The Effect of Neoadjuvant Therapy on Esophagectomy for cT2N0M0 Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: For cT2N0M0 esophageal adenocarcinomas, the effects of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NT) on surgical outcomes and the oncological benefits to the patients are debatable. In this study, we investigated the optimal management for cT2N0M0 adenocarcinoma (1) assessing the perioperative impact of NT on esophagectomy and (2) evaluating the oncologic effect of NT in a homogeneous group of patients with clinical stage IIA. We hypothesized that NT does not negatively affect perioperative outcomes and provides an oncologic benefit to selected patients with cT2N0M0 disease. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried (2010-2019) for patients with cT2N0M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma undergoing esophagectomy. After propensity-matching to adjust for differences in patient and tumor characteristics, we compared postoperative outcomes (logistic regression) and survival (Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression) among those who underwent NT vs upfront surgery (S). RESULTS: This study included 3413 patients, of whom 2359 (69%) received NT, and 1054 (31%) S. In contrast to those who underwent S, in the matched cohort, patients treated with NT had comparable conversion rates (8% vs11.1%, p = 0.06), length of stay (9 vs 10 days, p = 0.078), unplanned readmission (5.4% vs 8.8%, p = 0.109), and 30- (3.9% vs 3.7%, p = 0.90) and 90-day mortality (5.7% vs 4.7%, p = 0.599). In addition, NT associated with improved survival in patients with cT2N0M0 tumors > 5 cm (HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.17-0.36). CONCLUSIONS: NT does not appear to increase technical complexity or to adversely affect postoperative outcomes after esophagectomy. Furthermore, minimally invasive esophagectomy is feasible following NT, with comparable conversion rates to those who had upfront surgery. Lastly, NT was selectively associated with improved survival in patients with cT2N0M0 esophageal cancer.

Extended Lymphadenectomy Improves Survival After Induction Chemoradiation for Esophageal Cancer: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the potential value of extended nodal-dissection following neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT), by analyzing data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). BACKGROUND: A CROSS-trial post-hoc analysis showed that the number of dissected lymph nodes was associated with improved survival in patients undergoing upfront surgery but not in those treated with neoadjuvant CRT. METHODS: The NCDB was queried (2004-2014) for patients who underwent esophagectomy following induction CRT. Predictors of overall survival (OS) were assessed. The optimal number of dissected LNs associated with highest survival benefit was determined by multiple regression analyses and receiveroperating characteristic curve analysis. The whole cohort was divided into 2 groups based on the predefined cutoff number. The two groups were propensity-matched (PMs). RESULTS: Esophagectomy following induction-CRT was performed in 14,503 patients. The number of resected nodes was associated with improved OS in the multivariable analysis (hazard ratio for every 10 nodes: 0.95 (95% confidence interval: 0.93-0.98). The cutoff number of resected LNs that was associated with the highest survival benefit was 20 nodes. In the PM groups, patients in the "≥20 LNs" group had a 14% relative-increase in OS ( P = 0.002), despite having more advanced pathological stages (stage II-IV: 76% vs 72%, P < 0.001), and higher number of positive nodes (0-2 vs 0-1, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The total number of resected nodes is a significant determinant of improved survival following induction CRT in patients with either node negative or node positive disease. In the matched groups, patients with higher number of resected lymph nodes had higher OS rate, despite having more advanced pathological disease and higher number of resected positive lymph nodes.

Is There a Role for Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy for cT4bM0 Colon Cancer? A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Nonmetastatic T4b colon cancer has been traditionally treated with upfront surgery, often requiring technically challenging multiorgan resection. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy can potentially downsize these tumors and improve their resectability. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore trends and outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy use compared to upfront surgery in patients with nonmetastatic T4b colon cancer. This study also sought to determine factors associated with increased neoadjuvant chemotherapy use and with overall survival. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: Conducted using the National Cancer Database. PATIENTS: Patients with nonmetastatic T4b colon cancer who underwent colectomy (2006-2016) were included in the study. Patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy were propensity-matched (1:2) to those who underwent upfront surgery in either clinically node-negative or node-positive disease. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative outcomes (length of stay, 30-d readmission, 30/90-d mortality), oncologic resection adequacy (R0 rate, number of resected/positive nodes), and overall survival were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was used in 7.7% of the patients. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy use increased over the study period from 4% to 16% in the entire cohort, from 3% to 21% in patients with clinically node-positive disease, and from 6% to 12% in patients with clinically node-negative disease. Factors associated with increased use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy included younger age (OR 0.97; 95% CI, 0.96-0.98; p < 0.001), male sex (OR 1.35; 95% CI, 1.11-1.64; p = 0.002), recent diagnosis year (OR 1.16; 95% CI, 1.12-1.20; p < 0.001), academic centers (OR 2.65; 95% CI, 2.19-3.22; p < 0.001), clinically node-positive (OR 1.23; 95% CI, 1.01-1.49; p = 0.037), and tumor located in the sigmoid colon (OR 2.44; 95% CI, 1.97-3.02; p < 0.001). Patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy had significantly higher R0 resection compared with upfront surgery (87% vs 77%; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with higher overall survival (HR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.91; p = 0.002). On propensity-matched analyses, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a higher 5-year overall survival compared to upfront surgery in patients with clinically node-positive disease (57% vs 43%; p = 0.003) but not in patients with clinically node-negative disease (61% vs 56%; p = 0.090). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective design. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy use for nonmetastatic T4b has increased significantly on the national level, more so in patients with clinically node-positive disease. Patients with node-positive disease treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy had higher overall survival compared to those who underwent upfront surgery. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C228 . EXISTE LUGAR PARA LA TERAPIA SISTMICA NEOADYUVANTE PARA EL CNCER DE COLON CTBM UN ANLISIS EMPAREJADO DE PUNTAJE DE PROPENSIN DE LA BASE DE DATOS NACIONAL DEL CNCER: ANTECEDENTES:El cáncer de colon T4b no metastásico se ha tratado tradicionalmente con cirugía inicial, que frecuentemente requiere de una resección multiorgánica técnicamente desafiante. La quimioterapia neoadyuvante puede potencialmente reducir el tamaño y mejorar la resecabilidad de esos tumores.OBJETIVO:Explorar las tendencias y los resultados del uso de quimioterapia neoadyuvante en pacientes con cáncer de colon T4b no metastásico, en comparación con la cirugía inicial. Determinar los factores asociados con el aumento del uso de quimioterapia neoadyuvante y con la supervivencia general.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Utilizando de la Base de Datos Nacional del Cáncer.PACIENTES:Pacientes con cáncer de colon T4b no metastásico sometidos a colectomía (2006-2016). Los pacientes que recibieron quimioterapia neoadyuvante fueron emparejados por propensión (1:2) con aquellos sometidos a cirugía inicial, ya sea en enfermedad clínica con ganglios negativos o ganglios positivos.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Resultados posoperatorios (duración de la hospitalización, reingreso a los 30 días, mortalidad a los 30/90 días), adecuación de la resección oncológica (tasa R0, número de ganglios resecados/positivos) y supervivencia general.RESULTADOS:La quimioterapia neoadyuvante se utilizó en el 7,7% de los pacientes. El uso de quimioterapia neoadyuvante aumentó durante el período de estudio del 4% al 16% en toda la cohorte; del 3% al 21% en pacientes con enfermedad clínica y ganglios positivos; y del 6% al 12% en pacientes con enfermedad clínica y ganglios negativos. Los factores asociados con un mayor uso de quimioterapia neoadyuvante incluyeron, edad más joven (OR 0,97, IC del 95 %: 0,96-0,98, p < 0,001), sexo masculino (OR 1,35, IC del 95 %: 1,11-1,64, p = 0,002), año de diagnóstico mas reciente (OR 1,16, 95% IC: 1,12-1,20, p < 0,001), centros académicos (OR 2,65, 95% IC: 2,19-3,22, p < 0,001), enfermedad clínica con ganglios positivos (OR 1,23, 95% IC: 1,01-1,49, p = 0,037), y tumor localizado en colon sigmoide (OR 2,44, 95% IC: 1,97-3,02, p < 0,001). Los pacientes que recibieron quimioterapia neoadyuvante tuvieron una resección R0 significativamente mayor en comparación con la cirugía inicial (87 % frente a 77 %, p < 0,001). En análisis multivariable, la quimioterapia neoadyuvante se asoció con una mayor supervivencia global (HR 0,76, IC del 95%: 0,64-0,91, p = 0,002). En los análisis de propensión pareada, la quimioterapia neoadyuvante se asoció con una mayor supervivencia general a los 5 años en comparación con la cirugía inicial en pacientes con enfermedad clínica con ganglios positivos (57% frente a 43%, p = 0,003), pero no en pacientes con enfermedad clínica y ganglios negativos (61% vs 56%, p = 0,090).LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIÓN:El uso de quimioterapia neoadyuvante para T4b no metastásico ha aumentado significativamente a nivel nacional, más aún en pacientes con enfermedad clínica y ganglios positivos. Los pacientes con enfermedad y ganglios positivos tratados con quimioterapia neoadyuvante tuvieron una mayor supervivencia general en comparación con la cirugía inicial. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C228 . (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy outcomes in colon adenocarcinoma in the elderly population: a propensity-score matched analysis of the National Cancer Database.

PURPOSE: While robotic surgery is more costly and involves longer intra-operative time, it has a technical advantage over laparoscopic surgery. With our aging population, patients are being diagnosed with colon cancer at older ages. The aim of this study is to compare laparoscopic versus robotic colectomy short- and long-term outcomes in elderly patients diagnosed with colon cancer at a national level. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted using the National Cancer Database. Subjects ≥ 80-years-old who were diagnosed with stage I to III colon adenocarcinoma and underwent a robotic or laparoscopic colectomy from 2010-2018 were included. The laparoscopic group was propensity-score matched in a 3:1 ratio to the robotic group with 9343 laparoscopic and 3116 robotic cases matched. The main outcomes evaluated were 30-day mortality, 30-day readmission rate, median survival, and length of stay. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the 30-day readmission rate (OR = 1.1, CI = 0.94-1.29, p = 0.23) or 30-day mortality rate (OR = 1.05, CI = 0.86-1.28, p = 0.63) between both groups. Robotic surgery was associated with higher overall survival (42 vs 44.7 months, p < 0.001) using a Kaplan-Meier survival curve. Robotic surgery had a statistically significant shorter length of stay (6.4 vs. 5.9 days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Robotic colectomies are associated with higher median survival rates and decrease in the length of hospital stay compared to laparoscopic colectomies in the elderly population.

Robotic Approach is Associated With a Lower Conversion Rate Compared to Laparoscopic Approach for Patients Undergoing Colectomy for T4b Colon Cancer. An Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

INTRODUCTION: We examined the perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing open, laparoscopic, or robotic colectomy for T4b colon cancer, as well as the clinical factors associated with conversion to an open approach and its consequences on perioperative and oncologic outcomes. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients undergoing colectomy for cT4b colon cancer (2010-2016). Patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic colectomy were matched using Propensity-Score analysis. Factors associated with conversion to an open approach were assessed using Logistic-regression multivariable-analysis (MVA). RESULTS: Colectomy for cT4b colon cancer was performed in 9030 patients (open: n = 6,543, robotic: n = 157, laparoscopic: n = 2330). In the propensity-matched groups, robotic approach had lower rate of conversion (12% vs 37%, P < .001), shorter hospital stays (5 vs 7-days, P = .02), and similar overall-survival (5-yr: 49% vs 39%, P = .16), compared to laparoscopic approach. Conversion to an open approach was noted in 801(32%) of the patients undergoing minimally invasive surgical colectomy (robotic n = 23(15%), laparoscopic n = 778(33%). Factors associated with lower rate of conversion on multivariable-analysis included recent year of surgery (95% CI: 0.88-.97), robotic approach (95% CI: 0.22-.56), and surgeries performed in Academic hospitals (95% CI: 0.65-.96). Conversion to an open approach was associated with higher rate of positive parenchymal margin (31% vs 25%, P = .001), higher rate of 30-day readmission (12% vs 9.5%, P = .04), and similar overall survival (5-yr: 32% vs 35%, P = .19), compared to those who had no conversion. CONCLUSION: At the National level, patients undergoing colectomy for T4b colon cancer via a robotic approach had more favorable perioperative outcomes compared to laparoscopic approach. Conversion to an open approach did not compromise long term survival, despite being associated with higher rate of positive margins and readmissions rate.

National Trends and Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic-assisted Hepatectomy in the USA: A Propensity-score Matched Analysis from the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: A paucity of data exists on the national use of robotic hepatectomy. We assessed national trends and perioperative outcomes of robotic hepatectomy in the USA. In addition, factors associated with use of the robotic approach were analyzed. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients undergoing hepatectomy from 2010 to 2016. Patients undergoing total hepatectomy for transplant were excluded. Factors associated with the use of the robotic approach were assessed using logistic regression multivariable analysis. Propensity-score analysis was performed (robotic vs. laparoscopic and robotic vs. open approaches), and perioperative outcomes were compared between the matched groups. RESULTS: The robotic approach was used in 287 patients (110 hospitals). Utilization of the robotic approach increased significantly on the national level from 0.8% in 2010 to 4.1% in 2016 (P<0.001). The number of hospitals performing a minimum of one robotic hepatectomy per year increased from 8 in 2010 to 35 in 2016. The median hospital length of stay was 4 days (IQR 3-6), 30-day readmission rate was 5%, and 30-day/90-day mortality rates were 3%/4%. Factors associated with using robotic approach were African-American race (95% CI 1.02-2.11), recent year of surgery (95% CI 1.11-1.32), HCC histology (95% CI 1.01-52.03), tumor size (95% CI 0.87-0.96), and early-stage tumor (Stage I-II, 95% CI 1.27-3.99). On propensity-matched analysis, there were no differences between robotic and open approaches (n=184 each group) in 30-day readmission (5% vs. 7%, P=0.651), 30-day mortality (2% vs. 4%, P=0.106), 90-day mortality (3% vs. 7%, P=0.080), or 5-year overall survival (58% vs. 43%, P=0.211). However, the robotic approach was associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay (median: 4 vs. 6 days, P<0.001). There were no differences between matched groups of patients undergoing robotic and laparoscopic approaches (n=182 in each group) in perioperative outcomes or length of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: National use of robotic-assisted hepatectomy has increased by fivefold over the seven-year study period. It was associated with a shorter hospital length of stay compared to the open approach without compromising perioperative outcomes or survival.

Trends of core versus subspecialty operative procedures completed in general surgery residency training programs.

INTRODUCTION: General surgery residency involves performing subspecialty procedures in addition to the core general procedures. However, the proportion of core general surgery versus subspecialty procedures during training is variable and its temporal changes are unknown. The goal of our study was to assess the current trends in core general surgery and subspecialty procedure distributions during general surgery residency training. METHODS: Data were collected from the ACGME core general surgery national resident available report case logs from 2007 to 2019. Descriptive and time series analyses were used to compare proportions of average procedures performed per resident in the core general surgery category versus the subspecialty category. F-tests were conducted to show whether the slopes of the trend lines were significantly non-zero. RESULTS: The mean of total procedures completed for major credit by the average general surgery resident increased from 910.1 (SD=30.31) in 2007 to 1070.5 (SD=37.59) in 2019. Over that same period, the number of general, cardiothoracic, plastic and urology surgery procedures increased by 24.9%, 9.8%, 76.6% and 19.3%, respectively. Conversely, vascular and paediatric surgery procedures decreased by 7.6% and 30.7%, respectively. The neurological surgery procedures remain stable at 1.1 procedures per resident per year. A significant positive correlation in the trend reflecting total (p<0.0001), general (p<0.0001) and plastic (p<0.0016) surgery procedures and the negative correlation in the trend lines for vascular (p<0.0006) and paediatric (p<0.0001) surgery procedures were also noted. CONCLUSIONS: Trends in overall surgical case volume performed by general surgery residents over the last 12 years have shown a steady increase in operative training opportunity despite the increasing number of subspecialty training programmes and fellowships. Further research to identify areas for improvement and to study the diversity of operative procedures, and their outcomes is warranted in the years to come.

Sensitivity and specificity of fine needle aspiration for the diagnosis of mediastinal lesions.

Fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) of mediastinal masses allows for rapid on-site evaluation and the triaging of material for ancillary studies. However, surgical pathology is often considered to be the gold standard for diagnosis. This study examines the sensitivity and specificity of FNAC compared to a concurrent or subsequent surgical pathology specimen in 77 mediastinal lesions. The overall sensitivity for mediastinal mass FNAC was 78% and the overall specificity was 98%. For individual categories the sensitivity and specificity of FNAC was respectively as follows: inflammatory/infectious (33%, 99%), metastatic carcinoma (93%, 100%), lymphoma (84%, 97%), cysts (25%, 100%), soft tissue tumors (100%, 100%), paraganglioma (50%, 100%), germ cell tumor (100%, 99%), thymoma (87%, 94%), thymic carcinoma (60%, 100%), benign thymus (0%, 100%), and indeterminate (100%, 90%). For different locations within the mediastinum the sensitivity and specificity of FNAC was respectively as follows: anterosuperior mediastinum (80%, 98%), posterior mediastinum (33%, 95%), middle mediastinum (100%, 100%), and mediastinum, NOS (79%, 99%). Thus, mediastinal FNAC is fairly sensitive, very specific, and is a valuable technique in the diagnosis of mediastinal masses.

Oncologic considerations in the elderly.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Elderly patients presenting with thoracic malignancies tend to be largely undertreated because of a presumption that this group will incur a high treatment-associated morbidity and mortality. The current review highlights the current practice and recent updates in the surgical management of thoracic malignancies, mainly lung cancer, in the elderly population. RECENT FINDINGS: Lung resections appears to be relatively safe in the elderly patients presenting with lung cancer. Whenever possible, a lobectomy should be offered to patients with a good performance status who present with early stage disease. However, a limited resection may offer a valuable comparable alternative in patients with advanced comorbidities and borderline pulmonary functions. The use of minimally invasive approaches, namely video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and robotic surgery are associated with lower morbidity and improved perioperative outcomes compared with the traditional thoracotomy approach and are ideal for the aged. In elderly patients presenting with advanced staged lung cancer, major lung resections following induction therapy, although feasible, should be discussed in a multispecialty tumor board committee. SUMMARY: There is growing evidence from the literature that surgical resection is relatively safe in the elderly population. Age by itself should not preclude patients from having curative resection. Resections can be tailored to performance status of the patient.

Inguinoscrotal Hernia of the Urinary Bladder.

Inguinal bladder hernia (IBH) is a rare clinical condition that may present as scrotal swelling. Most patients are asymptomatic and found incidentally at the time of herniorrhaphy. IBH continues to pose a challenge to surgeons before, during, and even after herniorrhaphy. This case report aims to describe the case of the incarcerated right inguinal hernia containing the small bowel and the urinary bladder herniation. An 81-year-old male presented to the emergency department with complaints of abdominal pain, distension, and swelling in the right groin. Physical examination was remarkable for incarcerated right inguinal hernia with tenderness to palpation. A CT scan demonstrated a right inguinal hernia containing a small bowel. The urinary bladder was noted to be adherent to the hernia sac. The hernia sac and urinary bladder were reduced, and Lichtenstein tension-free hernia repair was performed. The postoperative course was uneventful without any complications. IBHs are uncommon. Unrecognized bladder hernias can cause bladder injury during surgery. It is particularly common in individuals with long-standing hernias and should be anticipated during surgery. High-risk patients including obese, older men, who have urinary symptoms that need further evaluation with a CT scan, ultrasound, or cystography to prevent iatrogenic injury and complications. Management consists of reduction or resection of the herniated bladder followed by hernia repair.

Sublobar resection is associated with less lymph nodes examined and lower delivery of adjuvant therapy in patients with 1.5- to 2.0-cm clinical IA2 non-small-cell lung cancer: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: CALGB140503, in which nodal sampling was mandated, reported non-inferior disease-free survival for patients undergoing sublobar resection (SLR) compared to lobectomy (L). Outside of trial settings, the adequacy of lymphadenectomy during SLR has been questioned. We sought to evaluate whether SLR is associated with suboptimal lymphadenectomy, differences in pathologic upstaging and survival in patients with 1.5- to 2.0-cm tumours using real-world data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database(2018-2019), we evaluated patients with 1.5- to 2.0-cm non-small-cell lung cancer who underwent resection (sublobar versus lobectomy). We studied factors associated with nodal upstaging (logistic regression) and survival (Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier method) after propensity matching to adjust for differences among groups. RESULTS: Among 3196 patients included, SLR was performed in 839 (26.3%) (of which 588 were wedge resections) and L was performed in 2357 (73.7%) patients. More patients undergoing SLR (21.7%) compared to L (2.1%) had no lymph nodes sampled (P < 0.001). Those undergoing SLR had fewer total lymph nodes examined (4 vs 11, P < 0.001) and were less likely to have pathologic nodal metastases (4.7% vs 9%, P < 0.001) compared to L. Multivariable analysis identified L [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.21, 95% confidence interval, 1.47-3.35] to be independently associated with pathologic N+ disease. Overall survival was not associated with the type of procedure but was significantly decreased in those with N+ disease. CONCLUSIONS: Despite comparable overall survival to L, SLR is associated with suboptimal lymphadenectomy in patients with 1.5-2.0 cm non-small-cell lung cancer. Surgeons should be careful to perform adequate lymphadenectomy when performing SLR to mitigate nodal under-staging and to identify appropriate patients for systemic therapy.

Association of socioeconomic factors with the receipt of neoadjuvant therapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant therapy (NT) will be increasingly used for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), particularly given the recent approval of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy. Several barriers may prevent the uptake of NT and should be identified and addressed. We queried the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to determine predictors of the use of NT. METHODS: Using the NCDB (2006-2019), we identified 80,707 patients who underwent surgery for clinical stage II and III NSCLC. Sociodemographic and clinical factors were reviewed, and univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify associations with the uptake of NT. In propensity score-matched groups, survival was determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Among 80,707 eligible patients, 17,262 (21.4%) received NT. Clinical stage and node positivity were associated with receipt of NT. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with lower rates of NT included black race (odds ratio [OR], 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-0.90), Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥2 (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.67-0.85), Medicaid/Medicare insurance (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.75-0.90), lower income level (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.71-0.87), and treatment at a community center (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-0.96). In an exploratory analysis, those patients who received NT had longer 5-year overall survival compared with those who did not (48.3% vs 46.0%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of NT are relatively low for patients with clinical stage II/III NSCLC treated prior to recent chemoimmunotherapy trials. Socioeconomic barriers to the uptake of NT include race, insurance status, income, and area of residence. As NT becomes more widely offered, accessibility for vulnerable populations must be assured.

Minimally invasive surgery for clinical T4 non-small-cell lung cancer: national trends and outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Recent randomized data support the perioperative benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Its utility for cT4 tumours remains understudied. We, therefore, sought to analyse national trends and outcomes of minimally invasive resections for cT4 cancers. METHODS: Using the 2010-2019 National Cancer Database, we identified patients with cT4N0-1 NSCLC. Patients were stratified by surgical approach. Multivariable logistic analysis was used to identify factors associated with use of a minimally invasive approach. Groups were matched using propensity score analysis to evaluate perioperative and survival end points. RESULTS: The study identified 3715 patients, among whom 64.1% (n = 2381) underwent open resection and 35.9% (n = 1334) minimally invasive resection [robotic-assisted in 31.5% (n = 420); and video-assisted in 68.5% (n = 914)]. Increased MIS use was noted among patients with higher income [≥$40 227, odds ratio (OR) 1.24; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.51] and those treated at academic hospitals (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.07-1.45). Clinically node-positive patients (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.55-0.83) and those who underwent neoadjuvant therapy (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.65-0.93) were less likely to have minimally invasive resection. In matched groups, patients undergoing MIS had a shorter median length of stay (5 vs 6 days, P < 0.001) and no significant differences between 30-day readmissions or 30/90-day mortality. MIS did not compromise overall survival (log-rank P = 0.487). CONCLUSIONS: Nationally, the use of minimally invasive approaches for patients with cT4N0-1M0 NSCLC has increased substantially. In these patients, MIS is safe and does not compromise perioperative outcomes or survival.

Resection of the Primary Tumor and Survival in Patients with Single-Site Synchronous Oligometastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Propensity-Matched Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Local therapy for the primary tumor is postulated to remove resistant cancer cells as well as immunosuppressive cells from the tumor microenvironment, potentially improving response to systemic therapy (ST). We sought to determine whether resection of the primary tumor was associated with overall survival (OS) in a multicentric cohort of patients with single-site synchronous oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer. STUDY DESIGN: Using the National Cancer Database (2018 to 2020), we evaluated patients with clinical stage IVA disease who received ST and stratified the cohort based on receipt of surgery for the primary tumor (S). We used multivariable and propensity score-matched analysis to study factors associated with S (logistic regression) and OS (Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier), respectively. RESULTS: Among 12,215 patients identified, 2.9% (N = 349) underwent S and 97.1% (N = 11,886) ST (chemotherapy or immunotherapy) without surgery. Patients who underwent S were younger, more often White, had higher income levels, were more likely to have private insurance, and were more often treated at an academic facility. Among those who received S, 22.9% (N = 80) also underwent resection of the distant metastatic site. On multivariable analysis, metastasis to bone, N+ disease, and higher T-stages were independently associated with less S. On Cox regression, S and resection of the metastatic site were associated with improved survival (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.80 and hazard ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.88, respectively). After propensity matching, OS was improved in patients undergoing S (median 36.8 vs 20.8 months, log-rank p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Advances in ST for non-small cell lung cancer may change the paradigm of eligibility for surgery. This study demonstrates that surgical resection of the primary tumor is associated with improved OS in selected patients with single-site oligometastatic disease.

Pneumonectomy for non-small cell lung cancer. A National Cancer Database analysis of geographic and temporal trends, outcomes, and associated factors.

BACKGROUND: The circumstances under which pneumonectomy should be performed are controversial. This study aims to investigate national trends in pneumonectomy use to determine which patients, in what geographic areas, and under what clinical circumstances pneumonectomy is performed in the United States. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database and included all patients undergoing anatomic surgical resection for non-small cell lung cancer (2015-2020). The association between demographic and clinical factors and the use of pneumonectomy were investigated. RESULTS: Who: A total of 128,421 patients were identified, of whom 738 (0.6%) underwent pneumonectomy. Those patients were younger (median 65 vs 68 years, P < .001), more often male (59.9% vs 44.9%, P < .001), more likely to be below median income level (44.2% vs 38.6%, P = .002), and more likely to have lower education indicators (53% vs 48.6%, P = .02) than those who underwent other anatomic resections. Notably, there was a decreasing trend in pneumonectomy use during the study period (0.9% down to 0.4%, P < .001). Where: Patients undergoing pneumonectomy were less likely to live in metropolitan areas (77.9% vs 81.7%, P = .008) and to live closer (<12 miles) to their treating facility (45% vs 49%, P = .02). Regional geographic differences also were identified (P < .001). Why: Patients who underwent pneumonectomy were more likely to have received neoadjuvant therapy (20.6% vs 5.3%, P < .001), to be clinically N (+) (39.3% vs 12.3%, P < .001), and to have more advanced tumors (cT3-4: 46.3% vs 11.3%, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Although primarily driven by advanced oncologic features, socioeconomic and geographic factors also were associated independently with the use of pneumonectomy. Standardizing pneumonectomy indications nationwide is crucial to prevent widening outcome gaps for patients with lung cancer.

Small saphenous vein aneurysm diagnosis and treatment.

Venous aneurysms are rare, particularly those arising from the superficial venous system. Current limited evidence suggests that congenital weakness of the vein wall, degenerative changes, trauma and inflammation are among potential causes. Surgical management has been the mainstay treatment modality of venous aneurysms. Surgical approaches and techniques should be tailored on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration aneurysm location, size, shape and presence of complications (ie, rupture or thrombosis). In this report, we present a male patient in his late thirties who presented with right leg swelling and achiness 2 years following right lower extremity blunt trauma and was found to have a 3 cm small saphenous vein aneurysm extending to the saphenopopliteal junction. The patient was successfully treated with excision of the aneurysm via a posterior approach. This case report adds to the current literature and may help to define future treatment recommendations.

Overestimation of screening-related complications in the National Lung Screening Trial.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening-associated complications are often quoted as one of the major barriers for wider screening adoption. A detailed analysis of the National Lung Screening Trial dataset was performed to extrapolate the safety of lung cancer screening. METHODS: Lung cancer screening-associated invasive procedures and their related complications were analyzed using the National Lung Screening Trial dataset. Factors associated with 90-day postprocedure complications per patient were analyzed with logistic-regression multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Major complications rate in patients undergoing low-dose computed tomography screening who were diagnosed with lung cancer was 10.2% compared with only 0.04% for patients without lung cancer. Low-dose computed tomography screening, compared with chest radiography, led to major complications in an excess of only 3.5 per 10,000 patients without lung cancer. Among 25,633 patients without lung cancer who underwent low-dose computed tomography screening, 45 developed 90-day postprocedure complications (71 total complications). The most common were pneumothorax (n = 29; 41%), postprocedure hospitalization (n = 6; 8.5%), and infection/fever requiring antibiotics (n = 5; 7%). Cardiac/respiratory arrest occurred in less than 1 in 10,000 low-dose computed tomography-screened patients without lung cancer. On multivariable analysis, pulmonary comorbidity (confidence interval, 1.00-3.37) and procedure type (thoracoscopy [confidence interval, 2.04-10.64] or thoracotomy [confidence interval, 2.38-8.93]) were associated with postprocedure complications in patients without lung cancer. Randomization arm (low-dose computed tomography vs chest x-ray) was not a significant factor (confidence interval, 0.89-1.37). CONCLUSIONS: It is more informative to report procedural complications in patients not found to have cancer as the true screening-associated risk. Only 4 in 10,000 of patients undergoing low-dose computed tomography screening but not found to have lung cancer will have major complications. Permanent or debilitating complications are exceedingly rare.