Benedetto Mungo

Thirty-Day Outcomes of Paraesophageal Hernia Repair Using the NSQIP Database: Should Laparoscopy Be the Standard of Care?

BACKGROUND Although surgical repair is universally recognized as the gold standard for treatment of paraesophageal hernia (PEH), the optimal surgical approach is still the subject of debate. To determine which surgical technique is safest, we compared the outcomes of laparoscopic (lap), open transabdominal (TA), and open transthoracic (TT) PEH repair using the NSQIP database. STUDY DESIGN From 2005 to 2011, we identified 8,186 patients who underwent a PEH repair (78.4% lap, 19.2% TA, 2.4% TT). Primary outcome measured was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, and NSQIP-measured postoperative complications. Multivariable analyses were performed to compare the odds of each outcome across procedure type (lap, TA, and TT) while adjusting for other factors. RESULTS Transabdominal patients had the highest 30-day mortality rate (2.6%), compared with 0.5% in the lap patients (p < 0.001) and 1.5% in TT patients. Mean length of stay was statistically significantly longer for TA and TT patients (7.8 days and 6.5 days, respectively) compared with lap patients (3.3 days). After adjusting for age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, emergency cases, functional status, and steroid use, TA patients were nearly 3 times as likely as lap patients to experience 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 2.97; 95% CI, 1.69 to 5.20; p < 0.001). Moreover, TA and TT patients had significantly increased odds of overall (OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.79 to 2.51; p < 0.001; OR 2.73; 95% CI 1.88 to 3.96; p < 0.001; respectively) and serious morbidity (OR 1.90; 95% CI 1.53 to 2.37, p < 0.001; OR 2.49; 95% CI 1.54 to 4.00; p < 0.001; respectively). CONCLUSIONS In the absence of published data indicating improved long-term outcomes after open TA or TT approach, our findings support the use of laparoscopy, whenever technically feasible, because it yields improved short-term outcomes.

Influence of body mass index on outcomes after major resection for cancer

BACKGROUND Evidence supporting worse outcomes among obese patients is inconsistent. This study examined associations between body mass index (BMI) and outcomes after major resection for cancer. METHODS Data from the 2005-2012 ACS-NSQIP were used to identify cancer patients (≥18 years) undergoing 1 of 6 major resections: lung surgery, esophagectomy, hepatectomy, gastrectomy, colectomy, or pancreatectomy. We used crude and multivariable regression to compare differences in 30-day mortality, serious and overall morbidity, duration of stay, and operative time among 3 BMI cohorts defined by the World Health Organization: normal versus underweight, overweight-obese I, and obese II-III. Propensity-scored secondary assessment and resection type-specific stratified analyses corroborated results. RESULTS A total of 529,955 patients met inclusion criteria; 32.06% had normal BMI, 3.45% were underweight, 32.52% overweight, and 17.76%, 7.51%, and 4.94% obese I-III, respectively. Risk-adjusted outcomes for underweight patients consistently were worse. Overweight-obese I fared similarly to patients with normal BMI but had greater odds of isolated complications. Obese II-III patients experienced only marginally increased odds of morbidity. Analyses among propensity-scored cohorts and stratified by cancer-resection type reported similar trends. Worse outcomes were observed among morbidly obese hepatectomy and pancreatectomy patients. CONCLUSION Evidence-based assessment of outcomes after major resection for cancer suggests that obese patients should be treated with the aim for optimal oncologic standards without being hindered by a misleading perception of prohibitively increased perioperative risk. Underweight and certain types of morbidly obese patients require targeted provision of appropriate care.

Why are patients being readmitted after surgery for esophageal cancer

OBJECTIVE Readmission after surgery is an unwanted adverse event that is costly to the healthcare system. We sought to evaluate factors associated with increased risk of readmission and to characterize the nature of these readmissions in patients who have esophageal cancer. METHODS A retrospective cohort study was performed in 306 patients with esophageal carcinoma who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by esophagectomy at Johns Hopkins Hospital between 1993 and 2011. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with 30-day readmission. Readmissions were defined as inpatient admissions to our institution within 30 days of discharge. RESULTS The median age at surgery was 61 years; the median postoperative length of stay was 9 days; and 48% of patients had ≥1 postoperative complication (POC). The 30-day readmission rate was 13.7% (42 of 306). In univariate analysis, length of stay and having ≥1 POC were significantly associated with readmission. In multivariate analysis, having ≥1 POC was significantly associated with a >2-fold increase in risk for 30-day readmission (odds ratio 2.35, with 95% confidence interval [1.08-5.09], P = .031) when controlling for age at diagnosis and length of stay. Of the 42 patients who were readmitted, 67% experienced POCs after surgery; 50% of patients who experienced POCs were readmitted for reasons related to their postoperative complication. The most common reasons for readmission were pulmonary issues (29%), anastomotic complications (20%), gastrointestinal concerns (17%), and venous thromboembolism (14%). CONCLUSIONS Complications not adequately managed before discharge may lead to readmission. Quality improvement efforts surrounding venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, and discharging patients nothing-by-mouth, may be warranted.

Does obesity affect the outcomes of pulmonary resections for lung cancer? A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program analysis

BACKGROUND Obesity has increased dramatically in the American population during the past 2 decades. Approximately 35% of adults are obese. Although obesity represents a major health issue, the association between obesity and operative outcomes has been a subject of controversy. We queried the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database to determine whether an increased body mass index (BMI) affects the outcomes of pulmonary resection for lung cancer. METHODS We identified 6,567 patients with a diagnosis of lung cancer who underwent pulmonary resection from 2005 to 2012 in the NSQIP database. We stratified this population into 6 BMI groups according to the World Health Organization classification. The primary outcome measured was 30-day mortality; secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), operative time, and NSQIP-measured postoperative complications. We performed both unadjusted analysis and adjusted multivariable analysis, controlling for statistically significant variables. RESULTS Adjusted multivariable logistic regression showed no increase in 30-day mortality, overall morbidity, and serious morbidity among obese patients. Adjusted Poisson regression revealed greater operative times for both obese and underweight patients compared with normal weight patients. Overall, obese patients were younger and had a greater percentage of preoperative comorbidities, including diabetes, hypertension, dyspnea, renal disease, and history of previous cardiac surgery. The prevalence of active smokers was greater among patients with low and normal BMI. Underweight patients had a greater risk-adjusted LOS relative to normal weight patients, whereas overweight and mildly obese patients had lesser risk-adjusted LOS. CONCLUSION The results of our analysis suggest that obesity does not confer greater mortality and morbidity after lung resection.

Does neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer increase postoperative morbidity or mortality

Neoadjuvant therapy has proven to be effective in the reduction of locoregional recurrence and mortality for esophageal cancer. However, induction treatment has been reported to be associated with increased risk of postoperative complications. We therefore compared outcomes after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer for patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy and patients treated with surgery alone. Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2005-2011), we identified 1939 patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Seven hundred and eight (36.5%) received neoadjuvant therapy, while 1231 (63.5%) received no neoadjuvant therapy within 90 days prior to surgery. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality, and secondary outcomes included overall and serious morbidity, length of stay, and operative time. Patients who underwent neoadjuvant treatment were younger (62.3 vs. 64.7, P < 0.001), were more likely to have experienced recent weight loss (29.4% vs. 15.9%, P < 0.001), and had worse preoperative hematological cell counts (white blood cells <4.5 or >11 × 10(9) /L: 29.3% vs. 15.0%, P < 0.001; hematocrit <36%: 49.7% vs. 30.0%, P < 0.001). On unadjusted analysis, 30-day mortality, overall, and serious morbidity were comparable between the two groups, with the exception of the individual complications of venous thromboembolic events and bleeding transfusion, which were significantly lower in the surgery-only patients (5.71% vs. 8.27%, P = 0.027; 6.89% vs. 10.57%, P = 0.004; respectively). Multivariable and matched analysis confirmed that 30-day mortality, overall, and serious morbidity, as well as prolonged length of stay, were comparable between the two groups of patients. An increasing trend of preoperative neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer was observed through the study years (from 29.0% in 2005-2006 to 44.0% in 2011, P < 0.001). According to our analysis, preoperative neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer does not increase 30-day mortality or the overall risk of postoperative complications after esophagectomy.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Respiratory Complications in Patients Undergoing Esophagectomy for Malignancy: A NSQIP Analysis

Respiratory complications are the most frequent adverse events in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer, and their occurrence may negatively affect postoperative recovery and outcomes. We queried the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset to study the rate and influence of pneumonia, unplanned intubation, and ventilator dependency >48 hours on the early outcomes after esophagectomy and risk factors for their development. We included adult patients with an esophageal or gastric cancer diagnosis who were treated with esophagectomy between 2005 and 2012 and grouped them into 2 categories with respect to development of respiratory complications. Early surgical outcomes (including 30-day mortality, overall morbidity, return to operating room, and length of hospital stay) were compared. Risk factors associated with respiratory complications after esophagectomy were assessed using modified Poisson regression. A total of 2945 patients were identified and respiratory complications were observed in 687 (23.3%) of them. We observed a significant decrease in respiratory complication rates after esophagectomy throughout the studied years. Patients who developed respiratory complications were older and had more comorbidities and longer operative time. These patients also had statistically significantly higher rates of 30-day mortality and overall morbidity and were more likely to return to the operating room and to stay in the hospital longer. On multivariable analysis, numerous factors, including advanced age, smoking, alcohol use, dyspnea, history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and prolonged operative time, were found to be risk factors for developing respiratory complications. As the development of respiratory complications leads to worse early surgical outcomes after esophagectomy, efforts should be made to prevent their occurrence by identifying patients with significant risk factors.

Transarterial chemoembolization in soft-tissue sarcoma metastases to the liver – The use of imaging biomarkers as predictors of patient survival

BACKGROUND The clinical management of patients with metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma of the liver is complicated by the paucity of reliable clinical data. This study evaluated the safety profile, survival outcome as well as the role of imaging biomarkers of tumor response in metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma (mSTS) of the liver treated with conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE). MATERIALS/METHODS This retrospective analysis included 30 patients with mSTS of the liver treated with cTACE. The safety profile, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after the procedure were evaluated. Tumor response in each patient was assessed using RECIST, modified (m) RECIST and EASL guidelines. In addition, a 3D quantification of the enhancing tumor volume (quantitative [q] EASL) was performed. For each method, patients were classified as responders (R) and non-responders (NR), and evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox proportional hazard ratio (HR) analysis. RESULTS No Grade III or IV toxicities were reported in a total of 77 procedures (mean, 2.6/patient). Median OS was 21.2 months (95% CI, 13.4-28.9) and PFS was 6.3 months (95% CI, 4.4-8.2). The enhancement-based techniques identified 11 (44%), 12 (48%) and 12 (48%) patients as R according to EASL, mRECIST and qEASL, respectively. No stratification was achieved with RECIST. Multivariate analysis identified tumor response according to mRECIST and qEASL as reliable predictors of improved patient survival (P=0.019; HR 0.3 [0.1-0.8] and P=0.006; HR 0.2 [0.1-0.6], respectively). CONCLUSION This study confirmed the role of cTACE as a safe salvage therapy option in patients with mSTS of the liver. The demonstrated advantages of enhancement-based tumor response assessment techniques over size-based criteria validate mRECIST and qEASL as preferable methods after intraarterial therapy.

Novel combined VATS/laparoscopic approach for giant and complicated paraesophageal hernia repair: description of technique and early results

BackgroundThe laparoscopic approach for repair of giant and/or recurrent paraesophageal hernias (PEH) is challenging, due to limited access to the dissection of the hernia sac into the proximal mediastinum and esophageal mobilization through the diaphragmatic hiatus. An esophageal lengthening procedure is often necessary, due to the difficulty in obtaining adequate intra-abdominal esophageal length. We, therefore, developed a VATS and laparoscopic technique, which allows for safe and extensive thoracic dissection and intra-abdominal gastric fixation and cruroplasty, yet preserving the benefits of minimally invasive surgery.MethodsWe use a standard VATS approach. The hernia sac, optimally visualized, is dissected posteriorly from the thoracic aorta, inferiorly from its diaphragmatic attachments, anteriorly from the pericardium, and laterally from the mediastinal pleura. The esophagus is completely mobilized up to the aortic arch, and the anterior vagus nerve is released from its bronchial branches. The hernia sac is then opened, dissected, and completely removed. The hernia content is then reduced into the abdomen laparoscopically, the short gastric vessels are divided and the gastric fundus is completely mobilized. The hiatus is closed with interrupted sutures, and the cruroplasty is buttressed with a biological mesh. A floppy Nissen or a partial fundoplication and a gastropexy are done for reflux control and gastric fixation.ResultsFrom January 2012 to January 2014, we treated 18 patients (7 with type III PEH and 11 with type IV) with the above-described procedure. Six patients had previous history of antireflux surgery. We performed a planned laparotomy instead of laparoscopy in two patients, who needed concurrent repair of complex incisional hernias. We did not need esophageal lengthening procedures, nor experienced damages to thoracic structures in any patient.ConclusionsOur newly developed surgical approach has proven to be safe and feasible. This technique represents a good option for treatment of giant and complicated PEH.

Outcomes of operations for benign foregut disease in elderly patients: A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database analysis

BACKGROUND The development of minimally invasive operative techniques and improvement in postoperative care has made surgery a viable option to a greater number of elderly patients. Our objective was to evaluate the outcomes of laparoscopic and open foregut operation in relation to the patient age. METHODS Patients who underwent gastric fundoplication, paraesophageal hernia repair, and Heller myotomy were identified via the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database (2005-2011). Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between five age groups (group I: ≤65 years, II: 65-69 years; III: 70-74 years; IV: 75-79 years; and V: ≥80 years). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to predict the impact of age and operative approach on the studied outcomes. RESULTS A total of 19,388 patients were identified. Advanced age was associated with increased rate of 30-day mortality, overall morbidity, serious morbidity, and extended length of stay, regardless of the operative approach. After we adjusted for other variables, advanced age was associated with increased odds of 30-day mortality compared with patients <65 years (III: odds ratio 2.70, 95% confidence interval 1.34-5.44, P = .01; IV: 2.80, 1.35-5.81, P = .01; V: 6.12, 3.41-10.99, P < .001). CONCLUSION Surgery for benign foregut disease in elderly patients carries a burden of mortality and morbidity that needs to be acknowledged.

Post-discharge complications after esophagectomy account for high readmission rates.

AIM To identify rates of post-discharge complications (PDC), associated risk factors, and their influence on early hospital outcomes after esophagectomy. METHODS We used the 2005-2013 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database to identify patients ≥ 18 years of age who underwent an esophagectomy. These procedures were categorized into four operative approaches: transhiatal, Ivor-Lewis, 3-holes, and non-gastric conduit. We selected patient data based on clinical relevance to patients undergoing esophagectomy and compared demographic and clinical characteristics. The primary outcome was PDC, and secondary outcomes were hospital readmission and reoperation. The patients were then divided in 3 groups: no complication (Group 1), only pre-discharge complication (Group 2), and PDC patients (Group 3). A modified Poisson regression analysis was used to identify risk factors associated with developing post-discharge complication, and risk ratios were estimated. RESULTS 4483 total patients were identified, with 8.9% developing PDC within 30-d after esophagectomy. Patients who experienced complications post-discharge had a median initial hospital length of stay (LOS) of 9 d; however, PDC occurred on average 14 d following surgery. Patients with PDC had greater rates of wound infection (41.0% vs 19.3%, P < 0.001), venous thromboembolism (16.3% vs 8.9%, P < 0.001), and organ space surgical site infection (17.1% vs 11.0%, P = 0.001) than patients with pre-discharge complication. The readmission rate in our entire population was 12.8%. PDC patients were overwhelmingly more likely to have a reoperation (39.5% vs 22.4%, P < 0.001) and readmission (66.9% vs 6.6%, P < 0.001). BMI 25-29.9 and BMI ≥ 30 were associated with increased risk of PDC compared to normal BMI (18.5-25). CONCLUSION PDC after esophagectomy account for significant number of reoperations and readmissions. Efforts should be directed towards optimizing patients health pre-discharge, with possible prevention programs at discharge.