Predicting Colonic Neoplasia Surgical Complications: A Machine Learning Approach.

BACKGROUND: A range of statistical approaches have been used to help predict outcomes associated with colectomy. The multifactorial nature of complications suggests that machine learning algorithms may be more accurate in determining postoperative outcomes by detecting nonlinear associations, which are not readily measured by traditional statistics. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the utility of machine learning algorithms to predict complications in patients undergoing colectomy for colonic neoplasia. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis using decision tree, random forest, and artificial neural network classifiers to predict postoperative outcomes. SETTINGS: National Inpatient Sample database (2003-2017). PATIENTS: Adult patients who underwent elective colectomy with anastomosis for neoplasia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Performance was quantified using sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to predict the incidence of anastomotic leak, prolonged length of stay, and inpatient mortality. RESULTS: A total of 14,935 patients (4731 laparoscopic, 10,204 open) were included. They had an average age of 67 ± 12.2 years, and 53% of patients were women. The 3 machine learning models successfully identified patients who developed the measured complications. Although differences between model performances were largely insignificant, the neural network scored highest for most outcomes: predicting anastomotic leak, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.88/0.93 (open/laparoscopic, 95% CI, 0.73-0.92/0.80-0.96); prolonged length of stay, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.84/0.88 (open/laparoscopic, 95% CI, 0.82-0.85/0.85-0.91); and inpatient mortality, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.90/0.92 (open/laparoscopic, 95% CI, 0.85-0.96/0.86-0.98). LIMITATIONS: The patients from the National Inpatient Sample database may not be an accurate sample of the population of all patients undergoing colectomy for colonic neoplasia and does not account for specific institutional and patient factors. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning predicted postoperative complications in patients with colonic neoplasia undergoing colectomy with good performance. Although validation using external data and optimization of data quality will be required, these machine learning tools show great promise in assisting surgeons with risk-stratification of perioperative care to improve postoperative outcomes. See Video Abstract . PREDICCIN DE LAS COMPLICACIONES QUIRRGICAS DE LA NEOPLASIA DE COLON UN ENFOQUE DE MODELO DE APRENDIZAJE AUTOMTICO: ANTECEDENTES:Se han utilizado una variedad de enfoques estadísticos para ayudar a predecir los resultados asociados con la colectomía. La naturaleza multifactorial de las complicaciones sugiere que los algoritmos de aprendizaje automático pueden ser más precisos en determinar los resultados posoperatorios al detectar asociaciones no lineales, que generalmente no se miden en las estadísticas tradicionales.OBJETIVO:El objetivo de este estudio fue investigar la utilidad de los algoritmos de aprendizaje automático para predecir complicaciones en pacientes sometidos a colectomía por neoplasia de colon.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo utilizando clasificadores de árboles de decisión, bosques aleatorios y redes neuronales artificiales para predecir los resultados posoperatorios.AJUSTE:Base de datos de la Muestra Nacional de Pacientes Hospitalizados (2003-2017).PACIENTES:Pacientes adultos sometidos a colectomía electiva con anastomosis por neoplasia.INTERVENCIONES:N/A.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El rendimiento se cuantificó utilizando la sensibilidad, especificidad, precisión y la característica operativa del receptor del área bajo la curva para predecir la incidencia de fuga anastomótica, duración prolongada de la estancia hospitalaria y mortalidad de los pacientes hospitalizados.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron un total de 14.935 pacientes (4.731 laparoscópicos, 10.204 abiertos). Presentaron una edad promedio de 67 ± 12,2 años y el 53% eran mujeres. Los tres modelos de aprendizaje automático identificaron con éxito a los pacientes que desarrollaron las complicaciones medidas. Aunque las diferencias entre el rendimiento del modelo fueron en gran medida insignificantes, la red neuronal obtuvo la puntuación más alta para la mayoría de los resultados: predicción de fuga anastomótica, característica operativa del receptor del área bajo la curva 0,88/0,93 (abierta/laparoscópica, IC del 95%: 0,73-0,92/0,80-0,96); duración prolongada de la estancia hospitalaria, característica operativa del receptor del área bajo la curva 0,84/0,88 (abierta/laparoscópica, IC del 95%: 0,82-0,85/0,85-0,91); y mortalidad de pacientes hospitalizados, característica operativa del receptor del área bajo la curva 0,90/0,92 (abierto/laparoscópico, IC del 95%: 0,85-0,96/0,86-0,98).LIMITACIONES:Los pacientes de la base de datos de la Muestra Nacional de Pacientes Hospitalizados pueden no ser una muestra precisa de la población de todos los pacientes sometidos a colectomía por neoplasia de colon y no tienen en cuenta factores institucionales y específicos del paciente.CONCLUSIONES:El aprendizaje automático predijo con buen rendimiento las complicaciones postoperatorias en pacientes con neoplasia de colon sometidos a colectomía. Aunque será necesaria la validación mediante datos externos y la optimización de la calidad de los datos, estas herramientas de aprendizaje automático son muy prometedoras para ayudar a los cirujanos con la estratificación de riesgos de la atención perioperatoria para mejorar los resultados posoperatorios. (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Systematic Review of Prophylactic Plastic Surgery Closure to Prevent Postoperative Wound Complications Following Spine Surgery.

Spinal surgeries are increasingly performed in the United States, but complication rates can be unacceptably high at up to 26%. Consequently, plastic surgeons (PS) are sometimes recruited by spine surgeons (SS) for intraoperative assistance with soft tissue closures. An electronic multidatabase literature search was systematically conducted to determine whether spinal wound closure performed by PS minimizes postoperative wound healing complications when compared to closure by SS (neurosurgical or orthopedic), with the hypothesis that closures by PS minimizes incidence of complications. All published studies involving patients who underwent posterior spinal surgery with closure by PS or SS at index spine surgery were identified. Filtering by exclusion criteria identified 10 studies, 4 of which were comparative in nature and included both closures by PS and SS. Of these 4, none reported significant differences in postoperative outcomes between the groups. Across all studies, PS were involved in cases with higher baseline risk for wound complications and greater comorbidity burden. Closures by PS were significantly more likely to have had prior chemotherapy in 2 of the 4 (50%) studies (P = 0.014, P < 0.001) and radiation in 3 of the 4 (75%) studies (P < 0.001, P < 0.01, P < 0.001). In conclusion, closures by PS are frequently performed in higher risk cases, and use of PS in these closures may normalize the risk of wound complications to that of the normal risk cohort, though the overall level of evidence of the published literature is low.

Examining Racial and Gender Diversity in the Plastic Surgery Pipeline: Where is the Leak?

Background: There is limited information about minority representation throughout the plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) pipeline. The aim of this study was to examine trends in representation among minorities at different stages of the PRS training pathway, starting with potential candidates in high school through practicing physicians. Methods: The PRS pipeline was defined as high school; college; medical school applicants, matriculants, and graduates; PRS residency applicants, matriculants, and active residents; and PRS practicing physicians. Racial data for each stage were obtained from the US Census and Association of American Medical Colleges. The proportion of races at each stage were divided by their US population counterpart proportions to produce representation quotients (RQs). Medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs) are reported. Mann-Whitney U tests compared RQ values within identities between successive stages. Results: Black students had high representation in high school (RQ = 1.26 [IQR: 1.21-1.29]) but had significant, stepwise decreases in representation in subsequent stages. A similar trend was observed for Hispanic individuals, who had their highest representation in high school (1.43 [1.37-1.50]), followed by significant decreases in RQ at nearly every subsequent stage up to and including practicing physicians (0.30 [0.28-0.31). Asian individuals were overrepresented at every stage (high school RQ: 1.01 [1.00-1.03]; practicing physician RQ: 2.30 [2.27-2.32]). White individuals were underrepresented before residency but had an RQ that approximated 1 in subsequent stages. Conclusions: Racial minorities experienced decreases in representation at each successive stage in the PRS pipeline following high school. Ongoing diversity efforts should focus on premedical recruitment and professional support for minority students.

National Analysis of Sternal Wound Complications and Readmissions After Coronary Bypass Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Wound complications are a cause for readmission after cardiac surgery. Health insurance status has been associated with poor postoperative outcomes. We investigate the association between health insurance status and post-CABG wound dehiscence or infection along with 30-day wound-related readmission using a national database. METHODS: We queried the National Readmissions Database for the year 2018 for patients aged 18 years or more undergoing multivessel coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). Patients were subcategorized by health insurance status (private, Medicaid, Medicare, uninsured). Our primary outcomes were wound dehiscence or infection during the index admission and 30-day readmission after discharge for wound-related complications. RESULTS: In all, 131,976 patients met inclusion criteria: 32.7% private, 7.6% Medicaid, 59.3% Medicare, and 0.4% uninsured. Compared with patients having private insurance, Medicaid patients had greater odds of readmission for superficial wound dehiscence (odds ratio [OR] 2.11; 1.11-4.00; P = .022) and deep wound dehiscence (OR 2.11; 95% CI, 1.09-4.10; P = .026), as did Medicare patients (OR 2.34; 95% CI, 1.29-3.88; P = .004; and OR 3.23; 95% CI, 1.76-5.90; P = .001, respectively). Medicaid patients additionally had higher odds of readmission for superficial wound infection (OR 1.59; 95% CI, 1.11-4.00; P = .014). Compared with patients with private insurance, Medicaid patients had higher odds of deep wound dehiscence on index admission (OR 1.97; 95% CI, 1.02-3.83; P = .044), and Medicare patients had higher odds of superficial wound dehiscence (OR 2.55; 95% CI, 1.28-5.06; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with Medicaid and Medicare had greater odds of readmission for wound complications and higher rates of wound dehiscence in their index admission. Further research is warranted to characterize factors driving readmission due to postsurgical wound complications in low socioeconomic status populations.

Pediatric Orthognathic Surgery: A NSQIP-P Comparison of Peri-Operative Factors and Outcome Differences Between Cleft and Noncleft Patients.

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to investigate the risk factors, complication profiles, and clinical outcomes of cleft and noncleft patients undergoing single jaw (mandibular or LeFort 1) and bimaxillary (BSSO + LeFort 1). DESIGN: Retrospective Cross-sectional Study Setting: National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database 2018-2019. PATIENTS: Pediatric patients. INTERVENTIONS: Outcomes for mandibular, LeFort 1, and bimaxillary osteotomy were retrospectively evaluated for cleft and noncleft patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the odds of complications and length of stay for cleft and noncleft patients undergoing single jaw and double jaw surgery. RESULTS: 669 pediatric patient underwent orthognathic surgery in the study period; the majority received LF1 only (n = 385; 58.3%), followed by mandible only (n = 179; 27.1%), and bimaxillary (n = 105; 15.9%%). Cleft differences were present in 56% of LFI patients, 32% of mandibular patients, and 22% of bimaxillary patients. After multivariate adjustment, ASA class III was associated with nearly 400% increased odds of any complication including readmission and reoperation (OR = 5.99; CI [[1.54-23.32]], p < 0.01, and 65% increased LOS (ß-coefficient = 1.65, CI [1.37-1.99], p < 0.01). Presence of cleft was not significantly associated with odds of any complication (p = 0.69) nor increased LOS (p = 0.46) in this population. CONCLUSION: Complications remained low between surgery types among cleft and noncleft patients. The most significant risk factor in pediatric orthognathic surgery was not the presence of cleft but rather increased ASA class. Though common in patients seeking orthognathic surgery, cleft differences did not cause additional risk after adjustment for other variables.

Characterizing the Association of Race and Insurance Status with Resource Utilization in Brachial Plexopathy Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the link between socioeconomic status and immediate postoperative brachial plexus injury (BPI) management outcomes is critical to mitigating disparities and optimizing postoperative recovery plans. The present study aimed to elucidate the association between socioeconomic status and resource utilization following surgery for BPI. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of adult patients (18 years) with a BPI diagnosis from the 2002-2017 National Inpatient Sample. Primary outcomes included home discharge rates, length of stay (LOS), and cost. We used multivariable regressions to analyze outcome measures. RESULTS: A total of 23,755 BPI admissions were identified, 14.67% of whom received surgical intervention. Patients receiving Medicare had lower odds of home discharge compared with privately insured patients (adjusted odds ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.58-0.74; P < 0.001). Medicaid, Medicare, and uninsured patients had 6%-32% longer LOS than privately insured patients (P < 0.001, P = 0.004, and P = 0.006, respectively). Patients in the top income quartile had a 12% increase in costs compared with those in the bottom quartile (P < 0.001). Latinx and Other race groups had 11%-14% increased costs compared with White patients (Latinx P < 0.001, Other P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Differences in BPI resource utilization and allocation exist, from increased LOS among non-privately insured and non-White patients to increased BPI treatment costs among patients in higher-income quartiles. Further research is necessary to elucidate how these disparities exist and impact functional outcomes.

Predicting the Impact of Race and Socioeconomic Status on Cranioplasty Materials and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Cranioplasty can be performed with either autologous or synthetic materials. No clear consensus has been reached regarding which material is superior and which social factors might influence the choice of treatment modality and the outcomes. We investigated the effects of race and socioeconomic status on the implant choice and outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of adult cranioplasty patients from 2002 to 2017 using the National Inpatient Sample. Autologous implant use, admission costs, length of stay (LOS), and home discharge were analyzed by race, income quartile, and insurance type using multivariable regression models. RESULTS: A total of 105,714 admissions met the inclusion criteria. Most of the patients were women (50.3%) and White (73.7%). Black, other race, and Medicaid patients had greater odds of autologous graft usage, and patients in the 76th-100th income quartile had lower usage. Higher income patients (51th-75th and 76th-100th) had had significantly higher hospitalization costs, amounting to a $1547.2 increase, compared with the bottom quartile. The Medicaid patients had a longer LOS (odds ratio, 1.06; P = 0.008) and decreased rates of home discharge (odds ratio, 0.41; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found increased autologous cranioplasty usage for non-White and Medicaid patients and increased use of higher cost synthetic implants for high-income patients. Non-White patients and those from higher income quartiles incurred higher admission costs. Medicaid patients had a longer LOS and decreased rates of home discharge.

Predicting access to postoperative treatment after glioblastoma resection: an analysis of neighborhood-level disadvantage using the Area Deprivation Index (ADI).

PURPOSE: Social determinants of health (SDoH)-socioeconomic and environmental factors-impact outcomes. The Area Deprivation Index (ADI), a composite of seventeen SDoH factors, has been correlated with poorer outcomes. We aimed to compare outcomes and treatment access for glioblastoma, a universally fatal malignant brain tumor, in patients more (ADI 34-100%) versus less disadvantaged (ADI 0-33%). METHODS: A 5-year retrospective study of Rhode Island Hospital and Mayo Clinic databases was conducted from 2012 to 2017 for patients ≥ 18 years with glioblastoma. Patient addresses were matched to ADI percentiles and grouped into more (top 66% ADI) and less disadvantaged. Adjusted multivariable regressions were used to compare outcomes between groups. RESULTS: A total of 434 patients met inclusion; 92.9% were insured, 56.2% were more disadvantaged (n = 244), and the more disadvantaged cohort was younger on average (62 years). After adjustment, the more disadvantaged group had decreased odds of receiving gross total resection (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.43, 95% CI [0.27-0.68]; p < 0.001). This cohort also had decreased odds of undergoing chemotherapy (aOR 0.51[0.26-0.98]), radiation (aOR 0.39[0.20-0.77]), chemoradiation (aOR 0.42[0.23-0.77]), tumor-treating fields (aOR 0.39[0.16-0.93]), and clinical trial participation (aOR 0.47[0.25-0.91]). No differences in length of survival or postoperative Karnofsky Performance Status Scale were observed. CONCLUSION: More disadvantaged glioblastoma patients had decreased odds of receiving gross total resection. They also exhibited decreased odds of receiving standard of care like chemoradiation as well as participating in a clinical trial, compared to the less disadvantaged group. More research is needed to identify modifiable SDoH barriers to post-operative treatment in disadvantaged patients with glioblastoma.

Association of Patient Frailty With Vestibular Schwannoma Resection Outcomes and Machine Learning Development of a Vestibular Schwannoma Risk Stratification Score.

BACKGROUND: Patient frailty is predictive of higher neurosurgical morbidity and mortality. However, existing frailty measures are hindered by lack of specificity to neurosurgery. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the association between 3 risk stratification scores and outcomes for nationwide vestibular schwannoma (VS) resection admissions and develop a custom VS risk stratification score. METHODS: We identified all VS resection admissions in the National Inpatient Sample (2002-2017). Three risk stratification scores were analyzed: modified Frailty Index-5, modified Frailty Index-11(mFI-11), and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Survey-weighted multivariate regression evaluated associations between frailty and inpatient outcomes, adjusting for patient demographics, hospital characteristics, and disease severity. Subsequently, we used k -fold cross validation and Akaike Information Criterion-based model selection to create a custom risk stratification score. RESULTS: We analyzed 32 465 VS resection admissions. High frailty, as identified by the mFI-11 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.27, P = .021) and CCI (OR = 1.72, P < .001), predicted higher odds of perioperative complications. All 3 scores were also associated with lower routine discharge rates and elevated length of stay (LOS) and costs (all P < .05). Our custom VS-5 score ( https://skullbaseresearch.shinyapps.io/vs-5_calculator/ ) featured 5 variables (age ≥60 years, hydrocephalus, preoperative cranial nerve palsies, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension) and was predictive of higher mortality (OR = 6.40, P = .001), decreased routine hospital discharge (OR = 0.28, P < .001), and elevated complications (OR = 1.59, P < .001), LOS (+48%, P < .001), and costs (+23%, P = .001). The VS-5 outperformed the modified Frailty Index-5, mFI-11, and CCI in predicting routine discharge (all P < .001), including in a pseudoprospective cohort (2018-2019) of 3885 admissions. CONCLUSION: Patient frailty predicted poorer inpatient outcomes after VS surgery. Our custom VS-5 score outperformed earlier risk stratification scores.

The National Inpatient Sample: A Primer for Neurosurgical Big Data Research and Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) (the largest all-payer inpatient database in the United States) is an important instrument for big data analysis of neurosurgical inquiries. However, earlier research has determined that many NIS studies are limited by common methodological pitfalls. In this study, we provide the first primer of NIS methodological procedures in the setting of neurosurgical research and review all reported neurosurgical studies using the NIS. METHODS: We designed a protocol for neurosurgical big data research using the NIS, based on our subject matter expertise, NIS documentation, and input and verification from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. We subsequently used a comprehensive search strategy to identify all neurosurgical studies using the NIS in the PubMed and MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases from inception to August 2021. Studies underwent qualitative categorization (years of NIS studied, neurosurgical subspecialty, age group, and thematic focus of study objective) and analysis of longitudinal trends. RESULTS: We identified a canonical, 4-step protocol for NIS analysis: study population selection; defining additional clinical variables; identification and coding of outcomes; and statistical analysis. Methodological nuances discussed include identifying neurosurgery-specific admissions, addressing missing data, calculating additional severity and hospital-specific metrics, coding perioperative complications, and applying survey weights to make nationwide estimates. Inherent database limitations and common pitfalls of NIS studies discussed include lack of disease process-specific variables and data after the index admission, inability to calculate certain hospital-specific variables after 2011, performing state-level analyses, conflating hospitalization charges and costs, and not following proper statistical methodology for performing survey-weighted regression. In a systematic review, we identified 647 neurosurgical studies using the NIS. Although almost 60% of studies were reported after 2015, <10% of studies analyzed NIS data after 2015. The average sample size of studies was 507,352 patients (standard deviation = 2,739,900). Most studies analyzed cranial procedures (58.1%) and adults (68.1%). The most prevalent topic areas analyzed were surgical outcome trends (35.7%) and health policy and economics (17.8%), whereas patient disparities (9.4%) and surgeon or hospital volume (6.6%) were the least studied. CONCLUSIONS: We present a standardized methodology to analyze the NIS, systematically review the state of the NIS neurosurgical literature, suggest potential future directions for neurosurgical big data inquiries, and outline recommendations to improve the design of future neurosurgical data instruments.

Brain tumor craniotomy outcomes for dual-eligible medicare and medicaid patients: a 10-year nationwide analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Dual-eligible (DE) patients, simultaneous Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, have been shown to have poorer clinical outcomes while incurring higher resource utilization. However, neurosurgical oncology outcomes for DE patients are poorly characterized. Accordingly, we examined the impact of DE status on perioperative outcomes following glioma, meningioma, or metastasis resection. METHODS: We identified all admissions undergoing a craniotomy for glioma, meningioma, or metastasis resection in the National Inpatient Sample from 2002 to 2011. Assessed outcomes included inpatient mortality, complications, discharge disposition, length of stay (LOS), and hospital costs. Multivariable regression adjusting for 13 patient, severity, and hospital characteristics assessed the association between DE status and outcomes, relative to four reference insurance groups (Medicare-only, Medicaid-only, private insurance, self-pay). RESULTS: Of 195,725 total admissions analyzed, 3.0% were dual-eligible beneficiaries (n = 5933). DEs were younger than Medicare admissions (P < 0.001) but older than Medicaid, private, and self-pay admissions (P < 0.001). Relative to other insurance groups, DEs also exhibited higher severity of illness, risk of mortality, and Charlson Comorbidity Index scores as well as treatment at low-volume hospitals (all P < 0.001). DEs had lower mortality than self-pay admissions (odds ratio [OR] 0.47, P = 0.017). Compared to Medicare, Medicaid, private, and self-pay admissions, DEs had lower rates of discharge disposition (OR 0.53, 0.50, 0.34, and 0.27, respectively, all P < 0.001). DEs also had higher complications (OR 1.23 and 1.20, respectively, both P < 0.05) and LOS (ß = 1.06 and 1.13, respectively, both P < 0.01) than Medicare and private insurance beneficiaries. Differences in discharge disposition remained significant for all three tumor subtypes, but only glioma DE admissions continued to exhibit higher complications and LOS. CONCLUSIONS: DEs undergoing definitive craniotomy for brain tumor had higher rates of unfavorable discharge disposition compared to all other insurance groups and, especially for glioma surgery, had higher inpatient complication rates and LOS. Practice and policy reforms to improve outcomes for this vulnerable clinical population are warranted.

Health disparities attributed to Medicare-Medicaid dual-eligible status in patients with peripheral arterial disease.

OBJECTIVE: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is a prevalent and debilitating disease that can be effectively treated by surgical revascularization. However, Medicare-Medicaid dual-eligible patients have experienced worse long-term outcomes, notably higher rates of amputation and mortality, relative to other insurance groups. In the present study, we investigated how insurance status can perpetuate health disparities in PAD outcomes. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample was queried from 2000 to 2011 for patients aged ≥18 years with PAD who had undergone surgical revascularization with hospitalization. Patients were stratified by insurance status, and dual-eligible patients were compared with Medicare-only, Medicaid-only, private insurance, and self-pay patients. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to assess the effect of dual-eligible status on postoperative outcomes such as inpatient mortality, complications, and favorable discharge (home or home with services). RESULTS: A total of 771,790 hospitalizations were included in the present analysis and stratified by insurance type. Dual-eligible patients had the highest rates of major (32%) and extreme (11%) severity of illness and the highest rates of major (19%) and extreme (6%) risk of mortality among all insurance groups (P < .001). Dual-eligibility status was independently associated with reduced odds of favorable discharge relative to all patients (P < .001) and increased length of stay relative to Medicare-only (P = .002) and private-payor groups (P < .001). Although dual-eligible patients had increased mortality odds relative to the Medicaid-only and self-pay groups, they did not have significantly different odds of perioperative complications relative to all other insurance groups. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare-Medicaid dual-eligible patients with PAD had had more severe clinical presentations, a greater risk of extended hospitalizations, and a lower likelihood of discharge to home, relative to patients without dual eligibility. Further studies are needed to examine the link between discharge disposition and disparities in healthcare outcomes and to investigate the interventions that effectively address the increased severity of PAD in dual-eligible patients.

Outcomes after clipping and endovascular coiling for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage among dual-eligible beneficiaries.

Dual-eligible beneficiaries, individuals with both Medicare and Medicaid coverage, represent a high-cost and vulnerable population; however, literature regarding outcomes is sparse. We characterized outcomes in dual-eligible beneficiaries treated for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) compared to Medicare only, Medicaid only, private insurance, and self-pay. A 10-year cross-sectional study of the National Inpatient Sample was conducted. Adult aSAH emergency admissions treated by neurosurgical clipping or endovascular coiling were included. Multivariable regression was used to adjust for confounders. A total of 57,666 patients met inclusion criteria. Dual-eligibles comprised 2.8% of admissions and were on average younger (62.4 years) than Medicare (70.0 years), older than all other groups, and had higher mean National Inpatient Sample-Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Severity Scores than all other groups (p ≤ 0.001). Among patients treated by clipping, dual-eligibles were less often discharged to home compared to Medicare (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.30-0.87, p < 0.05) and all other insurance groups, p < 0.01. Likewise, those who received coiling were less often discharged to home compared to Medicaid (aOR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.23-0.73), private (aOR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.23-0.76) and self-pay patients (aOR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.12-0.46). They also had increased odds of poor National Inpatient Sample-Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Outcome Measures compared to Medicaid, private, and self-pay patients, all p < 0.05. There were no differences in inpatient mortality or total complications. In conclusion, dual-eligible patients had higher aSAH severity scores, less often discharged home, and among patients who received coiling, dual-eligibles had increased odds of poor outcome. Dual-eligible patients with aSAH represent a vulnerable population that may benefit from targeted clinical and public policy initiatives.

The impact of hospital safety-net status on inpatient outcomes for brain tumor craniotomy: a 10-year nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: Outcome disparities have been documented at safety-net hospitals (SNHs), which disproportionately serve vulnerable patient populations. Using a nationwide retrospective cohort, we assessed inpatient outcomes following brain tumor craniotomy at SNHs in the United States. METHODS: We identified all craniotomy procedures in the National Inpatient Sample from 2002-2011 for brain tumors: glioma, metastasis, meningioma, and vestibular schwannoma. Safety-net burden was calculated as the number of Medicaid plus uninsured admissions divided by total admissions. Hospitals in the top quartile of burden were defined as SNHs. The association between SNH status and in-hospital mortality, discharge disposition, complications, hospital-acquired conditions (HACs), length of stay (LOS), and costs were assessed. Multivariate regression adjusted for patient, hospital, and severity characteristics. RESULTS: 304,719 admissions were analyzed. The most common subtype was glioma (43.8%). Of 1,206 unique hospitals, 242 were SNHs. SNH admissions were more likely to be non-white (P < .001), low income (P < .001), and have higher severity scores (P = .034). Mortality rates were higher at SNHs for metastasis admissions (odds ratio [OR] = 1.48, P = .025), and SNHs had higher complication rates for meningioma (OR = 1.34, P = .003) and all tumor types combined (OR = 1.17, P = .034). However, there were no differences at SNHs for discharge disposition or HACs. LOS and hospital costs were elevated at SNHs for all subtypes, culminating in a 10% and 9% increase in LOS and costs for the overall population, respectively (all P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: SNHs demonstrated poorer inpatient outcomes for brain tumor craniotomy. Further analyses of the differences observed and potential interventions to ameliorate interhospital disparities are warranted.

Early outcomes of supratentorial cranial surgery for tumor resection in older patients.

With longevity increasing in the United States, more older individuals are presenting with supratentorial brain tumors. Despite improved perioperative management, there is persistent disparity in surgical resection rates among patients aged 65 years or older. We aim to assess the effects of advanced age (≥65 years) on 30-day outcomes in patients with supratentorial tumors who underwent craniotomy for supratentorial tumor resection. Data obtained in adults who underwent supratentorial tumor resections was extracted from the prospectively-collected American College of Surgeons: National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP; 2012-2018) database. Using multivariate regression, we compared odds of major and minor complications; prolonged length-of-stay (LOS); discharge anywhere other than home; and 30-day readmission, reoperation, and mortality rates between patients aged 18-64 years (the control cohort) and those 65-74 years or ≥75 years of age. Of the 14,234 patients who underwent craniotomy for supratentorial tumors and met inclusion criteria, 30.7% were ≥65 years of age; 71.4% of these were 65-74 years and 28.6% were ≥75 years old. Compared to the control group, both older subpopulations had more medical comorbidities. Both older subgroups had increased odds of major complications and prolonged LOS relative to the control group. Older patients had greater odds of mortality at 30 days. Advanced age, defined as ≥65 years, was significantly associated with higher odds of complications, prolonged LOS, and mortality within the 30-day post- operative period after adjusting for potential confounders. Age is one important consideration when prospectively risk-stratifying patients to minimize and mitigate suboptimal perioperative outcomes.

Interhospital competition and hospital charges and costs for patients undergoing cranial neurosurgery.

OBJECTIVE: Research has documented significant growth in neurosurgical expenditures and practice consolidation. The authors evaluated the relationship between interhospital competition and inpatient charges or costs in patients undergoing cranial neurosurgery. METHODS: The authors identified all admissions in 2006 and 2009 from the National Inpatient Sample. Admissions were classified into 5 subspecialties: cerebrovascular, tumor, CSF diversion, neurotrauma, or functional. Hospital-specific interhospital competition levels were quantified using the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI), an economic metric ranging continuously from 0 (significant competition) to 1 (monopoly). Inpatient charges (hospital billing) were multiplied with reported cost-to-charge ratios to calculate costs (actual resource use). Multivariate regressions were used to assess the association between HHI and inpatient charges or costs separately, controlling for 17 patient, hospital, severity, and economic factors. The reported ß-coefficients reflect percentage changes in charges or costs (e.g., ß-coefficient = 1.06 denotes a +6% change). All results correspond to a standardized -0.1 change in HHI (increase in competition). RESULTS: In total, 472,938 nationwide admissions for cranial neurosurgery treated at 896 unique hospitals met inclusion criteria. Hospital HHIs ranged from 0.099 to 0.724 (mean 0.298 ± 0.105). Hospitals in more competitive markets had greater charge/cost markups (ß-coefficient = 1.10, p < 0.001) and area wage indices (ß-coefficient = 1.04, p < 0.001). Between 2006 and 2009, average neurosurgical charges and costs rose significantly ($62,098 to $77,812, p < 0.001; $21,385 to $22,389, p < 0.001, respectively). Increased interhospital competition was associated with greater charges for all admissions (ß-coefficient = 1.07, p < 0.001) as well as cerebrovascular (ß-coefficient = 1.08, p < 0.001), tumor (ß-coefficient = 1.05, p = 0.039), CSF diversion (ß-coefficient = 1.08, p < 0.001), neurotrauma (ß-coefficient = 1.07, p < 0.001), and functional neurosurgery (ß-coefficient = 1.11, p = 0.037) admissions. However, no significant associations were observed between HHI and costs, except for CSF diversion surgery (ß-coefficient = 1.03, p = 0.021). Increased competition was not associated with important clinical outcomes, such as inpatient mortality, favorable discharge disposition, or complication rates, except for lower mortality for brain tumors (OR 0.78, p = 0.026), but was related to greater length of stay for all admissions (ß-coefficient = 1.06, p < 0.001). For a sensitivity analysis adjusting for outcomes, all findings for charges and costs remained the same. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals in more competitive markets exhibited higher charges for admissions of patients undergoing an in-hospital cranial procedure. Despite this, interhospital competition was not associated with increased inpatient costs except for CSF diversion surgery. There was no corresponding improvement in outcomes with increased competition, with the exception of a potential survival benefit for brain tumor surgery.

Patient-Oriented Aesthetic Outcome After Lumbar Spine Surgery: A 1-Year Follow-Up Prospective Observational Study Comparing Minimally Invasive and Standard Open Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Despite recent treatment developments, back pain and related disabilities still represent a challenge for practitioners. Among the available surgical techniques, many different features and outcomes have been investigated; however, aesthetic result was missing among them. The present investigation was designed to prospectively compare patient-oriented aesthetic results after minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and standard open surgery (SOS) for the lumbar spine. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study with 1-year follow-up. Patients who underwent SOS were assigned to group 1 and MIS to group 2. Patient-oriented aesthetic result evaluation was collected using a dedicated visual aesthetic analogue scale. The Vancouver Scar Scale was used to exclude objective underlying influencing factors. The Oswestry Disability Index and a 10-point itemized visual analogue scale for back pain were administered to assess the clinical and functional status. Follow-up data were collected before discharge at 1, 6, and 12 months. Statistical analysis was conducted, and P < 0.05 was considered as significant. RESULTS: We enrolled 74 patients, 44 in group 1 and 30 in group 2. The 2 groups were homogeneous for demographic and clinical data. No clinical or functional differences were measured at the end of follow-up. Visual aesthetic analogue scale reported greater mean values in group 1 at every follow-up time. CONCLUSIONS: Patients seem to prefer the aesthetic result from a single midline incision after SOS compared with MIS. The use of specific techniques could be considered if there is scientific evidence reporting greater aesthetic outcome, having similar clinical and functional ones.