, uptake, and sustainability of the intervention. METHODS: We will conduct a multicenter, randomized, assessor-blind, parallel-group, pragmatic, hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial at three cancer centers across the United States. The DeCIDE PC intervention will be delivered over 6 months with CHW support tailored to the individual needs of the patient and caregiver. The primary outcome will be advance care planning. The treatment effect will be modeled using logistic regression. The secondary outcomes are quality of life, quality of communication, hospice care utilization, and patient symptoms. DISCUSSION: We expect the DeCIDE PC intervention to improve integration of palliative care, reduce multilevel barriers to care, enhance clinic and patient linkage to resources, and ultimately improve palliative care outcomes for African American patients with advanced cancer. If found to be effective, the DeCIDE PC intervention may be a transformative model with the potential to guide large-scale adoption of promising strategies to improve palliative care use and decrease disparities in end-of-life care for African American patients with advanced cancer in the United States. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05407844). First posted on June 7, 2022.

De-implementation of Axillary Dissection in Women With Breast Cancer is Largely Driven By Site-level Contextual Effects.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the contribution of unknown institutional factors (contextual effects) in the de-implementation of cALND in women with breast cancer. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Women included in the National Cancer Database with invasive breast carcinoma from 2012 to 2016 that underwent upfront lumpectomy and were found to have a positive sentinel node. METHODS: A multivariable mixed effects logistic regression model with a random intercept for site was used to determine the effect of patient, tumor, and institutional variables on the risk of cALND. Reference effect measureswere used to describe and compare the contribution of contextual effects to the variation in cALND use to that of measured variables. RESULTS: By 2016, cALND was still performed in at least 50% of the patients in a quarter of the institutions. Black race, younger women and those with larger or hormone negative tumors were more likely to undergo cALND. However, the width of the 90% reference effect measures range for the contextual effects exceeded that of the measured site, tumor, time, and patient demographics, suggesting institutional contextual effects were the major drivers of cALND de-implementation. For instance, a woman at an institution with low-risk of performing cALND would have 74% reduced odds of havinga cALND than if she was treated at a median-risk institution, while a patient at a high-risk institution had 3.91 times the odds. CONCLUSION: Compared to known patient, tumor, and institutional factors, contextual effects had a higher contribution to the variation in cALND use.

Comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiation therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: National Cancer Database cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant treatment is important for improving the rate of R0 surgical resection and overall survival outcome in treating patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, the true efficacy of radiotherapy (RT) for neoadjuvant treatment of PDAC is uncertain. This retrospective study evaluated the treatment outcome of neoadjuvant RT in the treatment of PDAC. METHODS: Collected from the National Cancer Database, information on patients with PDAC who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and pancreatectomy between 2010 to 2016 was used in this study. Short- and long-term outcomes were compared between patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) and NAC. RESULTS: The study included 6936 patients, of whom 3185 received NACRT and 3751 NAC. The groups showed no difference in overall survival (NACRT 16.1 months versus NAC 17.4 months; P = 0.054). NACRT is associated with more frequent margin negative resection (86.1 versus 80.0 per cent; P < 0.001) but a more unfavourable 90-day mortality than NAC (6.4 versus 3.6 per cent; P < 0.001). The odds of 90-day mortality were higher in the radiotherapy group (odds ratio 1.81; P < 0.001), even after adjusting for significant covariates. Patients who received NACRT received single-agent chemotherapy more often than those who received NAC (31.5 versus 10.7 per cent; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study failed to show a survival benefit for NACRT over NAC alone, despite its association with negative margin resection. The significantly higher mortality in NACRT warrants further investigation into its efficacy in the treatment of pancreatic cancer.

Using the Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System to Define the "High Risk" Surgical Patient.

BACKGROUND: Defining a "high risk" surgical population remains challenging. Using the Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS), we sought to define "high risk" groups for adverse postoperative outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the 2009-2018 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. SURPAS calculated probabilities of 12 postoperative adverse events. The Hosmer Lemeshow graphs of deciles of risk and maximum Youden index were compared to define "high risk." RESULTS: Hosmer-Lemeshow plots suggested the "high risk" patient could be defined by the 10th decile of risk. Maximum Youden index found lower cutoff points for defining "high risk" patients and included more patients with events. This resulted in more patients classified as "high risk" and higher number needed to treat to prevent one complication. Some specialties (thoracic, vascular, general) had more "high risk" patients, while others (otolaryngology, plastic) had lower proportions. CONCLUSIONS: SURPAS can define the "high risk" surgical population that may benefit from risk-mitigating interventions.