Search

PURPOSE: Preoperative therapy for pancreatic cancer represents a new treatment option with the potential to improve outcomes for patients, yet with complex risks. By not discussing the potential risks and benefits of new treatment options, clinicians may hinder patients from making informed decisions. METHODS: From 2017 to 2019, we conducted a mixed-methods study. First, we elicited clinicians' (n = 13 medical, radiation, and surgery clinicians), patients' (n = 18), and caregivers' (n = 14) perceptions of information needed for decision making regarding preoperative therapy and generated a list of key elements. Next, we audio-recorded patients' (n = 20) initial multidisciplinary oncology visits and used qualitative content analyses to describe how clinicians discussed this information and surveyed patients to ask if they heard each key element. RESULTS: We identified 13 key elements of information patients need when making decisions regarding preoperative therapy, including treatment complications, alternatives, logistics, and potential outcomes. Patients reported hearing infrequently about complications (eg, hospitalizations [n = 3 of 20]) and alternatives (n = 8 of 20) but frequently recalled logistics and potential outcomes (eg, likelihood of surgery [n = 19 of 20]). Clinicians infrequently discussed complications (eg, hospitalizations [n = 7 of 20]), but frequently discussed alternatives, logistics, and potential outcomes (eg, likelihood of surgery [n = 20 of 20]). No overarching differences in clinician discussion content emerged to explain why patients did or did not hear about each key element. CONCLUSION: We identified key elements of information patients with pancreatic cancer need when considering preoperative therapy. Patients infrequently heard about treatment complications and alternatives, while frequently hearing about logistics and potential outcomes, underscoring areas for improvement in educating patients about new treatment options in oncology.

The eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manual's TNM staging classification for gastric neuroendocrine tumors has been shown to have poor prognostic discriminability. The aim of present study was to propose a modified T-stage classification, and externally validate its performance in a separate population data registry.A modified T-stage classification with tumor size and extent of tumor invasion was generated from the National Cancer Database between 2004 and 2014 (n = 1249). External validation was performed using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry between 1973 and 2013 (n = 539).In the National Cancer Database population, using the AJCC T-stage classification, the 5-y survival rates were 85.7%, 80.8%, 64.5%, and 46.1% in T1, T2, T3, and T4 patients respectively (P0.001). These rates were more contrasting with the modified T-stage (mT) classification at 87.0%, 78.2%, 59.0%, and 40.3% respectively (P0.001). When patients within each of the AJCC T stages were stratified by mT stages, significant survival heterogeneity was observed within each of the AJCC T2 to T4 stages (P0.01). Conversely, when mT stages were stratified by AJCC T stage, no survival difference was observed in any of the mT stages (P0.05). The same analyses were performed using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data, and all the observed results were validated.The current AJCC T stage classification categorizes patients into groups with heterogenous prognosis, thus failing to serve as an effective staging tool. A modified T-stage classification demonstrated significantly improved stratification for patients with gastric neuroendocrine tumors.

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been rising, and 80% of HCCs are unresectable at the time of presentation. In recent years, Yttrium-90 (Y90) radioembolization has arisen as a potential tool to treat the primary HCC tumor while also inducing contralateral liver hypertrophy to increase future liver remnant volumes. The goal of this multidisciplinary review is to summarize the contemporary evidence on the safety, efficacy, and utility of Y90 as a bridge to liver resection and transplant in patients with HCC. A narrative review was conducted of the recent literature regarding the utilization of Y90 as a therapy prior to liver resection or transplant in patients with HCC. A specific emphasis was placed on articles published in the last 10 years. Y90 radioembolization has demonstrated a high safety profile and increasing utility in bridging and downstaging patients with HCC who subsequently undergo liver resection or transplant. The continuous advancements in treatment strategies and radiation dosimetry have paved the way for the incorporation of Y90 in all stages of HCC with different intents, including downstaging and bridging. Y90 radioembolization can be safely used in the HCC population to bridge patients to resection or transplantation, induce future liver remnant growth, and select for less aggressive tumor biology prior to surgery.

Long-term pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) survivors have previously reported favorable quality of life (QoL). However, there has been a paucity of studies utilizing pancreas-specific modules for QoL assessment, which may uncover disability that general modules cannot detect. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PAN26 questionnaires were administered to PD survivors who were at least 5 years out of their operations for neoplasms (1998–2011, study cohort) and compared their scores with published preoperative scores of patients with pancreatic cancer (control cohort). The clinical relevance (CR) of differences was scored as small (5–10), moderate (10–20), or large (> 20) based on validated interpretation of clinically important differences. Of 1266 patients who underwent PD, there were 305 survivors with valid contact information, of whom 248 responded to the questionnaire (response rate 81.3%) and made up the study cohort. The median follow-up was 9.1 years (range 5.1–21.2 years). When compared with the control cohort, patients in the study cohort reported higher pancreatic pain (41.7 ± 17.6 vs. 18.1 ± 20.5, p

Prior literature suggests that cancer patients with hyperglycemia and type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) exhibit worse oncologic and overall outcomes. Tumor metabolism and anabolism pathophysiology may explain this association, although this has not been adequately studied in adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC). We hypothesized that DM would be associated with worse oncological outcomes in ACC, and we utilized data from a national database and institutional sources for multimodal analysis. Both a multi-institutional database (the Collaborative Endocrine Surgery Quality Improvement Program or CESQIP) and a single-center longitudinal cohort (Dana Farber Cancer Institute or DFCI) were queried as unique retrospective cohorts to identify patients with ACC. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, DM-specific variables, and oncologic outcome data were assessed. Results were analyzed via univariate analysis and multivariable linear regression analysis. Statistical significance was defined as p 110 mg/dL had increased risk (HR 36.3, 95% confidence interval 1.6, 831.3) for all-cause mortality. This multi-institutional, multimodal analysis suggests that patients with DM have worse oncologic and overall outcomes for ACC. While further study is warranted, consideration should be given among clinicians to optimize glycemic control as part of their ACC management.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare policies have focused on centralizing care to high-volume centers in an effort to optimize patient outcomes. However, little is known about patients’ and caregivers’ considerations and selection process when selecting hospitals for care. We aim to explore how patients and caregivers select hospitals for complex cancer care and to develop a taxonomy for their selection considerations. METHODS: Qualitative study in which data were gathered from in-depth interviews conducted from March to November 2019 among patients with hepatopancreatobiliary cancers who were scheduled to undergo a pancreatectomy (n=20) at a metropolitan, urban regional or suburban medical center and their caregivers (n=10). RESULTS: The interviews revealed 6 broad domains that characterized hospital selection considerations: hospital factors, team characteristics, travel distance to hospital, referral or recommendation, continuity of care, and insurance considerations. The identified domains were similar between participants seen at the metropolitan center and urban/suburban medical centers with the following exceptions: participants receiving care specifically at the metropolitan center noted operative volume and access to specific services like clinical trials in their hospital selection; participants receiving care at urban/suburban centers noted health insurance considerations and having access to existing medical records in their hospital selection. CONCLUSIONS: This study delineates the many considerations of patients and caregivers when selecting hospitals for complex cancer care. These identified domains should be incorporated into the development and implementation of centralization policies to help increase patient access to high quality cancer care that is consistent with their priorities and needs.

Background The prognostic significance of the platelet (PLR) and neutrophil (NLR) to lymphocyte ratios for patients with resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases (CLM) was evaluated. Methods Clinicopathologic data from patients who underwent hepatectomy for CLM at two tertiary care hospitals between 1995 and 2017 were collected. Blood counts were evaluated for prognostic significance. Results 151 patients met inclusion criteria. The median age was 58 years, 44% were female, and 58% had synchronous metastases. Median number of liver metastases was 2, and 59% of patients underwent lobectomy or extended lobectomy. On multivariable analysis, NLR ≥5 (HR 2.46 [1.08–5.60 CI], p = 0.032), PLR ≥ 220 (HR 2.10 [1.04–4.23 CI], p = 0.037), and greater than 2 liver metastases (HR 2.41 [1.06–5.45 CI], p = 0.035) were associated with reduced overall survival. Conclusions PLR ≥ 220 and NLR ≥ 5 may have utility as preoperative prognostic markers for overall survival in patients with resectable CLM.

Many studies have demonstrated associations between surgical resections at academic centers and improved outcomes, particularly for complex operations. However, few studies have examined this relationship in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). The hypothesis of this study was that facility type is associated with improved postoperative outcomes and survival for patients with ICC who undergo resection. Patients with stages 1 to 3 ICC who underwent hepatectomy were identified using the National Cancer Database (NCDB) (2004–2014). Facilities were categorized as academic or community centers per Commission on Cancer designations. High-volume hospitals were those that performed 11 or more hepatectomies per year. Multilevel logistic mixed-effects models to identify predictors of outcomes and parametric survival-time models were used to determine overall survival (OS). The study identified 2256 patients. Of these patients, 423 (18.8%) were treated at community centers, and 1833 (81.3%) were treated at academic centers. Nearly all high-volume centers were academic facilities (98.5% academic vs. 1.5% community centers), whereas low-volume centers were mixed (65.5% academic vs. 34.5% community centers) (p

OBJECTIVE: To establish an international core set of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) selected by both patients and healthcare providers (HCPs) from the United States (US), Europe, and Asia. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: PROs are increasingly recognized in pancreatic cancer studies. There is no consensus on which of the many available PROs are most important. METHODS: A multicenter Delphi study among patients with pancreatic cancer (curative- and palliative-setting) and HCPs in 6 pancreatic centers in the US (Baltimore, Boston), Europe (Amsterdam, Verona), and Asia (Mumbai, Seoul) was performed. In round 1, participants rated the importance of 56 PROs on a 1 to 9 Likert scale. PROs rated as very important (scores 7-9) by the majority (≥80%) of curative- and/or palliative-patients as well as HCPs were included in the core set. PROs not fulfilling these criteria were presented again in round 2, together with feedback on individual and group ratings. Remaining PROs were ranked based on the importance ratings. RESULTS: In total 731 patients and HCPs were invited, 501 completed round 1, and 420 completed both rounds. This included 204 patients in curative-setting, 74 patients in palliative-setting, and 142 HCPs. After 2 rounds, 8 PROs were included in the core set: general quality of life, general health, physical ability, ability to work/do usual activities, fear of recurrence, satisfaction with services/care organization, abdominal complaints, and relationship with partner/family. CONCLUSIONS: This international Delphi study among patients and HCPs established a core set of PROs in pancreatic cancer, which should facilitate the design of future pancreatic cancer trials and outcomes research.

We aimed to study the contributing factors and costs of malpractice claims involving the surgical management of benign biliary disease given the emotional, physical, and financial toll of these claims on patients, providers, and the healthcare system.Cholecystectomy complications carry significant morbidity and rank among the leading sources of surgical malpractice claims.Using the CRICO Strategies' Comparative Benchmarking System database, representing approximately 30% of all paid and unpaid malpractice claims in the United States, 4081 closed claims filed against general surgeons from 1995 to 2015 were reviewed to isolate 745 cholecystectomy-related claims. A multivariable model was used to determine factors associated with claim outcome.The most common associated complications included bile duct injury (n = 397), bowel perforation (n = 96), and hemorrhage (n = 78). Bile duct injuries were recognized intraoperatively only 19% of the time and required biliary reconstruction surgery 77% of the time. The total cost for all claims over the study period was over $128 M and the median time from event to case close was over 3 years. 40% of claims resulted in patient payout; of these, most claims were settled out of court and the median cost per claim was $264,650. For the 60% of claims not resulting in patient payout, most cases were denied, dropped, or dismissed, yet still averaged over $15,000 per claim in legal and administrative fees. On multivariable analysis, bile duct injury, bowel perforation, and high clinical severity were associated with patient payout, while a resident or fellow being named in a claim was negatively associated with patient payout (P0.05).Cholecystectomy-related claims are costly and time-consuming. Strategies that reduce the risk and aid in recognition of cholecystectomy complications, as well as advance support of patients and families after poor outcomes, may improve clinical care and reduce claim burden.

Hospital volume has been shown to be inversely correlated with surgical mortality rates in complex surgery including pancreatectomy.1, 2 Based on this, there has been a push for regionalization of complex surgical procedures to high-volume centers, with several major medical health systems pledging to adopt the policy.3, 4 However, regionalization may increase travelling times, which imposes financial burdens and time demands on patients.5 On one hand, the intended mortality benefit may be realized if patients are able and willing to travel the added distance for better outcomes. For example, many would be willing to travel for vacation and major purchases, and should therefore be even more willing to do so for their own health care. On the other hand, not all patients have the needed resources to travel, especially marginalized populations. Moreover, it is important to note that while the added travel may only equate to a single trip for the patient’s operation, it will translate to multiple trips for their family members and loved ones, including additional overnight lodging that are not covered by insurance. Additionally, the added travel time would also factor into the needed preoperative clinic, postoperative follow-up, adjuvant treatment and long-term surveillance appointments. Before this debate can be appropriately addressed, the first step is to quantitatively assess the real-world magnitude of the impact of a volume-based regionalization policy on travel times. Therefore, the aim of this study is to simulate the regionalization of pancreatectomies to quantitatively assess the impact of a proposed low-volume threshold policy on spatial access in terms of patient and family driving times. We selected pancreatectomy as the procedure of choice given that hospital volume had the most drastic impact on perioperative mortality compared to other gastrointestinal operations.2 We hypothesized that a simulated regionalization policy would significantly increase the required driving times for patients undergoing pancreatectomy and their families.

Whether prevention strategy for postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) should be tailored across racial groups remains unknown.Patients who underwent major abdominal operation in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) were examined. Our primary outcome was postoperative VTE, and the secondary outcome was postoperative bleeding. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed and validated with the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database.781,888 patients from NIS were analyzed. Overall VTE rate was 2.0%. Compared to White patients, Hispanic (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.93, p 0.01) and Asian patients (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.40-0.61, p 0.01) had significantly lower risks for VTE. In contrast, Asian patients had a significantly higher risk of bleeding (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.24-1.56, p 0.01). Similar trends were observed in NSQIP.The risk-benefit ratio of postoperative VTE prophylaxis for Asian patients is roughly three times higher than that for White patients, suggesting a tailored approach is necessary.

Pancreatic surgery is complex and associated with high morbidity rates. While safety of pancreatectomy has dramatically improved over the last few decades secondary to improvements in techniques and perioperative care, there is still wide variation in outcomes across facilities performing these specialized procedures. In recent years, there has been a wide array of solitary and composite quality metrics that have been proposed and utilized in the literature. Within this chapter, we review commonly used quality metrics in pancreatic surgery, and discuss each of their individual limitations to help readers better understand and interpret published metrics across the literature.

Objective To test the hypothesis that complete, tumor-free resection at the pancreatic neck, achieved either en-bloc or non-en-bloc (ie, revision based on intraoperative frozen section [FS] analysis), is associated with improved survival as compared with incomplete resection (IR) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Summary background data Given the likely systemic nature of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, the oncologic benefit of achieving a histologically complete local resection, particularly through revision of a positive intraoperative FS at the pancreatic neck, remains controversial. Methods Clinicopathologic and treatment data were reviewed for 986 consecutive patients with ductal adenocarcinoma at the head, neck, or uncinate process of the pancreas who underwent open pancreatectomy as well as intraoperative FS analysis between 1998 and 2012 at Massachusetts General Hospital and between 1998 and 2013 at the University of Verona. Overall survival (OS) and perioperative morbidity and mortality were compared across 3 groups: complete resection achieved en-bloc (CR-EB), complete resection achieved non-en-bloc (CR-NEB), and IR. Results The CR-EB cohort comprised 749 (76%) patients, CR-NEB 159 patients (16%), and IR 78 patients (8%). Other than a higher incidence of vascular resection among CR-NEB and IR patients, no demographic, pathologic (eg, tumor grade, lymph node positivity, superior mesenteric artery involvement), or treatment factors (eg, neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy use) differed between the groups. Median OS was significantly higher in patients with CR-EB (28 mo, P = 0.01) and CR-NEB resections (24 mo, P = 0.02) as compared with patients with IR resections (19 mo). After adjusting for clinicopathologic and treatment characteristics, CR-EB and CR-NEB margin status were found to be independent predictors of improved OS (relative to IR, CR-EB hazard ratio [HR] 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.86; CR-NEB HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.50-0.96). There were no intergroup differences in perioperative morbidity and mortality, including rates of pancreatic fistula. Conclusions For patients with ductal adenocarcinoma at the head, neck, or uncinate process of the pancreas undergoing pancreatectomy, complete tumor extirpation via either en-bloc or non-en-bloc complete resection based on FS analysis is associated with improved OS, without an associated increased perioperative morbidity or mortality.

Objective A resident-run minor surgery clinic was developed to increase resident procedural autonomy. We evaluated whether 1) there was a significant difference between complications and patient satisfaction when procedures were independently performed by surgical residents vs. a surgical attending and 2) if participation was associated with an increase in resident procedural confidence. Design Third year general surgery residents participated in a weekly procedure clinic from 2014-2018. Post-procedure complications and patient satisfaction were compared between patients operated on by residents vs. the staff surgeon. Residents were surveyed regarding their confidence in independently performing a variety of clinic-based patient care tasks. Setting Massachusetts General Hospital General in Boston, MA; an academic tertiary care general surgery residency program. Participants Post-graduate year three general surgery residents that ran the clinic as part of a general surgery rotation. Results 1230 patients underwent 1592 procedures (612 in resident clinic, 980 in attending clinic). There was no significant difference in the 30-day complication rate between patients operated on by the resident vs. attending (2.5% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.49). 459 patient satisfaction surveys were administered with a 79.1% response rate. There was no significant difference in the overall quality of care rating between residents and the attending surgeon (87.5% top-box rating vs. 93.1%, p = 0.15). Twenty-one residents completed both a pre- and post-rotation survey (77.8% response rate). The proportion of residents indicating that they could independently perform a variety of patient care tasks significantly increased across the rotation (all p Conclusion Mid-level general surgery residents can independently perform office-based procedures without detriment to safety or patient satisfaction. The resident-run procedure clinic serves as an environment for residents to grow in confidence in both technical and non-technical skills. Given the high rate at which patients provide resident feedback, future work may investigate how to best incorporate patient derived evaluations into resident assessment.

Because of the biologic aggressiveness and late presentation of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), up to 80% of patients have locally advanced or metastatic disease at presentation. The success of multiagent chemotherapy regimens in the management of metastatic disease has been translated to patients with locally advanced PDAC. Both FOLFIRINOX (fluorouracil/folinic acid/irinotecan/oxaliplatin) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel are used to downstage locally advanced PDAC to render it eligible for resection with curative intent. This paradigm shift has significantly expanded the pool of patients who are eligible for resection with curative intent. However, the generalizability of present studies and the patient selection process are unclear. This article provides an evidence-based review of patient selection considerations and management algorithms, and details our institution’s approach to patients with locally advanced PDAC after preoperative chemotherapy.

The incidence of cholangiocarcinoma has doubled over the last 15 years with a similar rise in mortality, which provides the impetus for standardization of evidence-based care through the establishment of guidelines. We compared available guidelines on the clinical management of cholangiocarcinoma in the United States and Europe, which included the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the International Liver Cancer Association (ILCA) guidelines. There is discordance in the recommendation for biopsy in patients with potentially resectable cholangiocarcinoma and in the recommendation for use of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scans. Similarly, the recommendation for preoperative biliary drainage for extrahepatic and perihilar cholangiocarcinoma in the setting of jaundice is inconsistent across all four guidelines. The BILCAP (capecitabine) and ABC-02 trials (gemcitabine with cisplatin) have provided the strongest evidence for systemic therapy in the adjuvant and palliative settings, respectively, but all guidelines have refrained from setting them as standard of care, given heterogeneity in the study cohorts and ABC-02’s negative intention-to-treat results. Future progress in enhancing survivorship of patients with cholangiocarcinoma would likely entail improvements in diagnostic biomarkers and novel systemic therapies. Based on recent results from studies of targeted therapy, future iterations of the guidelines will likely incorporate molecular profiling.

The implementation of upfront, preoperative habilitation (“prehabilitation”), as opposed to postoperative habilitation (rehabilitation), provides a unique opportunity to optimize surgical outcomes, while ensuring that patients receive necessary conditioning that may otherwise be significantly delayed by postoperative complications. In this review, opportunities to design, implement, monitor, and evaluate a surgical prehabilitation program in colorectal surgery are discussed, and broken down to include emotional, physical, and nutritional aspects of care in the preoperative setting.

Cancer center accreditation is designed to identify centers that provide high-quality cancer care. This also guides patients and referring physicians towards centers of excellence for specialized care. We sought to examine if cancer center accreditation was associated with improved long-term oncologic outcomes in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.Using the SEER-Medicare database, we identified patients who underwent pancreatectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma from 1996 to 2013. Hospitals were categorized into three groups: National Cancer Institute-designated (NCI-designated) centers, Commission on Cancer (CoC)-accredited centers, and "non-accredited" (NA) centers. Multilevel mixed-effects models were used to calculate adjusted examined lymph nodes, disease-specific survival (DSS), and overall survival (OS).We identified 5,118 patients who underwent pancreatectomy at 632 hospitals (41.0% NA, 49.6% CoC, 9.4% NCI). NCI-designated centers had a greater median number of lymph nodes examined compared with CoC-accredited or NA centers (14 vs. 10 vs. 11.0 nodes, respectively; p 0.001). Patients treated at NCI centers had a higher 5-year DSS compared to those treated at CoC or NA centers (31.2% vs. 23.6% vs. 23.0%, respectively; p 0.001). Finally, patients treated at NCI centers had a higher 5-year OS compared to those treated at CoC or NA centers (23.5% vs. 18.9% vs. 17.9%, respectively; p 0.001). The associations held true when adjusted analyses were performed.Patients with resected pancreatic cancer treated at NCI-designated centers were associated with improved long-term oncologic outcomes. There was no difference between CoC-accredited centers compared with NA centers. Meticulous validation of accreditation is warranted globally prior to implementation.

Background Readmission after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair to a different (nonindex) hospital has been shown to be associated with high mortality rates. Factors influencing this association remain unknown. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of hospital teaching status on nonindex hospital readmission and mortality. Methods An observational analysis of the longitudinally linked California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database was conducted from 1995 to 2009. Patients who were readmitted within 30 days after open AAA repair were included. The primary outcome measured was mortality on readmission. Results Over the 15-year study period, 3,475 readmissions after AAA were analyzed, of which 1,020 (29.4%) were to a nonindex hospital. After adjusting for age, race, gender, insurance, comorbidities, perioperative factors, and reason for readmission, nonindex readmission for patients undergoing their initial operation at a teaching hospital did not impact mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28–2.17, P = 0.63). Nonindex readmission for patients undergoing their initial operation at a nonteaching hospital, however, significantly increased mortality (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.04–2.54, P = 0.03). Conclusions Readmission to a different hospital is associated with a higher mortality rate for patients undergoing AAA repair at nonteaching hospitals. This effect is not seen in patients having their initial operation performed at teaching hospitals, possibly due to infrastructure at these hospitals allowing for decreased impact from fragmentation of care. In cases where triage to an index hospital for readmission is not possible, communication at a high level between the index hospital and readmission hospital is paramount.

Background A minimum-volume policy restricting hospitals not meeting the threshold from performing complex operation may increase travel burden and decrease spatial access to operation. We aim to identify vulnerable populations that would be sensitive to an added travel burden. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of the database of the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development for patients undergoing pancreatectomy from 2005 to 2014. Number of hospitals bypassed was used as a metric for travel. Patients bypassing fewer hospitals were deemed to be more sensitive to an added travel burden. Results There were 13,374 patients who underwent a pancreatectomy, of whom 2,368 (17.7%) were nonbypassers. On unadjusted analysis, patients >80 year old travelled less than their younger counterparts, bypassing a mean of 10.9 ± 9.5 hospitals compared with 14.2 ± 21.3 hospitals bypassed by the 35–49 year old age group ( P P P Conclusion In patients undergoing pancreatectomy, the elderly, racial minorities, and patients with self-pay or Medicaid payer status were associated with an increased sensitivity to an added travel burden. This vulnerable cohort may be affected disproportionately by a minimum-volume policy.

Background and Objectives Despite routine inclusion of lymphovascular invasion (LVI) status in pathologic reports of resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDA), the clinical implications of LVI have not been well characterized. Methods This study is a retrospective review of 2640 patients who underwent a pancreatectomy for PDA at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Massachusetts General Hospital, or Johns Hopkins Hospital (2003-2014). Clinical and pathologic records were extracted from institutional databases. Results The median post-resection survival for the total cohort was 19.2 months with a 5-year survival rate of 15.2%. In a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model including conventional pathologic features, LVI was an independent predictor of survival (HR = 1.14, P = 0.017). In a stratified Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, patients with N0, LVI- PDA had a significantly improved overall survival compared to those with N0, LVI+ PDA (median 31 vs 24 mo, P = 0.020). Similarly, patients with N1, LVI- PDA had superior survival to patients with N1, LVI+ disease (18.6 vs 16.5 mo, P = 0.001). Conclusions As the first large scale study focused on the clinical impact of LVI status in PDA, these data indicate that this routinely reported pathologic feature is a bona fide and independent adverse prognostic factor.

Outpatient adrenalectomy has the potential to decrease costs, improve inpatient capacity, and decrease patient exposure to hospital-acquired conditions. Still, the practice has yet to be widely adopted and current studies demonstrating the safety of outpatient adrenalectomy are limited by sample size, extensive exclusion criteria, and no comparison to inpatient cases. We aimed to study the characteristics and safety of outpatient adrenalectomy using the largest such sample to date across 2 academic medical centers and 3 minimally invasive approaches.All minimally invasive adrenalectomies were identified, starting from the time outpatient adrenalectomy was initiated at each institution. Cases involving removal of other organs, bilateral adrenalectomies, and cases in which a patient was admitted to the hospital before the day of surgery were excluded. Patient, tumor, and case characteristics were compared between outpatient and inpatient cases, and multivariable regression analysis was used to assess odds of 30-day readmission and/or complication.Of 203 patients undergoing minimally invasive adrenalectomy, 49% (n = 99) were performed on an outpatient basis. Outpatient disposition was more likely in the setting of lower estimated blood loss, case completion before 3 pm, and for surgery performed in the setting of nodule/mass and primary hyperaldosteronism versus Cushing's syndrome, pheochromocytoma, and metastasis (P.05). There were no significant differences in patient age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, procedure performed, or total time under anesthesia between inpatient and outpatient cases. On adjusted analysis, outpatient adrenalectomy was not associated with increased 30-day readmission rate (odds ratio 0.23 [confidence interval 0.04-1.26] P = .09) or 30-day complication rate (odds ratio 0.21 [confidence interval 0.06-0.81] P = .02).Outpatient adrenalectomy can be performed safely without increased risk of 30-day complications or readmission in appropriately selected candidates.

Background Whether the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) may be reduced by preoperative administration of prophylactic heparin is unknown. We hypothesized that timing of heparin administration does not significantly alter the incidence of VTE in pancreatic surgery. Methods An analysis was conducted using data from Massachusetts General Hospital's National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from 2012 to 2017. All patients admitted for elective pancreatic resection were included. The primary outcome was development of VTE. Multivariable regression was performed, adjusting for patient demographics and various clinical factors. Results In total, 1448 patients were analyzed, of whom 1062 received preoperative heparin (73.3%). Overall, 36 (2.5%) patients developed VTE. On unadjusted analysis, there was no statistically significant difference between patients who received preoperative heparin compared with those who did not (2.6% vs. 1.3%, respectively; p = 0.079). On adjusted analysis, there was an association with increased VTE rates among patients who received preoperative heparin (OR 2.93, 95% CI 1.10–7.81; p = 0.031). Conclusion There was an association between preoperative heparin administration and increased incidence of VTE on adjusted analysis, possibly reflecting appropriate surgical judgment in patient selection for prophylaxis. These data question the inclusion of preoperative VTE pharmacologic prophylaxis as a reliable quality indicator.

Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) are cystic neoplasms with the potential for progression to pancreatic cancer. Recognized by the global medical community just over two decades ago, IPMN have gained great epidemiological and clinical relevance thanks to the widespread use of cross-sectional abdominal imaging, which has led to a surge in the number of incidental pancreatic cysts being diagnosed. As our understanding of this disease has improved, we now know that some IPMN have a very elevated risk of cancer and require surgical resection, while others are low-risk lesions and can be followed. The approach to IPMN must therefore strike a balance between preventing the over-utilization of surgery and the timely recognition and treatment of patients with high-risk lesions. Several clinical, radiographic, and laboratory parameters have been proposed to risk-stratify IPMN, leading to the publication of management guidelines that do not always converge in their recommendations. The goal of this clinical therapeutic review is to describe the strategic approach to IPMN at the Massachusetts General Hospital, and how our current understanding, management algorithm, and future directions have been informed by research efforts at our institution and other centers.

Objective General surgery training has evolved to align with changes in work hour restrictions, supervision regulations, and reimbursement practices. This has culminated in a lack of operative autonomy, leaving residents feeling inadequately prepared to perform surgery independently when beginning fellowship or practice. A resident-run minor surgery clinic increases junior resident autonomy, but its effects on patient outcomes have not been formally established. This pilot study evaluated the safety of implementing a resident-run minor surgery clinic within a university-based general surgery training program. Design Single institution case-control pilot study of a resident-run minor surgery clinic from 9/2014 to 6/2015. Rotating third-year residents staffed the clinic once weekly. Residents performed operations independently in their own procedure room. A supervising attending surgeon staffed each case prior to residents performing the procedure and viewed the surgical site before wound closure. Postprocedure patient complications and admissions to the hospital because of a complication were analyzed and compared with an attending control cohort. Setting Massachusetts General Hospital General in Boston, MA; an academic tertiary care general surgery residency program. Participants Ten third-year general surgery residents. Results Overall, 341 patients underwent a total of 399 procedures (110 in the resident clinic vs. 289 in the attending clinic). Minor surgeries included soft tissue mass excision (n = 275), abscess incision and drainage (n = 66), skin lesion excision (n = 37), skin tag removal (n = 15), and lymph node excision (n = 6). There was no significant difference in the overall rate of patients developing a postprocedure complication within 30 days (3.6% resident vs. 2.8% attending; p = 0.65); which persisted on multivariate analysis. Similar findings were observed for the rate of hospital admission resulting from a complication. Resident evaluations overwhelmingly supported the rotation, citing increased operative autonomy as the greatest strength. Conclusions Implementation of a resident-run minor surgery clinic is a safe and effective method to increase trainee operative autonomy. The rotation is well suited for mid-level residents, as it provides an opportunity for realistic self-evaluation and focused learning that may enhance their operative experience during senior level rotations.

BACKGROUND Early invasive carcinoma may be encountered in association with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) of the pancreas. The natural history of these early invasive lesions is unknown. METHODS Pancreatic surgical databases from 4 high-volume centers were queried for IPMNs, with invasive components measuring 20 mm or less. All cases were reviewed by GI gastrointestinal pathologists, and pathologic features were analyzed to identify predictors of recurrence and survival. RESULTS A total of 70 small IPMN-associated invasive carcinomas (≤20-mm invasion) were identified, comprising 25% of resected IPMN-associated carcinomas (n = 280). Most of these small invasive cancers were multifocal (66%), less than 10 mm in size (73%), and arose in the setting of a main duct IPMN (96%). The most common adenocarcinoma subtypes were tubular (57%) and colloid (29%). Lymph node metastases were present in 19% of cases and 23% were T3 lesions. The overall recurrence rate was 24% (n = 17), and the median time to recurrence was 16 months (range: 4-132 months). Median and 5-year survival rates were 99 months and 59%. Recurrence patterns of invasive disease were local in 35%, distant in 47%, and both in 18%. Lymphatic spread and T3 stage were predictive of recurrence (univariate, P = 0.006), whereas tubular carcinoma type was the most predictive of poor overall survival (multivariate hazard ratio = 3.7, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS This study represents the largest multi-institutional experience of resected small IPMN-associated carcinoma. Although these malignancies may frequently be cured with resection, recurrence risk is significant. Lymphatic spread, increased T stage, and tubular type carcinoma were associated with the poorest outcome.

159 Background: Older adults with GI cancer often experience poor surgical outcomes, yet little is known about their PROs, such as physical function, quality of life (QOL), and physical and psychological symptom burden. Methods: As part of a randomized trial of perioperative geriatric care, we prospectively enrolled adults age ≥65 with GI cancer planning to undergo surgical resection. We asked patients preoperatively to self-report their physical function (activities of daily living [ADLs] and instrumental ADLs [IADLs]), QOL (EORTC QLQ-C30), symptom burden (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS], scores > 3 considered moderate/severe [mod/sev]), depression symptoms (Geriatric Depression Scale [GDS], scores > 4 represent a positive screen for depression), and comorbidities. We used regression models to explore relationships among PROs and clinical outcomes (receiving planned surgery, postoperative complications [Clavien-Dindo], hospital readmissions within 90 days, and survival). Results: From 9/2016 - 4/2019, we enrolled 160 of 221 (72.4%) patients approached (median age: 72, range: 65-92). At baseline, most (53.1%) reported at least one comorbidity and required assistance with ADLs (94.8%) and IADLs (52.3%). Patients reported an average of 2.56 mod/sev ESAS symptoms, and 27.7% screened positive for depression. For surgical outcomes, 137 patients (85.6%) underwent planned surgery, and 99 (72.2%) of these had at least one postoperative complication. Greater independence with ADLs was associated with undergoing planned surgery (OR = 1.21, P = .02), lower risk of complications (OR = 0.81, P < .01), and improved survival (HR = 0.87, P = .02), but not readmissions. Greater independence with IADLs was associated with undergoing planned surgery (OR = 1.30, P = .03) and improved survival (HR = 0.73, P < .01), but not other outcomes. Higher baseline QOL was only associated with lower risk of postoperative complications (OR = 0.97, P = .04). Higher depression scores were only associated with worse survival (HR = 1.13, P = .02). Higher baseline symptom burden predicted for shorter time to readmission (HR = 1.13, p = .03). Patient-reported number of comorbidities was associated with shorter time to readmission (HR = 1.49, p = .03) and higher risk of complications (OR = 1.70, P = .03). Conclusions: Older adults with GI cancer often have baseline functional limitations and a high symptom burden, all of which are associated with worse clinical outcomes. Future work should study whether addressing preoperative PROs could improve older patients’ surgical outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT02810652 .

147 Background: Preoperative therapy for localized pancreatic cancer represents an emerging treatment paradigm with the potential to provide significant benefits, yet with complex risks. Research is lacking about whether clinicians effectively communicate key components of informed decision-making for patients considering this treatment. Methods: From 2017-2019, we conducted a two-part, mixed methods study. In part 1, we conducted interviews with clinicians (medical/radiation/surgical oncology, n = 13) and patients with pancreatic cancer who had received preoperative therapy (n = 18) to explore perceptions of information needed to make informed decisions about preoperative therapy, from which we generated a list of key elements. In part 2, we audio recorded the initial multidisciplinary visits of patients with pancreatic cancer eligible for preoperative therapy (n = 20). Two coders (94% concordance) independently identified whether clinicians discussed key elements from part 1. Patients also completed a post-visit survey reporting whether clinicians discussed the key elements. We explored discordance between audio recordings and patient reports using qualitative, explanatory themes. Results: In part 1, we identified 13 key elements of informed treatment decision-making, including treatment logistics, alternatives, and potential risks/benefits. In part 2, recordings showed that most visits included discussions about logistics, such as the chemotherapy schedule (n = 20) and use of a port-a-cath (n = 20), whereas few included discussions about risks, such as the potential for hospitalizations (n = 7), urgent visits (n = 6), or needing help with daily tasks (n = 6). Patients reported hearing about potential benefits, such as likelihood of achieving surgery (n = 10) and cure (n = 7), even when these were not discussed. Qualitative themes across these discordant cases included clinician optimism regarding present day results versus historical findings and mentions of positive outcomes from prior patients without citing specific data or potential adverse outcomes. Conclusions: We identified key elements of information patients with pancreatic cancer need to make informed decisions about preoperative therapy. Although clinicians frequently disclosed much of this information, we found multiple cases of patient-clinician discordance for certain key elements, which underscores the need for interventions to enhance patient-clinician communication regarding pancreatic cancer treatment decisions.

Objective Trials for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) report lower perioperative mortality and morbidity, but also higher costs compared with open repair. However, few studies have examined the subsequent cost of follow-up evaluations and interventions. Therefore, we present the index and 5-year follow-up costs of EVAR from the Endurant Stent Graft System Post Approval Study. Methods From August 2011 to June 2012, 178 patients were enrolled in the Endurant Stent Graft System Post Approval Study de novo cohort and treated with the Medtronic Endurant stent graft system (Medtronic Vascular, Santa Rosa, Calif), of whom 171 (96%) consented for inclusion in the economic analysis and 177 participated in the quality-of-life (QOL) assessment over a 5-year follow-up period. Cost data for the index and follow-up hospitalizations were tabulated directly from hospital bills and categorized by Uniform Billing codes. Surgeon costs were calculated by Current Procedural Terminology codes for each intervention. Current Procedural Terminology codes were also used to calculate imaging and clinic follow-up reimbursement as surrogate to cost based on year-specific Medicare payment rates. Additionally, we compared aneurysm-related versus nonaneurysm-related subsequent hospitalization costs and report EuroQol 5D QOL dimensions. Results The mean hospital cost per person for the index EVAR was $45,304 (interquartile range [IQR], $25,932-$44,784). The largest contributor to the overall cost was operating room supplies, which accounted for 50% of the total cost at a mean of $22,849 per person. One hundred patients had 233 additional post index admission inpatient admissions; however, only 32 readmissions (14%) were aneurysm related, with a median cost of $13,119 (IQR, $4570-$24,153) compared with a nonaneurysm-related median cost of $6609 (IQR, $1244-$26,466). Additionally, 32 patients were admitted a total of 37 times for additional procedures after index admission, of which 14 (38%) were aneurysm-related. The median cost of hospitalization for aneurysm-related subsequent intervention was $22,023 (IQR, $13,177-$47,752), compared with a median nonaneurysm-related subsequent intervention cost of $19,007 (IQR, $8708-$33,301). After the initial 30-day visit, outpatient follow-up imaging reimbursement averaged $550 per person per year ($475 for computed tomography scans, $75 for the abdomen), whereas annual office visits averaged $107 per person per year, for a total follow-up reimbursement of $657 per person per year. There were no significant differences in the five EuroQol 5D QOL dimensions at each follow-up compared with baseline. Conclusions Costs associated with index EVAR are driven primarily by cost of operating room supplies, including graft components. Subsequent admissions are largely not aneurysm related; however, cost of aneurysm-related hospitalizations is higher than for nonaneurysm admissions. These data will serve as a baseline for comparison with open repair and other devices.

There is no consensus on the use of chest imaging in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients. Among PDAC patients, we examined the use of chest computed tomography (CT) over time and determined whether the use of chest CT led to a survival difference or change in management via identification of indeterminate lung nodules (ILNs). Retrospective clinical data was collected for patients diagnosed with PDAC from 1998 to 2014. We examined the proportion of patients undergoing staging chest CT scan and those who had ILN, defined as ≥ 1 well-defined, noncalcified lung nodule(s) ≤ 1 cm in diameter. We determined time to overall survival (OS) using multivariate Cox regression. We also assessed changes in management of PDAC patients who later developed lung metastasis only. Of the 2710 patients diagnosed with PDAC, 632 (23%) had greater than one chest CT. Of those patients, 451 (71%) patients had ILNs, whereas 181 (29%) had no ILNs. There was no difference in median overall survival in patients without ILNs (16.4 [13.6, 19.0] months) versus those with ILN (14.8 [13.6, 15.8] months, P = 0.18). Examining patients who developed isolated lung metastases (3.3%), we found that staging chest CTs did not lead to changes in management of the primary abdominal tumor. Survival did not differ for PDAC patients with ILNs identified on staging chest CTs compared with those without ILNs. Furthermore, ILN identification did not lead to changes in management of the primary abdominal tumor, questioning the utility of staging chest CTs for PDAC patients.

Objective: The aim of this study was to elucidate the impact of intraoperative blood loss on outcomes following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Background: The negative impact of intraoperative blood loss on outcomes in PD has long been suspected but not well characterized, particularly those factors that may be within surgeons’ control. Methods: From 2001 to 2015, 5323 PDs were performed by 62 surgeons from 17 institutions. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was discretized (0 to 300, 301 to 750, 751 to 1300, and >1300 mL) using optimal scaling methodology. Multivariable regression, adjusted for patient, surgeon, and institutional variables, was used to identify associations between EBL and perioperative outcomes. Factors associated with both increased and decreased EBL were elucidated. The relative impact of surgeon-modifiable contributors was estimated through beta coefficient standardization. Results: The median EBL of the series was 400 mL [interquartile range (IQR) 250 to 600]. Intra-, post-, and perioperative transfusion rates were 15.8%, 24.8%, and 37.2%, respectively. Progressive EBL zones correlated with intra- but not postoperative transfusion in a dose-dependent fashion (P < 0.001), with a key threshold of 750 mL EBL (8.14% vs 40.9%; P < 0.001). Increasing blood loss significantly correlated with poor perioperative outcomes. Factors associated with increased EBL were trans-anastomotic stent placement, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, pancreaticogastrostomy reconstruction, multiorgan or vascular resection, and elevated operative time, of which 38.7% of the relative impact was “potentially modifiable” by the surgeon. Conversely, female sex, small duct, soft gland, minimally invasive approach, pylorus-preservation, biological sealant use, and institutional volume (≥67/year) were associated with decreased EBL, of which 13.6% was potentially under the surgeon's influence. Conclusion: Minimizing blood loss contributes to fewer intraoperative transfusions and better perioperative outcomes for PD. Improvements might be achieved by targeting modifiable factors that influence EBL.

Randomized controlled trials have historically been regarded as the gold standard of modern clinical research tools, allowing us to elucidate the efficacy of novel therapeutics in an unparalleled manner. However, when attempting to generalize trial results to broader populations, it becomes apparent that the unexplained outcome variability exists among treatment recipients, suggesting that randomized controlled trials harbor inherent limitations. Herein, we explore the benefits of health services (outcomes) research utilization in addressing variation in patient outcomes following surgical intervention in the non-randomized setting, with a specific focus on hepatopancreaticobiliary surgery outcomes. To achieve this, we have constructed a framework that outlines the complex interactions existing between therapeutic, patient, and provider factors that subsequently lead to variation in outcomes. By exploring examples in the current literature, we have highlighted the areas where the knowledge is currently lacking and can be further strengthened through the application of outcomes research. Furthermore, we have attempted to demonstrate the utility of alternative study designs in the investigation of novel clinical questions currently unanswered in the field of hepatopancreaticobiliary surgery.

In our current era where shortage of liver grafts is commonplace, utilization of traumatic liver grafts may represent an opportunity to expand the organ donor pool without compromising graft survival. However, data on liver transplantation using a fractured liver allograft is scarce, with only small case series and reports found in the literature. In this report, we describe our experience with utilizing a liver graft with grade IV hepatic fracture for transplantation. At 12 months follow up, the recipient has excellent graft function and has regained an excellent quality of life. We demonstrated that the ability to safely use a fractured liver graft represents an additional avenue for expansion of the deceased donor population, especially in regions with prolonged waitlist times.

BackgroundMost studies on learning curves for pancreaticoduodenectomy have been based on single-surgeon series at tertiary academic centers or are inferred indirectly from volume-outcome relationships. Our aim is to describe mortality rates associated with cumulative surgical experience among non-teaching hospitals.Study designObservational study of a statewide inpatient database. Analysis included hospitals that began performing pancreaticoduodenectomy between 1996 and 2010, as captured by the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database. Cases were numbered sequentially within each hospital. The same sequential series (e.g., first 10 cases, 11th through 20th cases) were identified across hospitals. The outcome measure was in-hospital mortality.ResultsA total of 1210 cases from 143 non-teaching hospitals were analyzed. The average age was 63 years old, and the majority of patients were non-Hispanic white. The median overall mortality rate was 9.75 %. The mortality rate for the first 10 aggregated cases was 11.3 %. This improved for subsequent cases, reaching 7.1 % for the 21st-30th cases. However, the mortality rate then increased, reaching 16.7 % by the 41st-50th cases before falling to 0.0 % by the 61st-70th cases.ConclusionsInitial improvement in surgical outcomes relative to cumulative surgical experience is not sustained. It is likely that factors other than surgical experience affect outcomes, such as less rigorous assessment of comorbidities or changes in support services. Vigilance regarding outcomes should be maintained even after initial improvements.

OBJECTIVE To perform an unbiased assessment of first postoperative day (POD 1) drain amylase level and pancreatic fistula (PF) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). BACKGROUND Recent evidence demonstrated that drain abandonment in PD is unsafe. Early drain amylase levels have been proposed as predictors of PF after PD, allowing for selection of patients for early drain removal. METHODS Daily drain amylase levels were correlated with the development of PF in 2 independent cohorts of patients undergoing PD: training cohort (n = 126; year 2008) and validation cohort (n = 369; years 2009-2012). RESULTS POD 1 drain amylase level had the highest predictive ability (concordance index: 0.911) for PF in the training cohort. An amylase level of 612 U/L or higher showed the best accuracy (86%), sensitivity (93%), and specificity (79%). Thus, a cutoff value of 600 U/L was utilized. In the validation cohort, 229 (62.1%) patients had a POD 1 drain amylase level of lower than 600 U/L, and PF developed in only 2 (0.9%) cases; whereas in patients with POD 1 drain amylase level of 600 U/L or higher (n = 140) the PF rate was 31.4% (odds ratio [OR] = 52, P < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, POD 1 drain amylase level of lower than 600 U/L (OR = 0.0192, P < 0.0001) was a stronger predictor of the absence of PF than pancreatic gland texture (OR = 0.193, P = 0.002) and duct diameter (OR = 0.861, P = 0.835). CONCLUSIONS After PD, the risk of PF is less than 1% if POD 1 drain amylase level is lower than 600 U/L. We propose that in this group, which comprise more than 60% of patients, drains should be removed on POD 1.