Increased social media utilization and content creation by cardiothoracic surgery programs during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Objectives: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed the landscape of professional activities, emphasizing virtual meetings and social media (SoMe) presence. Whether cardiothoracic programs increased their SoMe presence is unknown. We examined SoMe use and content creation by cardiothoracic surgery programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We searched the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education to identify all cardiothoracic surgery residency programs (n = 122), including independent (n = 74), integrated (n = 33), and congenital (n = 15) training programs at 78 US cardiothoracic surgery teaching institutions. We then manually searched Google, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, and Twitter to identify the associated residency and departmental accounts. The timeline for our search was between 10/2021 and 4/2022. March 2020 was used as the starting point for the COVID-19 pandemic. We also contacted the account managers to identify account content creators. The data are descriptively reported and analyzed. Results: Of 137 SoMe accounts from 78 US cardiothoracic surgery teaching institutions, 72 of 137 (52.6%) were on Twitter, 34 of 137 (24.8%) on Facebook, and 31 of 137 (22.6%) on Instagram. Most accounts were departmental accounts (105/137 = 76.6%) versus 32 of 137 (23.4%) training program accounts. Most training program-specific SoMe accounts across all platforms were created after the COVID-19 pandemic, whereas departmental accounts were pre-existing (P < .001). The most pronounced SoMe growth was on Instagram at the training program level, with 91.7% of Instagram accounts created after the pandemic. Trainees are the content creators for 94.4% of residency accounts and 33.3% of departmental accounts. Facebook's presence was stagnant. Congenital training programs did not have a specific SoMe presence. Conclusions: SoMe presence by cardiothoracic surgery training programs and departments has increased during the pandemic. Twitter is the most common platform, with a recent increased trend on Instagram. Trainees largely create content. SoMe education and training pathways may be needed for involved trainees to maximize their benefits.

Inflammatory cytokines in robot-assisted thoracic surgery versus video-assisted thoracic surgery.

Background: Cytokines play a crucial role in the inflammatory response and are essential modulators of injury repair mechanisms. While minimally invasive operations have been shown to induce lower levels of cytokines compared to open thoracotomy, the inflammatory cytokine profile difference between video-assisted (VATS) and robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) techniques has yet to be elucidated. Methods: In this prospective observational study of 45 patients undergoing RATS (n=30) or VATS (n=15) lung resection for malignancy, plasma levels of interleukin (IL)-1α, IL-1ß, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), interferon (IFN)-γ, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, monocyte chemo-attractant protein (MCP)-1, and endothelial growth factor (EGF) were measured before and after surgery via immunoassay. Results: Levels of IL-6 and MCP-1 were significantly higher in patients undergoing VATS than in patients undergoing RATS (P<0.001 and P=0.005, respectively) 2 hours following surgery. MCP-1 levels were also found to be significantly higher in the VATS group (P<0.001) 24 hours following surgery. IL-1α, IL-1ß, IL-2, IL-4, IL-8, IL-10, IFN-γ, TNF-α, and EGF levels were not significantly different at any time-point comparing VATS to RATS. Conclusions: The VATS approach is associated with a more robust pro-inflammatory cytokine response through the upregulation of MCP-1 and IL-6 when compared to the RATS approach in patients undergoing anatomic lung resection. Further studies are necessary to validate the clinical significance of this finding.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy vs Chemoradiation Therapy Followed by Sleeve Resection for Resectable Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy is followed by resection in patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The risks and benefits of this approach are not well defined in patients requiring a sleeve lung resection. In this context, we compare the short- and long-term outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone vs chemoradiation therapy followed by sleeve lung resection. METHODS: We used the National Cancer Database to identify locally advanced NSCLC patients who received chemotherapy-alone or chemoradiation therapy in the neoadjuvant setting, followed by a sleeve lung resection, between 2006 and 2017. Our outcomes of interest were 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, and overall survival. To minimize confounding by indication, we used propensity score adjustment, logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, and Cox proportional hazards models to identify associations. RESULTS: Of 176 patients undergoing sleeve lung resection, 92 (52.3%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy-alone, and 84 (47.7%) received neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Patients in both groups were well balanced in age, sex, race, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index, insurance status, median income, and education (all P > .05). Similarly, the groups were well balanced in histology, tumor location, and stage (all P > .05). Patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy had higher 90-day mortality (11.96% vs 2.38%, P = .015), and there was no difference in overall survival between the neoadjuvant chemotherapy-alone vs chemoradiation therapy cohorts (P = .621). CONCLUSIONS: In this national study of patients with locally advanced resectable NSCLC requiring a sleeve lung resection, neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy was associated with a 5-fold increase in 90-day mortality without an overall survival benefit over neoadjuvant chemotherapy-alone.

Assessment of Textbook Outcome After Surgery for Stage I/II Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

Outcomes after cancer resection are traditionally measured individually. Composite metrics, or textbook outcomes, bundle outcomes into a single value to facilitate assessments of quality. We propose a composite outcome for non-small cell lung cancer resections, examine factors associated with the outcome, and evaluate its effect on overall survival. We queried the National Cancer Database for patients with stage I/II non-small cell lung cancer who underwent sublobar resection, lobectomy, or pneumonectomy from 2010 to 2016. We defined the metric as margin-negative resection, sampling of ≥10 lymph nodes, length of stay <75th percentile, no 30-day mortality, no readmission, and receipt of indicated adjuvant therapy. Multivariable logistic regression, Cox proportional hazards modeling, survival analyses, and propensity score matching were used to identify factors associated with the outcome and overall survival. Of 88,208 patients, 70,149 underwent lobectomy, 14,922 underwent sublobar resection, and 3,137 underwent pneumonectomy. Textbook outcome was achieved in 26.3% of patients. Failure to achieve the outcome was most commonly driven by inadequate nodal assessment. Textbook outcome was more likely after minimally invasive surgical approaches (aOR = 1.47; P< 0.001) relative to open resection and less likely after sublobar resection (aOR = 0.20; P< 0.001) relative to lobectomy. Achievement of textbook outcome was associated with an 9.6% increase in 5-year survival (P< 0.001), was independently associated with improved survival (aHR = 0.72; P < 0.001), and remained strongly associated with survival independent of resection extent after propensity matching. One in 4 patients undergoing non-small cell lung cancer resection achieve textbook outcome. Textbook outcome is associated with improved survival and has value as a quality metric.

The impact of marginal lung function on outcomes in the era of minimally invasive thoracic surgery.

BACKGROUND: The effect of marginal lung function on outcomes after lung resection has traditionally been studied in the context of open thoracic surgery. Its impact on postoperative outcomes in the era of minimally invasive lung resection is unclear. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we included adult patients who underwent minimally invasive lung resection at our institution between January 2017 and May 2020 for known malignancy or lung nodule. Marginal lung function was defined as pre-operative forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and/or diffusion lung capacity of carbon monoxide <60% of predicted. Our outcomes included a composite outcome of pulmonary morbidity and/or 30- and 90-day mortality, and hospital length of stay. We used multivariable logistic and Poisson regression models to identify associations with outcomes, and Kaplan-Meier and Cox models to estimate survival. RESULTS: Of 300 patients, 88 (29%) had marginal lung function. Patients in the marginal group were more likely to be female (69% vs. 56%; P=0.028), and more likely to have: hypertension (HTN) (83% vs. 71%; P=0.028), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (38% vs. 12%; P<0.001), interstitial lung disease (ILD) (9% vs. 3%; P<0.019), and ischemic heart disease (28% vs. 18%; P=0.033). Patients were similar in terms of age (68±8 vs. 68±10 years; P=0.932), and other comorbidities. Anatomic lung resection comprised 56.8% of the marginal group vs. 74% in the non-marginal group (P=0.003). The most common complication was prolonged air leak (18.2% vs. 11.8%; P=0.479). Marginal lung function had a trend toward increased composite respiratory complications (22.7% vs. 15.1%; P=0.112) and 90-day mortality (5.7% vs. 4.2%; P=0.591), although they did not reach statistical significance. There was a statistically significant 1-day average increase in length of stay in the marginal lung function cohort (4.6 vs. 3.4 days; P<0.015) with a stronger association with diffusion lung capacity of carbon monoxide than FEV1. Survival was similar (marginal function HR =1.0; P=0.994). CONCLUSIONS: In the era of minimally invasive thoracic surgery, lung resection in patients with marginal lung function may be considered in select patients. These findings aid in the selection consideration and counseling of this patient population.

Postoperative ileus: strategies for reduction.

Postoperative Ileus (POI) is a frequent, frustrating occurrence for patients and surgeons after abdominal surgery. Despite significant research investigating how to reduce this multi-factorial phenomenon, a single strategy has not been shown to reduce POI's significant effects on length of stay (LOS) and hospital costs. Perhaps the most significant cause of POI is the use of narcotics for analgesia. Strategies that target inflammation and pain reduction such as NSAID use, epidural analgesia, and laparoscopic techniques will reduce POI but are accompanied by a simultaneous reduction in opioid use. Pharmacologic means of stimulating gut motility have not shown a positive effect, and the routine use of nasogastric tubes only increases morbidity. Recent multi-site phase III trials with alvimopan, a peripherally acting mu-antagonist, have shown significant reductions in POI and LOS by 12 and 16 hours, respectively, by blunting the effects of narcotics on gut motility while sparing centrally mediated analgesia. Use of alvimopan, along with a multi-modal postoperative treatment plan involving early ambulation, feeding, and avoiding nasogastric tubes, will likely be the crux of POI treatment and prevention.