Shanda H. Blackmon

Predictors of Major Morbidity or Mortality After Resection for Esophageal Cancer: A Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database Risk Adjustment Model

BACKGROUND The purpose of this analysis was to revise the model for perioperative risk for esophagectomy for cancer utilizing The Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database to provide enhanced risk stratification and quality improvement measures for contributing centers. METHODS The Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database was queried for all patients treated for esophageal cancer with esophagectomy between July 1, 2011, and June 30, 2014. Multivariable risk models for major morbidity, perioperative mortality, and combined morbidity and mortality were created with the inclusion of surgical approach as a risk factor. RESULTS In all, 4,321 esophagectomies were performed by 164 participating centers. The most common procedures included Ivor Lewis (32.5%), transhiatal (21.7%), minimally invasive esophagectomy, Ivor Lewis type (21.4%), and McKeown (10.0%). Sixty-nine percent of patients received induction therapy. Perioperative mortality (inpatient and 30-day) was 135 of 4,321 (3.4%). Major morbidity occurred in 1,429 patients (33.1%). Major morbidities include unexpected return to operating (15.6%), anastomotic leak (12.9%), reintubation (12.2%), initial ventilation beyond 48 hours (3.5%), pneumonia (12.2%), renal failure (2.0%), and recurrent laryngeal nerve paresis (2.0%). Statistically significant predictors of combined major morbidity or mortality included age more than 65 years, body mass index 35 kg/m(2) or greater, preoperative congestive heart failure, Zubrod score greater than 1, McKeown esophagectomy, current or former smoker, and squamous cell histology. CONCLUSION Thoracic surgeons participating in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database perform esophagectomy with low morbidity and mortality. McKeown esophagectomy is an independent predictor of combined postoperative morbidity or mortality. Revised predictors for perioperative outcome were identified to facilitate quality improvement processes and hospital comparisons.

Optimal approach to the management of intrathoracic esophageal leak following esophagectomy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND Recently, endoscopic interventions (eg, esophageal stenting) have been successfully used for the management of intrathoracic leak. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the safety and efficacy of techniques used in the management of intrathoracic anastomotic leak. DATA SOURCES We performed a systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed to identify eligible studies analyzing management of intrathoracic esophageal leak following esophagectomy. CONCLUSIONS Intraoperative anastomotic drain placement was associated with earlier identification and resolution of anastomotic leak (mean 23.4 vs 80.7 days). In addition, reinforcement of the anastomosis with omentoplasty may reduce the incidence of anastomotic leak by nearly 50%. Endoscopic stent placement was associated with leak resolution in 72%; fatal complications were reported, however, and safety remains to be proven. Negative pressure therapy, a potentially useful tool, requires further study. If stenting and wound vacuum are used, undrained mediastinal contamination and persistent leak require surgical intervention.

Surgical Treatment of Primary Cardiac Sarcomas: Review of a Single-Institution Experience

BACKGROUND Primary cardiac sarcomas are rare, aggressive, and usually lethal. Surgical management protocols are not defined because of the lack of extensive experience in treating these patients. In this study, we reviewed our outcomes with primary cardiac sarcoma, and we make recommendations regarding management. METHODS Review of the Houston Methodist Hospital cardiac tumor database from 1990 to 2015 (25 years) yielded 131 primary cardiac evaluations of possible cardiac sarcoma. From these we identified 95 patients who underwent surgical excision. A computer search of cardiac sarcomas yielded 131 tumors that were coded as primary cardiac sarcoma or possible primary cardiac sarcoma. Retrospective data collection and clinical outcomes were evaluated for all 95 patients. Medical records and follow-up material were requested for all patients through clinic visits and contacting the physician of the patient, the hospital record department, and the cardiac tumor board after previous approval. The procedures were performed using an institutional review board-approved cardiac tumor protocol, and the patients gave full consent. RESULTS All 95 patients were diagnosed as having primary cardiac sarcoma by histologic appearance. Age ranged from 15 to 84 years at the time of presentation (mean, 44 years). Male patients made up 57% of the sample. The most common site for the cardiac sarcoma was the right atrium (37 patients) followed by the left atrium (31 patients). Postoperative 1-year mortality was 35% (33 patients). The most common tumor histologic type was angiosarcoma (40%) followed by spindle cell sarcoma (11%). CONCLUSIONS Primary cardiac sarcoma is a rare but lethal disease. Surgical intervention is associated with acceptable surgical mortality in this high-risk group of patients.

Individualizing Management of Complex Esophageal Pathology Using Three-Dimensional Printed Models

PURPOSE In complex esophageal cases, conventional two-dimensional imaging is limited in demonstrating anatomic relationships. We describe the utility of three-dimensional (3D) printed models for complex patients to individualize care. DESCRIPTION Oral effervescent agents, with positive enteric contrast, distended the esophagus during computed tomography (CT) scanning to facilitate segmentation during post-processing. The CT data were segmented, converted into a stereolithography file, and printed using photopolymer materials. EVALUATION In 1 patient with a left pneumonectomy, aortic bypass, and esophageal diversion, 3D printing enabled visualization of the native esophagus and facilitated endoscopic mucosal resection, followed by hiatal dissection and division of the gastroesophageal junction as treatment. In a second patient, 3D printing allowed enhanced visualization of multiple esophageal diverticula, allowing for optimization of the surgical approach. CONCLUSIONS Printing of 3D anatomic models in patients with complex esophageal pathology facilitates planning the optimal surgical approach and anticipating potential difficulties for the multidisciplinary team. These models are invaluable for patient education.

From 3-Dimensional Printing to 5-Dimensional Printing: Enhancing Thoracic Surgical Planning and Resection of Complex Tumors

PURPOSE Three-dimensional (3D) printing of anatomic models for complex surgical cases improves patient and resident education, operative team planning, and guides the operation. Our group describes two additional dimensions. DESCRIPTION The process of 5-dimensional (5D) printing was developed for surgical planning. Pretreatment computed tomography and positron emission tomography scans were reformatted and fused. Selected anatomy from these studies, along with posttreatment computed tomography and magnetic resonance images, were coregistered and segmented. This fused anatomy was converted into stereolithography files for 3D printing. EVALUATION A patient presenting with a complex thoracic tumor was selected for 5D printing. 3D and 5D models were prepared to allow surgical teams to directly evaluate and compare the added benefits of information provided by printing in 5 dimensions. CONCLUSIONS Printing 5D models in patients with complex thoracic pathology facilitates surgical planning, selecting margins for resection, anticipating potential difficulties, teaching for learners, and education for patients.

Comparison of Two National Databases for General Thoracic Surgery

BACKGROUND Improving the quality of surgical care through accurate measurement of outcomes is an important endeavor. The purpose of this study was to compare data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) general thoracic surgery database to determine if a sampling technique (ACS NSQIP) is as effective and accurate as the comprehensive technique (STS database). METHODS A common data abstractor collected and recorded data for the ACS NSQIP and STS database from our institution for the year 2012. The data was completely deidentified and analyzed for demographics, preoperative risk factors, mortality, and morbidity. RESULTS The STS database recorded 1,595 (100%) operations for the year 2012, whereas the ACS NSQIP by design collects a limited sample and recorded 308 (19.3%) operations. Postoperative events were recorded in 17.2% of ACS NSQIP operations and in 30.1% of operations reported in the STS database. As more specific operations are examined, errors in the NSQIP data increase significantly. For example, the ACS NSQIP underestimated the pneumonia rate for lobectomy (5.9% versus 10.9%) and overestimated the pneumonia rate for an Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy (23.8% vs 18.8%). When the ACS NSQIP was used to compare our institution to the ACS NSQIP national norms, our institution was ranked in the lowest eighth decile for 30-day operative mortality; however, we were better than average when using STS database data (1.2% [2 of 162 procedures] vs 1.4% [538 of 37,324 procedures]) for pulmonary resections and 3.0% (3 of 100 procedures) vs 3.6% [138 of 3,865 procedures] for esophagectomy). CONCLUSIONS Databases built on partial sampling that do not capture all patients, such as the ACS NSQIP, may be useful for global analyses, but fall short of providing a foundation for meaningful quality improvement initiatives when analyzing data for specific thoracic surgical operations. These results highlight the utility and importance of complete databases such as the STSDB. National comparisons of clinical outcomes for thoracic surgical procedures should be interpreted with caution when using partial databases.

Improved Outcomes With the Evolution of a Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Approach to Right Heart Sarcoma

BACKGROUND Right-side heart sarcomas tend to be bulky, infiltrative, and difficult to treat. We have previously examined our outcomes with right heart sarcomas. Surgical resection with R0 margins showed better survival than positive margins but in only one third of cases could R0 status be achieved. The hypothesis for this study was that preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy would shrink the tumor margins and allow an increase in R0 resection, and hence, better survival. METHODS Review of our cardiac tumor database from 1990 to 2015 yielded 133 primary cardiac sarcoma cases. Of these, we identified 44 patients with primary right-side heart sarcomas. Prospective database and retrospective data collection and clinical outcomes were evaluated for all 44 patients. Primary outcomes included 30-day mortality and morbidity and long-term survival. We used univariate and multivariate analyses to identify independent predictors of overall survival. RESULTS There were 27 male and 17 female patients with a mean age of 41 ± 12.7 years (range, 15 to 67). Seventy-three percent of the patients (32 of 44) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The most common tumor histology was angiosarcoma in 30 of 44 (68%). Thirty-day mortality was 4.5%, and statistically similar between the two groups. The median survival of patients who had R0 resection was 53.5 months compared with 9.5 months for R1. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy led to a doubling of survival (20 versus 9.5 months). CONCLUSIONS Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical surgery is a safe and effective strategy in patients with primary right-side heart sarcoma. This multimodality treatment enhances resectability (R0 resection) that translates into improved patient survival.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Expert Consensus Statement: A Tool Kit to Assist Thoracic Surgeons Seeking Privileging to Use New Technology and Perform Advanced Procedures in General Thoracic Surgery

Division of General Thoracic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; Section of General Thoracic Surgery, University of California, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California; Division of Thoracic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts; Division of Thoracic Surgery, WellStar Health System, Marietta, Georgia; Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; National Cancer Institute, Pascale Foundation, Naples, Italy; Division of Thoracic Surgery, Memorial Hospital-University of Colorado Health, Colorado Springs, Colorado; Department of Surgery, Southern Illinois University, Springfield, Illinois; Division of Thoracic Surgery, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, Illinois; Esophageal Center of Excellence, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington; Division of Thoracic Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina; Division of Thoracic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; and Division of Thoracic Surgery, University of Calgary, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Management of Conduit Necrosis Following Esophagectomy

The management of conduit necrosis during or after esophagectomy requires the assembly of a multidisciplinary team to manage nutrition, sepsis, intravenous access, reconstruction, and recovery. Reconstruction is most often performed as a staged procedure. The initial surgery is likely to involve esophageal diversion onto the chest where possible, making an effort to preserve esophageal length. Optimization of patients before reconstruction enhances outcomes following reconstruction with either jejunum or colon after gastric conduit failure. Maintaining enteral access for feeding at all times is imperative. Management of patients should be performed at high-volume esophageal centers performing regular reconstructions.

Minimally invasive thymectomy: the Mayo Clinic experience

BACKGROUND The prevalence of minimally invasive thymectomy (MIT) is increasing and may have significant benefit to patients in terms of morbidity and post-operative recovery. Our aim was to review the Mayo Clinic experience of MIT. METHODS We reviewed data from all MIT cases collected in a prospectively maintained database from January 1995 to February 2015. Data were collected regarding patient demographics, perioperative management and patient outcomes. RESULTS A total of 510 thymectomies were performed in 20 years. Fifty-six patients underwent MIT (45 video-assisted thoracoscopy, 11 robotic-assisted). The median age was 55 years (range, 23-87 years) with male to female ratio of 25:31. Thymoma was the main pathologic diagnosis in 27/56 patients (48%), with 11/27 (41%) associated with myasthenia gravis (MG), and 16/27 (59%) non-MG. Other pathologies included 1/56 (2%) of each teratoma, lymphoma, lymphangioma, carcinoma and thymolipoma. There were 3/56 (5%) atrophic glands, 4/56 (7%) cysts, 6/56 (11%) benign glands and 11/56 (20%) hyperplastic. Mean blood loss (mL) and operative time (min) were significantly lower in the video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) group compared to robotic (65±41 vs. 160±205 mL, P=0.04 and 102±39 vs. 178±53 min, P=0.001, respectively). There was no 30-day mortality. Post-operative morbidity occurred in 7/45 (16%) VATS patients (phrenic nerve palsy 7%, pericarditis 4%, atrial fibrillation 2%, pleural effusion 2%) and 1/11 (9%) robotic (urinary retention requiring self-catheterization). Reoperation was required in 1/3 of VATS patients with phrenic nerve palsy. There was no significant difference in length of hospital stay [VATS 1.5 days (range, 1-4 days) and robotic 2 days (range, 1-5 days) VATS; P=0.05]. Mean follow-up was 18.4 months (range, 1-50.4 months) with no tumor recurrences. CONCLUSIONS MIT can be performed with low morbidity and mortality. VATS is associated with reduced blood loss, operative times and earlier hospital discharge compared to robotic MIT.