Differences in outcomes by race/ethnicity after thoracic surgery in a large integrated health system.

Background: Disparities exist throughout surgery. We aimed to assess for racial/ethnic disparities among outcomes in a large thoracic surgery patient population. Methods: We reviewed all thoracic surgery patients treated at our integrated health system from January 1, 2016-December 31, 2020. Post-operative outcomes including length of stay (LOS), 30-day return to the emergency department (30d-ED), 30-day readmission, 30- and 90-day outpatient appointments, and 30- and 90-day mortality were compared by race/ethnicity. Bivariate analyses and multivariable logistic regression were performed. Our multivariable models adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, surgery type, neighborhood deprivation index, insurance, and home region. Results: Of 2730 included patients, 59.4 % were non-Hispanic White, 15.0 % were Asian, 11.9 % were Hispanic, 9.6 % were Black, and 4.1 % were Other. Median (Q1-Q3) LOS (in hours) was shortest among non-Hispanic White (37.3 (29.2-76.1)) and Other (36.5 (29.3-75.4)) patients followed by Hispanic (46.8 (29.9-78.1)) patients with Asian (51.3 (30.7-81.9)) and Black (53.7 (30.6-101.6)) patients experiencing the longest LOS (p < 0.01). 30d-ED rates were highest among Hispanic patients (21.3 %), followed by Black (19.2 %), non-Hispanic White (18.1 %), Asian (13.4 %), and Other (8.0 %) patients (p < 0.01). On multivariable analysis, Hispanic ethnicity (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.43 (95 % CI 1.03-1.97)) and Medicaid insurance (OR 2.37 (95 % CI 1.48-3.81)) were associated with higher 30d-ED rates. No racial/ethnic disparities were found among other outcomes. Conclusions: Despite parity across multiple surgical outcomes, disparities remain related to patient encounters within our system. Health systems must track such disparities in addition to standard clinical outcomes. Key message: While our large integrated health system has been able to demonstrate parity across many major surgical outcomes among our thoracic surgery patients, race/ethnicity disparities persist including in the number of post-operative return trips to the emergency department. Tracking outcome disparities to a granular level such as return visits to the emergency department and number of follow up appointments is critical as health systems strive to achieve equitable care.

Association of Surgical Timing with Outcomes in Early Stage Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Optimal time to surgery for lung cancer is not well established. We aimed to assess whether time to surgery correlates with outcomes. METHODS: We assessed patients 18-84 years old who were diagnosed with stage I/II lung cancer at our integrated healthcare system from 2009 to 2019. Time to surgery was defined to start with disease confirmation (imaging or biopsy) prior to the surgery scheduling date. Outcomes of unplanned return to care within 30 days of lung cancer surgery, all-cause mortality, and disease recurrence were compared based on time to surgery before and after 2, 4, and 12 weeks. RESULTS: Of 2861 included patients, 70% were over 65 years old and 61% were female. Time to surgery occurred in 1-2 weeks for 6%, 3-4 weeks for 31%, 5-12 weeks for 58%, and 13-26 weeks for 5% of patients. Patients with time to surgery > 4 (vs. ≤ 4) weeks had greater risk of both death (hazard ratio (HR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00-1.39) and recurrence (HR 1.33, 95% CI 1.10-1.62). Associations were not statistically significant when dichotomizing time to surgery at 2 or 12 weeks for death (2 week HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.93-1.64; 12 week HR 1.35, 95% CI 0.97-1.88) and recurrence (2 week HR 1.54, 95% CI 0.85-2.80; 12 week HR 2.28, 95% CI 0.80-6.46). CONCLUSIONS: Early stage lung cancer patients with time to surgery within 4 weeks experienced lower rates of recurrence. Optimal time to surgical resection may be shorter than previously reported.

Comparison of Survival by Multimodal Treatment Regimen Among Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Patients in an Integrated Health System.

BACKGROUND: Optimal therapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) remains unclear. We compared overall survival in patients with MPM after various multimodal treatment regimens including combinations of immunotherapy, chemotherapy, and surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined MPM patients treated within our integrated health system from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2020. Patients were grouped based on treatment regimen: chemotherapy alone (CT), immunotherapy with or without chemotherapy (iCT), surgery with chemotherapy (sCT), and surgery with immunotherapy and chemotherapy (siCT). We analyzed baseline characteristics and overall patient survival among these groups and several subgroups. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-nine patients were included. Among the study groups, there was no difference in age, sex, race/ethnicity, Charlson Comorbidity Index, or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. Patients treated with CT (N = 109), iCT (N = 35), sCT (N = 26), and siCT (N = 9) had median (95% confidence interval) survivals of 11.7 (9.9-16.3), 18.2 (14.5-29.8), 20.7 (11.6-37.2), and 22.6 (19.7-37.8) months, respectively (P < .001). Median survival among patients with and without immunotherapy was 19.7 (17.4-29.8) and 12.3 (10.6-17.3) months, respectively (P = .023). Median survival among patients with and without surgery was 21.7 (17.6-34.8) and 13.6 (11.5-17.3) months, respectively (P = .007). Patients with biphasic/sarcomatoid subtypes who received immunotherapy experienced 76.2% (55.8%-100.0%) 12 month survival vs. 13.6% (4.8%-39.0%) among those who did not (P < .001). CONCLUSION: MPM patients receiving surgery and immunotherapy as part of multimodal treatment regimens experienced the longest survival. Surgery and immunotherapy are each associated with survival. Further investigations are warranted to assess the benefit of immunotherapy within multimodal treatment regimens for MPM.

Effect of thoracic surgery regionalization on long-term survival after lung cancer resection.

OBJECTIVE: Existing evidence demonstrates some benefit of regionalization on early postoperative outcomes following lung cancer resection, but data regarding the persistence of this effect in long-term mortality are lacking. We investigated whether previously reported improvements in short-term outcomes translated to long-term survival benefit. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing major pulmonary resection (lobectomy, bilobectomy, or pneumonectomy) for cancer within our integrated health care system before (2011-2013; n = 782) and after (2015-2017; n = 845) thoracic surgery regionalization. Overall survival was compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis, and 1- and 3-year mortality was compared by the by χ2 or Fisher exact test. Multivariable Cox regression models evaluated the effect of regionalization on mortality adjusted for relevant factors. RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier curves showed that overall survival was better among patients undergoing surgery postregionalization (log-rank test, P < .0001). Both 1- and 3-year mortality were decreased after regionalization: to 5.7% from 11.1% (P < .0001) for 1 year and to 17.0% from 25.5% (P = .0002) for 3 years. The multivariable adjusted Cox regression analysis revealed that only regionalization (hazard ratio [HR], 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.76), age (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.04), cancer stage (HR, 1.72, 1.83, and 2.56 for stages II, III, and IV, respectively), and Charlson comorbidity index (HR, 1.80 for 1-2; 2.05 for ≥3) were independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We found that overall mortality as well as 1- and 3-year mortality for lung cancer resection were lower after thoracic surgery regionalization. The association between regionalization and reduced mortality was significant even after adjusting for other related factors in a multivariable Cox analysis. Notably, surgeon volume, facility volume, surgeon specialty, neoadjuvant treatment, and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery approach did not significantly affect mortality in the adjusted model.

Regionalization of Lung Cancer Surgery Improves Outcomes in an Integrated Health Care System.

BACKGROUND: Current literature favors a volume-outcome relationship in pulmonary lobectomy that prompted centralization of these operations abroad, in national, single-payer health care settings. This study examined the impact of regionalization on outcomes after lung cancer resection within a US integrated health care system. METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed major pulmonary resections (lobectomy, bilobectomy, pneumonectomy) for lung cancer that were performed before (2011 to 2013; n = 782) and after (2015 to 2017; n = 845) thoracic surgery regionalization during 2014. RESULTS: Case migration from 16 regionwide sites to 5 designated centers was complete by 2016. Facility volume increased from 17.4 to 48.3 cases/y (P = .002), and surgeon volume increased from 12.5 to 19.9 cases/y (P = .001). The postregionalization era was characterized by increased video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (86% from 57%; P < .001), as well as decreased intensive care unit use (-1.0 days; P < .001) and hospital length of stay (-3.0 days; P < .001). Postregionalization patients experienced fewer total (26.2% from 38.6%; P < .001) and major (9.6% from 13.6%; P = .01) complications. The association between regionalization and decreased length of stay and morbidity was independent of surgical approach and case volume in mixed multivariate models. CONCLUSIONS: After the successful implementation of thoracic surgery regionalization in our US health care network, pulmonary resection volume increased, and practice shifted to majority video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and minimum intensive care unit utilization. Regionalization was independently associated with significant reductions in length of stay and morbidity.

Regionalization of thoracic surgery improves short-term cancer esophagectomy outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Some studies have found that outcomes from cancer esophagectomy are better at higher-volume centers than at lower-volume centers. Reports on outcomes following systematic centralization have largely demonstrated subsequent improvements, but these originate in nationalized healthcare systems that are not very comparable to the heterogeneous private-payer systems that predominate in the United States. We examined how regionalization of thoracic surgery to Centers of Excellence (CoE) within our American integrated healthcare system changed overall care for our patients, and whether it changed outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of 461 consecutive patients undergoing cancer esophagectomy between 2009-2016, spanning the 2014 shift to regionalization. High-volume was defined as ≥5 esophagectomies per year. We compared characteristics of the surgeon, hospital, and operation pre- and post-regionalization using Chi-square or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and Kruskal-Wallis test for age. We evaluated their associations with patient outcomes with hierarchical linear and logistic mixed models, which adjusted for clustering within surgeon and facility levels and relevant covariates. RESULTS: While there was no difference in their baseline demographics, patients undergoing esophagectomy post-regionalization were much more likely to have their surgery performed at a designated Center of Excellence (78.8% of cases versus 34.2%, P<0.001), at a high-volume hospital (92.1% from 75.7%, P<0.001), by a high-volume surgeon (78.8% from 58.8%, P<0.001), by a board-certified thoracic surgeon (82.5% from 64.0%, P<0.001), and by minimally-invasive, versus open, approach (60.8% from 22.1%, P<0.001). Post-regionalization patients were in higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classes (P=0.03) and trended toward higher-stage disease (P=0.14), indicative of the inclusion of higher-complexity patients. Despite that, regionalization was associated with improved short-term outcomes, most notably: average minimally-invasive esophagectomy (MIE) operative time decreased by 2 hours (-135.9 minutes, 95% CI: -172.2, -99.7 minutes); length of stay (LOS) decreased by 2.3 days (95% CI: -3.4, -1.2 days); and 30-day complication rate decreased significantly, from 50.7% to 30.2% (OR 0.45, 95% CI: 0.25, 0.79). Regionalization was the only variable significantly and independently associated with all three outcomes in our adjusted multivariable models. Mortality, both at 30 and 90 days, decreased modestly but was low pre-regionalization, and the difference did not reach significance. CONCLUSIONS: Regionalization of thoracic surgery in our hospital system resulted in esophagectomies being performed by more experienced surgeons at higher-volume centers, with a concomitant improvement in short-term outcomes. Patients undergoing esophagectomy, particularly MIE, post-regionalization benefited significantly from decreased LOS and perioperative complication rate. Our results suggest that, in a large integrated healthcare system, regionalization significantly improves overall outcomes for patients undergoing cancer esophagectomy.