Clinical and financial outcomes of per-oral endoscopic myotomy compared to laparoscopic heller myotomy for treatment of achalasia.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies analyzing short-term outcomes for per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) have shown excellent clinical response rates and shorter operative times compared to laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM). Despite this, many payors have been slow to recognize POEM as a valid treatment option. Furthermore, comparative studies analyzing long-term outcomes are limited. This study compares perioperative and long-term outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and reimbursement for POEM and LHM at a single institution. METHODS: Adult patients who underwent POEM or LHM between 2014 and 2021 and had complete preoperative data with at least one complete follow up, were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic data, success rate, operative time, myotomy length, length of stay, pre- and postoperative symptom scores, anti-reflux medication use, cost and reimbursement were compared. RESULTS: 58 patients met inclusion with 25 undergoing LHM and 33 undergoing POEM. There were no significant differences in preoperative characteristics. Treatment success (Eckardt ≤ 3) for POEM and LHM was achieved by 88% and 76% of patients, respectively (p = 0.302). POEM patients had a shorter median operative time (106 min. vs. 145 min., p = 0.003) and longer median myotomy length (11 cm vs. 8 cm, p < 0.001). All LHM patients had a length of stay (LOS) ≥ 1 day vs. 51.5% for POEM patients (p < 0.001). Both groups showed improvements in dysphagia, heartburn, regurgitation, Eckardt score, GERD HRQL, RSI, and anti-reflux medication use. The improvement in dysphagia score was greater in patients undergoing POEM (2.30 vs 1.12, p = 0.003). Median hospital reimbursement was dramatically less for POEM ($3,658 vs. $14,152, p = 0.002), despite median hospital costs being significantly lower compared to LHM ($2,420 vs. $3,132, p = 0.029). RESULTS: POEM is associated with a shorter operative time and LOS, longer myotomy length, and greater resolution of dysphagia compared to LHM. POEM costs are significantly less than LHM but is poorly reimbursed.

A comparative evaluation of robotic and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a critical evaluation on the impact of postoperative pain and opioid requirements.

INTRODUCTION: The benefits of minimally invasive surgery using laparoscopy on postoperative pain and opioid use are well established. Our goal was to determine whether patients who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass using a robotic approach (RA-RYGB) had lower postoperative pain and required less opioids than those undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (L-RYGB). Secondary outcomes evaluated included length of stay, operative time, and readmissions. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: This was a retrospective cohort study from a tertiary academic medical center. Patients who underwent L-RYGB or RA-RYGB between 5/1/2018 and 10/31/2019 were included. Cases with concomitant hernia repair, chronic opioid use, and those who did not receive a TAP block or multimodal pain control were excluded. Baseline demographics were compared. Inpatient and outpatient opioid use in Morphine Milligram Equivalents (MME) and pain scores (10-point Likert scale) were compared. RESULTS: There were 573 RY patients included (462 L-RYGB; 111 RA-RYGB). Median and maximum inpatient pain scores were similar for L-RYGB and RA-RYGB (3.0 vs 3.1, p = 0.878; 7.0 vs 7.0, p = 0.688). Median inpatient opioid use and maximum single day use were similar for L-RYGB and RA-RYGB (40.0 MME vs. 42.0 MME, p = 0.671; 30.0 MME vs 30.0 MME, p = 0.648). Both the outpatient prescribing of opioids (50.2% vs. 42.3%, p = 0.136) and outpatient opioid MME at 2 weeks (L-RYGB 30.0 MME vs. 33.8 MME, p = 0.854) were comparable between cohorts. Patient reported pain at 2-week follow-up was significantly higher for RA-RYGB (68.1%) than L-RYGB (55.6%) (p = 0.030). RA-RYGB had a higher rate of 30-day readmission and longer operative times compared to the L-RYGB (6.3% vs 13.5%, p = 0.010; 144.5 vs 200.0 min, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study identified no benefit for postoperative pain or opioid requirements in patients undergoing RA-RYGB compared to L-RYGB. The RA-RYGB group was significantly more likely to report pain at the two-week follow-up.

The Longitudinal Efficiency of Robotic Surgery: an MBSAQIP Propensity Matched 4-Year Comparison of Robotic and Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to examine the MBSAQIP database to assess efficiency trends and perioperative outcomes in robotic bariatric surgery. METHODS: Robotic (RA) and laparoscopic (L) sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and gastric bypass (RYGB) were compared using the 2015-2018 MBSAQIP Participant Use Data Files. Patients were propensity matched 1:1 based on sex, body mass index, assistant, and previous obesity or foregut surgery. A total of 93,802 patients were included. RESULTS: Median operative times were significantly longer for both RA-SG (89 vs. 62 min; p < 0.0001) and RA-RYGB (141 vs. 105 min; p < 0.0001) compared with laparoscopic. Over the 4-year period, the difference in operative times (OR delta) between RA-SG and L-SG was unchanged while the difference in operative times between RA-RYGB and L-RYGB increased. Both robotic groups were significantly more likely to be readmitted (RA-SG p = 0.001, RA-RYGB p = 0.006). Robotic SG was more likely to have a reintervention (p = 0.018) and extended length of stay (LOS) (> 4 days) compared with laparoscopic (p = < 0.0002). No significant differences were noted in morbidity and mortality by approach. CONCLUSIONS: Operative times were 30% longer for RA-SG and 25% longer for RA-RYGB when compared with laparoscopic. There was no significant improvement in OR delta for either RA-SG or RA-RYGB over the four years. Readmission rates were higher for both RA-SG and RA-RYGB. Robotic SG had a greater percentage of patients with extended LOS compared with laparoscopic. No evidence of improved efficiency for robotic bariatric surgery as defined by operative time or clinical outcomes was identified.

Lymph Node Harvest as a Measure of Quality and Effect on Overall Survival in Esophageal Cancer: A National Cancer Database Assessment.

Surgical therapy for esophageal cancer is the cornerstone of treatment, and the highest quality operation should lead to the highest cure rate. Evaluated lymph node (ELN) count is one quality measure that has been championed. The objective of this study was to explore ELN in esophagectomy, examine predictors of harvesting ≥12 nodes, and determine whether higher ELN improves overall survival (OS). ELN was examined in patients with resected esophageal cancer using the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2013. In this study, 41,746 patients met the inclusion criteria. Fifty-two per cent of patients had 12 or more nodes harvested. Academic programs were most likely to harvest ≥12 nodes (58% of cases) compared with other programs (43-56% of cases). Seventy per cent of cases with ≥12 nodes harvested were performed at high-volume centers. Preoperative radiation or preoperative chemoradiation led to lower ELN (46% and 48%) versus preoperative chemotherapy alone (66%). Multivariate analysis showed that patients who had ≥12 nodes removed had better OS (Hazard Ratio 0.843 [95 confidence interval 0.820-0.867]). In addition, care at a high-volume facility, care at an academic facility, private insurance, and income ≥$63,000 were all associated with improved OS. Higher ELN count is associated with OS in patients with esophageal cancer. Patients who receive care at high-volume centers and academic centers are more likely to undergo more extensive lymphadenectomy. All centers should strive to examine at least 12 nodes to provide a quality esophagectomy.

Arsenic induces structural and compositional colonic microbiome change and promotes host nitrogen and amino acid metabolism.

Chronic exposure to arsenic in drinking water causes cancer and non-cancer diseases. However, mechanisms for chronic arsenic-induced pathogenesis, especially in response to lower exposure levels, are unclear. In addition, the importance of health impacts from xeniobiotic-promoted microbiome changes is just being realized and effects of arsenic on the microbiome with relation to disease promotion are unknown. To investigate impact of arsenic exposure on both microbiome and host metabolism, the stucture and composition of colonic microbiota, their metabolic phenotype, and host tissue and plasma metabolite levels were compared in mice exposed for 2, 5, or 10weeks to 0, 10 (low) or 250 (high) ppb arsenite (As(III)). Genotyping of colonic bacteria revealed time and arsenic concentration dependent shifts in community composition, particularly the Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes, relative to those seen in the time-matched controls. Arsenic-induced erosion of bacterial biofilms adjacent to the mucosal lining and changes in the diversity and abundance of morphologically distinct species indicated changes in microbial community structure. Bacterical spores increased in abundance and intracellular inclusions decreased with high dose arsenic. Interestingly, expression of arsenate reductase (arsA) and the As(III) exporter arsB, remained unchanged, while the dissimilatory nitrite reductase (nrfA) gene expression increased. In keeping with the change in nitrogen metabolism, colonic and liver nitrite and nitrate levels and ratios changed with time. In addition, there was a concomitant increase in pathogenic arginine metabolites in the mouse circulation. These data suggest that arsenic exposure impacts the microbiome and microbiome/host nitrogen metabolism to support disease enhancing pathogenic phenotypes.