New Onset Geriatric Syndromes and One-year Outcomes Following Elective Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether older adults who develop geriatric syndromes following elective gastrointestinal surgery have poorer 1-year outcomes. BACKGROUND: Within 10 years, 70% of all cancers will occur in older adults ≥65 years old. The rise in older adults requiring major surgery has brought attention to age-related complications termed geriatric syndromes. However, whether postoperative geriatric syndromes are associated with long-term outcomes is unclear. METHODS: A population-based retrospective cohort study using the New York State Cancer Registry and the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System was performed including patients >55 years with pathologic stage I-III esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, colon, or rectal cancer who underwent elective resection between 2004 and 2018. Those aged 55 to 64 served as the reference group. The exposure of interest was a geriatric syndrome [fracture, fall, delirium, pressure ulcer, depression, malnutrition, failure to thrive, dehydration, or incontinence (urinary/fecal)] during the surgical admission. Patients with any geriatric syndrome within 1 year of surgery were excluded. Outcomes included incident geriatric syndrome, 1-year days alive and out of the hospital, and 1-year all-cause mortality. RESULTS: In this study, 37,998 patients with a median age of 71 years without a prior geriatric syndrome were included. Of those 65 years or more, 6.4% developed a geriatric syndrome. Factors associated with an incident geriatric syndrome were age, alcohol/tobacco use, comorbidities, neoadjuvant therapy, ostomies, open surgery, and upper gastrointestinal cancers. An incident geriatric syndrome was associated with a 43% higher risk of 1-year mortality (hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-1.60). For those aged 65+ discharged alive and not to hospice, a geriatric syndrome was associated with significantly fewer days alive and out of hospital (322 vs 346 days, P < 0.0001). There was an indirect relationship between the number of geriatric syndromes and 1-year mortality and days alive and out of the hospital after adjusting for surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS: Given the increase in older adults requiring major surgical intervention, and the establishment of geriatric surgery accreditation programs, these data suggest that morbidity and mortality metrics should be adjusted to accommodate the independent relationship between geriatric syndromes and long-term outcomes.

The Rise of Patients Declining Rectal Cancer Surgery in the Era of Total Neoadjuvant Therapy.

BACKGROUND: The treatment landscape for rectal cancer is rapidly evolving, particularly with the increasing use of neoadjuvant therapies. Still, up to 50% of patients with stage II-III disease require surgical resection post-neoadjuvant therapy to achieve the best oncologic outcomes. Many patients, however, hope to avoid surgery. This study aimed to assess trends and factors associated with declining recommended oncologic resection after systemic therapy nationally and in our institution. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis using the National Cancer Database from 2009 to 2021 and an institutional cohort at an academic center between 2009 and 2022 including adults with stage I-III rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent neoadjuvant therapy and were suitable for surgery. RESULTS: Of 96,997 patients nationally, the rate of declining surgery increased from 2.3% in 2009 to 6.3% in 2021, a trend mirrored in our institutional cohort of 365 patients (0% in 2009/2010 to approximately 6-12% in 2021/2022). Locally, patients who declined surgery had higher rates of tobacco use, temporary loss to follow-up during therapy, and a more robust, albeit incomplete, tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy compared with controls who underwent surgery. Despite a stoma being the most cited reason for declining surgery, 30.4% of patients who declined oncologic resection died with a stoma. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore a notable trend of patients declining oncologic resections following neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer. By shedding light on the outcomes of patients who opt against surgery, we address a critical gap in the literature essential for informing patients about potential risks.

The predicting value of post neoadjuvant treatment magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Neoadjuvant therapy has become standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer patients. It is correlated with improved clinical and pathological outcomes, including significant tumor downstaging and organ preservation in certain patients. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which has become the standard for pre-operative staging, is also used for clinical and pre-operative restaging following pre-operative treatment. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the concordance between restaging MRI (following the completion of neoadjuvant therapy) and postoperative pathology result. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Two independent reviewers searched PubMed and Google Scholar for studies reporting restaging MRI results compared to pathological outcomes. Outcomes included tumor and nodal staging, circumferential resection margin (CRM) and pathological complete response (pCR). RESULTS: Out of 25,000 studies found on the initial search; 33 studies were included. The studies were published between 2005 and 2023 and included 4100 patients (57.14% males). The median age was 62.45 years. The median interval between the conclusion of neoadjuvant treatment and the subsequent restaging MRI was 6 weeks (range 4.14-8.8 weeks). The pooled concordance rates between the restaging MRI and the pathological outcomes for ypT stage and ypN stage were 63.9% (54.5%-73.3%, I2 = 96.02%) and 60.9% (42.9%-78.9%, I2 = 98.96%), respectively. The pooled concordance for predicting pathological complete response was 70.4% (53.6%-87.1%, I2 = 98.21%). As for the circumferential resection margin (CRM), the pooled concordance was 78.2.% (71.6%-84.8%, I2 = 83.76%). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the concordance rates between restaging MRI and pathological outcomes in rectal cancer patients following neoadjuvant therapy are limited. Caregivers should take these results into consideration when making clinical decisions about these patients. More data should be gathered about the predictive value of MRI after total neoadjuvant therapy as well as immunotherapy in rectal cancer patients.

Disparities in Care Access to Liver-Directed Therapy Among Medicare Beneficiaries with Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis.

BACKGROUND: Liver-directed therapies (LDT) are important components of the multidisciplinary care of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM) that contribute to improved long-term outcomes. Factors associated with receipt of LDT are poorly understood. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients > 65 years old diagnosed with CRCLM were identified within the Medicare Standard Analytic File (2013-2017). Patients with extrahepatic metastatic disease were excluded. Mixed-effects analyses were used to assess patient factors associated with the primary outcome of LDT, defined as hepatectomy, ablation, and/or hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy (HAIC), as well as the secondary outcome of hepatectomy. RESULTS: Among 23,484 patients with isolated CRCLM, only 2004 (8.5%) received LDT, although resectability status could not be determined for the entire cohort. Among patients who received LDT, 61.7% underwent hepatectomy alone, 28.1% received ablation alone, 8.5% underwent hepatectomy and ablation, and 1.8% received HAIC either alone (0.8%) or in combination with hepatectomy and/or ablation (0.9%). Patient factors independently associated with lower odds of LDT included older age, female sex, Black race, greater comorbidity burden, higher social vulnerability index, primary rectal cancer, synchronous liver metastasis, and further distance from a high-volume liver surgery center (p < 0.05). Results were similar for receipt of hepatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the well-accepted role of LDT for CRCLM, only a small proportion of Medicare beneficiaries with CRCLM receive LDT. Increasing access to specialized centers with expertise in LDT, particularly for Black patients, female patients, and those with higher levels of social vulnerability or long travel distances, may improve outcomes for patients with CRCLM.

Mediating Factors Between Race and Time to Treatment in Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Previous disparities research has demonstrated that underrepresented racial minority patients have worse colorectal cancer outcomes and that they experience unnecessary delays in time to treatment. These delays may explain worse colorectal cancer outcomes for minority patients and serve as a marker of inequalities in our healthcare system. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to quantify the mechanisms that contribute to this disparity in treatment delay. DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis of colorectal cancer patients who underwent elective resection from 2004 to 2017. A causal inference mediation analysis using the counterfactual framework was utilized to estimate the extent to which racial disparities among patient factors explain the racial disparities in time to treatment. Mediators included income, education, comorbidities, insurance, and hospital type. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at hospitals participating in the National Cancer Database. PATIENTS: Stage I-III colorectal cancer patients, ≥18 years old, who underwent elective resection from 2004 through 2017 were included. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: The primary measures were indirect effects of mediators between race and delayed time to treatment. RESULTS: Of the 504,405 patients (370,051 colon and 134,354 rectal), 10%, 5%, and 4% were black, Hispanic, and other. In multivariable models, compared to white patients, these patients had 25%, 27%, and 17% greater odds of delayed treatment. Mediation analyses suggested that 43%, 20%, and 31% of the treatment delay among them could be removed if an intervention equalized income, education, comorbidities, insurance, and hospital type to that of white patients. Treatment at an academic hospital explained 15% to 32% of the racial disparity and was the most potent mediator. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective design and failure to capture all meaningful mediators. CONCLUSIONS: Black, Hispanic, and other colorectal cancer patients experience treatment delays when compared to white patients. Equalization of the mediators used in this study could reduce treatment delays by 20% to 43% depending on the racial/ethnic group. Future research should identify other causes of racial disparities in treatment delay and intervene accordingly. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B871 . FACTORES MEDIADORES ENTRE LA RAZA Y EL TIEMPO HASTA EL TRATAMIENTO EN EL CNCER COLORECTAL: ANTECEDENTES:Investigaciones anteriores sobre disparidades han demostrado que los pacientes de minorías raciales subrepresentados tienen peores resultados de cáncer colorrectal y que experimentan retrasos innecesarios en el tiempo de tratamiento. Estos retrasos pueden explicar los peores resultados del cáncer colorrectal para los pacientes de minorías y servir como un marcador de desigualdades en nuestro sistema de salud.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tiene como objetivo cuantificar los mecanismos que contribuyen a esta disparidad en el retraso del tratamiento.DISEÑO:Este es un análisis retrospectivo de pacientes con cáncer colorrectal que se sometieron a resección electiva entre 2004 y 2017. Se utilizó un análisis de mediación de inferencia causal utilizando el marco contra factual para estimar hasta qué punto las disparidades raciales entre los factores del paciente explican las disparidades raciales en el tiempo hasta el tratamiento. Los mediadores incluyeron ingresos económicos, educación, comorbilidades, seguro médico y tipo de hospital.AJUSTES:Este estudio se realizó en hospitales que participan en la Base de datos nacional del cáncer.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes con cáncer colorrectal en estadio I-III, ≥18 años, que se sometieron a resección electiva entre 2004 y 2017.PRINCIPALES RESULTADOS MEDIDAS:Las principales mediciones fueron el efecto indirecto de los mediadores entre la raza y el retraso en el tratamiento.RESULTADOS:De los 504,405 pacientes (370,051 de colon, 134,354 rectal), 10%, 5%, 4% eran negros, hispanos, y otros, respectivamente. En modelos multivariables, en comparación con los pacientes blancos, estos pacientes tenían un 25%, 27%, y 17% más de probabilidades de retrasar el tratamiento. Los análisis de medición sugirieron que el 43%, 20%, 31% del retraso del tratamiento entre, respectivamente, podría eliminarse si una intervención igualara los ingresos económicos, la educación, las comorbilidades, el seguro médico y el tipo de hospital a los de los pacientes blancos. El tratamiento en un hospital académico demostró entre el 15% y el 32% de la disparidad racial y fue el mediador más potente.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por su diseño retrospectivo; falla en capturar a todos los mediadores significativos.CONCLUSIONES:Los pacientes negros, hispanos y otros con cáncer colorrectal experimentan retrasos en el tratamiento en comparación con los pacientes blancos. La igualación de los mediadores utilizados en este estudio podría reducir los retrasos en el tratamiento en un 20-43%, según el grupo racial / étnico. Las investigaciones futuras deberían identificar otras causas de disparidades raciales en el retraso del tratamiento e intervenir sobre ellas. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B871 . (Traducción-Dr. Yolanda Colorado ).

Is robotic utilization associated with increased minimally invasive colorectal surgery rates? Surgeon-level evidence.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether robotic utilization has increased overall minimally invasive colorectal surgery rates or if robotics is being adopted instead of laparoscopy. The goal was to evaluate whether increasing robotic surgery utilization is associated with increased rates of overall colorectal minimally invasive surgery. METHODS: The Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (New York) was used to identify patients undergoing elective colectomy or proctectomy from 2009 to 2015. Individual surgeons were categorized as having increasing or non-increasing robotic utilization (IRU or non-IRU, respectively) based on the annual increase in the proportion of robotic surgery performed. The odds of surgical approach across the study period were evaluated with multinomial regression. RESULTS: Among 72,813 resections from 2009 to 2015, minimally invasive-surgery increased (47-61%, p < 0.0001). For colectomy, overall minimally invasive-surgery rates increased (54-66%, p < 0.0001), laparoscopic remained stable (53-54%), and robotics increased (1-12%). For proctectomy, overall minimally invasive-surgery rates increased (22-43%, p < 0.0001), laparoscopic remained stable (20-21%), and robotics increased (2-22%). Over the study period, 2487 surgeons performed colectomies. Among 156 surgeons with IRU for colectomies, robotics increased (2-29%), while laparoscopy decreased (67-44%), and open surgery decreased (31-27%). Overall, surgeons with IRU performed minimally invasive colectomies 73% of the time in 2015 versus 69% in 2009. Over the study period, 1131 surgeons performed proctectomies. Among 94 surgeons with IRU for proctectomies, robotics increased (3-42%), while laparoscopy decreased (25-15%), and open surgery decreased (73-44%). Overall, surgeons with IRU performed minimally invasive proctectomy 56% of the time in 2015 versus 27% in 2009. Patients in the latter study period had 57% greater odds of undergoing robotic surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, minimally invasive colorectal resections increased from 2009 to 2015 largely due to increasing robotic utilization, particularly for proctectomies.

Variation in outcomes across surgeons meeting the Leapfrog volume standard for complex oncologic surgery.

BACKGROUND: A large body of evidence supports regionalization of complex oncologic surgery to high-volume surgeons at high-volume hospitals. However, whether there is heterogeneity of outcomes among high-volume surgeons at high-volume hospitals remains unknown. METHODS: Patients who underwent esophagectomy, lung resection, pancreatectomy, or proctectomy for primary cancer were identified within the Medicare 100% Standard Analytic File (2013-2017). Mixed-effects analyses assessed the association between Leapfrog annual volume standards for surgeons (esophagectomy ≥7, lung resection ≥15, pancreatectomy ≥10, proctectomy ≥6) and hospitals (esophagectomy ≥20, lung resection ≥40, pancreatectomy ≥20, proctectomy ≥16) relative to postoperative complications and 90-day mortality. Additional analyses using New York's all-payer Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (2004-2015) were performed. RESULTS: Among 112,154 Medicare beneficiaries, high-volume surgeons at high-volume hospitals were associated with lower adjusted odds of complications (esophagectomy: odds ratio [OR], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.61-0.86]; lung resection: OR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.82-0.94]; pancreatectomy: OR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.66-0.80]; proctectomy: OR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99]) and 90-day mortality (esophagectomy: OR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.44-0.76]; lung resection: OR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.73-0.93]; pancreatectomy: OR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.56-0.76]; proctectomy: OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.65-0.85]). For the average patient at the average high-volume hospital, there was a 2-fold difference in the adjusted complication rate between the best-performing and worst-performing high-volume surgeon for all operations (esophagectomy, 28%-55%; lung resection, 7%-21%; pancreatectomy, 16%-35%; proctectomy, 16%-28%). Wide variation was also present in adjusted 90-day mortality for esophagectomy (3.5%-9.3%). Results from New York's all-payer database were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Even among high-volume surgeons meeting the Leapfrog volume standards, wide variation in postoperative outcomes exists. These findings suggest that volume alone should not be used as a quality indicator, and quality metrics should be continuously evaluated across all surgeons and hospital systems. LAY SUMMARY: Previous studies have demonstrated a surgical volume-outcome relationship for high-risk operations-that is high-volume surgeons and hospitals that perform a specific surgical procedure more frequently have better outcomes for that operation. Although most high-volume surgeons had better outcomes, this study demonstrated that some high-volume surgeons did not have better outcomes. Therefore, volume is an important factor but should not be the only factor considered when assessing the quality of a surgeon and a hospital for cancer surgery.

Is Textbook Oncologic Outcome a Valid Hospital-Quality Metric after High-Risk Surgical Oncology Procedures?

BACKGROUND: "Textbook oncologic outcome" (TOO) is a composite quality measure representing the "ideal" outcome for patients undergoing cancer surgery. This study sought to assess the validity of TOO as a metric to evaluate hospital quality. METHODS: Patients who underwent curative-intent resection of gastric, pancreatic, colon, rectal, lung, esophageal, bladder, or ovarian cancer were identified in the National Cancer Database (2006-2017). Cancer site-specific TOO was defined as adequate lymph node yield, R0 resection, non-length-of-stay outlier, no hospital readmission, and receipt of guideline-concordant chemotherapy and/or radiation. Mixed-effects analyses estimated the adjusted TOO rate for each hospital stratified by cancer site. The association between hospital adjusted TOO rates and 5-year overall survival was assessed using mixed-effects Cox proportional hazards analyses. RESULTS: Among 852,988 cancer resections, the TOO rate varied across cancer sites as follows: stomach (31.8%), pancreas (25%), colon (66.9%), rectum (33.6%), lung (35.1%), esophagus (31.2%), bladder (43%), and ovary (44.7%). After characterization of adjusted hospital TOO rates into quintiles, an incremental improvement in overall survival was observed, with higher adjusted TOO rates. Similarly, with the adjusted hospital TOO rate treated as a continuous variable, there was a significant 4% to 12% improvement in overall survival for every 10% increase in the adjusted hospital TOO rate for gastric (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-0.91), pancreatic (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.88-0.93), colon (0.93; 95% CI, 0.91-0.94), rectal (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.87-0.93), lung (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.97), esophageal (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.95), bladder (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.91-0.97), and ovarian (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94-0.98) cancer. CONCLUSIONS: A direct association exists between adjusted hospital TOO rates and survival after high-risk cancer procedures. As a valid hospital metric, TOO can be used to compare the overall quality of cancer care across hospitals.

One-year patient survival correlates with surgeon volume after elective open abdominal aortic surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Volume-outcome relationships in surgery have been well established. Studies have shown that high-volume surgeons provide improved outcomes in performing open abdominal aneurysm repairs. The hypothesis of this study was that high-volume surgeons provide superior short-term and midterm outcomes of elective open aortic operations compared with low-volume surgeons. METHODS: We evaluated patients undergoing elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, aortofemoral bypass, and aortomesenteric bypass by board-certified vascular surgeons using the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database from 2002 to 2014. The Contal and O'Quigley technique was used to estimate a cut point objectively and provided an estimate of significance. A division using average yearly volumes (averaged during 3 years) of seven or more cases and fewer than seven cases per year returned the highest Q statistic, and this grouping was used to classify high-volume and low-volume provider groups. Rates of complications during index hospitalization, length of stay, 30-day survival, 90-day survival, 1-year survival, and cause of death were analyzed using mixed effect models. RESULTS: In 118 hospitals during the 13-year period, 266 board-certified vascular surgeons performed 244 aortomesenteric bypasses, 4202 aortofemoral bypasses, and 6126 abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs. High-volume surgeons' rates of complications during index hospitalization, 30-day survival, 90-day survival, and 1-year survival were superior to those of low-volume surgeons. The Contal and O'Quigley technique returned an estimate of seven operations per year for optimal survival during 1 year. This cutoff is associated with an adjusted 1-year hazard ratio of 0.687 (P = .003), a 2.69% difference in 1-year all-cause survival (P = .003), and a 1.76-day reduction in the mean length of stay at index hospitalization (P < .001). Higher volume surgeons showed a 25.0%, 43.4%, 42.4%, 40.6%, and 45.0% reduction in postoperative rates of acute renal failure (P < .001), hemorrhage (P < .001), pulmonary failure (P < .001), sepsis (P < .001), and venous thromboembolism (P < .001), respectively. Abdominal abscess, acute renal failure, hemorrhage, myocardial infarction, and sepsis were associated with increased cardiovascular cause-specific mortality after open aortic operations (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that high-volume surgeons performing elective open aortic operations provide reduced complications and improved short-term and midterm survival compared with low-volume surgeons. Clinical and postoperative variables that are associated with increased cardiovascular cause-specific mortality are also identified. These data provide further evidence that elective open abdominal vascular surgery should be centralized to high-volume surgeons.

Variation in Adequate Lymph Node Yield for Gastric, Lung, and Bladder Cancer: Attributable to the Surgeon, Pathologist, or Hospital?

BACKGROUND: The Commission on Cancer recently released quality-of-care measures regarding adequate lymphadenectomy for colon, gastric, lung, and bladder cancer. There is currently little information regarding variation in adequate lymph node yield (ALNY) for gastric, lung, and bladder cancer. METHODS: The New York State Cancer Registry and Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System were queried for stage I-III gastric, stage I-II lung, and stage II-III bladder cancer resections from 2004 to 2014. Hierarchical models assessed factors associated with ALNY (gastric ≥ 15; lung ≥ 10; bladder ≥ 2). Additionally, the proportions of variation attributable to surgeons, pathologists, and hospitals were estimated among Medicare patients. RESULTS: Among 3716 gastric, 18,328 lung, and 1512 bladder cancer resections, there were low rates of ALNY (gastric = 53%, lung = 36%, bladder = 67%). When comparing 2004-2006 and 2012-2014, there was significant improvement in ALNY for gastric cancer (39% vs. 68%), but more modest improvement for lung (33% vs. 38%) and bladder (65% vs. 71%) cancer. Large provider-level variation existed for each organ system. After controlling for patient-level factors/variation, the majority of variation was attributable to hospitals (gastric: surgeon = 4%, pathologist = 2.8%, hospital = 40%; lung: surgeon = 13.8%, pathologist = 1.5%, hospital = 18.3%) for gastric and lung cancer. For bladder cancer, most of the variation was attributable to pathologists (surgeon = 3.3%, pathologist = 10.5%, hospital = 6.2%). CONCLUSIONS: ALNY rates are low for gastric, lung, and bladder cancer, with only modest improvement over time for lung and bladder cancer. Given that the proportion of variation attributable to the surgeon, pathologist, and hospital is different for each organ system, future quality improvement initiatives should target the underlying causes, which vary by individual organ system.

Centralizing Rectal Cancer Surgery: What Is the Impact of Travel on Patients?

BACKGROUND: It is unclear what impact centralizing rectal cancer surgery may have on travel burden for patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the impact of centralizing rectal cancer surgery to high-volume centers on patient travel distance. DESIGN: This is a population-based study. SETTINGS: The New York State Cancer Registry and Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System were queried for patients with rectal cancer undergoing proctectomy. PATIENTS: Patients with stage I to III rectal cancer who underwent surgical resection between 2004 and 2014 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome of interest was travel distance calculated as the straight-line distance between the centroid of the patient residence zip code and the hospital zip code. Mean distance was compared by using the Student t test. RESULTS: A total of 5860 patients met inclusion criteria. The total number of hospitals performing proctectomies for rectal cancer decreased between 2004 and 2014. The average number of proctectomies performed at high-volume centers (20+ resections/year) increased from 16.6 to 24.4 during this time. The average number of miles traveled by patients was 12.1 miles in 2004, and this increased to 15.4 in 2014. If proctectomies were centralized to high-volume centers, there would be 11 facilities. The mean distance traveled would be 24.5 miles. LIMITATIONS: This study is subject to the limitations of an administrative data set. There are no patient preference or referral data. CONCLUSIONS: The number of hospitals performing rectal cancer resections in New York State is decreasing and volume by center is increasing. There was a statistically significant difference in the mean distance traveled by patients over time. If rectal cancer resections were centralized to high-volume centers, the mean travel distance would increase by 9.5 miles. There would be a 321% increase in the number of patients having to travel 50+ miles for surgery. Any plan for centralization in New York State will require careful planning to avoid placing undue travel burden on patients. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B138. CENTRALIZACIÓN DE LA CIRUGÍA DE CÁNCER RECTAL: ¿CUÁL ES EL IMPACTO DEL VIAJE PARA LOS PACIENTES?: No está claro qué impacto puede tener la centralización de la cirugía de cáncer rectal en la carga de viaje para los pacientes.Determinar el impacto de centralizar la cirugía de cáncer rectal en centros de alto volumen sobre la distancia de viaje del paciente.Este es un estudio basado en cohorte poblacional.El Registro de Cáncer del Estado de Nueva York y el Sistema Cooperativo de Planificación e Investigación Estatal fueron consultados para pacientes con cáncer rectal sometidos a proctectomía.Pacientes con cáncer rectal en estadio I-III que se sometieron a resección quirúrgica entre 2004-2014.El resultado de interés fue la distancia de viaje calculada como la distancia en línea recta entre el centroide de la residencia del paciente y el código postal del hospital. La distancia media se comparó mediante la prueba t de Student.Un total de 5,860 pacientes cumplieron los criterios de inclusión. El número total de hospitales que realizaron proctectomías para cáncer rectal disminuyó entre 2004-2014. El número promedio de proctectomías realizadas en centros de alto volumen (más de 20 resecciones/año) aumentó de 16.6 a 24.4 durante este tiempo. El número promedio de millas recorridas por los pacientes fue de 12.1 millas en 2004 y esto aumentó a 15.4 en 2014. Si las proctectomías se centralizaran en centros de alto volumen, habría 11 instalaciones. La distancia media recorrida sería de 24.5 millas.Limitaciones inherentes a un conjunto de datos administrativos. No existen datos sobre preferencia del paciente o sobre referencia de los mismos.El número de hospitales que realizan resecciones de cáncer rectal en Nueva York está disminuyendo y el volumen por centro está aumentando. Hubo una diferencia estadísticamente significativa en la distancia media recorrida por los pacientes a lo largo del tiempo. Si las resecciones por cáncer rectal se centralizaran en centros de gran volumen, la distancia media de viaje aumentaría 9.5 millas. Habría un aumento del 321% en el número de pacientes que tienen que viajar más de 50 millas para la cirugía. Cualquier plan de centralización en Nueva York requerirá una planificación cuidadosa para evitar imponer una carga de viaje excesiva a los pacientes. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B138.

A Population-Based Study of 90-Day Hospital Cost and Utilization Associated With Robotic Surgery in Colon and Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The role of robotic surgery in colorectal cancer remains contentious with most data arising from small, single-institution studies. METHODS: Stage I-III colorectal cancer resections from 2008 to 2014 were identified in New York State. Propensity score-adjusted negative binomial models were used to compare cost and utilization between robotic, laparoscopic, and open resections. RESULTS: A total of 12,218 patients were identified. For colectomy, the robotic-to-open conversion rate was 3%, and the laparoscopic-to-open conversion rate was 13%. For rectal resection, the robotic-to-open conversion rate was 7% and the laparoscopic-to-open conversion rate was 32%. In intention-to-treat analysis, there was no significant difference in cost across the surgical approaches, both in overall and stratified analyses. Both laparoscopic and robotic approaches were associated with decreased 90-d hospital utilization compared with open surgery in intention-to-treat analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic and laparoscopic colorectal cancer resections were not associated with a hospital cost benefit after 90 d compared with open but were associated with decreased hospital utilization. Conversion to open resection was common, and efforts should be made to prevent them. Future research should continue to measure how robotic and laparoscopic approaches can add value to the health care system.

Complications and Survivorship Trends After Primary Debulking Surgery for Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: We examined factors associated with postoperative complications, 1-year overall and cancer-specific survival after epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) diagnosis. METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery for EOC between 2004 and 2013 were included. Multivariable models analyzed postoperative complications, overall survival, and cancer-specific survival. RESULTS: Among 5223 patients, surgical complications were common. Postoperative complications correlated with increased odds of overall and disease-specific survival at 1 y. Receipt of chemotherapy was similar among women with and without postoperative complications and was independently associated with a reduction in the hazard of overall and disease-specific death at 1-year. Extensive pelvic and upper abdomen surgery resulted in 2.26 times the odds of postoperative complication, but was associated with longer 1-year overall 0.53 (0.35, 0.82) and disease-specific survival 0.54 (0.34, 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: Although extent of surgery was associated with complications, the survival benefit from comprehensive surgery offset the risk. Tailored surgical treatment for women with EOC may improve outcomes.

Allogeneic Leukocyte-Reduced Red Blood Cell Transfusion Is Associated with Postoperative Infectious Complications and Cancer Recurrence after Colon Cancer Resection.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Transfusion rates in colon cancer surgery are traditionally very high. Allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusions are reported to induce immunomodulation that contributes to infectious morbidity and adverse oncologic outcomes. In an effort to attenuate these effects, the study institution implemented a universal leukocyte reduction protocol. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of leukocyte-reduced (LR) transfusions on postoperative infectious complications, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival (OS). METHODS: In a retrospective study, patients with stage I-III adenocarcinoma of the colon from 2003 to 2010 who underwent elective resection were studied. The primary outcome measures were postoperative infectious complications and recurrence-free and OS in patients that received a transfusion. Bivariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed for each endpoint. RESULTS: Of 294 patients, 66 (22%) received a LR RBC transfusion. After adjustment, transfusion of LR RBCs was found to be independently associated with increased infectious complications (OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.24-7.73), increased odds of cancer recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] 3.74, 95% CI 1.94-7.21), and reduced OS when ≥3 units were administered (HR 2.24, 95% CI 1.12-4.48). CONCLUSION: Transfusion of LR RBCs is associated with an increased risk of infectious complications and worsened survival after elective surgery for colon cancer, irrespective of leukocyte reduction.

Surgeon, Hospital, and Geographic Variation in Minimally Invasive Colectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To identify sources of variation in the use of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for colectomy. BACKGROUND: MIS is associated with decreased analgesic use, shorter length of stay, and faster postoperative recovery. This study identified factors explaining variation in MIS use for colectomy. METHODS: The Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System was queried for scheduled admissions in which a colectomy was performed for neoplastic, diverticular, or inflammatory bowel disease between 2008 and 2015. Mixed-effects analyses were performed assessing surgeon, hospital, and geographic variation and factors associated with an MIS approach. RESULTS: Among 45,714 colectomies, 68.1% were performed using an MIS approach. Wide variation in the rate of MIS was present across 1253 surgeons (median 50%, interquartile range 10.9%-84.2%, range 0.3%-99.7%). Calculating intraclass correlation coefficients after controlling for case-mix, 62.8% of the total variation in MIS usage was attributable to surgeon variation compared with 28.5% attributable to patient variation, 7% attributable to hospital variation, and 1.6% attributable to geographic variation. Surgeon-years in practice since residency/fellowship completion explained 19.2% of the surgeon variation, surgeon volume explained 5.2%, hospital factors explained 0.1%, and patient factors explained 0%. CONCLUSIONS: Wide surgeon variation exists regarding an MIS approach for colectomy, and most of the total variation is attributable to individual surgeon practices-much of which is related to year of graduation. As increasing surgeon age is inversely proportional to the rate of MIS, patient referral and/or providing tailored training to older surgeons may be constructive targets in increasing the use of MIS and reducing healthcare utilization.

Postoperative Mortality After Nonelective Surgery for Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients in the Era of Biologics.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to analyze recent trends in the rate of nonelective surgery and corresponding mortality for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients since the rise of biologic use. BACKGROUND: Modern biologic therapy has improved outcomes for IBD, but little is known about the impact on mortality rates after nonelective surgery. METHODS: New York's Statewide Planning & Research Cooperative System was queried for hospital admissions for ulcerative colitis (UC) with concurrent colectomy and Crohn disease (CD) with concurrent small bowel resection or colectomy from 2000 to 2013. Mixed-effects analyses assessed patient, surgeon, and hospital-level factors and hospital-level variation associated with 30-day mortality after nonelective surgery. RESULTS: Between 2000 to 2006 and 2007 to 2013, the number of unscheduled IBD-related admissions increased by 50% for UC and 41% for CD, but no change in the proportion of nonelective surgery cases was observed (UC=38% vs 38%; CD=45% vs 42%) among 15,837 intestinal resections (UC=5,297; CD=10,540). Nonelective surgery mortality rates between 2000 to 2006 and 2007 to 2013 were high and increased for UC (10.2% vs 15%) but decreased for CD (3.3% vs 2.2%). Nonelective surgery in 2007 to 2013 was associated with an 82% increased risk of 30-day mortality in UC cases (odds ratio: 1.82; confidence interval: 1.19-2.62). After controlling for patient-level factors, large hospital-level variation was observed with 23-fold difference in mortality for both UC and CD. CONCLUSIONS: Although nonelective IBD surgery rates have remained stable, associated 30-day mortality for UC has doubled in recent years despite advances in medical management. Current clinical decision-making and care pathways must be further evaluated to improve outcomes in this high-risk population.

Treatments for Stage IV Colon Cancer and Overall Survival.

BACKGROUND: The role of primary tumor resection (PTR) for asymptomatic stage IV colon cancer with unresectable metastases remains unclear. Increasingly there has been a trend away from resection. The aim of this study was to examine trends in the treatment of stage IV colon cancers, impact of different treatments on long-term mortality, and factors associated with receipt of postoperative chemotherapy. METHODS: The 2006-2012 National Cancer Data Base was queried for stage IV colon cancer patients. Treatments were grouped into PTR and chemotherapy, PTR only, chemotherapy only, and no treatment. A descriptive analysis was performed examining patient and hospital characteristics associated with different treatments. A Cox regression analysis was used to assess the adjusted effect of different treatments on long-term survival. A multivariable logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with postoperative chemotherapy. RESULTS: Of 31,310 patients, who met inclusion criteria, 22% of the patients underwent PTR and chemotherapy, 37.5% received chemotherapy only, 11.9% underwent PTR, and 28.6% received no treatment. Patients who received no treatment had the highest hazard of death at 1, 3, and 5 y, followed by PTR only, and chemotherapy only compared with PTR combined with chemotherapy. Patients who were older and had more comorbidities were less likely to receive postoperative chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Primary tumor resection in conjunction with postoperative chemotherapy among stage IV colon cancer patients with unresectable metastases was associated with a long-term survival benefit compared with other treatment options. Efforts should be made to increase the use of postoperative chemotherapy where feasible.

Nationwide Heterogeneity in Hospital-Specific Probabilities of Rectal Cancer Understaging and Its Effects on Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Rectal cancer patients who are understaged may not be offered the highest quality treatment modalities, which are based on an accurate assessment of preoperative staging. The objective of this study was to evaluate heterogeneity in the probability of being understaged at Commission on Cancer hospitals in the United States and to assess how this variation affects outcomes. METHODS: The 2006-2013 National Cancer Data Base was queried for clinical stage I-III rectal cancer patients who underwent resection. The initial clinical stage was compared with the "gold standard," pathological stage. A Bayesian multilevel logistic regression model was used to characterize variation in hospital-specific probabilities of being understaged (clinical stage < pathologic stage). Separate analyses assessed the impact of being understaged on positive circumferential resection margins (CRM), receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, and 5-year overall survival. RESULTS: Among 12,684 patients who did not receive neoadjuvant chemoradiation and treated at 1176 hospitals, 3044 (24%) were understaged. After patient level risk-adjustment, a 24-fold difference in the probability of being understaged was observed between hospitals (range 3-72%, median = 15%). Understaging was independently associated with positive CRM [odds ratio (OR) 1.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.39, 1.92] and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 14.22, 95% CI 13.55, 18.88). Despite an increase in the delivery of systemic therapy after surgical resection, understaging was associated with worse survival (hazard ratio = 1.61, 95% CI 1.48, 1.95). CONCLUSIONS: Deficiencies in high-quality rectal cancer management begin with incorrect clinical staging. The risk-adjusted probability of understaging varied widely between hospitals. This institutional failure to provide optimal oncological management at the start of care was associated with worse long-term survival.

Trends in Surgeon-Level Utilization of Sacral Nerve Stimulator Implantation for Fecal Incontinence in New York State.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of real-world data regarding surgeon utilization of sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence compared with anal sphincteroplasty. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine trends in sacral nerve stimulation use compared with sphincteroplasty for fecal incontinence and surgeon-level variation in progression to implantation of the pulse generator. DESIGN: This is a population-based study. PATIENTS: Patients with fecal incontinence between 2011 and 2014 in New York who underwent stage 1 of the sacral nerve stimulation procedure were selected. For the comparison with sphincteroplasty, patients with fecal incontinence who underwent anal sphincteroplasty between 2008 and 2014 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcomes after sacral nerve stimulation generator placement were unplanned 30-day admission, emergency department visit within 30 days, revision or explant of leads or generator, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Six hundred twenty-one patients with fecal incontinence underwent a stage 1 procedure with 79.7% progressing to stage 2. There has been an increase in the number of sacral nerve stimulation cases per year as well as the number of surgeons performing the procedure. The rate of progression to stage 2 among patients treated by colorectal surgeons was 80.2% compared with 77.0% among those treated by noncolorectal surgeons. Among those who completed stage 2, there were 3 (0.5%) unplanned 30-day admissions, 24 (4.4%) emergency department visits within 30 days, and 0 mortalities within 30 days. Thirty-two (6.5%) patients had their leads or pulse generator revised or explanted. There was a significant decrease in annual sphincteroplasty cases and the number of providers performing the procedure starting in 2011. LIMITATIONS: We lacked data regarding patient and physician decision making and the severity of disease. CONCLUSIONS: Sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence is increasing in popularity with an increasing number of surgeons utilizing sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence rather than sphincteroplasty. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A450.