Computational risk model for predicting 2-year malignancy of pulmonary nodules using demographic and radiographic characteristics.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether discriminatory performance of a computational risk model in classifying pulmonary lesion malignancy using demographic, radiographic, and clinical characteristics is superior to the opinion of experienced providers. We hypothesized that computational risk models would outperform providers. METHODS: Outcome of malignancy was obtained from selected patients enrolled in the NAVIGATE trial (NCT02410837). Five predictive risk models were developed using an 80:20 train-test split: univariable logistic regression model based solely on provider opinion, multivariable logistic regression model, random forest classifier, extreme gradient boosting model, and artificial neural network. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve achieved during testing of the predictive models was compared to that of prebiopsy provider opinion baseline using the DeLong test with 10,000 bootstrapped iterations. RESULTS: The cohort included 984 patients, 735 (74.7%) of which were diagnosed with malignancy. Factors associated with malignancy from multivariable logistic regression included age, history of cancer, largest lesion size, lung zone, and positron-emission tomography positivity. Testing area under the receiver operating characteristic curve were 0.830 for provider opinion baseline, 0.770 for provider opinion univariable logistic regression, 0.659 for multivariable logistic regression model, 0.743 for random forest classifier, 0.740 for extreme gradient boosting, and 0.679 for artificial neural network. Provider opinion baseline was determined to be the best predictive classification system. CONCLUSIONS: Computational models predicting malignancy of pulmonary lesions using clinical, demographic, and radiographic characteristics are inferior to provider opinion. This study questions the ability of these models to provide additional insight into patient care. Expert clinician evaluation of pulmonary lesion malignancy is paramount.

Endoscopic vs Open Vein Harvest in Drug-Eluting Stents or Bypass Surgery for Left Main Disease Trial.

BACKGROUND: We investigated outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with endoscopic vein harvest (EVH) vs open vein harvest (OVH) within the Evaluation of XIENCE Versus CABG (EXCEL) trial. METHODS: All patients in EXCEL randomized to CABG were included in this study. For this analysis, the primary end points were ischemia-driven revascularization (IDR) and graft stenosis or occlusion at 5 years. Additional end points were as follows: a composite of death from any cause, stroke, or myocardial infarction; bleeding; blood product transfusion; major arrhythmia; and infection requiring antibiotics. Event rates were based on Kaplan-Meier estimates in time-to-first-event analyses. RESULTS: Of the 957 patients randomized to CABG, 686 (71.7%) received at least 1 venous graft with 257 (37.5%) patients in the EVH group and 429 (62.5%) patients in the OVH group. At 5 years, IDR was higher (11.5% vs 6.7%; P = .047) in the EVH group. At 5 years, rates of graft stenosis or occlusion (9.7% vs 5.4%; P = .054) and the primary end point (17.4% vs 20.9%; P = .27) were similar. In-hospital bleeding (11.3% vs 13.8%; P = .35), in-hospital blood product transfusion (12.8% vs 13.1%; P = .94), and infection requiring antibiotics within 1 month (13.6% vs 16.8%; P = .27) were similar between EVH and OVH patients. Major arrhythmia in the hospital (19.8% vs 13.5%; P = .03) and within 1 month (21.8% vs 15.4%; P = .03) was higher in EVH patients. CONCLUSIONS: IDR at 5 years was higher in the EVH group. EVH and OVH patients had similar rates of graft stenosis or occlusion and the composite of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction at 5 years.

Age disparities in triple-negative breast cancer treatment and outcomes: An NCDB analysis.

BACKGROUND: Race, access to care, and molecular features result in outcome disparities in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). We sought to determine the role of age in TNBC disparity by hypothesizing that younger patients receive more comprehensive treatment, resulting in survival differences. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify women with unilateral TNBC treated from 2005 through 2017. Patients were stratified by age (≤40, 41-70, >70); demographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment factors were compared. Logistic regression determined factors associated with treatment received. Survival outcomes were analyzed using a stratified log-rank test. RESULTS: Of the 168,715 patients, 16,287 (9.6%) were ≤40 years. Patients ≤40 were significantly more likely to present at higher clinical stage (P < .001) and receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC, P < .001). Bilateral mastectomy was the most common surgery for patients ≤40 (37%), whereas partial mastectomy was most often used in patients 41 to 70 years old (48%) and those >70 (49%) (P < .001). Patients ≤40 years were significantly more likely to undergo both NAC and mastectomy than those >40 (odds ratio 1.5, both P < .05) despite a greater in-breast tumor response in the youngest patients. Patients treated with mastectomy and axillary lymph node dissection had inferior survival outcomes compared to those treated with partial mastectomy and sentinel lymph node biopsy across all 3 age groups (P < .001). CONCLUSION: The clinical characteristics of TNBC differ significantly at the extremes of age, likely driving treatment decisions. Although patients ≤40 present with a more advanced disease and appropriately receive NAC, they also undergo more extensive surgery that does not yield a survival benefit. Further research is needed to determine if age disparity is due to oncologic factors or patient and provider preferences.

"Double-Stick" Transsubclavian Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Use of a Balloon Expandable Valve: A Less Invasive Option for Alternative Access.

Access options for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) currently include transfemoral, transaortic, transapical, transsubclavian, and other approaches. Transsubclavian access for balloon expandable valves is gaining popularity when transfemoral access is not suitable, given its peripheral access compared with central access. With the transsubclavian approach, second femoral or radial artery access is necessary for pigtail catheter placement. We describe a "double-stick" transsubclavian technique that eliminates secondary arterial access. With this technique, the transsubclavian approach can still be used in patients with advanced femoral disease, and it allows for rapid ambulation in most patients.

One heart in 3 patients.

In this report, we present a successful reuse of a transplanted heart under complex clinical conditions. Our patient was the second recipient, a 63-year-old man with end-stage heart failure due to amyloid-induced cardiomyopathy. After an uneventful postoperative course, he was diagnosed with acute myelogenous leukemia 6 months after transplantation and died 10 months after transplantation. This outcome was determined by a malignancy in an immunosuppressed patient. Reuse of a transplanted heart in carefully selected patients is a possible alternative in an era of donor organ shortage.

Mechanical circulatory support after heart transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) may be used for severe graft failure after heart transplantation, but the degree to which it is lifesaving is uncertain. METHODS: Between June 1990 and December 2009, 53 patients after 1417 heart transplants (3.7%) required post-transplant MCS for acute rejection (n=17), biventricular failure (n=16), right ventricular failure (n=16), left ventricular failure (n=1), or respiratory failure (n=3). Although support was occasionally instituted remotely post-transplant (5>1 year), in 39 (73%) instances it was required within 1 week. Initial mode of support was extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in 43 patients (81%), biventricular assist device in 4 (7.5%), and right ventricular assist device in 6 (11%). RESULTS: Risk of requiring respiratory support was highest in those with restrictive cardiomyopathy as indication for transplant, women, and those with elevated pulmonary pressure or renal failure. Complications of support, which increased progressively with its duration, included stroke in two patients (3.8%), infection in two (3.8%), and reoperation for bleeding (seven instances) in four (7.0%). Nineteen patients (36%) recovered and were removed from support, five (9.4%) underwent retransplantation (four after biventricular failure and one after acute rejection), and 29 died while on support (55%). Overall survival after initiating support was 94%, 83%, 66%, and 43% at 1, 3, 7, and 30 days, respectively. Patients requiring support for biventricular failure had better survival than those having acute rejection or other indications (P=0.03). Survival after retransplantation or removal from support following recovery was 88% at 1 year and 61% at 10 years. CONCLUSION: Severe refractory heart failure after transplantation is a rare catastrophic event for which MCS offers the possibility of recovery or bridge to retransplantation, particularly for patients with biventricular failure in the absence of rejection. Early retransplantation should be considered in patients who show no evidence of graft recovery on MCS.

Robotic repair of posterior mitral valve prolapse versus conventional approaches: potential realized.

OBJECTIVE: Robotic mitral valve repair is the least invasive approach to mitral valve repair, yet there are few data comparing its outcomes with those of conventional approaches. Therefore, we compared outcomes of robotic mitral valve repair with those of complete sternotomy, partial sternotomy, and right mini-anterolateral thoracotomy. METHODS: From January 2006 to January 2009, 759 patients with degenerative mitral valve disease and posterior leaflet prolapse underwent primary isolated mitral valve surgery by complete sternotomy (n = 114), partial sternotomy (n = 270), right mini-anterolateral thoracotomy (n = 114), or a robotic approach (n = 261). Outcomes were compared on an intent-to-treat basis using propensity-score matching. RESULTS: Mitral valve repair was achieved in all patients except 1 patient in the complete sternotomy group. In matched groups, median cardiopulmonary bypass time was 42 minutes longer for robotic than complete sternotomy, 39 minutes longer than partial sternotomy, and 11 minutes longer than right mini-anterolateral thoracotomy (P < .0001); median myocardial ischemic time was 26 minutes longer than complete sternotomy and partial sternotomy, and 16 minutes longer than right mini-anterolateral thoracotomy (P < .0001). Quality of mitral valve repair was similar among matched groups (P = .6, .2, and .1, respectively). There were no in-hospital deaths. Neurologic, pulmonary, and renal complications were similar among groups (P > .1). The robotic group had the lowest occurrences of atrial fibrillation and pleural effusion, contributing to the shortest hospital stay (median 4.2 days), 1.0, 1.6, and 0.9 days shorter than for complete sternotomy, partial sternotomy, and right mini-anterolateral thoracotomy (all P < .001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic repair of posterior mitral valve leaflet prolapse is as safe and effective as conventional approaches. Technical complexity and longer operative times for robotic repair are compensated for by lesser invasiveness and shorter hospital stay.