Early diagnosis is associated with improved clinical outcomes in benign esophageal perforation: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Time of diagnosis (TOD) of benign esophageal perforation is regarded as an important risk factor for clinical outcome, although convincing evidence is lacking. The aim of this study is to assess whether time between onset of perforation and diagnosis is associated with clinical outcome in patients with iatrogenic esophageal perforation (IEP) and Boerhaave's syndrome (BS). METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane library through June 2018 to identify studies. Authors were invited to share individual patient data and a meta-analysis was performed (PROSPERO: CRD42018093473). Patients were subdivided in early (≤ 24 h) and late (> 24 h) TOD and compared with mixed effects multivariable analysis while adjusting age, gender, location of perforation, initial treatment and center. Primary outcome was overall mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay, re-interventions and ICU admission. RESULTS: Our meta-analysis included IPD of 25 studies including 576 patients with IEP and 384 with BS. In IEP, early TOD was not associated with overall mortality (8% vs. 13%, OR 2.1, 95% CI 0.8-5.1), but was associated with a 23% decrease in ICU admissions (46% vs. 69%, OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2-7.2), a 22% decrease in re-interventions (23% vs. 45%, OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.2-6.7) and a 36% decrease in length of hospital stay (14 vs. 22 days, p < 0.001), compared with late TOD. In BS, no associations between TOD and outcomes were found. When combining IEP and BS, early TOD was associated with a 6% decrease in overall mortality (10% vs. 16%, OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1-3.9), a 19% decrease in re-interventions (26% vs. 45%, OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.2) and a 35% decrease in mean length of hospital stay (16 vs. 22 days, p = 0.001), compared with late TOD. CONCLUSIONS: This individual patient data meta-analysis confirms the general opinion that an early (≤ 24 h) compared to a late diagnosis (> 24 h) in benign esophageal perforations, particularly in IEP, is associated with improved clinical outcome.

Opportunities for quality improvement in the morbidity pattern of older adults undergoing pulmonary lobectomy for cancer.

BACKGROUND: There is limited information on the frequency of complications among older adults after oncological thoracic surgery in the modern era. We hypothesized that morbidity and mortality in older adults with lung cancer undergoing lobectomy is low and different than that of younger patients undergoing thoracic surgery. METHODS: All patients undergoing lobectomy at a large volume academic center between May 2016 and May 2019 were included. Patients were prospectively monitored to grade postoperative morbidity by organ system, based on the Clavien-Dindo classification. Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 included patients 65-91 years of age, and Group 2 included those <65 years. RESULTS: Of 680 lobectomies in 673 patients, 414(61%) were older than 65 years of age (group 1). Median age at surgery was 68 years (20-91). Median hospital stay was 4 days (1-38) and longer in older adults. Older adults experienced higher rates of grade II and IV complications, mostly driven by an increased incidence of delirium, atrial fibrillation, prolonged air leak, respiratory failure and urinary retention. In this modern cohort, there was only 1 stroke (0.1%), and delirium was reduced to 7%. Patients undergoing minimally invasive (MI) surgery had a lower rate of Grade IV life-threatening complications. Older adults were more likely to be discharged to a rehabilitation facility, however this difference also disappeared with MI surgical procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Current morbidity of older adults undergoing lobectomy for cancer is low and is different than that of younger patients. Thoracotomy may be associated with postoperative complications in these patients. Our findings suggest the need to consider MI approaches and broad-based, geriatric-focused perioperative management of older adults undergoing lobectomy.

Cumulative nonsmoking risk factors increase the probability of developing lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that 20% of lung cancer cases in the United States are among never smokers, yet current screening recommendations only include a small subset of high-risk patients. In this study, 2 models were used to predict the risk of developing lung cancer in subgroups of never smoking patients with additional risk variables. METHODS: The Liverpool Lung Project (LLP) and the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO) were 2 models used to calculate risk of developing lung cancer. Risk was calculated as a function of age for developing lung cancer within the next 5 to 10 years. RESULTS: PLCO estimated a peak risk of 16.20% at age 75 for 30-pack-year smokers with a first-degree relative with lung cancer. LLP estimated a peak risk of 7.3% over the next 5 years at age 79 for men with 30-pack-year and a first-degree relative with early-onset lung cancer (<60 years). Female never smokers with cumulative variables other than smoking had a peak risk of 3.40% for age 74 to 75 years. In contrast, women with only 30-pack-year smoking history and no other variable had a peak risk of 2.20% at age 74 to 75 years. CONCLUSIONS: Models such as LLP and PLCO might be used to identify risk for patients who would otherwise not receive lung cancer screening. These individual risk assessments can be used by patients and providers to assess if one is at substantial risk for developing lung cancer.