Short-Stay Left Colectomy for Colon Cancer: Is It Safe?

BACKGROUND: Advances in surgical practices have decreased hospital length of stay (LOS) after surgery. This study aimed to determine the safety of short-stay (≤24-hour) left colectomy for colon cancer patients in the US. STUDY DESIGN: Adult colon cancer patients who underwent elective left colectomies were identified using the American College of Surgeons NSQIP database (2012 to 2021). Patients were categorized into 4 LOS groups: LOS 1 day or less (≤24-hour short stay), 2 to 4, 5 to 6, and 7 or more. Primary outcomes were 30-day postoperative overall and serious morbidity. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality and readmission. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to explore the association between LOS and overall and serious morbidity. RESULTS: A total of 15,745 patients who underwent left colectomies for colon cancer were identified with 294 (1.87%) patients undergoing short stay. Short-stay patients were generally younger and healthier with lower 30-day overall morbidity rates (LOS ≤1 day: 3.74%, 2 to 4: 7.38%, 5 to 6: 16.12%, and ≥7: 37.64%, p < 0.001). Compared with patients with LOS 2 to 4 days, no differences in mortality and readmission rates were observed. On adjusted analysis, there was no statistical difference in the odds of overall (LOS 2 to 4 days: odds ratio 1.90, 95% CI 1.01 to 3.60, p = 0.049) and serious morbidity (LOS 2 to 4 days: odds ratio 0.86, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.76, p = 0.672) between the short-stay and LOS 2 to 4 days groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although currently performed at low rates in the US, short-stay left colectomy is safe for a select group of patients. Attention to patient selection, refinement of clinical pathways, and close follow-up may enable short-stay colectomies to become a more feasible reality.

Differential Safety Between Top-Ranked Cancer Hospitals and Their Affiliates for Complex Cancer Surgery.

Importance: Leading cancer hospitals have increasingly shared their brands with other hospitals through growing networks of affiliations. However, the brand of top-ranked cancer hospitals may evoke distinct reputations for safety and quality that do not extend to all hospitals within these networks. Objective: To assess perioperative mortality of Medicare beneficiaries after complex cancer surgery across hospitals participating in networks with top-ranked cancer hospitals. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional study was performed of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 100% Medicare Provider and Analysis Review file from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2016, for top-ranked cancer hospitals (as assessed by U.S. News and World Report) and affiliated hospitals that share their brand. Participants were 29 228 Medicare beneficiaries older than 65 years who underwent complex cancer surgery (lobectomy, esophagectomy, gastrectomy, colectomy, and pancreaticoduodenectomy [Whipple procedure]) between January 1, 2013, and October 1, 2016. Exposures: Undergoing complex cancer surgery at a top-ranked cancer hospital vs an affiliated hospital. Main Outcomes and Measures: Risk-adjusted 90-day mortality estimated using hierarchical logistic regression and comparison of the relative safety of hospitals within each cancer network estimated using standardized mortality ratios. Results: A total of 17 300 patients (59.2%; 8612 women and 8688 men; mean [SD] age, 74.7 [6.2] years) underwent complex cancer surgery at 59 top-ranked hospitals and 11 928 patients (40.8%; 6287 women and 5641 men; mean [SD] age, 76.2 [6.9] years) underwent complex cancer surgery at 343 affiliated hospitals. Overall, surgery performed at affiliated hospitals was associated with higher 90-day mortality (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.23-1.59; P < .001), with odds ratios that ranged from 1.32 (95% CI, 1.12-1.56; P = .001) for colectomy to 2.04 (95% CI, 1.41-2.95; P < .001) for gastrectomy. When the relative safety of each top-ranked cancer hospital was compared with its collective affiliates, the top-ranked hospital was safer than the affiliates in 41 of 49 studied networks (83.7%; 95% CI, 73.1%-93.3%). Conclusions and Relevance: The likelihood of surviving complex cancer surgery appears to be greater at top-ranked cancer hospitals compared with the affiliated hospitals that share their brand. Further investigation of performance across trusted cancer networks could enhance informed decision making for complex cancer care.

The Impact of an Interventional Pulmonary Program on Nontherapeutic Lung Resections.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary resection can concurrently diagnose and treat known or suspected lung cancer, but is not without risk. Benign resection rates range widely (9% to 40%). We evaluated the impact of an Interventional Pulmonology (IP) program and dedicated Pulmonary Nodule Clinic on surgical benign resection rates at a single institution. METHODS: An IP program was initiated in August 2010 that offered advanced diagnostic techniques and a dedicated Pulmonary Nodule Clinic was opened in August 2013. We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent resection for known or suspected lung cancer between 2005 and 2015 at our tertiary referral hospital. Demographics, preoperative tissue diagnoses, surgical procedure, final pathology, and staging were collected. Quarterly benign resection rates were calculated and plotted on a statistical quality control chart (P-Chart) to determine the impact of the IP program and Pulmonary Nodule Clinic on benign resection rates over time. RESULTS: Of 1112 resections, 209 (19%) were benign. Variation in quarterly benign resection rates decreased after introduction of the IP program in 2010, and a significant (P<0.05) sustained decrease in the quarterly benign resection rate occurred after introduction of the pulmonary nodule clinic in 2013 to a new baseline of 12% compared with 24% before 2010. After introduction of the IP program, mean quarterly preoperative tissue diagnostic rates increased from 45% to 58% (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: Integration of an IP program employing advanced diagnostic bronchoscopic techniques has improved preoperative diagnostic rates of suspicious pulmonary nodules and in combination with a pulmonary nodule clinic has resulted in fewer benign resections.

Variable impact of prior cancer history on the survival of lung cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) is commonly diagnosed in patients who have survived a prior malignancy. However, it is currently unclear whether NSCLC patient survival is impacted by the potential for previously-treated malignancies to recur. Understanding the impact of a prior cancer history on NSCLC survival could not only enhance decision making but could affect eligibility for NSCLC studies. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for NSCLC patients (stage I-IV) diagnosed between 2004-2014. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were estimated to analyze overall survival across a variety of treatment approaches and stages in the presence and absence of a prior cancer history. RESULTS: A total of 821,323 patients with a newly diagnosed NSCLC were identified including 179,512 (21.9%) with a prior history of cancer. The unadjusted 5-year overall survival of patients with a prior cancer history (9.8%) was slightly better to those without a cancer history (9.5%, 95% CI 11.76-11.84, P < 0.0001). However, adjusted analyses revealed the impact of prior cancer history was extremely heterogenous across stage and treatment approach. Ultimately, 51.4% of patients fell into a subgroup in which prior cancer history appeared to compromise survival, 16.3% in which the difference was not significant, and 32.3% in which prior cancer was associated with increased survival. Patients with earlier-staged tumors were the most negatively NSCLC impacted by prior cancer history. CONCLUSIONS: The association between prior cancer history and survival of newly diagnosed NSCLC patients is highly variable and to some degree reflects a patient's potential for cure.

Motivators, Barriers, and Facilitators to Traveling to the Safest Hospitals in the United States for Complex Cancer Surgery.

Importance: Directing patients to safer hospitals for complex cancer surgery (regionalization) may prevent thousands of mortalities in the United States. Objective: To understand the potential for individuals to move to safer hospitals: what would inspire them to travel (motivators), what challenges would they face (barriers), and what would enable them to travel (facilitators). Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationally representative online survey study asked respondents to consider complex cancer surgery at their local hospital or a hospital specializing in cancer an hour farther away. Completed surveys were weighted across sociodemographics to be nationally representative and outcomes were reported as weighted percentages. In January 2018, a panel of 1817 US adults recruited by address- and telephone-based sampling to be nationally representative were invited to take the survey. Data analysis was conducted from January 24, 2018, to September 19, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of respondents motivated to travel by specific quality and safety indicators (motivators), magnitude in difference that would be necessary, proportion facing specific barriers, and proportion enabled to move by facilitators. Resistant individuals were identified as people who would not travel except for the largest (top quartile) outcomes differences. Results: There were 1016 completed surveys (response rate of 55.9%). The weighted median age was 48 years, 52% were female, median annual income was between $60 000 and $75 000, and 85% lived in a metropolitan area. Nonresponders were more likely than responders to be female, younger, nonwhite, less educated, and lower income (female: 54.4% vs 48.3%; P = .01; younger [aged <45 years]: 56.3% vs 37.1%; P < .001; nonwhite: 41.6% vs 30.0%; P < .001; less than college education: 43.8% vs 32.4%; P < .001; income <$30 000: 22.1% vs 17.1%; P = .01). Superior safety or oncologic outcomes, presented separately, motivated an average of 92% of respondents (95% CI, 90%-94%) to travel. One-third were easily motivated, requiring less than 1% advantage in safety or quality, while 12% were particularly resistant across outcomes. Respondents with lower income (income <$25 000: odds ratio, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.19-3.39) and nonwhite race (odds ratio, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.05-2.42) were more resistant to travel. At least 1 barrier was identified by 74% of respondents (95% CI, 72%-77%), most commonly financial (costs/insurance). However, 94% of respondents (95% CI, 92%-96%) with barriers would travel if provided facilitators, many of which were relatively low cost (transportation, parking, and hotel). Conclusions and Relevance: It appears that most of the US public could be motivated to travel to safer hospitals for complex cancer surgery, yet most would require some support to move. Further efforts to ensure that benefits from regionalization are equitable across sociodemographic strata are indicated.