Clinical Variation Reduction in Propensity-matched Patients Treated for Malignant Pleural Effusion.

BACKGROUND: The potential advantages of clinical variation reduction are improved patient outcomes and cost reduction through optimizing and standardizing care. Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is a common condition encountered by thoracic surgeons that has significant variation in cost and outcomes. The purpose of this investigation was to assess the opportunity of improving patient outcomes and reducing cost by using a standardized treatment algorithm based on evidenced-based care. METHODS: Patients treated for MPE using a standardized treatment algorithm at the study institution over a 2 year period were identified and propensity matched to MPE patients from 1 of 6 affiliated hospitals with comprehensive oncology and thoracic surgery services. Matched patients were treated at their physicians' discretion. Factors used in propensity matching were age, performance status, and tumor histology. The 2 cohorts were then compared for interventions, admissions and readmissions, morbidity, and pleural effusion-associated costs. Patients who desired only comfort or hospice care were excluded. RESULTS: From 2016 through 2018, 60 patients were treated using the standardized algorithm. These patients were propensity matched and the 2 cohorts compared. Patients treated with the algorithm experienced significantly fewer hospital admissions, readmissions, interventions, and costs while having a comparable procedural morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: An evidence-based treatment algorithm for MPE produces superior clinical outcomes to individualized therapy while significantly reducing the costs of care.

Patient Outcomes After Stent Failure for the Treatment of Acute Esophageal Perforation.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal stent placement for acute esophageal perforation has become part of the treatment algorithm for many thoracic surgery programs. Despite high success rates, there are patients for which stent placement is not successful. This investigation summarizes the outcomes of a relatively large group of such patients. METHODS: Patients who underwent esophageal stent placement for an acute perforation but required conversion to another form of therapy were identified from a prospectively collected institutional database. Excluded were patients whose perforation was associated with a malignancy. Patient demographics, operative and nonoperative invasive procedures, morbidities, mortality, and 6-month follow-up after discharge were reviewed. RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2015, 26 patients who failed to seal their esophageal leak after stent placement were identified. Eighteen (69%) of these patients required an operative repair with primary closure of the perforation. Four (15%) primary repairs had a persistent leak controlled with subsequent stent placement. Four (15%) patients required an esophagectomy with cervical esophagostomy. Three patients (11%), because of comorbid conditions, were referred for hospice care. One patient (3%) refused operative repair and developed a chronic fistula that resolved with subsequent stent placement. CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal stent placement continues to be a safe and effective treatment for acute esophageal perforation. Patients whose perforation does not seal with initial stent placement can be treated with primary surgical repair or esophagectomy without increasing their morbidity or mortality or compromising their prognosis.

An Assessment of the Frequency of Palliative Procedures in Thoracic Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Palliative care is a medical specialty focused on improving the quality of life of patients and their families with life threatening illness by preventing or relieving suffering. An assessment of a thoracic surgery service was performed to identify the scope and frequency of care that was considered palliative and any implications the findings might have on the current thoracic surgery residency curriculum. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of general thoracic surgery procedures performed over a 5-year period at a single institution was performed. Procedures considered palliative were reviewed for demographics, diagnoses, palliative prognosis score, treatment, morbidity, operative mortality, and survival. Excluded were referrals from thoracic surgery to other specialties for palliative procedures. RESULTS: During the study period, 3842 procedures were performed of which 884 (23%) were palliative. Indications included pleural or pericardial effusion or both, dysphagia, hemoptysis, tracheobronchial obstruction, bronchopleural fistula, and tracheoesophageal fistula. The majority was related to a malignancy. Only 127 patients (14%) had a palliative care assessment before thoracic surgery consultation. Mean survival following thoracic surgery intervention was 110 days for patients with malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: This investigation found that thoracic surgeons commonly care for patients when the intention or indication or both is palliation. Most of these patients have an associated malignancy, a poor performance status and a projected significantly decreased survival compared with the general population. Thoracic surgeons should be familiar with the concepts of palliative care and consideration should be given to expanding exposure to the principles of palliative care in the cardiothoracic residency training curriculum.

The Effects of a Multidisciplinary Care Conference on the Quality and Cost of Care for Lung Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: A prospective, multidisciplinary care conference (MDC) has been shown to result in measurable benefits for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However whether a MDC also results in a difference in resource utilization and cost as well as whether these benefits persist across a multiinstitutional system has not been reported. This investigation compared propensity-matched patients with NSCLC whose care was coordinated through a MDC to patients without access to an MDC across a geographically diverse system of hospitals. METHODS: The Premiere database (Premier Inc, Charlotte, NC) for a health system's 70 hospitals was used to identify patients undergoing treatment for NSCLC during a 5-year period. Propensity matching was used to populate an MDC and non-MDC cohort. The two cohorts were compared for the costs of staging and diagnosis as well as the timeliness and quality of care metrics. RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2013, 13,254 patients were propensity matched. Patient demographics and Charlson comorbidity scores were comparable after matching. Significant differences were identified in adherence to national guidelines (p < 0.0001) for staging and treatment (p < 0.0001), timeliness of care (p < 0.0001), and costs (p < 0.0001) between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: This investigation found that patients with NSCLC realize improved quality and timeliness of care when that care is coordinated through an MDC. The use of an MDC was also associated with a significant reduction in cost. These differences persisted across a geographically diverse set of hospitals, providers, and patients. Prospective MDCs should be considered integral and compulsory for patients with NSCLC.

An Assessment of the Optimal Time for Removal of Esophageal Stents Used in the Treatment of an Esophageal Anastomotic Leak or Perforation.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal stent for the treatment of a perforation or anastomotic leak has been shown to be effective and safe. However, the optimal timing for stent removal is in question. This purpose of this investigation was to identify a time for stent removal in patients treated for an acute perforation or anastomotic leak that resulted in sealing of the leak while minimizing the incidence of stent-related complications. METHODS: Patients undergoing esophageal stent placement for the treatment of an acute perforation or intrathoracic anastomotic leak were identified from a single institution's prospectively collected database. Patient outcomes were recorded and analyzed. Complications were segregated by stent dwell time. RESULTS: During the study period, 162 patients underwent esophageal stent placement for an acute perforation (n = 117) or anastomotic leak (n = 45). Patients whose stent was removed in less than 28 days after placement for an acute perforation realized a stent complication rate that was independently reduced by 39% (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.54 to 0.78; p < 0.01), whereas patients whose stent was removed in less than 14 days after placement for an acute perforation realized a stent complication rate that was independently reduced by 56% (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.38 to 0.69; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Endoluminal esophageal stent placement is a safe and effective treatment for patients with an acute esophageal perforation or intrathoracic anastomotic leak after esophagectomy. Removal of stents at 2 weeks for anastomotic leak or 4 weeks for perforation has the potential to significantly decrease the incidence of complications associated with stent use.

A propensity-matched comparison of cost and outcomes after esophageal stent placement or primary surgical repair for iatrogenic esophageal perforation.

OBJECTIVES: Esophageal stent placement has been shown to be a safe and effective treatment for acute esophageal perforation in selected patients. However, a comparison between surgical repair and stent placement has not been reported. This investigation compares the outcomes and costs of the 2 treatment modalities. METHODS: The Premiere database for a single health system's hospitals was used to identify patients undergoing treatment for an acute intrathoracic esophageal perforation over a 4-year period. Patient cohorts for stent placement or surgical repair were formed using propensity matching. The 2 cohorts were compared for length of stay, morbidity, mortality, and costs. RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2012, 60 patients undergoing esophageal stent placement or surgical repair were propensity matched. Mean patient age and Charlson comorbidity scores did not differ significantly (P = .4 and P = .4, respectively). Significant differences in morbidity (4% vs 43%; P = .02), mean length of stay (6 vs 11 days; P = .0007), time to oral intake (3 vs 8 days; P = .0004), and cost ($91,000 vs $142,000; P < .0001) were identified in the esophageal stent cohort when compared with patients receiving surgical repair. Operative mortality did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal stent placement for the treatment of an acute esophageal perforation seems to be as effective as surgical repair when compared between propensity-matched patients. However, stent placement resulted in a shorter length of stay, lower rates of morbidity, and lower costs when compared with traditional surgical repair.

A propensity-matched comparison of pleurodesis or tunneled pleural catheter for heart failure patients with recurrent pleural effusion.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe heart failure often have recurrent pleural effusions that produce dyspnea and shortness of breath. It is unclear whether chemical pleurodesis or the placement of a tunneled pleural catheter that can be used for intermittent pleural drainage produces superior palliation, a shorter hospital stay, and less morbidity. This investigation compares these two treatments. METHODS: Patients with a recurrent, symptomatic, pleural effusion secondary to advanced heart failure who had undergone at least two unilateral thoracenteses were identified. Two patient groups were formed by propensity matching patients who received either talc pleurodesis or a tunneled pleural catheter. Patient demographics, length of stay, need for further intervention for the pleural effusion, and procedural morbidity and mortality were collected and compared. Patients who had undergone ventricular assist device placement or cardiac transplant were excluded. RESULTS: Over a 5-year period, 80 patients undergoing treatment were identified and propensity matched. All 80 patients were classified as having class III or IV heart failure. No significant differences in palliation from their effusion were identified. However, the group treated with a tunneled pleural catheter realized a significantly shorter hospital stay as well as a lower rate of operative morbidity and readmissions than patients undergoing talc pleurodesis. CONCLUSIONS: This investigation found that a tunneled pleural catheter provided palliation of patients' pleural effusions and freedom from reintervention equal to that of talc pleurodesis using thoracoscopy while resulting in a shorter mean length of hospital stay. Lower rates of operative morbidity and readmission related to the pleural effusion were also seen in the tunneled catheter treatment group. This method of palliation of recurrent pleural effusion should be considered for symptomatic patients with advanced heart failure.

An analysis of esophageal stent placement for persistent leak after the operative repair of intrathoracic esophageal perforations.

BACKGROUND: Surgical repair of esophageal perforation has been the mainstay of therapy for patients without associated esophageal malignancy or diffuse mediastinal necrosis. However, the leak rate after primary surgical repair is reported to range between 15% and 20% and increases to 45% and 70% in patients whose repair is delayed beyond 24 hours. This analysis reviews patients who experienced a leak after the operative repair of an esophageal perforation treated with esophageal stent placement. METHODS: Patients undergoing esophageal stent placement for the treatment of a leak after the operative repair of an intrathoracic esophageal perforation were identified from a single institution's database, which included patients initially treated at other facilities. Patient outcomes were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: During a 7-year period, 32 esophageal stents were placed in 29 patients who experienced an esophageal leak after operative repair. Associated surgical procedures were simultaneously performed in 7 (24%) patients. Leak occlusion occurred in 27 patients (93%). Two patients required a reoperative repair. Twenty-five patients (86%) were able to initiate oral nutrition within 72 hours of stent placement. Stent migration in 5 patients (19%) required repositioning (n=2) or replacement (n=3). Stents were removed at a mean of 22±16 days after placement. Mean hospital length of stay was 8±11 days. CONCLUSIONS: Endoluminal esophageal stent placement is a safe and effective treatment for the majority of leaks after the operative repair of an intrathoracic esophageal perforation. Stent placement resulted in rapid leak occlusion and provided the opportunity for early oral nutrition while eliminating the need for reoperative repair or esophageal exclusion in the majority of patients.

A comparison of length of stay, readmission rate, and facility reimbursement after lobectomy of the lung.

BACKGROUND: Readmission to the hospital has become a focus for payers with the threat of nonpayment for preventable readmissions and a global penalty for excessive readmissions rates. This study compares readmission rates with lengths of stay (LOS) for patients undergoing lobectomy of the lung and the potential impact on reimbursement. METHODS: The Premier database for a single health system's hospitals was used to identify patients undergoing lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer by cardiothoracic surgeons over a 5-year period. Charlson comorbidity scores were also calculated. Regression analysis was used to study the relationship between length of stay and readmission rates. A comparison of the effects of LOS and readmission on reimbursement was also performed. RESULTS: During the study period, 4,296 lobectomies were performed in 61 hospitals within the healthcare system that met the study's inclusion criteria. A readmission was recorded for 289 patients (7%). Factors associated with readmission were length of stay less than 5 days or more than 16 days and age more than 78 years (p = 0.001). An analysis of the effects of LOS and readmission on reimbursement found an extension of LOS was more cost effective than a readmission. CONCLUSIONS: This review found that mean LOS after lobectomy is negatively associated with readmission rates, with the maximal effect being before postoperative day 5. Furthermore, facility reimbursement was optimized when LOS was extended to minimize the risk of readmission.

Ablation of TNF-alpha receptors influences mesenchymal stem cell-mediated cardiac protection against ischemia.

Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) infusion may reduce myocardial ischemic injury. TNF-alpha is a proinflammatory cytokine produced in large quantities during myocardial ischemia that can exert beneficial or detrimental effects on MSC function by binding to a 55-kd receptor (TNFR1) or a 75-kd receptor (TNFR2) on MSCs. We investigated whether genetic modification with ablation of TNFR1 and/or TNFR2 affects MSC-mediated protection against myocardial ischemic injury. The MSCs were harvested from wild-type mice (WT-MSCs) and knockout mice with ablation of TNFR1 and/or TNFR2 (TNFR1KO, TNFR2KO, and TNFR1/R2KO MSCs). After anesthesia was initiated via inhalation of isoflurane, myocardial ischemia was induced in rats via coronary artery ligation. Hearts were then injected with vehicle or MSCs (1 x 10 cells/mL). Myocardial function was assessed 28 days postsurgery with 2-dimensional echocardiograms and isolated heart perfusion. Myocardial tissue was collected for cytokine analysis and infarct measurements. We found that MSC treatment offered significant protection against myocardial ischemia, namely by decreasing infarct size, improving heart function, and decreasing ventricular remodeling compared with vehicle. Compared with WT-MSCs, TNFR1KO MSCs conferred increased cardiac protection, although TNFR2KO and TNFR1/R2KO MSCs conferred less cardiac protection. In addition, treatment with TNFR1KO MSCs was associated with decreased levels of proinflammatory cytokines and an increased level of vascular endothelial growth factor in the myocardium, whereas treatment with TNFR2KO or TNFR1/R2KO MSCs was associated with increased levels of proinflammatory cytokines and a decreased level of vascular endothelial growth factor compared with treatment with WT-MSCs. We conclude that MSC TNFR1 and TNFR2 play important roles in MSC-mediated cardiac protection after myocardial ischemia.