Variation in surgical management of primary hyperparathyroidism in the US Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system: A 15-year observational study.

BACKGROUND: Primary hyperparathyroidism is underdiagnosed and undertreated nationally despite the benefits of parathyroidectomy. However, the degree of hospital-level variation in the management of primary hyperparathyroidism is unknown. METHODS: We performed a national, retrospective study of Veterans with primary hyperparathyroidism using the Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse from January 2000 to September 2015. The objective was to characterize the extent of hospital-level variation in the use of parathyroidectomy for the management of primary hyperparathyroidism within a national, integrated healthcare system. Rate of parathyroidectomy in patients with primary hyperparathyroidism was stratified by (1) geographic region, (2) facility complexity level, (3) volume of parathyroidectomies per facility, and (4) frequency of parathyroid hormone testing in hypercalcemic patients. RESULTS: Among 47,158 Veterans with primary hyperparathyroidism, 6,048 (12.8%) underwent parathyroidectomy. Rates of parathyroidectomy were significantly higher in the Continental (17.0%) and Pacific (16.0%) regions than in other areas (11.4%, P < .01). The highest complexity referral centers had the highest rate of parathyroidectomy (13.6%) compared with all other facilities (12.1%, P < .01). Centers that performed the highest volume of parathyroidectomies were more likely to offer surgery (13.3%) than low volume centers (8.9%, P < .01). Facilities with higher frequency of parathyroid hormone testing among hypercalcemic patients were more likely to offer parathyroidectomy (15.2%) than those with the lowest parathyroid hormone testing frequency (12.6%, P < .01). CONCLUSION: Although there is notable variation in parathyroidectomy use for definitive treatment of primary hyperparathyroidism between Veterans Affairs facilities, parathyroidectomy rates are low across the entire system. Further research is needed to understand additional local contextual and other patient and clinician-level factors for the undertreatment of primary hyperparathyroidism to subsequently guide corrective interventions.

Association of the Addition of Oral Antibiotics to Mechanical Bowel Preparation for Left Colon and Rectal Cancer Resections With Reduction of Surgical Site Infections.

IMPORTANCE: Surgical site infections (SSIs) after colorectal surgery remain a significant complication, particularly for patients with cancer, because they can delay the administration of adjuvant therapy. A combination of oral antibiotics and mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) is a potential, yet controversial, SSI prevention strategy. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of the addition of oral antibiotics to MBP with preventing SSIs in left colon and rectal cancer resections and its association with the timely administration of adjuvant therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective review was performed of 89 patients undergoing left colon and rectal cancer resections from October 1, 2013, to December 31, 2016, at a single institution. A bowel regimen of oral antibiotics and MBP (neomycin sulfate, metronidazole hydrochloride, and magnesium citrate) was implemented August 1, 2015. Patients receiving MBP and oral antibiotics and those undergoing MBP without oral antibiotics were compared using univariate analysis. Multivariable logistic regression controlling for factors that may affect SSIs was used to evaluate the association between use of oral antibiotics and MBP and the occurrence of SSIs. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Surgical site infections within 30 days of the index procedure and time to adjuvant therapy. RESULTS: Of the 89 patients (5 women and 84 men; mean [SD] age, 65.3 [9.2] years) in the study, 49 underwent surgery with MBP but without oral antibiotics and 40 underwent surgery with MBP and oral antibiotics. The patients who received oral antibiotics and MBP were younger than those who received only MBP (mean [SD] age, 62.6 [9.1] vs 67.5 [8.8] years; P = .01), but these 2 cohorts of patients were otherwise similar in baseline demographic, clinical, and cancer characteristics. Surgical approach (minimally invasive vs open) and case type were similarly distributed; however, the median operative time of patients who received oral antibiotics and MBP was longer than that of patients who received MBP only (391 minutes [interquartile range, 302-550 minutes] vs 348 minutes [interquartile range, 248-425 minutes]; P = .03). The overall SSI rate was lower for patients who received oral antibiotics and MBP than for patients who received MBP only (3 [8%] vs 13 [27%]; P = .03), with no deep or organ space SSIs or anastomotic leaks in patients who received oral antibiotics and MBP compared with 9 organ space SSIs (18%; P = .004) and 5 anastomotic leaks (10%; P = .06) in patients who received MBP only. Despite this finding, there was no difference in median days to adjuvant therapy between the 2 cohorts (60 days [interquartile range, 46-73 days] for patients who received MBP only vs 72 days [interquartile range, 59-85 days] for patients who received oral antibiotics and MBP; P = .13). Oral antibiotics and MBP (odds ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02-0.86; P = .04) and minimally invasive surgery (odds ratio, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.05-0.89; P = .03) were independently associated with reduced odds of SSIs. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The combination of oral antibiotics and MBP is associated with a significant decrease in the rate of SSIs and should be considered for patients undergoing elective left colon and rectal cancer resections.