External validation of the Codman score in colorectal surgery: a pragmatic tool to drive quality improvement.

AIM: The simple six-variable Codman score is a tool designed to reduce the complexity of contemporary risk-adjusted postoperative mortality rate predictions. We sought to externally validate the Codman score in colorectal surgery. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) participant user file and colectomy targeted dataset of 2020 were merged. A Codman score (composed of six variables: age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, emergency status, degree of sepsis, functional status and preoperative blood transfusion) was assigned to every patient. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and secondary outcome was morbidity at 30 days. Logistic regression analyses were performed using the Codman score and the ACS NSQIP mortality and morbidity algorithms as independent variables for the primary and secondary outcomes. The predictive performance of discrimination area under receiver operating curve (AUC) and calibration of the Codman score and these algorithms were compared. RESULTS: A total of 40 589 patients were included and a Codman score was generated for 40 557 (99.02%) patients. The median Codman score was 3 (interquartile range 1-4). To predict mortality, the Codman score had an AUC of 0.92 (95% CI 0.91-0.93) compared to the NSQIP mortality score 0.93 (95% CI 0.92-0.94). To predict morbidity, the Codman score had an AUC of 0.68 (95% CI 0.66-0.68) compared to the NSQIP morbidity score 0.72 (95% CI 0.71-0.73). When body mass index and surgical approach was added to the Codman score, the performance was no different to the NSQIP morbidity score. The calibration of observed versus expected predictions was almost perfect for both the morbidity and mortality NSQIP predictions, and only well fitted for Codman scores of less than 4 and greater than 7. CONCLUSION: We propose that the six-variable Codman score is an efficient and actionable method for generating validated risk-adjusted outcome predictions and comparative benchmarks to drive quality improvement in colorectal surgery.

Novel Strategy to Drive the Intracellular Uptake of Lipid Nanoparticles for Photodynamic Therapy.

Nanoparticles' uptake by cancer cells upon reaching the tumor microenvironment is often the rate-limiting step in cancer nanomedicine. Herein, we report that the inclusion of aminopolycarboxylic acid conjugated lipids, such as EDTA- or DTPA-hexadecylamide lipids in liposome-like porphyrin nanoparticles (PS) enhanced their intracellular uptake by 25-fold, which was attributed to these lipids' ability to fluidize the cell membrane in a detergent-like manner rather than by metal chelation of EDTA or DTPA. EDTA-lipid-incorporated-PS (ePS) take advantage of its unique active uptake mechanism to achieve >95 % photodynamic therapy (PDT) cell killing compared to <5 % cell killing by PS. In multiple tumor models, ePS demonstrated fast fluorescence-enabled tumor delineation within minutes post-injection and increased PDT potency (100 % survival rate) compared to PS (60 %). This study offers a new nanoparticle cellular uptake strategy to overcome challenges associated with conventional drug delivery.

Evaluating the Accuracy and Design of Visual Abstracts in Academic Surgical Journals.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the quality and accuracy of visual abstracts published in academic surgical journals. BACKGROUND: Visual abstracts are commonly used to disseminate medical research findings. They distill the key messages of a research article, presenting them graphically in an engaging manner so that potential readers can decide whether to read the complete manuscript. METHODS: We developed the Visual Abstract Assessment Tool based upon published guidelines. Seven reviewers underwent iterative training to apply the tool. We collected visual abstracts published by 25 surgical journals from January 2017 to April 2021; those corresponding to systematic reviews without meta-analysis, conference abstracts, narrative reviews, video abstracts, or nonclinical research were excluded. Included visual abstracts were scored on accuracy (as compared with written abstracts) and design, and were given a "first impression" score. RESULTS: Across 25 surgical journals 1325 visual abstracts were scored. We found accuracy deficits in the reporting of study design (35.8%), appropriate icon use (49%), and sample size reporting (69.2%), and design deficits in element alignment (54.8%) and symmetry (36.1%). Overall scores ranged from 9 to 14 (out of 15), accuracy scores from 4 to 8 (out of 8), and design scores from 3 to 7 (out of 7). No predictors of visual abstract score were identified. CONCLUSION: Visual abstracts vary widely in quality. As visual abstracts become integrated with the traditional components of scientific publication, they must be held to similarly high standards. We propose a checklist to be used by authors and journals to standardize the quality of visual abstracts.

Malignant Bowel Obstruction Management Over Time: Are We Doing Anything New? A Current Narrative Review.

INTRODUCTION: Malignant bowel obstruction from peritoneal carcinomatosis affects a significant proportion of luminal gastrointestinal and ovarian oncology patients, and portends poor long-term survival. The management approach for these patients includes a range of medical therapies and surgical options; however, how to select an optimal treatment strategy remains enigmatic. The goal of this narrative review was to summarize the latest evidence around multimodal malignant bowel obstruction treatment and to establish if and where progress has been made. METHODS: A targeted literature search examining articles focused on the management of malignant bowel obstruction from peritoneal carcinomatosis was performed. Following data extraction, a narrative review approach was selected to describe evidence and guidelines for surgical prognostic factors, imaging, tube decompression, medical management, nutrition, and quality of life. RESULTS: Outcomes in the literature to date are summarized for various malignant bowel obstruction treatment strategies, including surgical and non-surgical approaches, as well as a discussion of the role of total parenteral nutrition and chemotherapy in holistic malignant bowel obstruction management. CONCLUSION: There has been little change in survival outcomes in malignant bowel obstruction in over more than a decade and there remains a paucity of high-level evidence to direct treatment decision making. Healthcare providers treating patients with malignant bowel obstruction should work to establish consensus guidelines, where feasible, to support medical providers in ensuring compassionate care during this often terminal event for this unique patient group.

Post-operative outcomes in patients with locally advanced colon cancer: a comparison of operative approach.

INTRODUCTION: Surgeons may choose an open approach to locally advanced colon cancer (LACC) because of the elevated conversion rate (minimally invasive to open) in these patients (resulting in part from a judgment of the technical feasibility of a minimally invasive approach). Poorer outcomes have been suggested in those requiring conversion from a minimal access to an open approach; however, the influence of conversion has not been studied in LACC. We sought to compare perioperative outcomes in patients with T4aN2 colon cancer undergoing minimally invasive surgery (MIS), planned open (PO), and converted (CN) procedures to evaluate the influence of conversion in this subgroup. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the NSQIP database. Patients with T4aN2 colon cancer undergoing elective resection were included; rectal/unknown tumor location, and T4b disease were excluded (to ensure homogeneity in surgical management). Patients were divided into cohorts based on approach: PO, MIS, and CN. Summary statistics were compared between groups. Multivariable analysis was conducted for mortality and morbidity outcomes. RESULTS: 1286 cases were included (313 PO, 842 MIS, 131 CN); 10.2% underwent conversion. Those undergoing MIS had a shorter length of stay than those undergoing PO or CN (p < 0.0001). On univariable analysis, CN resulted in increased rates of any complication (p < 0.0001). CN also had a greater rate of anastomotic leak (p = 0.0046) and death (p = 0.05). On multivariable analysis, significant predictors of any complication included age, ASA class, M stage, and approach; however, CN did not increase the risk of complication compared with MIS, whereas PO nearly doubled the risk of complication (OR = 1.98, p = 0.0083). The only significant predictor of mortality on multivariable analysis was age (HR = 1.09, p = 0.0002)-approach was not associated with mortality. CONCLUSION: PO confers the greatest risk of suffering any complication. Surgical approach was not associated with death. Results of our study challenge the notion that conversion is associated with the worst perioperative outcomes and an MIS approach should be considered in patients with LACC.

Starting late does not increase the risk of post-operative complications in patients undergoing common general surgical procedures.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of evidence surrounding the issue of delays on the day of surgery with respect to both causes and consequences. We sought to determine whether patients whose operations started late were at increased risk of post-operative complications. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1420 first-of-the-day common general surgical procedures, dividing these into "on-time start" (OTS) and "late-start" (LS) cases. Our primary outcomes were minor and major complication rate; our secondary objective was to identify factors predicting LS. Groups were compared using univariable and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: LS rate was 55.3%. On univariable analysis, LS had higher rates of major and minor complications (7.3% vs. 3.5%, p = 0.002; 3.8% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.011). On multivariable analysis, LS was not associated with increased odds of any complications. Minor complications were predicted by operative duration [OR = 1.005 (1.002-1.008)], female sex [OR = 1.78 (1.037-3.061)], and undergoing an ileostomy closure procedure [OR = 10.60 (2.791-40.246)], and were reduced in those undergoing surgery on Wednesdays [OR = 0.38 (0.166-0.876)]. Major complications were predicted by operative duration [OR = 1.007 (1.003-1.011)] and ASA class [OR = 6.73 (1.505-30.109)]. Multivariable analysis using LS as an outcome identified that anesthesia time [OR = 1.35 (1.031-1.403)], insulin-dependent diabetes [OR = 1.91 (1.128-3.246)], and dyspnea upon moderate exertion [OR = 2.52 (1.423-4.522)] were predictive of LS. CONCLUSIONS: Most cases in our study started late. While this has significant efficiency and economic costs, it is not associated with adverse patient outcomes. This topic remains incompletely described. Further research is needed to improve efficiency and patient experience by investigating the causes of operative delays.

The effect of operative duration on the outcome of colon cancer procedures.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged operative duration has been associated with increased post-operative morbidity in numerous surgical subspecialties; however, data are limited in operations for colon cancer specifically and existing literature makes unwarranted methodological assumptions of linearity. We sought to assess the effects of extended operative duration on perioperative outcomes in those undergoing segmental colectomy for cancer using a methodologically sound approach. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing segmental colectomy for cancer between 2014 and 2018, logged in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program datasets. Our primary outcome was a composite of any complication within 30 days; secondary outcomes included length of stay and discharge disposition. Our main factor of interest was operative duration. RESULTS: We analyzed 26,380 segmental colectomy cases, the majority of which were approached laparoscopically (64.95%) and were right sided (62.93%). Median operative duration was 152 (95% CI 112-206) minutes. On multivariable regression, increased operative duration was linearly associated with any complication (OR = 1.003, 95% CI 1.003-1.003, p < 0.0001) in the overall cohort, as was length of stay (p < 0.0001). All subgroups except for the laparoscopic left colectomy group were linearly associated with operative duration. In the laparoscopic left colectomy group, an inflection point in the odds of any complication was found at 176 min (OR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.20-1.61, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the risk of perioperative complications increases linearly with increasing operative duration, where each additional 30 min increases the odds of complication by 10%. In those undergoing laparoscopic left colectomy, the risk of complications sharply increases after ~ 3 h, suggesting that surgeons should aim to complete these procedures within 3 h where possible.

Ethical decision making during a healthcare crisis: a resource allocation framework and tool.

The COVID-19 pandemic has strained healthcare resources the world over, requiring healthcare providers to make resource allocation decisions under extraordinary pressures. A year later, our understanding of COVID-19 has advanced, but our process for making ethical decisions surrounding resource allocation has not. During the first wave of the pandemic, our institution uniformly ramped-down clinical activity to accommodate the anticipated demands of COVID-19, resulting in resource waste and inefficiency. In preparation for the second wave, we sought to make such ramp down decisions more prudently and ethically. We report the development of a tool that can be used to make fair and ethical decisions in times of resource scarcity. We formed an interprofessional team to develop and use this tool to ensure that a diverse range of stakeholder perspectives were represented in this development process. This team, called the clinical activity recovery team, established institutional objectives that were combined with well-established procedural values, substantive ethical principles and decision-making criteria by using a variation on the well-known accountability for reasonableness ethical framework. The result of this is a stepwise, semiquantitative, ethical decision tool that can be applied to resource allocation challenges in order to reach fair and ethically defensible decisions. This ethical decision tool can be applied in various contexts and may prove useful at both the institutional and the departmental level; indeed this is how it is applied at our centre. As the second wave of COVID-19 strains healthcare resources, this tool can help clinical leaders to make fair decisions.

Photodynamic Therapy for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review of Clinical Research.

BACKGROUND: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a therapeutic modality that can be used to ablate tumors using the localized generation of reactive oxygen species by combining a photosensitizer, light, and molecular oxygen. This modality holds promise as an adjunctive therapy in the management of colorectal cancer and could be incorporated into neoadjuvant treatment plans under the auspices of prospective clinical trials. METHODS: We conducted a search of primary literature published until January 2021, based on PRISMA guidelines. Primary clinical studies of PDT for the management of colorectal cancer were included. Screening, inclusion, quality assessment, and data collection were performed in duplicate. Analyses were descriptive or thematic. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included, most of which were case series. The total number of patients reported to have received PDT for colorectal cancer was 137, almost all of whom received PDT with palliative intent. The most common photosensitizer was hematoporphyin derivative or Photofrin. The light dose used varied from 32 J/cm2 to 500 J/cm2. Complete tumor response (cure) was reported in 40%, with partial response reported in 43.2%. Symptomatic improvement was reported in 51.9% of patients. In total, 32 complications were reported, the most common of which was a skin photosensitivity reaction. CONCLUSIONS: PDT for the management of colorectal cancer has not been well studied, despite promising results in early clinical case series. New, well designed, prospective clinical trials are required to establish and define the role of PDT in the management of colorectal cancer.

Neoadjuvant therapy versus direct to surgery for T4 colon cancer: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite persistently poor oncological outcomes, approaches to the management of T4 colonic cancer remain variable, with the role of neoadjuvant therapy unclear. The aim of this review was to compare oncological outcomes between direct-to-surgery and neoadjuvant therapy approaches to T4 colon cancer. METHODS: A librarian-led systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL up to 11 February 2020 was performed. Inclusion criteria were primary research articles comparing oncological outcomes between neoadjuvant therapies or direct to surgery for primary T4 colonic cancer. Based on PRISMA guidelines, screening and data abstraction were undertaken in duplicate. Quality assessment was carried out using Cochrane risk-of-bias tools. Random-effects models were used to pool effect estimates. This study compared pathological resection margins, postoperative morbidity, and oncological outcomes of cancer recurrence and overall survival. RESULTS: Four studies with a total of 43 063 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with direct to surgery, neoadjuvant therapy was associated with increased rates of margin-negative resection (odds ratio (OR) 2.60, 95 per cent c.i. 1.12 to 6.02; n = 15 487) and 5-year overall survival (pooled hazard ratio 1.42, 1.10 to 1.82, I2 = 0 per cent; n = 15 338). No difference was observed in rates of cancer recurrence (OR 0.42, 0.15 to 1.22; n = 131), 30-day minor (OR 1.12, 0.68 to 1.84; n = 15 488) or major (OR 0.62, 0.27 to 1.44; n = 15 488) morbidity, or rates of treatment-related adverse effects. CONCLUSION: Compared with direct to surgery, neoadjuvant therapy improves margin-negative resection rates and overall survival.

Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches Are Safe and Appropriate in N2 Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: There is emerging evidence of the oncological safety of minimally invasive surgery in T4 colorectal cancer; however, such support is lacking in N2 disease. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare oncological and perioperative outcomes of surgical resection for N2 colorectal cancer using an open versus minimally invasive approach. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program's generic and targeted colectomy data sets. SETTINGS: Data about surgery for N2 colorectal cancer were obtained regarding North American hospitals participating in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. PATIENTS: All patients undergoing elective surgical resection for N2 colorectal cancer in participating hospitals between 2014 and 2018 were selected. INTERVENTIONS: Surgical resection of N2 colorectal cancer was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Our primary outcome was nodal yield. Secondary outcomes included perioperative complications and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1837 patients underwent open and 3907 patients underwent minimally invasive surgery colectomies for N2 colorectal cancer (n = 5744). Median nodal yield was 20 (interquartile range, 15-27) in the open group and 21 (interquartile range, 16-28) in the minimally invasive group (p < 0.0001); however, nodal harvest between the 2 groups was not significantly different on multivariate analysis. Perioperative complications were higher on univariate analysis in the open surgery group, with respect to key outcomes including anastomotic leak and death (p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by its retrospective design and by the fact that the staging data collected by the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program are pathological rather than clinical; however, prior studies found a 97% concordance between pathological and clinical N2 determination. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive surgery approaches to colorectal cancer with N2 disease result in equivalent nodal harvests compared with open approaches. Our group supports the use of a minimally invasive approach in advanced nodal stage colorectal cancer in the appropriately selected patient. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B417. LOS ABORDAJES QUIRRGICOS MNIMAMENTE INVASIVOS SON SEGUROS Y APROPIADOS EN EL CNCER COLORRECTAL N: ANTECEDENTES:Existe evidencia emergente de la seguridad oncológica de la cirugía mínimamente invasiva en el cáncer colorrectal T4; sin embargo, semenjante apoyo falta en la enfermedad N2.OBJETIVO:comparar los resultados oncológicos y perioperatorios de la resección quirúrgica para el cáncer colorrectal N2 utilizando un abordaje abierto versus mínimamente invasivo.DISEÑO:Realizamos un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo utilizando los conjuntos de datos de colectomía genéricos y específicos del Programa Nacional de Mejoramiento de la Calidad Quirúrgica.AJUSTE:Hospitales de Norte America que participan en el Programa Nacional de Mejoramiento de la Calidad Quirúrgica del Colegio Americano de Cirujanos.PACIENTES:Todos los pacientes sometidos a resección quirúrgica electiva por cáncer colorrectal N2 en los hospitales participantes entre 2014 y 2018.INTERVENCIONES:Resección quirúrgica de cáncer colorrectal N2.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VOLORACION:Nuestro resultado principal fue el rendimiento nodal. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron complicaciones perioperatorias y mortalidad.RESULTADOS:1837 pacientes fueron sometidos a cirugía abierta y 3907 pacientes fueron sometidos a colectomías de cirugía mínimamente invasiva por cáncer colorrectal N2 (n = 5744). La mediana del rendimiento nodal fue 20 (IQR 15-27) en el grupo abierto y 21 (IQR 16-28) en el grupo mínimamente invasivo (p <0,0001); sin embargo, el rendimiento nodal entre los dos grupos no fue significativamente diferente en el análisis multivariado. Las complicaciones perioperatorias fueron mayores en el análisis univariado en el grupo de cirugía abierta, con respecto a los resultados clave, incluida la fuga anastomótica y la muerte (p <0,001).LIMITACIONES:Este estudio está limitado por su diseño retrospectivo y por el hecho de que los datos de estadificación recopilados por NSQIP son patológicos más que clínicos; sin embargo, estudios previos encontraron una concordancia del 97% entre la determinación patológica y clínica de N2.CONCLUSIONES:Los enfoques de cirugía mínimamente invasiva para el cáncer colorrectal con enfermedad N2 dan rendimientos nodales equivalentes a abordajes abiertos. Nuestro grupo apoya el uso de abordaje mínimamente invasivo en el cáncer colorrectal avanzado en estadio ganglionar en el paciente adecuadamente seleccionado. Consulte Video Resumenhttp://links.lww.com/DCR/B417.

Extended duration of faecal diversion is associated with increased ileus upon loop ileostomy reversal.

AIM: The timing of ileostomy reversal has been the subject of controversy, with researchers investigating the safety of early versus late stoma closure. Anecdotally, a longer duration of faecal diversion is associated with a greater incidence of postoperative ileus. We sought to investigate the association between duration of diversion and postoperative ileus. METHOD: We conducted an institutional retrospective cohort study on 173 patients undergoing ileostomy closure between 2012 and 2018. Our primary outcome was ileus; secondary outcomes included postoperative complications and descriptive factors. We investigated the association between duration of diversion and ileus using several analyses to ensure that time was treated appropriately as a continuous, nonlinear variable. RESULTS: In all, 20.2% of patients had an ileus. Multivariate analysis did not identify a significant association between any independent predictors and ileus, although there was a trend towards increased risk of ileus with increasing duration of diversion. When treated as a categorical variable, a duration of diversion >328 days independently increased the odds of ileus (OR = 3.25, P = 0.033). Duration of diversion was associated with days to first flatus and to first diet (P = 0.025 and P = 0.004, respectively). When patients received nasogastric intubation, the mean duration of intubation was 3.2 days. CONCLUSION: Greater duration of diversion was associated with a trend towards increased risk of ileus; this risk tripled when diversion lasted more than 328 days.

Current Evidence for Minimally Invasive Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Risk Mitigation Strategies: A Narrative Review.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to review the literature surrounding the risks of viral transmission during laparoscopic surgery and propose mitigation measures to address these risks. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused surgeons the world over to re-evaluate their approach to surgical procedures given concerns over the risk of aerosolization of viral particles and exposure of operating room staff to infection. International society guidelines advise against the use of laparoscopy; however, the evidence on this topic is scant and recommendations are based on the perceived most cautious course of action. METHODS: We conducted a narrative review of the existing literature surrounding the risks of viral transmission during laparoscopic surgery and balance these risks against the benefits of minimally invasive approaches. We also propose mitigation measures to address these risks that we have adopted in our institution. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: While it is currently assumed that open surgery minimizes operating room staff exposure to the virus, our findings reveal that this may not be the case. A well-informed, evidence-based opinion is critical when making decisions regarding which operative approach to pursue, for the safety and well-being of the patient, the operating room staff, and the healthcare system at large. Minimally invasive surgical approaches offer significant advantages with respect to both patient care, and the mitigation of the risk of viral transmission during surgery, provided the appropriate equipment and expertise are present.

The "teaching time-out": a novel framework for surgical education.

Summary: In the decade since its inception, the World Health Organization's surgical safety checklist has fundamentally changed the conduct of surgery the world over. A critical component of the checklist - the "pause" or "time-out" - requires all operating room staff to stop other activities and together review critical information about the case to ensure that nothing is missed. Surgical trainees in Canada are transitioning to a competency-based medical education model; a core aspect of this model requires trainees to advocate for their own learning goals. We propose the use of a detailed and formalized preoperative pause as a means to enable superior and more targeted intraoperative learning for surgical trainees.

Patient-perceived barriers to radiation therapy for breast cancer.

SUMMARY: Studies have shown that a number of women do not receive adjuvant radiation therapy following breast-conserving surgery; the reasons have not been well investigated. We reviewed the charts of 267 patients in our institution who did not receive radiation therapy following surgery in order to determine patient-stated reasons for nonreceipt. We found that 43% of patients did not receive radiation because they received a completion mastectomy. Excluding these patients, reasons for nonreceipt of radiation therapy were sorted into 9 categories. Most patients declined radiation therapy (against physician advice). We identified 3 major barriers to receipt of radiation therapy: improper patient selection, transportation or ambulatory issues and patient fear surrounding radiation toxicity. All of these reasons are surmountable barriers to radiation receipt.

Patient-perceived barriers to radiation therapy for breast cancer.

SUMMARY: Studies have shown that a number of women do not receive adjuvant radiation therapy following breast-conserving surgery; the reasons have not been well investigated. We reviewed the charts of 267 patients in our institution who did not receive radiation therapy following surgery in order to determine patientstated reasons for nonreceipt. We found that 43% of patients did not receive radiation because they received a completion mastectomy. Excluding these patients, reasons for nonreceipt of radiation therapy were sorted into 9 categories. Most patients declined radiation therapy (against physician advice). We identified 3 major barriers to receipt of radiation therapy: improper patient selection, transportation or ambulatory issues and patient fear surrounding radiation toxicity. All of these reasons are surmountable barriers to radiation receipt.

Predicting which patients actually receive radiation following breast conserving therapy in Canadian populations.

SUMMARY: Canadian women with breast cancer may choose breast conserving therapy as their course of treatment, requiring both breast conserving surgery and adjuvant radiation therapy. However, more than 15% of Canadian women fail to receive the appropriate radiation therapy, putting them at increased risk for recurrence. Age, distance from their radiation therapy centre and stage of disease affect patients' likelihood of receiving prescribed radiation therapy. We propose a nomogram that allows physicians to predict which patients will and will not receive radiation. This nomogram, once validated, could be used to guide decision making when choosing between breast conserving therapy and mastectomy as the treatment course and thereby change the practice of breast cancer management.

Is it safe to wait? The effect of surgical wait time on survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The effect of surgical wait times on survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains largely unknown. Our objective was to determine the effect of surgical wait time on survival and incidence of upstaging in patients with stage I and II NSCLC. METHODS: All patients with clinical stage I and II NSCLC who underwent surgical resection in a single centre between January 2010 and December 2011 were reviewed. Analysis was stratified based on preoperative clinical stage. We assessed the effect of wait time on survival using a Cox proportional hazard model with wait time in months as a categorical variable. Incidence of upstaging at least 1 stage was assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 222 patients: 180 were stage I and 42 were stage II. For stage I, wait times up to 4 months had no significant effect on survival or incidence of upstaging. For stage II, patients waiting between 2 and 3 months had significantly decreased survival (hazard ratio 3.6, p = 0.036) and increased incidence of upstaging (odds ratio 2.0, p = 0.020) than those waiting 0 to 1 month. For those waiting between 1 and 2 months, there was no significant difference in survival or upstaging. CONCLUSION: We did not identify an effect of wait time up to 4 months on survival or upstaging for patients with stage I NSCLC. For patients with stage II disease, wait times greater than 2 months adversely affected survival and upstaging.

CONTEXTE: En chirurgie, l'effet des temps d'attente sur la survie des patients atteints d'un cancer du poumon non à petites cellules (CPNPC) demeure pour une bonne part inconnu. Notre objectif était de déterminer l'effet des temps d'attente sur la survie et sur l'incidence de la restadification à un niveau plus élevé chez les patients atteints d'un CPNPC de stade I et II. MÉTHODES: Tous les patients présentant un CPNPC clinique de stade I et II ayant subi une résection chirurgicale dans un seul centre entre janvier 2010 et décembre 2011 ont été passés en revue. L'analyse a été stratifiée selon le stade clinique préopératoire. Nous avons évalué l'effet des temps d'attente sur la survie à l'aide d'un modèle de risques proportionnels de Cox, les temps d'attente en mois ayant servi de variable catégorielle. L'incidence de la restadification à la hausse d'au moins un stade a été évaluée par régression logistique. RÉSULTATS: Nous avons recensé 222 patients : 180 de stade I et 42 de stade II. Pour le stade I, les temps d'attente allant jusqu'à 4 mois n'ont eu aucun effet significatif sur la survie ou sur l'incidence de la restadification. Pour les stades II, les patients ayant attendu de 2 à trois 3 mois ont présenté une réduction significative de la survie (risque relatif 3,6, p = 0,036) et une incidence accrue de restadification (rapport des cotes 2,0, p = 0,02) comparativement à ceux qui avaient attendu 1 mois et moins. Chez les patients ayant attendu 1 ou 2 mois, on n'a noté aucune différence significative sur la survie ou la restadification. CONCLUSION: Nous n'avons observé aucun effet d'une attente allant jusqu'à 4 mois sur la survie ou la restadification chez les patients atteints d'un CPNPC de stade I. Pour les patients atteints d'une maladie de stade II, les temps d'attente de plus de 2 mois ont eu un impact négatif sur la survie et la restadification.

A machine learning model to predict the need for conversion of operative approach in patients undergoing colectomy for neoplasm.

BACKGROUND: Studies comparing conversion from laparoscopic to open approaches to colectomy have found an association between conversion and morbidity, mortality, and length of stay, suggesting that certain patients may benefit from an open approach "up-front." AIM: The objective of this study was to use machine learning algorithms to develop a model enabling the prediction of which patients are likely to require conversion. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used ACS NSQIP data to identify patients undergoing colectomy (2014-2019). We included patients undergoing elective colectomy for colorectal neoplasm via a minimally invasive approach or a converted approach. The outcome of interest was conversion. Variables were included in the model based on their correlation with conversion by logistic regression (p < .05). Two models were used: weighted logistic regression with regularization, and Random Forest classifier. The data was randomly split into training (70%) and test (30%) cohorts, and prediction performance was calculated. 24 327 cases were included (17 028 training, 7299 test). When applied to the test cohort, the models had an accuracy of 0.675 (range 0.65-0.70) in predicting conversion; c-index ranged from 0.62-0.63. This machine learning model achieved a moderate area under the curve and a high negative predictive value, but a low positive predictive value; therefore, this model can predict (with 95% accuracy) whether a colectomy for neoplasm can be successfully completed using a minimally invasive approach. CONCLUSION: This model can be used to reassure surgeons of the appropriateness of a minimally invasive approach when planning for an elective colectomy.