Anesthetic choice during transcarotid artery revascularization and carotid endarterectomy affects the risk of myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have shown no differences in the outcomes of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) performed with general anesthesia (GA) vs local or regional anesthesia (LRA). To date, no study has specifically compared the outcomes of TCAR to those of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) stratified by anesthetic type. The aim of the present study was to identify the effect of the anesthetic type on the outcomes of TCAR vs CEA. METHODS: Patients undergoing CEA and TCAR for carotid artery stenosis from 2016 to 2019 in the Vascular Quality Initiative were included. We excluded patients who had undergone concomitant procedures, patients with more than two stented lesions, and patients who had undergone the procedure for a nonatherosclerotic indication. Propensity score matching was performed between the two procedures stratified by the anesthetic type for age, sex, race, presenting symptoms, major comorbidities (ie, hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease), previous coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous transluminal coronary intervention, previous CEA or carotid artery stenting, degree of ipsilateral stenosis, the presence of contralateral occlusion, and preoperative medications. Intergroup differences between the treatment groups and differences in the perioperative outcomes were tested using the McNemar test for categorical variables and the paired t test or Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test for continuous variables, as appropriate. The relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated as the ratio of the probability of the outcome event for the patients treated within each treatment group. RESULTS: A total of 65,337 patients were included. Of the 65,337 patients, 59,664 had undergone carotid revascularization under GA (91%). When performed with LRA, TCAR and CEA had similar rates of stroke, death, and MI. However, when performed with GA, patients undergoing TCAR had a 50% decreased risk of MI compared with those undergoing CEA under GA (0.5% vs 1.0%; RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.32-0.80; P < .01). When stratified by symptomatic status, patients undergoing TCAR with GA for symptomatic carotid disease had a 67% decreased risk of MI compared with those undergoing CEA with GA for symptomatic disease (0.4% vs 1.2%; RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.15-0.75; P < .01). In contrast, no difference was found in the risk of MI between patients undergoing CEA vs TCAR for asymptomatic carotid disease (0.6% vs 0.9%; RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.37-1.14; P = .13). CONCLUSIONS: The results from the present study have confirmed previous studies suggesting that TCAR confers a lower risk of MI compared with CEA. However, our findings demonstrated no differences in the MI rates between TCAR and CEA when performed with LRA. Patients undergoing TCAR under GA had lower rates of MI compared with patients undergoing CEA under GA. When stratified by symptomatic status, the benefit of TCAR persisted only for the symptomatic patients.

Preoperative bevacizumab does not increase complications following cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative bevacizumab has been reported to increase postoperative complication risk following cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC). We sought to review our experience with preoperative bevacizumab in patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC for peritoneal surface malignancy. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients who received neoadjuvant systemic therapy with or without bevacizumab prior to CRS/HIPEC at a high-volume academic center from 2007-2018. RESULTS: Of 499 patients, a total of 88 patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (n = 34) or in combination with bevacizumab (n = 54) within 3 months prior to CRS/HIPEC. No differences existed in 60-day major morbidity (17.6 vs. 16.7%, p = 0.81) or 60-day mortality (0 vs. 0%) between the two cohorts, and neoadjuvant bevacizumab was not associated with increased odds of overall complications (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.35-2.09, p = 0.73) or major morbidity (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.24-3.00, p = 0.81). Stratifying patients by primary tumor origin and post-operative complications did not reveal any significant differences between the two treatment groups. In addition, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were similar in both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative bevacizumab is not associated with increased morbidity or mortality following CRS/HIPEC. Neoadjuvant therapy employing this biologic agent is safe and should not be a deterrent for aggressive cytoreduction with curative intent.

Academic Surgical Oncologists' Productivity Correlates with Gender, Grant Funding, and Institutional NCI Comprehensive Cancer Center Affiliation.

BACKGROUND: A scholar's h-index is defined as the number of h papers published, each of which has been cited at least h times. We hypothesized that the h-index strongly correlates with the academic rank of surgical oncologists. METHODS: We utilized the National Cancer Institute (NCI) website to identify NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers (CCC) and Doximity to identify the 50 highest-ranked general surgery residency programs with surgical oncology divisions. Demographic data of respective academic surgical oncologists were collected from departmental websites and Grantome. Bibliometric data were obtained from Web of Science. RESULTS: We identified 544 surgical oncologists from 64 programs. Increased h-index was associated with academic rank (p < 0.001), male gender (p < 0.001), number of National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants (p < 0.001), and affiliation with an NCI CCC (p = 0.018) but not number of additional degrees (p = 0.661) or Doximity ranking (p = 0.102). H-index was a stronger predictor of academic rank (r = 0.648) than total publications (r = 0.585) or citations (r = 0.450). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report to assess the h-index within academic surgical oncology. H-index is a bibliometric predictor of academic rank that correlates with NIH grant funding and NCI CCC affiliation. We also highlight a previously unexpected and unappreciated gender disparity in the academic productivity of US surgical oncologists. When academic rank was accounted for, female surgical oncologists had lower h-indices compared with their male colleagues. Evaluation of the etiologies of this gender disparity is needed to address barriers to academic productivity faced by female surgical oncologists as they progress through their careers.

Laparoscopy is Safe and Accurate to Evaluate Peritoneal Surface Metastasis Prior to Cytoreductive Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Completeness of cytoreduction is a significant predictor of long-term outcome after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Imaging has limited sensitivity to identify peritoneal metastases and therefore predict whether complete cytoreduction is possible. We reviewed our experience using laparoscopy to determine candidates for complete cytoreduction and HIPEC. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective study examined patients from 2007 to 2014 who underwent laparoscopy to determine complete cytoreduction (CC-0/1)/HIPEC candidacy. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were collected. RESULTS: A total of 145 laparoscopies were performed on 141 patients, 72 (51.1 %) of whom were female, with a median age of 53 years (range 20-79). The primary site was appendiceal in 67 (47.5 %) patients, colorectal in 43 (30.5 %), mesothelioma in 17 (12.1 %), unknown in 9 (6.4 %), small bowel in 3 (2.1 %), gastric in 1, and ovarian in 1 (0.7 % each). Overall, 115 (81.6 %) patients had prior abdominal surgery, 111 (76.6 %) had evidence of disease on imaging, and 117 (80.7 %) underwent prior chemotherapy, with a median of 5.9 weeks between the last treatment and laparoscopy (0.9-498.9 weeks). Four (2.8 %) intraoperative complications were observed (one liver laceration, two enterotomies, and one air embolus), and nine (6.2 %) postoperative complications [four (2.8 %) Clavien grade (CG) I, three (2.8 %) CG II, one (0.7 %) CG III (return to operating room) and one (0.7 %) CG IV (transient ischemic attack)]. Forty-eight patients deemed candidates by laparoscopy underwent CRS/HIPEC (positive predictive value 82.8 %). CONCLUSION: Diagnostic laparoscopy is a safe, feasible, and accurate staging tool in patients with suspected peritoneal metastases being considered for CRS.