Thermal ablation compared to stereotactic body radiation therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: A multicenter retrospective comparative study.

BACKGROUND AIMS: Early-stage HCC can be treated with thermal ablation or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). We retrospectively compared local progression, mortality, and toxicity among patients with HCC treated with ablation or SBRT in a multicenter, US cohort. APPROACH RESULTS: We included adult patients with treatment-naïve HCC lesions without vascular invasion treated with thermal ablation or SBRT per individual physician or institutional preference from January 2012 to December 2018. Outcomes included local progression after a 3-month landmark period assessed at the lesion level and overall survival at the patient level. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to account for imbalances in treatment groups. The Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to compare progression and overall survival, and logistic regression was used for toxicity. There were 642 patients with 786 lesions (median size: 2.1 cm) treated with ablation or SBRT. In adjusted analyses, SBRT was associated with a reduced risk of local progression compared to ablation (aHR 0.30, 95% CI: 0.15-0.60). However, SBRT-treated patients had an increased risk of liver dysfunction at 3 months (absolute difference 5.5%, aOR 2.31, 95% CI: 1.13-4.73) and death (aHR 2.04, 95% CI: 1.44-2.88, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter study of patients with HCC, SBRT was associated with a lower risk of local progression compared to thermal ablation but higher all-cause mortality. Survival differences may be attributable to residual confounding, patient selection, or downstream treatments. These retrospective real-world data help guide treatment decisions while demonstrating the need for a prospective clinical trial.

Predicting intra-operative and postoperative consequential events using machine-learning techniques in patients undergoing robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative database study.

OBJECTIVE: To predict intra-operative (IOEs) and postoperative events (POEs) consequential to the derailment of the ideal clinical course of patient recovery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative is a multi-institutional dataset of patients who underwent robot-assisted partial nephectomy for kidney tumours. Machine-learning (ML) models were constructed to predict IOEs and POEs using logistic regression, random forest and neural networks. The models to predict IOEs used patient demographics and preoperative data. In addition to these, intra-operative data were used to predict POEs. Performance on the test dataset was assessed using area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) and area under the precision-recall curve (PR-AUC). RESULTS: The rates of IOEs and POEs were 5.62% and 20.98%, respectively. Models for predicting IOEs were constructed using data from 1690 patients and 38 variables; the best model had an AUC-ROC of 0.858 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.762, 0.936) and a PR-AUC of 0.590 (95% CI 0.400, 0.759). Models for predicting POEs were trained using data from 1406 patients and 59 variables; the best model had an AUC-ROC of 0.875 (95% CI 0.834, 0.913) and a PR-AUC 0.706 (95% CI, 0.610, 0.790). CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the ML models in the present study was encouraging. Further validation in a multi-institutional clinical setting with larger datasets would be necessary to establish their clinical value. ML models can be used to predict significant events during and after surgery with good accuracy, paving the way for application in clinical practice to predict and intervene at an opportune time to avert complications and improve patient outcomes.

Acute Care Surgery Model and Outcomes in Emergency General Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Annually, more than 2 million patients are admitted with emergency general surgery (EGS) conditions. Emergency general surgery cases comprise 11% of all general surgery operations, yet account for 47% of mortalities and 28% of complications. Using the statewide general surgery Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC) data, we previously confirmed that wide variations in EGS outcomes were unrelated to case volume/complexity. We assessed whether patient care model (PCM) affected EGS outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: There were 34 hospitals that provided data for PCM, resources, surgeon practice patterns, and comprehensive MSQC patient data from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2016 (general surgery cases = 126,494; EGS cases = 39,023). Risk and reliability adjusted outcomes were determined using hierarchical multivariable logistic regression analysis with multiple clinical covariates and PCM. RESULTS: The general surgery service (GSS) model was more common (73%) than acute care surgery (ACS, 27%). Emergency general surgery 30-day mortality was 4.1% (intestinal resections 11.6%). The ACS model was associated with a reduction of 31% in mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.69; 95% CI 0.52-0.92] for EGS cases, related to decreased mortality in the intestinal resection cohort (8.5% ACS vs 12% GSS, p < 0.0001). Morbidity in EGS was 17.4% (9.7% elective); highest (40%) in intestinal resection, and PCM did not affect morbidity. We identified specific variables for an optimal EGS risk adjustment model. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first multi-institutional study to identify that an ACS model is associated with a significant 31% mortality reduction in EGS using prospectively collected, clinically obtained, research-quality collaborative data. We identified that new risk adjustment models are necessary for EGS outcomes evaluations.

Can a single interactive seminar durably improve knowledge and confidence of hospital diabetes management?

BACKGROUND: Safe and effective diabetes management in the hospital is challenging. Inadequate knowledge has been identified by trainees as a key barrier. In this study we assess both the short-term and long-term impact of an interactive seminar on medical student knowledge and comfort with hospital diabetes management. METHODS: An interactive seminar covering hospital diabetes management and utilizing an audience response system was added to the third-year medical student curriculum. Students were given a multiple choice assessment immediately before and after the seminar to assess their comprehension of the material. Students were also asked to rate their confidence on this topic. Approximately 6 months later, students were given the same assessment to determine if the improvements in hospital diabetes knowledge and confidence were durable over time. Students from the preceding medical school class, who did not have a hospital diabetes seminar as a part of their curriculum, were used as a control. RESULTS: Fifty-three students participated in the short-term assessment immediately before and after the seminar. The mean score (maximum 15) was 7.7 +/- 2.7 (51%) on the pre-test and 11.4 +/- 1.8 (76%) on the post-test (p < 0.01). 75 students who attended the seminar completed the same set of questions 6 months later with mean score of 9.2 ± 2.3 (61%). The control group of 100 students who did not attend seminar had a mean score of 8.8 ± 2.5 (58%). The difference in scores between the students 6-months after the seminar and the control group was not significantly different (p = 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: Despite initial short-term gains, a single seminar on hospital diabetes management did not durably improve trainee knowledge or confidence. Addition of repeated and focused interactions during clinical rotations or other sustained methods of exposure need to be evaluated.

Prevalence and Determinants of Glycemic Abnormalities in Cardiac Surgery Patients without a History of Diabetes: A Prospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence and persistence of postoperative glycemic abnormalities in patients without a history of diabetes, undergoing cardiac surgery (CS). METHODS: Ninety-two patients without diabetes with planned elective CS procedures at a tertiary institution were evaluated preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively for measures of glucose control including hemoglobin A1c, fasting plasma glucose, 2-h post oral glucose load, and insulin levels. Data from the hospital course were recorded. RESULTS: Valid data were available from 61 participants at 3 months; 59% had prediabetes and 10% had diabetes preoperatively by one or more diagnostic criteria and continued to be dysglycemic at 3 months. Preoperative A1C was an independent predictor of postoperative hyperglycemia (p = 0.02). Insulin resistance and BMI rather than glycemic abnormalities before surgery were associated with a longer duration of the postoperative insulin infusion (p = 0.004, p = 0.048). CONCLUSION: Seventy percent of CS patients without known diabetes met criteria for diabetes or prediabetes preoperatively, and these abnormalities persisted after surgery.

Evaluation of hemoglobin A1c criteria to assess preoperative diabetes risk in cardiac surgery patients.

OBJECTIVE: Hemoglobin A1c (A1C) has recently been recommended for diagnosing diabetes mellitus and diabetes risk (prediabetes). Its performance compared with fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and 2-h post-glucose load (2HPG) is not well delineated. We compared the performance of A1C with that of FPG and 2HPG in preoperative cardiac surgery patients. METHODS: Data from 92 patients without a history of diabetes were analyzed. Patients were classified with diabetes or prediabetes using established cutoffs for FPG, 2HPG, and A1C. Sensitivity and specificity of the new A1C criteria were evaluated. RESULTS: All patients diagnosed with diabetes by A1C also had impaired fasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, or diabetes by other criteria. Using FPG as the reference, sensitivity and specificity of A1C for diagnosing diabetes were 50% and 96%, and using 2HPG as the reference they were 25% and 95%. Sensitivity and specificity for identifying prediabetes with FPG as the reference were 51% and 51%, respectively, and with 2HPG were 53% and 51%, respectively. One-third each of patients with prediabetes was identified using FPG, A1C, or both. When testing A1C and FPG concurrently, the sensitivity of diagnosing dysglycemia increased to 93% stipulating one or both tests are abnormal; specificity increased to 100% if both tests were required to be abnormal. CONCLUSIONS: In patients before cardiac surgery, A1C criteria identified the largest number of patients with diabetes and prediabetes. For diagnosing prediabetes, A1C and FPG were discordant and characterized different groups of patients, therefore altering the distribution of diabetes risk. Simultaneous measurement of FGP and A1C may be a more sensitive and specific tool for identifying high-risk individuals with diabetes and prediabetes.