The United States experience with diagnosing and treating esophageal cancer during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: A retrospective cohort study.

The downstream effects on healthcare delivery during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic remain unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine how the healthcare environment surrounding the pandemic affected the oncologic care of patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer. This was a retrospective cohort study evaluating patients in the National Cancer Database (2019-2020). Patients with esophageal cancer diagnoses were divided into pre-pandemic (2019) and pandemic (2020) groups. Patient demographics, cancer-related variables, and treatment modalities were compared. Among 26,231 esophageal cancer patients, 14,024 patients (53.5%) were in the pre-pandemic cohort and 12,207 (46.5%) were in the pandemic cohort. After controlling for demographics, patients diagnosed during the pandemic were more likely to have poorly differentiated tumors (odds ratio [OR] 1.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.42), pathologic T3 disease compared to T1 (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.02-1.53), positive lymph nodes on pathology (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.14-1.64), and to be pathologic stage IV (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.29-1.76). After controlling for oncologic characteristics, patients diagnosed during the pandemic were more likely to require at least two courses of systemic therapy (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.48-2.14) and to be offered palliative care (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.04-1.22). While these patients were offered curative therapy at lower rates, this became non-significant after risk-adjustment (p = .15). The pandemic healthcare environment was associated with significantly increased risk-adjusted rates of patients presenting with advanced esophageal cancer. While this led to significant differences in treatment, most of these differences became non-significant after controlling for oncologic factors.

Preoperative Prediction of Postoperative Infections Using Machine Learning and Electronic Health Record Data.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate preoperative risk of postoperative infections using structured electronic health record (EHR) data. BACKGROUND: Surveillance and reporting of postoperative infections is primarily done through costly, labor-intensive manual chart reviews on a small sample of patients. Automated methods using statistical models applied to postoperative EHR data have shown promise to augment manual review as they can cover all operations in a timely manner. However, there are no specific models for risk-adjusting infectious complication rates using EHR data. METHODS: Preoperative EHR data from 30,639 patients (2013-2019) were linked to the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program preoperative data and postoperative infection outcomes data from 5 hospitals in the University of Colorado Health System. EHR data included diagnoses, procedures, operative variables, patient characteristics, and medications. Lasso and the knockoff filter were used to perform controlled variable selection. Outcomes included surgical site infection, urinary tract infection, sepsis/septic shock, and pneumonia up to 30 days postoperatively. RESULTS: Among >15,000 candidate predictors, 7 were chosen for the surgical site infection model and 6 for each of the urinary tract infection, sepsis, and pneumonia models. Important variables included preoperative presence of the specific outcome, wound classification, comorbidities, and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for each model ranged from 0.73 to 0.89. CONCLUSIONS: Parsimonious preoperative models for predicting postoperative infection risk using EHR data were developed and showed comparable performance to existing American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program risk models that use manual chart review. These models can be used to estimate risk-adjusted postoperative infection rates applied to large volumes of EHR data in a timely manner.

Anatomic Lung Resection Outcomes After Implementation of a Universal Thoracic ERAS Protocol Across a Diverse Health Care System.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate how implementing a thoracic enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol impacted surgical outcomes after elective anatomic lung resection. BACKGROUND: The effect of implementing the ERAS Society/European Society of Thoracic Surgery thoracic ERAS protocol on postoperative outcomes throughout an entire health care system has not yet been reported. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study within one health care system (January 2019-March, 2023). A thoracic ERAS protocol was implemented on May 1, 2021 for elective anatomic lung resections, and postoperative outcomes were tracked using the electronic health record and Vizient data. The primary outcome was overall morbidity; secondary outcomes included individual complications, length of stay, opioid use, chest tube duration, and total cost. Patients were grouped into pre-ERAS and post-ERAS cohorts. Bivariable comparisons were performed using independent t -test, χ 2 , or Fisher exact tests, and multivariable logistic regression was performed to control for confounders. RESULTS: There were 1007 patients in the cohort; 450 (44.7%) were in the post-ERAS group. Mean age was 66.2 years; most patients were female (65.1%), white (83.8%), had a body mass index between 18.5 and 29.9 (69.7%), and were ASA class 3 (80.6%). Patients in the postimplementation group had lower risk-adjusted rates of any morbidity, respiratory complication, pneumonia, surgical site infection, arrhythmias, infections, opioid usage, ICU use, and shorter postoperative length of stay (all P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative outcomes were improved after the implementation of an evidence-based thoracic ERAS protocol throughout the health care system. This study validates the ERAS Society/European Society of Thoracic Surgery guidelines and demonstrates that simultaneous multihospital implementation can be feasible and effective.

The deimplementation of laboratory testing in low-risk patients as recommended by the American society of anesthesiologists: An ACS-NSQIP longitudinal analysis.

BACKGROUND: In 2012, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) published guidelines recommending against routine preoperative laboratory testing for low-risk patients to reduce unnecessary medical expenditures. The aim of this study was to assess the change in routine preoperative laboratory testing in low-risk versus higher-risk patients before and after release of these guidelines. METHODS: The ACS-NSQIP database, 2005-2018, was separated into low-risk versus higher-risk patients based upon a previously published stratification. The guideline implementation date was defined as January 2013. Changes in preoperative laboratory testing over time were compared between low- and higher-risk patients. A difference-in-differences model was applied. The primary outcome included any laboratory test obtained ≤90 days prior to surgery. RESULTS: Of 7,507,991 patients, 972,431 (13.0%) were defined as low-risk and 6,535,560 (87.0%) higher-risk. Use of any preoperative laboratory test declined in low-risk patients from 66.5% before to 59.6% after guidelines, a 6.9 percentage point reduction, versus 93.0%-91.9% in higher-risk patients, a 1.1 percentage point reduction (p < 0.0001, comparing percentage point reductions). After risk-adjustment, the adjusted odds ratio for having any preoperative laboratory test after versus before the guidelines was 0.77 (95% CI 0.76-0.78) in low-risk versus 0.93 (0.92-0.94) in higher-risk patients. In low-risk patients, lack of any preoperative testing was not associated with worse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: While a majority of low-risk patients continue to receive preoperative laboratory testing not recommended by the ASA, there has been a decline after implementation of guidelines. Continued effort should be directed at the deimplementation of routine preoperative laboratory testing for low-risk patients.

Postoperative Outcomes After Staged Versus Coordinated Breast Surgery and Bilateral Salpingo-Oophorectomy.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare postoperative complication rates and healthcare charges between patients who underwent coordinated versus staged breast surgery and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The MarketScan administrative database was used to identify adult female patients with invasive breast cancer or BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations who underwent BSO and breast surgery (lumpectomy or mastectomy with or without reconstruction) between 2010 and 2015. Patients were assigned to the coordinated group if a breast operation and BSO were performed simultaneously or assigned to the staged group if BSO was performed separately. Primary outcomes were (1) incidence of 90-day postoperative complications and (2) 2-year aggregate perioperative healthcare charges. Fisher's exact tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and multivariable regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of the 4228 patients who underwent breast surgery and BSO, 412 (9.7%) were in the coordinated group and 3816 (90.3%) were in the staged group. The coordinated group had a higher incidence of postoperative complications (24.0% vs. 17.7%, p < 0.01), higher risk-adjusted odds of postoperative complications [odds ratio (OR) 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06-1.76, p = 0.02], and similar aggregate healthcare charges before (median charges: $106,500 vs. $101,555, p = 0.96) and after risk-adjustment [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.93-1.07; p = 0.95]. In a subgroup analysis, incidence of postoperative complications (12.9% for coordinated operations vs. 11.7% for staged operation, p = 0.73) was similar in patients whose breast operation was a lumpectomy. CONCLUSIONS: While costs were similar, coordinating breast surgery with BSO was associated with more complications in patients who underwent mastectomy, but not in patients who underwent lumpectomy. These data should inform shared decision-making in high-risk patients.

Mucosal Ulceration in Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor is an Independent Predictor of Progression-Free Survival.

INTRODUCTION: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are the most common mesenchymal tumors of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Known prognostic features of GISTs include tumor mitotic rate, size, and location, yet one common feature of primary GISTs for which prognostic significance is unknown, is mucosal ulceration. This study aims to investigate the significance of mucosal ulceration in GISTs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted of 513 patients at a tertiary referral center with a suspected or documented diagnosis of primary GIST between the years of 2000 and 2020. Ulceration was confirmed by definitive documentation in the endoscopic or histopathologic report. The significance of ulceration in GIST was compared to other prognostic factors. RESULTS: Of the 513 patients reviewed, 310 primary GIST patients with known ulceration and disease status were identified. Of those, 27.4% (n = 85) demonstrated mucosal ulceration. Mucosal ulceration in GISTs is associated with GI bleeding, mitotic rate, tumor size, and exon 11 mutations. After a median follow-up of 35.4 (interquartile range = 17.1-62.2) mo, patients with ulcerated GISTs experienced higher rates of tumor progression (40.0% versus 14.2%, P < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, ulceration of GISTs was highly associated with disease progression (P < 0.0001) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio = 2.4 [1.2-4.7], P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Mucosal ulceration in GISTs is associated with GI bleeding, mitotic rate, tumor size, and exon 11 mutations. Overall, ulceration in GISTs is associated with elevated risk of tumor progression and is an independent prognostic factor. In multivariate analysis, ulceration in GIST remains an independent risk factor for disease progression.

Preoperative Prediction of Unplanned Reoperation in a Broad Surgical Population.

INTRODUCTION: Unplanned reoperation is an undesirable outcome with considerable risks and an increasingly assessed quality of care metric. There are no preoperative prediction models for reoperation after an index surgery in a broad surgical population in the literature. The Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS) preoperatively predicts 12 postoperative adverse events using 8 preoperative variables, but its ability to predict unplanned reoperation has not been assessed. This study's objective was to determine whether the SURPAS model could accurately predict unplanned reoperation. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program adult database, 2012-2018. An unplanned reoperation was defined as any unintended operation within 30 d of an initial scheduled operation. The 8-variable SURPAS model and a 29-variable "full" model, incorporating all available American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program nonlaboratory preoperative variables, were developed using multiple logistic regression and compared using discrimination and calibration metrics: C-indices (C), Hosmer-Lemeshow observed-to-expected plots, and Brier scores (BSs). The internal chronological validation of the SURPAS model was conducted using "training" (2012-2017) and "test" (2018) datasets. RESULTS: Of 5,777,108 patients, 162,387 (2.81%) underwent an unplanned reoperation. The SURPAS model's C-index of 0.748 was 99.20% of that for the full model (C = 0.754). Hosmer-Lemeshow plots showed good calibration for both models and BSs were similar (BS = 0.0264, full; BS = 0.0265, SURPAS). Internal chronological validation results were similar for the training (C = 0.749, BS = 0.0268) and test (C = 0.748, BS = 0.0250) datasets. CONCLUSIONS: The SURPAS model accurately predicted unplanned reoperation and was internally validated. Unplanned reoperation can be integrated into the SURPAS tool to provide preoperative risk assessment of this outcome, which could aid patient risk education.

Does Work Relative Value Unit Measure Surgical Complexity for Risk Adjustment of Surgical Outcomes?

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the work relative value unit (workRVU) of a patient's operation can be useful as a measure of surgical complexity for the risk adjustment of surgical outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the American College of Surgeon's National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2005-2018). We examined the associations of workRVU of the patient's primary operation with preoperative patient characteristics and associations with postoperative complications. We performed forward selection multiple logistic regression analysis to determine the predictive importance of workRVU. We then generated prediction models using patient characteristics with and without workRVU and compared c-indexes to assess workRVU's additive predictive value. RESULTS: 7,507,991 operations were included. Patients who were underweight, functionally dependent, transferred from an acute care hospital, had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class or who had medical comorbidities had operations with higher workRVU (all P < 0.0001). The subspecialties with the highest workRVU were neurosurgery (mean = 22.2), thoracic surgery (mean = 21.1), and vascular surgery (mean = 18.8) (P < 0.0001). For all postoperative complications, mean workRVU was higher for patients with the complication than those without (all P < 0.0001). For eight of 12 postoperative complications, workRVU entered the logistic regression models as a predictor variable in the 1st to 4th steps. Addition of workRVU as a preoperative predictive variable improved the c-index of the prediction models. CONCLUSIONS: WorkRVU was associated with sicker patients and patients experiencing postoperative complications and was an important predictor of postoperative complications. When added to a prediction model including patient characteristics, it only marginally improved prediction. This is possibly because workRVU is associated with patient characteristics.

Inpatient Versus Outpatient Surgery: A Comparison of Postoperative Mortality and Morbidity in Elective Operations.

BACKGROUND: Operations performed outpatient offer several benefits. The prevalence of outpatient operations is growing. Consequently, the proportion of patients with multiple comorbidities undergoing outpatient surgery is increasing. We compared 30-day mortality and overall morbidity between outpatient and inpatient elective operations. METHODS: Using the 2005-2018 ACS-NSQIP database, we evaluated trends in percent of hospital outpatient operations performed over time, and the percent of operations done outpatient versus inpatient by CPT code. Patient characteristics were compared for outpatient versus inpatient operations. We compared unadjusted and risk-adjusted 30-day mortality and morbidity for inpatient and outpatient operations. RESULTS: A total of 6,494,298 patients were included. The proportion of outpatient operations increased over time, from 37.8% in 2005 to 48.2% in 2018. We analyzed the 50 most frequent operations performed outpatient versus inpatient 25-75% of the time (n = 1,743,097). Patients having outpatient operations were younger (51.6 vs 54.6 years), female (70.3% vs 67.3%), had fewer comorbidities, and lower ASA class (I-II, 69.3% vs. 59.9%). On both unadjusted and risk-adjusted analysis, 30-day mortality and overall morbidity were less likely in outpatient versus inpatient operations. CONCLUSION: In this large multi-specialty analysis, we found that patients undergoing outpatient surgery had lower risk of 30-day morbidity and mortality than those undergoing the same inpatient operation. Patients having outpatient surgery were generally healthier, suggesting careful patient selection occurred even with increasing outpatient operation frequency. Patients and providers can feel reassured that outpatient operations are a safe, reasonable option for selected patients.

Using the Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System to Define the "High Risk" Surgical Patient.

BACKGROUND: Defining a "high risk" surgical population remains challenging. Using the Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS), we sought to define "high risk" groups for adverse postoperative outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the 2009-2018 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. SURPAS calculated probabilities of 12 postoperative adverse events. The Hosmer Lemeshow graphs of deciles of risk and maximum Youden index were compared to define "high risk." RESULTS: Hosmer-Lemeshow plots suggested the "high risk" patient could be defined by the 10th decile of risk. Maximum Youden index found lower cutoff points for defining "high risk" patients and included more patients with events. This resulted in more patients classified as "high risk" and higher number needed to treat to prevent one complication. Some specialties (thoracic, vascular, general) had more "high risk" patients, while others (otolaryngology, plastic) had lower proportions. CONCLUSIONS: SURPAS can define the "high risk" surgical population that may benefit from risk-mitigating interventions.

Associations Between Preoperative Risk, Postoperative Complications, and 30-Day Mortality.

BACKGROUND: Comorbidities and postoperative complications increase mortality, making early recognition and management critical. It is useful to understand how they are associated with one another. This study assesses associations between comorbidities, complications, and mortality. METHODS: We calculated associations between comorbidities, complications, and 30-day mortality using the 2012-2018 ACS-NSQIP database. We examined the association between mortality and number of complications which complications were most associated with mortality. RESULTS: 5,777,108 patients were included. 30-day mortality was 0.95%. For most comorbidities or postoperative complications, patients with these had higher mortality than patients without. Having ≥ 1 complication increased mortality risk by 32.5-fold (6.5% vs. 0.2%). Mortality rate significantly increased with increasing number of complications, particularly after two or more complications. Bleeding and sepsis were associated with the most deaths. CONCLUSION: The 30-day mortality rate was < 1% but was 32-fold higher in patients with complications and increased rapidly for patients with ≥ 2 complications. Bleeding and sepsis were the most prominent complications associated with mortality.

High Rates of Recurrent Revascularization in Acute Limb Ischemia - A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Study.

BACKGROUND: We queried the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database to review outcomes of acute limb ischemia (ALI) patients following open surgical intervention for ALI. METHODS: A previously validated tool was used to identify ALI patients in NSQIP undergoing open surgical revascularization from 2012 to 2017. Multivariable analysis was performed for the primary outcome of reoperation and secondary outcome of readmission and infection. RESULTS: A total of 2,878 ALI patients underwent open revascularization; 35.7% were transfers from another acute care hospital. A total of 13.8% required reoperation and 7.9% required readmission within 30 days. A total of 32% of reoperations were recurrent revascularization, representing 4.4% of all ALI patients. A total of 58.7% of patients were female and either overweight or obese. Younger age (odds ratio OR 0.991 [0.984-0.999], P = 0.02), underweight patients (OR 1.159 [0.667-2.01], P = 0.05), pre-operative steroid use (OR 1.61 [1.07-2.41], P = 0.02), and perioperative transfusion (OR 2.02 [1.04-3.95], P = 0.04) predicted reoperations. CONCLUSIONS: This registry series demonstrates all-cause ALI patients are a different population than PAD with different risk factors. Despite being a time-critical condition, ALI has higher interhospital transfer rates than ACS or ruptured aneurysm. Following open revascularization, ALI outcomes are worse than ACS but better than ruptured AAA. These outcomes do not appear related to patient factors in contrast to revascularization for chronic PAD.

Choosing Between Mastectomy and Breast-Conserving Therapy: Is Patient Distress an Influencing Factor?

BACKGROUND: Breast-conserving therapy (BCT) offers oncologic outcomes similar to those of mastectomy, yet many patients, when provided the option, choose mastectomy. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between patient-reported distress and surgical decisions and to determine factors predictive of choosing BCT versus mastectomy. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer deemed candidates for BCT who completed a distress screen at their initial visit to an academic institution between 2016 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. This screening tool captures distress in emotional, social, health, and practical domains on a scale of 0 to 10. The distress scores were compared against surgical decisions using nonparametric Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Patient factors associated with surgical choice were analyzed using chi-square, Fisher's exact, and Student's t tests. A two-sided p value lower than 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Of 506 patients deemed eligible for BCT, 430 (85%) chose BCT and 76 (15%) pursued mastectomy. The distress levels did not differ significantly between the surgical options. The patients who underwent mastectomy were on the average younger (50.7 vs 60.4 years; p < 0.0001), presented with palpable masses (p < 0.0001), had stage 0, 2, or 3 versus stage 1 disease (p < 0.0001), sought consultation for second opinions (19.7% vs 8.6%; p = 0.0032), received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (31.6% vs 16.3%; p = 0.0016), or had deleterious gene mutations (21.1% vs 5.1%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Distress was not associated with the pursuit of surgical treatment. Rather, younger age, search for a second opinion, and a palpable mass present at presentation were associated with more aggressive surgical decisions. Understanding factors that influence surgical decision-making is critical in guiding informed decisions that reflect patient values.

Modifiable risk factors for burnout in vascular surgery trainees.

OBJECTIVE: Burnout is prevalent among vascular surgery trainees. Here we aim to identify modifiable risk factors for burnout in vascular surgery training, to facilitate the development of programs to enhance and sustain trainee well-being. METHODS: The Association of Program Directors in Vascular Surgery issued the Annual Training survey in the fall of 2018 to all trainees. The survey contained items to assess frequency of burnout, as well as mentorship, training environment, and stress coping mechanisms using an abbreviated COPE (Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced) inventory. RESULTS: Of 628 surveys issued, the response rate was 30% (n = 188). Respondents indicated that the majority of programs offer mentorship opportunities (n = 150 [83%]) that are longitudinal throughout the duration of training (n = 140 [77%]). Fifty-eight percent (n = 109) indicated there was an appropriate balance between learning and productivity in their program, with more respondents leaning toward too much clinical productivity (n = 57) and fewer toward too much learning (n = 19). Forty-five percent of respondents indicated feeling burnout at least weekly (n = 81). The burnout group was less likely to report an appropriate balance between clinical productivity and learning (49.4% vs 67.7%; P < .001), as well as a lower frequency of mentorship opportunities (72.1% vs 92.7%; P < .001). Certain coping skills were used more frequently in the burnout group, including self-distraction, disengagement, humor, self-blame, and substance use. In multivariate analysis, frequent use of self-blame conferred a 9.847-fold increased risk (95% confidence interval, 2.114-45.871) of burnout (P = .003), while feeling appropriately challenged by the faculty was significantly protective (odds ratio for burnout, 0.158; 95% confidence interval, 0.031-0.820; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: The protective effect against vascular surgery trainee burnout conferred by the availability of mentorship suggests that an expansion and emphasis on mentorship in training may help to mitigate trainee burnout. Mentorship may also be a suitable channel to assess for an appropriate level of challenge, as well as for an appropriate balance between clinical productivity and learning that, when present, are also protective against burnout. Furthermore, the correlation between the frequent use of certain coping skills and burnout highlight this as an area for intervention, potentially through a combination of mentor modeling and formal training on healthy stress-related coping strategies.

A Pilot Study of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Across a Broad Sample of Surgical Patients.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have the potential to aid in surgical decision-making, predict surgical outcomes, assess recovery, and evaluate long-term success. We performed a pilot study testing the ability to use PROs in a broad surgical population in preparation for wide spread use. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Surgical patients completed five Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures during their preoperative encounter in the preanesthesia clinic and again postoperatively via emailed link. Preoperative to postoperative changes in PROMIS scores, factors related to completion of postoperative measures, intercorrelations between PROMIS measures, and numbers of patients with normal function, and mild, moderate, and severe deficits in PROMIS scores were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 393 patients undergoing surgery in 8 specialties completed preoperative PROMIS measures; 239 (60.8%) completed them postoperatively. Physical function (P < 0.0001), pain (P < 0.0001), and cognitive function (P = 0.03) PROMIS scores significantly worsened after surgery but not mental PROMIS scores (P = 0.48). Hispanic and sicker patients had lower completion rates of postoperative measures. Intercorrelations were very high (>0.80) among the physical function and self-efficacy for activities of daily living PROMIS measures. Physical function and pain PROMIS measures had the largest number of patients in the "severe" range after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Patients across a broad surgical population completed PROMIS measures successfully, both preoperatively and postoperatively, although the postoperative completion rate was lower than other studies reported in the literature. PROMIS scores were reflective of the effects of surgery. Some of the PROMIS measures were highly correlated suggesting that some measures could be eliminated or replaced with measures assessing other important effects of surgery. Consideration could be made to alert health care providers about patients having PROs in the "severe" range for potential intervention.

Longitudinal Risk Management for Patients with Increased Risk for Breast Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to characterize longitudinal care management and evaluate the relationship between various patient factors and the likelihood of choosing risk-reducing behaviors in women with increased risk of developing breast cancer. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted to evaluate all adult female patients who had at least one clinic visit with a surgical provider for discussion of breast cancer risk assessment between January, 2017 to July, 2020 at an academic center. Patients with prior history of breast cancer were excluded. Patient details and strategies pursued at clinic visits were recorded. A time-to-event analysis was performed, and hazard ratios were determined to characterize associations between patient characteristics and time to pursuing risk-reducing care management. RESULTS: There were 283 participants with at least one follow-up visit and 48 (17.0%) ultimately changed their initial strategy to either chemoprevention or prophylactic mastectomy. Patients with gene mutations were 6 times more likely to engage in risk-reducing management compared to those without (hazard ratio (HR) 5.99, P < 0.001). Those with histories of high-risk proliferative changes (HR 7.62, P < 0.001) and hysterectomy (HR 2.99, P = 0.019) were also more likely to engage in risk-reducing management. Age, race, and increased predicted risk of developing breast cancer (estimated by various calculators) were not associated with increased likelihood of engaging in risk-reducing strategies. CONCLUSION: Known gene mutations, history of high-risk proliferative changes, and prior hysterectomy were factors associated with women who were more likely to engage in risk-reducing strategies. These findings, when paired with patient reported outcome measures, may help guide shared decision-making.

The Waiting Game: How Long Are Breast Cancer Patients Waiting for Definitive Diagnosis?

BACKGROUND: Receiving a new breast cancer (BC) diagnosis can cause significant patient anxiety, which is amplified by delays in diagnosis. There is a lack of defined time periods for delays in the workup of BC. This study aims to evaluate national variations in timing from first abnormal mammogram to first biopsy and to determine independent predictors of delay in diagnosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were derived from SEER-Medicare linked claims database from 2007 to 2013. Time intervals from abnormal mammogram, either screening or diagnostic, to biopsy were assessed. The fourth quartile for timing from first mammogram to first biopsy was utilized to define delay in diagnosis. Multivariate analyses were used to evaluate the association between clinicopathologic variables and delays in diagnosis. RESULTS: We analyzed 53,758 patients with stage 0-II BC who underwent upfront surgery. Significant variations in timing of care were identified, with mean times from mammogram to biopsy, surgeon visit, and breast surgery of 23.3, 31.6, and 52.6 days, respectively. Over the study period, there was a decrease in delays from mammogram to biopsy. Non-White race, Northeast location, and earlier stage disease were found to be independent predictors of delays in the diagnosis of BC (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates significant variations in time to diagnostic biopsy. More efficient processes of care to address these delays should be implemented, and further studies are needed to determine whether improved efficiency decreases patient anxiety. The large variations in time to diagnosis speak to the need for consensus guidelines to establish a standard of care.

Postoperative Complications Are Not Elevated in Well-Compensated ESRD Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: End-Stage Renal Disease Cardiac Surgery Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are at high risk for cardiac disease requiring surgery, and have been shown to have increased surgical risks. There have been significant improvements in ESRD management, surgical techniques, and patient selection over the past 10 y. We evaluated rates of serious postoperative outcomes in stable, well-dialyzed patients with ESRD undergoing nonemergent cardiac surgery compared to the general cardiac surgery population. METHODS: In this propensity-score matched study, we evaluated 1451 adult patients who underwent nonemergent cardiac surgery at the University of Colorado Hospital (UCH) between 2011 and 2016. Patients with ESRD were compared to nonESRD patients. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint, including 30-d mortality, stroke, postoperative infection, and prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: A total of 35 patients with ESRD met inclusion criteria. These select patients were younger with few comorbidities than the nonESRD population. There were no statistically significant differences in the composite outcome between ESRD and nonESRD patients in the propensity-matched analysis (OR 0.70, CI 0.29-1.72, P = 0.44). There were no significant differences or trends for in-hospital mortality, postoperative stroke, infection, ICU LOS, or hospital LOS between the patients with and without ESRD. CONCLUSIONS: Stable ESRD patients undergoing nonemergent surgery are not at increased risk of major postoperative complications when compared to those without ESRD. Well-compensated ESRD patients should not be excluded from surgical consideration.

Clinical predictors of in-hospital mortality in venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

INTRODUCTION: Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is utilized as a life-saving procedure and bridge to myocardial recovery for patients in refractory cardiogenic shock. Despite technical advancements, VA-ECMO retains high mortality. This study aims to identify the clinical predictors of in-hospital mortality after VA-ECMO to improve risk stratification for this tenuous patient population. METHODS: The REgistry for Cardiogenic Shock: Utility and Efficacy of Device Therapy database is a multicenter, observational registry of ECMO patients. From 2013 to 2018, 789 patients underwent VA-ECMO. Bivariate analysis was performed on more than 300 variables regarding their association with in-hospital mortality. Logistic regression analyses were performed with variables chosen based upon clinical and statistical significance in the bivariate analysis. Tests were considered significant at a two-sided P < .05. RESULTS: Although 63.5% patients were successfully weaned from VA-ECMO, in-hospital mortality was 57.9%. Nonsurvivors were older (P < .0001), had higher body mass index (P = .01), higher rates of hypertension (P = .02), coronary artery disease (P = .02), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P = .02), chronic liver disease (P = .008), percutaneous coronary intervention (P = .02), and surgical revascularization (P = .02). Multivariate predictors for in-hospital mortality include older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.019; P = .007), cardiac arrest (OR, 2.76; P = .006), chronic liver disease (OR, 8.87; P = .04), elevated total bilirubin (OR, 1.093; P < .0001), and the presence of a left ventricular vent (OR, 2.018; P = .03). Pre-ECMO sinus rhythm was protective (OR, 0.374; P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: In a large study of recent VA-ECMO patients, in-hospital mortality remains significant, but acceptable given the severe pathology manifested in this population. Identification of pre-ECMO predictors of mortality helps stratify high-risk patients when deciding on ECMO placement, prolonged support, and prognosis.

Predictors of Acute Kidney Injury Following Aortic Arch Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) following open aortic arch surgery is a frequent complication associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The primary purpose of this study was to evaluate risk factors for postoperative AKI in patients who underwent open aortic arch surgery utilizing hypothermic circulatory arrest (HCA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Included were 295 patients undergoing surgery between January 2011 and March 2018. AKI was defined according to Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines. Preoperative and intraoperative variables were stratified by no AKI versus any AKI, and bivariate analysis was performed. Multivariable logistic regression analysis used statistically and clinically significant characteristics from the bivariate analysis. RESULTS: Of the 295 patients, 93 (32%) developed AKI. In the bivariate analysis, significant predictors of AKI included the following: history of hypertension (P < 0.001), diabetes (P = 0.03), operative urgency (P = 0.009), cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time (P < 0.0001), HCA time (0.02), total intraoperative transfusions (P = 0.002), and concomitant procedures (coronary artery bypass grafting, or mitral/tricuspid interventions, P = 0.0009). In the multivariable analysis, significant predictors of AKI were history of hypertension (P = 0.03) and CPB time (P = 0.02). Age, operative urgency, circulatory arrest time, and any intraoperative transfusion were not significant in the multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, given that CPB time is the only modifiable risk factor identified in the analysis, approaches to reducing bypass time should continue to be the focus of decreasing risk for postoperative AKI in HCA cases.