Search

Background: The preoperative period is an important target for interventions (eg Surgical Prehabilitation and Readiness [SPAR]) that can improve postoperative outcomes for older patients with comorbidities., Study Design: To determine whether a preoperative multidisciplinary prehabilitation program (SPAR) reduces postoperative 30-day mortality and the need for non-home discharge in high-risk surgical patients, surgical patients enrolled in a prehabilitation program targeting physical activity, pulmonary function, nutrition, and mindfulness were compared with historical control patients from 1 institution's American College of Surgeons (ACS) NSQIP database. SPAR patients were propensity score-matched 1:3 to pre-SPAR NSQIP patients, and their outcomes were compared. The ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator was used to compare observed-to-expected ratios for postoperative outcomes., Results: A total of 246 patients were enrolled in SPAR. A 6-month compliance audit revealed that overall patient adherence to the SPAR program was 89%. At the time of analysis, 118 SPAR patients underwent surgery with 30 days of follow-up. Compared with pre-SPAR NSQIP patients (n = 4,028), SPAR patients were significantly older with worse functional status and more comorbidities. Compared with propensity score-matched pre-SPAR NSQIP patients, SPAR patients had significantly decreased 30-day mortality (0% vs 4.1%, p = 0.036) and decreased need for discharge to postacute care facilities (6.5% vs 15.9%, p = 0.014). Similarly, SPAR patients exhibited decreased observed 30-day mortality (observed-to-expected ratio 0.41) and need for discharge to a facility (observed-to-expected ratio 0.56) compared with their expected outcomes using the ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator., Conclusions: The SPAR program is safe and feasible and may reduce postoperative mortality and the need for discharge to postacute care facilities in high-risk surgical patients., (Copyright © 2023 by the American College of Surgeons. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The purpose of this study was to recognize clinically meaningful differences in lung transplant outcomes based on local or distant lung procurement. This could identify if the lung allocation policy change would influence patient outcomes., Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort study analyzed adult patients who underwent lung transplant from 2006 to 2017. Donor and recipient data were abstracted from a collaborative, prospective registry shared by our local organ procurement organization, and tertiary medical center. Short-term outcomes, 1-year survival, and hospitalization costs were compared between local and distant lung transplants defined by donor service area., Results: Of the 722 lung transplants performed, 392 (54%) had local donors and 330 (46%) had distant donors. Donors were similar in age and cause of death. Recipients were significantly different in diagnosis and local recipients had lower median lung allocation scores (local, 37.3 and distant, 44.9; P < .01). Distant lung transplants had longer total ischemic times (local, 231 ± 52 minutes and distant, 313 ± 48 minutes; P < .01). The rate of major complications, length of hospital stay, and 1-year survival were similar between groups. Distant lung transplants were associated with higher median overall cost (local, $183,542 and distant, $229,871; P < .01). Local lung transplants were more likely to be performed during daytime (local, 333 out of 392 [85%] and distant, 291 out of 330 [61%]; P < .01)., Conclusions: Local lung transplants are associated with shorter ischemic times, lower cost, and greater likelihood of daytime surgery. Short- and intermediate-term outcomes are similar for lung transplants from local and distant donors. The new lung allocation policy, with higher proportion of distant lung transplants, is likely to incur greater costs but provide similar outcomes., (Copyright © 2020 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Protective ventilation may improve outcomes after major surgery. However, in the context of one-lung ventilation, such a strategy is incompletely defined. The authors hypothesized that a putative one-lung protective ventilation regimen would be independently associated with decreased odds of pulmonary complications after thoracic surgery., Methods: The authors merged Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database and Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group intraoperative data for lung resection procedures using one-lung ventilation across five institutions from 2012 to 2016. They defined one-lung protective ventilation as the combination of both median tidal volume 5 ml/kg or lower predicted body weight and positive end-expiratory pressure 5 cm H2O or greater. The primary outcome was a composite of 30-day major postoperative pulmonary complications., Results: A total of 3,232 cases were available for analysis. Tidal volumes decreased modestly during the study period (6.7 to 6.0 ml/kg; P < 0.001), and positive end-expiratory pressure increased from 4 to 5 cm H2O (P < 0.001). Despite increasing adoption of a "protective ventilation" strategy (5.7% in 2012 vs. 17.9% in 2016), the prevalence of pulmonary complications did not change significantly (11.4 to 15.7%; P = 0.147). In a propensity score matched cohort (381 matched pairs), protective ventilation (mean tidal volume 6.4 vs. 4.4 ml/kg) was not associated with a reduction in pulmonary complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.32). In an unmatched cohort, the authors were unable to define a specific alternative combination of positive end-expiratory pressure and tidal volume that was associated with decreased risk of pulmonary complications., Conclusions: In this multicenter retrospective observational analysis of patients undergoing one-lung ventilation during thoracic surgery, the authors did not detect an independent association between a low tidal volume lung-protective ventilation regimen and a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications., (Copyright © 2021, the American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Background: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) creates risk-adjustment models for common cardiothoracic operations for quality improvement purposes. Our aim was to update the lung cancer resection risk model utilizing the STS General Thoracic Surgery Database (GTSD) with a larger and more contemporary cohort., Methods: We queried the STS GTSD for all surgical resections of lung cancers from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2014. Logistic regression was used to create three risk models for adverse events: operative mortality, major morbidity, and composite mortality and major morbidity., Results: In all, 27,844 lung cancer resections were performed at 231 centers; 62% (n = 17,153) were performed by thoracoscopy. The mortality rate was 1.4% (n = 401), major morbidity rate was 9.1% (n = 2,545), and the composite rate was 9.5% (n = 2,654). Predictors of mortality included age, being male, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, body mass index, cerebrovascular disease, steroids, coronary artery disease, peripheral vascular disease, renal dysfunction, Zubrod score, American Society of Anesthesiologists rating, thoracotomy approach, induction therapy, reoperation, tumor stage, and greater extent of resection (all p < 0.05). For major morbidity and the composite measure, cigarette smoking becomes a risk factor whereas stage, renal dysfunction, congestive heart failure, and cerebrovascular disease lose significance., Conclusions: Operative mortality and complication rates are low for lung cancer resection among surgeons participating in the GTSD. Risk factors from the prior lung cancer resection model are refined, and new risk factors such as prior thoracic surgery are identified. The GTSD risk models continue to evolve as more centers report and data are audited for quality assurance., (Copyright © 2016 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The use of lung-protective ventilation (LPV) strategies may minimize iatrogenic lung injury in surgical patients. However, the identification of an ideal LPV strategy, particularly during one-lung ventilation (OLV), remains elusive. This study examines the role of ventilator management during OLV and its impact on clinical outcomes., Methods: Data were retrospectively collected from the hospital electronic medical record and the Society of Thoracic Surgery database for subjects undergoing thoracic surgery with OLV between 2012 and 2014. Mean tidal volume (VT) during two-lung ventilation and OLV and ventilator driving pressure (ΔP) (plateau pressure - positive end-expiratory pressure [PEEP]) were analyzed for the 1,019 cases that met the inclusion criteria. Associations between ventilator parameters and clinical outcomes were examined by multivariate linear regression., Results: After the initiation of OLV, 73.3, 43.3, 18.8, and 7.2% of patients received VT greater than 5, 6, 7, and 8 ml/kg predicted body weight, respectively. One hundred and eighty-four primary and 288 secondary outcome events were recorded. In multivariate logistic regression modeling, VT was inversely related to the incidence of respiratory complications (odds ratio, 0.837; 95% CI, 0.729 to 0.958), while ΔP predicted the development of major morbidity when modeled with VT (odds ratio, 1.034; 95% CI, 1.001 to 1.068)., Conclusions: Low VT per se (i.e., in the absence of sufficient PEEP) has not been unambiguously demonstrated to be beneficial. The authors found that a large proportion of patients continue to receive high VT during OLV and that VT was inversely related to the incidence of respiratory complications and major postoperative morbidity. While low (physiologically appropriate) VT is an important component of an LPV strategy for surgical patients during OLV, current evidence suggests that, without adequate PEEP, low VT does not prevent postoperative respiratory complications. Thus, use of physiologic VT may represent a necessary, but not independently sufficient, component of LPV.

Objectives: Postoperative readmission affects patient care and healthcare costs. There is a paucity of nationwide data describing the clinical significance of readmission after thoracic operations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between postoperative readmission and mortality after lung cancer resection., Methods: Data were extracted for patients undergoing lung cancer resection from the linked Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare registry (2006-2011), including demographics, comorbidities, socioeconomic factors, readmission within 30 days from discharge, and 90-day mortality. Readmitting facility and diagnoses were identified. A hierarchical regression model clustered at the hospital level identified predictors of readmission., Results: We identified 11,432 patients undergoing lung cancer resection discharged alive from 677 hospitals. The median age was 74.5 years, and 52% of patients received an open lobectomy. Thirty-day readmission rate was 12.8%, and 28.3% of readmissions were to facilities that did not perform the original operation. Readmission was associated with a 6-fold increase in 90-day mortality (14.4% vs 2.5%, P<.001). The most common readmitting diagnoses were respiratory insufficiency, pneumonia, pneumothorax, and cardiac complications. Patient factors associated with readmission included resection type; age; prior induction chemoradiation; preoperative comorbidities, including congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; and low regional population density., Conclusions: Factors associated with early readmission after lung cancer resection include patient comorbidities, type of operation, and socioeconomic factors. Metrics that only report readmissions to the operative provider miss one-fourth of all cases. Readmitted patients have an increased risk of death and demand maximum attention and optimal care., (Copyright © 2014 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Postoperative mortality is the most commonly reported surgical quality measure. However, such metrics may be incapable of identifying performance outliers. The purpose of this study was to compare different measures of postoperative mortality after lung cancer resection using a large multiinstitutional database., Methods: Data were extracted for lung cancer resection patients from the linked Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare Registry (2006 to 2010), which provides detailed and longitudinal information about Medicare beneficiaries with cancer. Four definitions of postoperative mortality were evaluated: in-hospital, 30-day, perioperative, and 90-day. Hierarchical regression models were used to estimate mortality risk at 30 and 90 days, and provider quality was assessed by comparing observed versus expected mortality., Results: We identified 11,787 lung cancer resection patients from 686 hospitals. The median age was 74 years, and 52% of patients were treated with open lobectomy. Although 30-day, perioperative, and in-hospital mortality rates were between 3% and 4%, 90-day mortality was almost double (6.89%). Clinical variables associated with 90-day mortality included sex, preexisting comorbidities, and procedure type. There were no statistically significant differences in 30-day or 90-day mortality rates among providers., Conclusions: Currently reported measures of in-hospital and 30-day postoperative mortality do not adequately represent a patient's true mortality risk as mortality almost doubles by 90 days. Because of low occurrence rate and variable provider volumes, neither 30-day nor 90-day mortality is a suitable quality indicator for lung resection., (Copyright © 2014 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Chronic renal failure after lung transplantation is associated with significant morbidity. However, the significance of acute kidney injury (AKI) after lung transplantation remains unclear and poorly studied. We hypothesized that hemodialysis (HD)-dependent AKI after lung transplantation is associated with significant mortality., Materials and Methods: We performed a retrospective review of all patients undergoing lung transplantation from July 1991 to July 2009 at our institution. Recipients with AKI (creatinine > 3 mg/dL) were identified. We compared recipients without AKI versus recipients with and without HD-dependent AKI. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were compared by log rank test., Results: Of 352 lung transplant recipients reviewed at our institution, 17 developed non-HD-dependent AKI (5%) and 16 developed HD-dependent AKI (4.6%). Cardiopulmonary bypass was significantly higher in patients with HD-dependent AKI. None of the recipients who required HD had recovery of renal function. The 30-day mortality was significantly greater in recipients requiring HD (63% versus 0%; P < 0.0001). One-year mortality after transplantation was significantly increased in recipients with HD-dependent AKI compared with those with non-HD-dependent AKI (87.5% versus 17.6%; P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Hemodialysis is associated with mortality after lung transplantation. Fortunately, AKI that does not progress to HD commonly resolves and has a better overall survival. Avoidance, if possible, of cardiopulmonary bypass may attenuate the incidence of AKI. Aggressive measures to identify and treat early postoperative renal dysfunction and prevent progression to HD may improve outcomes after lung transplantation., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To evaluate the volume-outcome relationship after lung cancer resection using 3 alternative measures of the effect of volume., Summary Background Data: Many studies of lung cancer resection indicate that hospital volume predicts mortality. However, controversy exists regarding the strength and validity of this association. Because thresholds of procedure volume are used to recommend the regionalization of care, investigation of the validity of the volume-outcome relationship is necessary., Methods: Lung cancer resection patients were identified in the 2007 Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Hospital volume was measured using 3 different methods: as a continuous linear function, as a nonlinear function using restricted cubic splines, and as the frequently used method of quintile categories. The statistical significance of the relationship between hospital volume and mortality risk was assessed, adjusted for patient age, comorbid disease, and for correlated events within hospitals., Results: Forty thousand four hundred and sixty lung cancer resection patients from 436 hospitals were identified. All 3 models demonstrated excellent performance characteristics (C index = 0.92, Nagelkerke R = 0.37). No significant association was demonstrated between hospital procedure volume and in-hospital mortality when measured as a linear or nonlinear function using splines. However, a statistically significant relationship was found for volume categorized into quintiles, although its relative contribution to the predictive capacity of the model was very small (likelihood ratio = 2.55, P = 0.04)., Conclusions: The apparent impact of hospital lung cancer resection volume on mortality is dependent on how volume is defined and entered into the regression equation. Hospital lung cancer resection volume is not a predictor of mortality and should not be used as a proxy measure for surgical quality.

Background: The effect of gender, race, and socioeconomic status on contemporary outcomes after lung cancer resections has not been comprehensively evaluated across the United States. We hypothesized that risk-adjusted outcomes for lung cancer resections would not be influenced by these factors., Methods: From 2003 to 2007, 129,207 patients undergoing lung cancer resections were evaluated using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. Multiple regression analysis was used to estimate the effects of gender, race, and socioeconomic status on risk-adjusted outcomes., Results: Average patient age was 66.8±10.5 years. Women accounted for 5.0% of the total study population. Among racial groups, whites underwent the largest majority of operations (86.2%), followed by black (6.9%) and Hispanic (2.8%) races. Overall the incidence of mortality was 2.9%, postoperative complications were 30.4%, and pulmonary complications were 22.0%. Female gender, race, and mean income were all multivariate correlates of adjusted mortality and morbidity. Black patients incurred decreased risk-adjusted morbidity and mortality compared with white patients. Hispanics and Asians demonstrated decreased risk-adjusted complication rates. Importantly low income status independently increased the adjusted odds of mortality., Conclusions: Female gender is associated with decreased mortality and morbidity after lung cancer resections. Complication rates are lower for black, Hispanic, and Asian patients. Low socioeconomic status increases the risk of in-hospital death. These factors should be considered during patient risk stratification for lung cancer resection., (Copyright © 2011 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)