User login
Mesh fixation method had no impact on chronic postop pain in TAPP
WASHINGTON – Mesh fixation technique is not a factor in persistent pain after transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) groin hernia surgery, a study showed.
“Persistent pain is a well-known phenomenon after groin hernia surgery,” said Jakob Burcharth, MD, of University Hospital of Sjaelland Koge (Denmark). “The way that we fixate the mesh in laparoscopic surgery has been hypothesized to have an [impact] on the risk of persistent pain.”
In a study presented by Dr. Burcharth and his associates at the American College of Surgeons Clinical Congress, a total of 1,421 patients were examined. Each patient completed a validated pain questionnaire through the Danish Hernia Database from 2009 to 2012. The patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 had spray fibrin sealant (34%) for mesh fixation, and group 2 had tacks (66%). The results showed no difference between the groups in terms of pain in getting up from a chair, sitting or standing for more than 30 minutes, walking stairs, driving a car, or exercising, or in the need for postoperative analgesics or postoperative sick leave (all P greater than .20).
Dr. Burcharth concluded that a high number of patients reported persistent pain regardless of mesh fixation technique, which emphasizes the need for preoperative information.
Dr. Burcharth reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
WASHINGTON – Mesh fixation technique is not a factor in persistent pain after transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) groin hernia surgery, a study showed.
“Persistent pain is a well-known phenomenon after groin hernia surgery,” said Jakob Burcharth, MD, of University Hospital of Sjaelland Koge (Denmark). “The way that we fixate the mesh in laparoscopic surgery has been hypothesized to have an [impact] on the risk of persistent pain.”
In a study presented by Dr. Burcharth and his associates at the American College of Surgeons Clinical Congress, a total of 1,421 patients were examined. Each patient completed a validated pain questionnaire through the Danish Hernia Database from 2009 to 2012. The patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 had spray fibrin sealant (34%) for mesh fixation, and group 2 had tacks (66%). The results showed no difference between the groups in terms of pain in getting up from a chair, sitting or standing for more than 30 minutes, walking stairs, driving a car, or exercising, or in the need for postoperative analgesics or postoperative sick leave (all P greater than .20).
Dr. Burcharth concluded that a high number of patients reported persistent pain regardless of mesh fixation technique, which emphasizes the need for preoperative information.
Dr. Burcharth reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
WASHINGTON – Mesh fixation technique is not a factor in persistent pain after transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) groin hernia surgery, a study showed.
“Persistent pain is a well-known phenomenon after groin hernia surgery,” said Jakob Burcharth, MD, of University Hospital of Sjaelland Koge (Denmark). “The way that we fixate the mesh in laparoscopic surgery has been hypothesized to have an [impact] on the risk of persistent pain.”
In a study presented by Dr. Burcharth and his associates at the American College of Surgeons Clinical Congress, a total of 1,421 patients were examined. Each patient completed a validated pain questionnaire through the Danish Hernia Database from 2009 to 2012. The patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 had spray fibrin sealant (34%) for mesh fixation, and group 2 had tacks (66%). The results showed no difference between the groups in terms of pain in getting up from a chair, sitting or standing for more than 30 minutes, walking stairs, driving a car, or exercising, or in the need for postoperative analgesics or postoperative sick leave (all P greater than .20).
Dr. Burcharth concluded that a high number of patients reported persistent pain regardless of mesh fixation technique, which emphasizes the need for preoperative information.
Dr. Burcharth reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Key clinical point:
Major finding: There was no difference between the groups in terms of pain in getting up from a chair, sitting or standing for more than 30 minutes, walking stairs, driving a car, or doing exercise, or in the need for postoperative analgesics or postoperative sick leave (all P greater than .20).
Data source: 1,421 patients who were examined and completed a validated pain questionnaire.
Disclosures: Dr. Burcharth reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Adding respiratory rate to triage criteria improves accurate staging of chest trauma patients
WASHINGTON – Adding respiratory rate and suspected blunt chest injury to a trauma assessment in the field significantly improved the appropriate triaging of level III trauma patients.
When the assessment specifically evaluated for tachypnea in the setting of blunt chest injury, undertriaging improved by 1.2%, John Yonge, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
“When we applied this new criteria to our 10-year study, we identified 661 patients who should have been activated as a level I or level II,” but instead were assessed as less critically injured, Dr. Yonge said in an interview. This initial misstep significantly extended the time before patients could have critical surgical procedures and was related to higher mortality among them.
Dr. Yonge, a surgical fellow at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, and his mentor Martin Schreiber, MD, conducted the retrospective study of 7,880 trauma patients admitted at level III activation from 2004 to 2014. The OHSU trauma system has three activation levels.
• Level I activations are reserved for the most critically injured patients; attending trauma surgeon and anesthesiologist presence is mandatory.
• Level II activations capture moderate to severe injuries; trauma surgeon and respiratory therapist presence is mandated.
• Level III activations are designed to capture patients who do not require an immediate lifesaving intervention; the presence of the trauma surgery chief resident and attending emergency medicine physician is mandatory.
Patients were considered undertriaged if they were admitted as level III activations, but then required a critical intervention (chest tube placement, intubation, needle thoracostomy, or intracranial pressure monitoring) in the emergency department or ultimately met level I or II activation criteria.
Among all the level III patients, 466 (6%) were undertriaged: 390 were undertriaged based on the existing level I or II activation criteria, and 76 were considered undertriaged based on the need for a critical intervention.
Most of the undertriaged patients (65%) met criteria for level I activation; the rest should have been triaged as level II patients. Compared with appropriately staged level III patients, mortality among the undertriaged patients was significantly higher (3.2% vs. 0.6%). Undertriaged patients also experienced longer delays before initiation of major emergency surgery: a mean of 147 minutes, compared with 106 minutes for appropriately triaged level I patients and 62 minutes for appropriately triaged level II patients.
Dr. Yonge then looked for clinical measures that would improve triage. Tachypnea (respiratory rate of more than 20 breaths per minute) in the field stood out as a significant factor. Tachypneic patients who had a suspected chest injury were 70% more likely to be undertriaged than were those with a normal respiratory rate. Tachypnea was significantly associated with a diagnosis of flail chest, emergency department intubation, and chest tube placement.
The team then constructed a new triage criterion for patients with suspected chest injury – tachypnea combined with suspected blunt thoracic injury. By applying that model to their study population of level III patients, they determined that the level III undertriage rate would be reduced by 1.2%.
Tying the physiologic marker of tachypnea to a suspected clinical diagnosis is a key factor, Dr. Yonge noted. “Just adding tachypnea doesn’t help us. In fact, it would overwhelm us, because a trauma patient could very well be tachypneic because he’s experiencing panic. But tying it to a suspected clinical diagnosis gives us a meaningful result.”
He confirmed this linkage with an additional analysis. “We looked to see how severely injured these patients were and found that 71% of them had an Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS) to the chest of 3 or more, indicating a severe chest injury. Only 29% had an AIS of 2 or less. So this proves that respiratory rate is a valid triage criterion and can be used to identify patients who need a higher level of trauma care.”
The challenge now, Dr. Yonge said, is incorporating the marker into clinical practice. “It doesn’t matter how many statistics you do, if you can’t educate the prehospital providers in this, it’s useless. They are the crux of the trauma system.”
Although national guidelines do recommend assessing respiratory rate as part of field triage, it often isn’t recorded or is only estimated, Dr. Yonge said. That’s one reason he used the 20-breaths-per-minute cutoff rate. “It doesn’t even take a full minute to assess this, but it can make a big improvement in care.”
Neither he nor Dr. Schreiber had any financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @alz_gal
WASHINGTON – Adding respiratory rate and suspected blunt chest injury to a trauma assessment in the field significantly improved the appropriate triaging of level III trauma patients.
When the assessment specifically evaluated for tachypnea in the setting of blunt chest injury, undertriaging improved by 1.2%, John Yonge, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
“When we applied this new criteria to our 10-year study, we identified 661 patients who should have been activated as a level I or level II,” but instead were assessed as less critically injured, Dr. Yonge said in an interview. This initial misstep significantly extended the time before patients could have critical surgical procedures and was related to higher mortality among them.
Dr. Yonge, a surgical fellow at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, and his mentor Martin Schreiber, MD, conducted the retrospective study of 7,880 trauma patients admitted at level III activation from 2004 to 2014. The OHSU trauma system has three activation levels.
• Level I activations are reserved for the most critically injured patients; attending trauma surgeon and anesthesiologist presence is mandatory.
• Level II activations capture moderate to severe injuries; trauma surgeon and respiratory therapist presence is mandated.
• Level III activations are designed to capture patients who do not require an immediate lifesaving intervention; the presence of the trauma surgery chief resident and attending emergency medicine physician is mandatory.
Patients were considered undertriaged if they were admitted as level III activations, but then required a critical intervention (chest tube placement, intubation, needle thoracostomy, or intracranial pressure monitoring) in the emergency department or ultimately met level I or II activation criteria.
Among all the level III patients, 466 (6%) were undertriaged: 390 were undertriaged based on the existing level I or II activation criteria, and 76 were considered undertriaged based on the need for a critical intervention.
Most of the undertriaged patients (65%) met criteria for level I activation; the rest should have been triaged as level II patients. Compared with appropriately staged level III patients, mortality among the undertriaged patients was significantly higher (3.2% vs. 0.6%). Undertriaged patients also experienced longer delays before initiation of major emergency surgery: a mean of 147 minutes, compared with 106 minutes for appropriately triaged level I patients and 62 minutes for appropriately triaged level II patients.
Dr. Yonge then looked for clinical measures that would improve triage. Tachypnea (respiratory rate of more than 20 breaths per minute) in the field stood out as a significant factor. Tachypneic patients who had a suspected chest injury were 70% more likely to be undertriaged than were those with a normal respiratory rate. Tachypnea was significantly associated with a diagnosis of flail chest, emergency department intubation, and chest tube placement.
The team then constructed a new triage criterion for patients with suspected chest injury – tachypnea combined with suspected blunt thoracic injury. By applying that model to their study population of level III patients, they determined that the level III undertriage rate would be reduced by 1.2%.
Tying the physiologic marker of tachypnea to a suspected clinical diagnosis is a key factor, Dr. Yonge noted. “Just adding tachypnea doesn’t help us. In fact, it would overwhelm us, because a trauma patient could very well be tachypneic because he’s experiencing panic. But tying it to a suspected clinical diagnosis gives us a meaningful result.”
He confirmed this linkage with an additional analysis. “We looked to see how severely injured these patients were and found that 71% of them had an Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS) to the chest of 3 or more, indicating a severe chest injury. Only 29% had an AIS of 2 or less. So this proves that respiratory rate is a valid triage criterion and can be used to identify patients who need a higher level of trauma care.”
The challenge now, Dr. Yonge said, is incorporating the marker into clinical practice. “It doesn’t matter how many statistics you do, if you can’t educate the prehospital providers in this, it’s useless. They are the crux of the trauma system.”
Although national guidelines do recommend assessing respiratory rate as part of field triage, it often isn’t recorded or is only estimated, Dr. Yonge said. That’s one reason he used the 20-breaths-per-minute cutoff rate. “It doesn’t even take a full minute to assess this, but it can make a big improvement in care.”
Neither he nor Dr. Schreiber had any financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @alz_gal
WASHINGTON – Adding respiratory rate and suspected blunt chest injury to a trauma assessment in the field significantly improved the appropriate triaging of level III trauma patients.
When the assessment specifically evaluated for tachypnea in the setting of blunt chest injury, undertriaging improved by 1.2%, John Yonge, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
“When we applied this new criteria to our 10-year study, we identified 661 patients who should have been activated as a level I or level II,” but instead were assessed as less critically injured, Dr. Yonge said in an interview. This initial misstep significantly extended the time before patients could have critical surgical procedures and was related to higher mortality among them.
Dr. Yonge, a surgical fellow at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, and his mentor Martin Schreiber, MD, conducted the retrospective study of 7,880 trauma patients admitted at level III activation from 2004 to 2014. The OHSU trauma system has three activation levels.
• Level I activations are reserved for the most critically injured patients; attending trauma surgeon and anesthesiologist presence is mandatory.
• Level II activations capture moderate to severe injuries; trauma surgeon and respiratory therapist presence is mandated.
• Level III activations are designed to capture patients who do not require an immediate lifesaving intervention; the presence of the trauma surgery chief resident and attending emergency medicine physician is mandatory.
Patients were considered undertriaged if they were admitted as level III activations, but then required a critical intervention (chest tube placement, intubation, needle thoracostomy, or intracranial pressure monitoring) in the emergency department or ultimately met level I or II activation criteria.
Among all the level III patients, 466 (6%) were undertriaged: 390 were undertriaged based on the existing level I or II activation criteria, and 76 were considered undertriaged based on the need for a critical intervention.
Most of the undertriaged patients (65%) met criteria for level I activation; the rest should have been triaged as level II patients. Compared with appropriately staged level III patients, mortality among the undertriaged patients was significantly higher (3.2% vs. 0.6%). Undertriaged patients also experienced longer delays before initiation of major emergency surgery: a mean of 147 minutes, compared with 106 minutes for appropriately triaged level I patients and 62 minutes for appropriately triaged level II patients.
Dr. Yonge then looked for clinical measures that would improve triage. Tachypnea (respiratory rate of more than 20 breaths per minute) in the field stood out as a significant factor. Tachypneic patients who had a suspected chest injury were 70% more likely to be undertriaged than were those with a normal respiratory rate. Tachypnea was significantly associated with a diagnosis of flail chest, emergency department intubation, and chest tube placement.
The team then constructed a new triage criterion for patients with suspected chest injury – tachypnea combined with suspected blunt thoracic injury. By applying that model to their study population of level III patients, they determined that the level III undertriage rate would be reduced by 1.2%.
Tying the physiologic marker of tachypnea to a suspected clinical diagnosis is a key factor, Dr. Yonge noted. “Just adding tachypnea doesn’t help us. In fact, it would overwhelm us, because a trauma patient could very well be tachypneic because he’s experiencing panic. But tying it to a suspected clinical diagnosis gives us a meaningful result.”
He confirmed this linkage with an additional analysis. “We looked to see how severely injured these patients were and found that 71% of them had an Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS) to the chest of 3 or more, indicating a severe chest injury. Only 29% had an AIS of 2 or less. So this proves that respiratory rate is a valid triage criterion and can be used to identify patients who need a higher level of trauma care.”
The challenge now, Dr. Yonge said, is incorporating the marker into clinical practice. “It doesn’t matter how many statistics you do, if you can’t educate the prehospital providers in this, it’s useless. They are the crux of the trauma system.”
Although national guidelines do recommend assessing respiratory rate as part of field triage, it often isn’t recorded or is only estimated, Dr. Yonge said. That’s one reason he used the 20-breaths-per-minute cutoff rate. “It doesn’t even take a full minute to assess this, but it can make a big improvement in care.”
Neither he nor Dr. Schreiber had any financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @alz_gal
AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Adding a triage assessment criterion of tachypnea plus suspected chest injury improved undertriage of chest trauma patients by 1.2%.
Data source: The retrospective database study comprising 7,880 patients.
Disclosures: Neither Dr. Yonge nor Dr. Schreiber had any financial disclosures.
Light and heavy mesh deliver similar outcomes and QOL for lap inguinal repair
WASHINGTON – The weight of mesh used in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs was not a significant factor in postoperative outcomes and quality of life, in a large, long-term study.
“There are approximately 700,000 inguinal hernia repairs annually,” said Steve Groene, MD, of the Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, N.C. “The goal of our study was to utilize a large sample size of long-term follow-up and compare surgical and quality of life outcomes between light-weight and heavy-weight mesh in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs.”
The rates of postoperative complications such as surgical infection, urinary retention, and recurrence in the two groups were similar. Although the LW mesh group had a significantly higher rate of hematoma and seroma, that difference vanished with a multivariate analysis that accounted for confounding factors such as smoking, elective vs. emergent surgery, and surgical technique, Dr. Groene said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
Quality of life (QOL) was measured with the Carolina Comfort Scale before surgery and at the 2-week, 1-month, 6-month, 12-month, 24-month, and 36-month follow-ups. The investigators looked at pain, movement limitation, and mesh sensation for outcomes and symptoms. There were no other statistically significant differences in QOL between the groups at any of the follow-up time points.
When asked during the discussion about the experience of the investigators in getting patients to continue through a 36-month follow-up, Dr. Groene said that “at 1 month, we were about 60%, [and] at 1 year about 40%; having about 40%-42% of people following up at 1 month is very good.”
Dr. Groene concluded that surgeons should continue to use the type of mesh they feel most comfortable with for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair and expect to have similar outcomes.
He reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
WASHINGTON – The weight of mesh used in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs was not a significant factor in postoperative outcomes and quality of life, in a large, long-term study.
“There are approximately 700,000 inguinal hernia repairs annually,” said Steve Groene, MD, of the Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, N.C. “The goal of our study was to utilize a large sample size of long-term follow-up and compare surgical and quality of life outcomes between light-weight and heavy-weight mesh in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs.”
The rates of postoperative complications such as surgical infection, urinary retention, and recurrence in the two groups were similar. Although the LW mesh group had a significantly higher rate of hematoma and seroma, that difference vanished with a multivariate analysis that accounted for confounding factors such as smoking, elective vs. emergent surgery, and surgical technique, Dr. Groene said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
Quality of life (QOL) was measured with the Carolina Comfort Scale before surgery and at the 2-week, 1-month, 6-month, 12-month, 24-month, and 36-month follow-ups. The investigators looked at pain, movement limitation, and mesh sensation for outcomes and symptoms. There were no other statistically significant differences in QOL between the groups at any of the follow-up time points.
When asked during the discussion about the experience of the investigators in getting patients to continue through a 36-month follow-up, Dr. Groene said that “at 1 month, we were about 60%, [and] at 1 year about 40%; having about 40%-42% of people following up at 1 month is very good.”
Dr. Groene concluded that surgeons should continue to use the type of mesh they feel most comfortable with for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair and expect to have similar outcomes.
He reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
WASHINGTON – The weight of mesh used in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs was not a significant factor in postoperative outcomes and quality of life, in a large, long-term study.
“There are approximately 700,000 inguinal hernia repairs annually,” said Steve Groene, MD, of the Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, N.C. “The goal of our study was to utilize a large sample size of long-term follow-up and compare surgical and quality of life outcomes between light-weight and heavy-weight mesh in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs.”
The rates of postoperative complications such as surgical infection, urinary retention, and recurrence in the two groups were similar. Although the LW mesh group had a significantly higher rate of hematoma and seroma, that difference vanished with a multivariate analysis that accounted for confounding factors such as smoking, elective vs. emergent surgery, and surgical technique, Dr. Groene said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
Quality of life (QOL) was measured with the Carolina Comfort Scale before surgery and at the 2-week, 1-month, 6-month, 12-month, 24-month, and 36-month follow-ups. The investigators looked at pain, movement limitation, and mesh sensation for outcomes and symptoms. There were no other statistically significant differences in QOL between the groups at any of the follow-up time points.
When asked during the discussion about the experience of the investigators in getting patients to continue through a 36-month follow-up, Dr. Groene said that “at 1 month, we were about 60%, [and] at 1 year about 40%; having about 40%-42% of people following up at 1 month is very good.”
Dr. Groene concluded that surgeons should continue to use the type of mesh they feel most comfortable with for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair and expect to have similar outcomes.
He reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
FROM ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: For laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair, mesh weight was not a significant factor in postoperative complications or quality of life, as measured by the Carolinas Comfort Scale.
Data source: A prospective study of 1,270 laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair patients from a hernia-specific database.
Disclosures: Dr. Groene reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Do fellowship programs help prepare general surgery residents for board exams?
WASHINGTON – Pass rates on the general surgery board exams were significantly higher for programs in which residents trained alongside surgical fellows, according to a retrospective study presented at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
The study adds another perspective to the ongoing debate about the impact of fellowships on general surgery residency and residency programs. Mohammed J. Al Fayyadh, MD, of the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio and his associates investigated the impact of fellowships on program pass rates for general surgery boards. They reviewed American Board of Surgery exam data for the classes of 2010-2014, which included 242 programs (a total of 5,191 resident examinees), of which 148 had fellows participating (3,767 resident examinees).
The findings suggest that having fellows in a program has a positive impact on the pass rates of those taking the ABS general surgery exam. Pass rates were significantly higher for general surgery programs with fellows. This trend held for all measures studied: Qualifying (written) exam (88% vs. 86%), certifying (oral) exam (83% vs. 80%), and combined exams (74% vs. 69%). Differences between the groups were statistically significant.
The pass rates tended to be higher in programs with higher Fel:Res ratios. For example, programs with a 1.5:1 Fel:Res ratio had the highest pass rates for the qualifying, certifying, and combined exams.
The impact of subspecialty fellowships on general surgery residencies has been the subject of research and debate in recent years. Some studies have suggested that subspecialty training for fellows has meant that general surgery residents have less opportunity to operate in areas such as trauma (“Trauma operative training declining for general surgery residents,” ACS Surgery News, Oct. 4, 2016) and vascular surgery (Ann Vasc Surg. 2016;33;98-102).
Taken in this context, it is possible that the programs with more fellows simply recruit more competitive residents who tend to do better on exams. However, this could also reflect more resources in fellowship programs that are available to all trainees or better mentorship opportunities, said Dr. Al Fayyadh. He concluded that more research is needed to tease out the impact of fellowship programs on general surgery resident education.
Dr. Al Fayyadh had no disclosures.
WASHINGTON – Pass rates on the general surgery board exams were significantly higher for programs in which residents trained alongside surgical fellows, according to a retrospective study presented at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
The study adds another perspective to the ongoing debate about the impact of fellowships on general surgery residency and residency programs. Mohammed J. Al Fayyadh, MD, of the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio and his associates investigated the impact of fellowships on program pass rates for general surgery boards. They reviewed American Board of Surgery exam data for the classes of 2010-2014, which included 242 programs (a total of 5,191 resident examinees), of which 148 had fellows participating (3,767 resident examinees).
The findings suggest that having fellows in a program has a positive impact on the pass rates of those taking the ABS general surgery exam. Pass rates were significantly higher for general surgery programs with fellows. This trend held for all measures studied: Qualifying (written) exam (88% vs. 86%), certifying (oral) exam (83% vs. 80%), and combined exams (74% vs. 69%). Differences between the groups were statistically significant.
The pass rates tended to be higher in programs with higher Fel:Res ratios. For example, programs with a 1.5:1 Fel:Res ratio had the highest pass rates for the qualifying, certifying, and combined exams.
The impact of subspecialty fellowships on general surgery residencies has been the subject of research and debate in recent years. Some studies have suggested that subspecialty training for fellows has meant that general surgery residents have less opportunity to operate in areas such as trauma (“Trauma operative training declining for general surgery residents,” ACS Surgery News, Oct. 4, 2016) and vascular surgery (Ann Vasc Surg. 2016;33;98-102).
Taken in this context, it is possible that the programs with more fellows simply recruit more competitive residents who tend to do better on exams. However, this could also reflect more resources in fellowship programs that are available to all trainees or better mentorship opportunities, said Dr. Al Fayyadh. He concluded that more research is needed to tease out the impact of fellowship programs on general surgery resident education.
Dr. Al Fayyadh had no disclosures.
WASHINGTON – Pass rates on the general surgery board exams were significantly higher for programs in which residents trained alongside surgical fellows, according to a retrospective study presented at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
The study adds another perspective to the ongoing debate about the impact of fellowships on general surgery residency and residency programs. Mohammed J. Al Fayyadh, MD, of the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio and his associates investigated the impact of fellowships on program pass rates for general surgery boards. They reviewed American Board of Surgery exam data for the classes of 2010-2014, which included 242 programs (a total of 5,191 resident examinees), of which 148 had fellows participating (3,767 resident examinees).
The findings suggest that having fellows in a program has a positive impact on the pass rates of those taking the ABS general surgery exam. Pass rates were significantly higher for general surgery programs with fellows. This trend held for all measures studied: Qualifying (written) exam (88% vs. 86%), certifying (oral) exam (83% vs. 80%), and combined exams (74% vs. 69%). Differences between the groups were statistically significant.
The pass rates tended to be higher in programs with higher Fel:Res ratios. For example, programs with a 1.5:1 Fel:Res ratio had the highest pass rates for the qualifying, certifying, and combined exams.
The impact of subspecialty fellowships on general surgery residencies has been the subject of research and debate in recent years. Some studies have suggested that subspecialty training for fellows has meant that general surgery residents have less opportunity to operate in areas such as trauma (“Trauma operative training declining for general surgery residents,” ACS Surgery News, Oct. 4, 2016) and vascular surgery (Ann Vasc Surg. 2016;33;98-102).
Taken in this context, it is possible that the programs with more fellows simply recruit more competitive residents who tend to do better on exams. However, this could also reflect more resources in fellowship programs that are available to all trainees or better mentorship opportunities, said Dr. Al Fayyadh. He concluded that more research is needed to tease out the impact of fellowship programs on general surgery resident education.
Dr. Al Fayyadh had no disclosures.
AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
REBOA may be a safe alternative to RTACC in the acute care setting
WASHINGTON – Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) could be an acceptable alternative to thoracotomy in traumatic arrest patients who are hemorrhaging below the diaphragm, according to the results of a small pilot study which were presented by William Teeter, MD, at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
Furthermore, virtual simulation training sufficiently prepares surgeons to safely use the REBOA technique in the acute care setting, a separate study found. Importantly, this training has the potential to allow REBOA to become a widespread tool for surgeons regardless of their endovascular surgical experience.
Dr. Teeter presented the preliminary results of a pilot study involving 19 patients who received RTACC between 2008 and 2013 and 17 patients who received REBOA between 2013 and 2015. All study participants were trauma patients who arrived at the R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center in arrest or arrested shortly after arrival.
Age, gender, Glasgow Coma Scale, and injury severity score were the same or similar between the two groups, Dr. Teeter reported. Mean systolic blood pressure at admission was 14 mmHg for the REBOA group and 28 mmHg for the RTACC group; however, the majority of patients (82% of REBOA patients and 73% of RTACC patients) arrived with a blood pressure of 0, reported Dr. Teeter.
Importantly, patients in the RTACC group who had penetrating chest injury were excluded for this analysis, Dr. Teeter noted, adding that there was a slightly higher incidence of blunt trauma within the REBOA group likely due to “a change in practice at the trauma center during this time.”
All resuscitations were captured with real-time videography. Continuous vitals were also collected and analyzed.
While more RTACC patients survived to the operating room (53% vs. 68%), among the REBOA group there were more patients who experienced return of spontaneous circulation (53% vs. 37%). However, neither of these results was statistically significant.
Following occlusion of the aorta, the blood pressure measures, taken from continuous vital signs and averaged over a 15-minute period, were 80 mmHg for the REBOA group and 46 mmHg for the RTACC group. Again, this result was statistically insignificant but trended toward favoring REBOA.
Overall, patient survival was dismal. Only one patient who received REBOA survived.
Following Dr. Teeter’s presentation, the study’s assigned discussant, Nicole A. Stassen, MD, of the University of Rochester Medical Center, N.Y., noted that while post-occlusion blood pressure was higher for the REBOA group it seemed not to matter as the majority of patients did not survive. Dr. Stassen also asked if these preliminary results were sufficient to inform or change clinical practice.
In response, Dr. Teeter explained that the pilot study was conducted at a time when the literature was unclear about how patients would respond to open versus endovascular occlusion, and this data helped guide further research and resuscitation efforts.
“At our center there has been a marked change in practice regarding which patients receive resuscitative thoracotomy and which get REBOA,” he added and concluded that “these and previous data suggest that the time performing thoracotomy for resuscitation purposes may be better spent performing CPR with REBOA.”
At the very least, this pilot study demonstrated that “REBOA may be an acceptable alternative to RTACC.” Further analysis of larger study populations will be published soon and will show that REBOA may be preferred over RTACC, according to Dr. Teeter.
A major hindrance to wider-spread REBOA use in the United States is the lack of endovascular training for surgeons during residency which has resulted in a limited number of surgeons who can perform the REBOA technique and a limited number of surgeons who can teach the procedure to others, said Dr. Hampton.
In lieu of experience, formalized 1- or 2-day endovascular simulation courses, such as BEST, were created to prepare surgeons to use techniques such as REBOA. Prior validation studies, including those conducted by researchers at the University of Maryland, demonstrated that surgeons who participated in these courses improved surgical technique and increased their surgical knowledge base, Dr. Hampton reported.
To further elucidate the benefits of these training courses on the successful use of REBOA in the acute care setting, Dr. Hampton and his associates selected nine acute care surgeons with varying endovascular surgical experience to complete the 1-day BEST course and then compared surgeons’ performances of the REBOA technique after successful course completion.
During the study, a total of 28 REBOA procedures were performed, 17 by the surgeons with no endovascular experience, and the remaining 11 by surgeons with endovascular surgical experience.
Overall, there was no difference in wire placements, sheath insertion, position or localization of balloons, or balloon inflation. In addition, there was no difference in mortality among patients, and there were no known REBOA complications during this study.
In conclusion, endovascular experience during residency is not a prerequisite for safe REBOA placement, Dr. Hampton commented.
Taken together, these two research studies are really helping to break ground on REBOA use in the acute care setting, commented an audience member.
The Department of Defense funded Dr. Teeter’s study. Dr. Teeter and Dr. Hampton both reported having no disclosures.
jcraig@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @jessnicolecraig
WASHINGTON – Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) could be an acceptable alternative to thoracotomy in traumatic arrest patients who are hemorrhaging below the diaphragm, according to the results of a small pilot study which were presented by William Teeter, MD, at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
Furthermore, virtual simulation training sufficiently prepares surgeons to safely use the REBOA technique in the acute care setting, a separate study found. Importantly, this training has the potential to allow REBOA to become a widespread tool for surgeons regardless of their endovascular surgical experience.
Dr. Teeter presented the preliminary results of a pilot study involving 19 patients who received RTACC between 2008 and 2013 and 17 patients who received REBOA between 2013 and 2015. All study participants were trauma patients who arrived at the R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center in arrest or arrested shortly after arrival.
Age, gender, Glasgow Coma Scale, and injury severity score were the same or similar between the two groups, Dr. Teeter reported. Mean systolic blood pressure at admission was 14 mmHg for the REBOA group and 28 mmHg for the RTACC group; however, the majority of patients (82% of REBOA patients and 73% of RTACC patients) arrived with a blood pressure of 0, reported Dr. Teeter.
Importantly, patients in the RTACC group who had penetrating chest injury were excluded for this analysis, Dr. Teeter noted, adding that there was a slightly higher incidence of blunt trauma within the REBOA group likely due to “a change in practice at the trauma center during this time.”
All resuscitations were captured with real-time videography. Continuous vitals were also collected and analyzed.
While more RTACC patients survived to the operating room (53% vs. 68%), among the REBOA group there were more patients who experienced return of spontaneous circulation (53% vs. 37%). However, neither of these results was statistically significant.
Following occlusion of the aorta, the blood pressure measures, taken from continuous vital signs and averaged over a 15-minute period, were 80 mmHg for the REBOA group and 46 mmHg for the RTACC group. Again, this result was statistically insignificant but trended toward favoring REBOA.
Overall, patient survival was dismal. Only one patient who received REBOA survived.
Following Dr. Teeter’s presentation, the study’s assigned discussant, Nicole A. Stassen, MD, of the University of Rochester Medical Center, N.Y., noted that while post-occlusion blood pressure was higher for the REBOA group it seemed not to matter as the majority of patients did not survive. Dr. Stassen also asked if these preliminary results were sufficient to inform or change clinical practice.
In response, Dr. Teeter explained that the pilot study was conducted at a time when the literature was unclear about how patients would respond to open versus endovascular occlusion, and this data helped guide further research and resuscitation efforts.
“At our center there has been a marked change in practice regarding which patients receive resuscitative thoracotomy and which get REBOA,” he added and concluded that “these and previous data suggest that the time performing thoracotomy for resuscitation purposes may be better spent performing CPR with REBOA.”
At the very least, this pilot study demonstrated that “REBOA may be an acceptable alternative to RTACC.” Further analysis of larger study populations will be published soon and will show that REBOA may be preferred over RTACC, according to Dr. Teeter.
A major hindrance to wider-spread REBOA use in the United States is the lack of endovascular training for surgeons during residency which has resulted in a limited number of surgeons who can perform the REBOA technique and a limited number of surgeons who can teach the procedure to others, said Dr. Hampton.
In lieu of experience, formalized 1- or 2-day endovascular simulation courses, such as BEST, were created to prepare surgeons to use techniques such as REBOA. Prior validation studies, including those conducted by researchers at the University of Maryland, demonstrated that surgeons who participated in these courses improved surgical technique and increased their surgical knowledge base, Dr. Hampton reported.
To further elucidate the benefits of these training courses on the successful use of REBOA in the acute care setting, Dr. Hampton and his associates selected nine acute care surgeons with varying endovascular surgical experience to complete the 1-day BEST course and then compared surgeons’ performances of the REBOA technique after successful course completion.
During the study, a total of 28 REBOA procedures were performed, 17 by the surgeons with no endovascular experience, and the remaining 11 by surgeons with endovascular surgical experience.
Overall, there was no difference in wire placements, sheath insertion, position or localization of balloons, or balloon inflation. In addition, there was no difference in mortality among patients, and there were no known REBOA complications during this study.
In conclusion, endovascular experience during residency is not a prerequisite for safe REBOA placement, Dr. Hampton commented.
Taken together, these two research studies are really helping to break ground on REBOA use in the acute care setting, commented an audience member.
The Department of Defense funded Dr. Teeter’s study. Dr. Teeter and Dr. Hampton both reported having no disclosures.
jcraig@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @jessnicolecraig
WASHINGTON – Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) could be an acceptable alternative to thoracotomy in traumatic arrest patients who are hemorrhaging below the diaphragm, according to the results of a small pilot study which were presented by William Teeter, MD, at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
Furthermore, virtual simulation training sufficiently prepares surgeons to safely use the REBOA technique in the acute care setting, a separate study found. Importantly, this training has the potential to allow REBOA to become a widespread tool for surgeons regardless of their endovascular surgical experience.
Dr. Teeter presented the preliminary results of a pilot study involving 19 patients who received RTACC between 2008 and 2013 and 17 patients who received REBOA between 2013 and 2015. All study participants were trauma patients who arrived at the R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center in arrest or arrested shortly after arrival.
Age, gender, Glasgow Coma Scale, and injury severity score were the same or similar between the two groups, Dr. Teeter reported. Mean systolic blood pressure at admission was 14 mmHg for the REBOA group and 28 mmHg for the RTACC group; however, the majority of patients (82% of REBOA patients and 73% of RTACC patients) arrived with a blood pressure of 0, reported Dr. Teeter.
Importantly, patients in the RTACC group who had penetrating chest injury were excluded for this analysis, Dr. Teeter noted, adding that there was a slightly higher incidence of blunt trauma within the REBOA group likely due to “a change in practice at the trauma center during this time.”
All resuscitations were captured with real-time videography. Continuous vitals were also collected and analyzed.
While more RTACC patients survived to the operating room (53% vs. 68%), among the REBOA group there were more patients who experienced return of spontaneous circulation (53% vs. 37%). However, neither of these results was statistically significant.
Following occlusion of the aorta, the blood pressure measures, taken from continuous vital signs and averaged over a 15-minute period, were 80 mmHg for the REBOA group and 46 mmHg for the RTACC group. Again, this result was statistically insignificant but trended toward favoring REBOA.
Overall, patient survival was dismal. Only one patient who received REBOA survived.
Following Dr. Teeter’s presentation, the study’s assigned discussant, Nicole A. Stassen, MD, of the University of Rochester Medical Center, N.Y., noted that while post-occlusion blood pressure was higher for the REBOA group it seemed not to matter as the majority of patients did not survive. Dr. Stassen also asked if these preliminary results were sufficient to inform or change clinical practice.
In response, Dr. Teeter explained that the pilot study was conducted at a time when the literature was unclear about how patients would respond to open versus endovascular occlusion, and this data helped guide further research and resuscitation efforts.
“At our center there has been a marked change in practice regarding which patients receive resuscitative thoracotomy and which get REBOA,” he added and concluded that “these and previous data suggest that the time performing thoracotomy for resuscitation purposes may be better spent performing CPR with REBOA.”
At the very least, this pilot study demonstrated that “REBOA may be an acceptable alternative to RTACC.” Further analysis of larger study populations will be published soon and will show that REBOA may be preferred over RTACC, according to Dr. Teeter.
A major hindrance to wider-spread REBOA use in the United States is the lack of endovascular training for surgeons during residency which has resulted in a limited number of surgeons who can perform the REBOA technique and a limited number of surgeons who can teach the procedure to others, said Dr. Hampton.
In lieu of experience, formalized 1- or 2-day endovascular simulation courses, such as BEST, were created to prepare surgeons to use techniques such as REBOA. Prior validation studies, including those conducted by researchers at the University of Maryland, demonstrated that surgeons who participated in these courses improved surgical technique and increased their surgical knowledge base, Dr. Hampton reported.
To further elucidate the benefits of these training courses on the successful use of REBOA in the acute care setting, Dr. Hampton and his associates selected nine acute care surgeons with varying endovascular surgical experience to complete the 1-day BEST course and then compared surgeons’ performances of the REBOA technique after successful course completion.
During the study, a total of 28 REBOA procedures were performed, 17 by the surgeons with no endovascular experience, and the remaining 11 by surgeons with endovascular surgical experience.
Overall, there was no difference in wire placements, sheath insertion, position or localization of balloons, or balloon inflation. In addition, there was no difference in mortality among patients, and there were no known REBOA complications during this study.
In conclusion, endovascular experience during residency is not a prerequisite for safe REBOA placement, Dr. Hampton commented.
Taken together, these two research studies are really helping to break ground on REBOA use in the acute care setting, commented an audience member.
The Department of Defense funded Dr. Teeter’s study. Dr. Teeter and Dr. Hampton both reported having no disclosures.
jcraig@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @jessnicolecraig
AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: More RTACC patients survived to the operating room (53% vs. 68%), but more REBOA patients experienced return of spontaneous circulation (53% vs. 37%).
Data source: Pilot study involving 36 trauma patients who received either RTACC or REBOA.
Disclosures: The Department of Defense funded Dr. Teeter’s study. Dr. Teeter and Dr. Hampton both reported having no disclosures.
Open, laparoscopic, robotic approaches all sound for distal pancreatectomy
WASHINGTON – The three approaches to distal pancreatectomy – open, laparoscopic, and robotic – are equally safe and oncologically sound methods in properly selected patients, findings from a NSQIP database study show.
“The three approaches have specific indications for use and advantages in well-selected patients; therefore, demonstrating the superiority of one technique over another remains challenging,” said Dimitrios Xourafas, MD, in his presentation at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
Laparoscopic surgeries are more likely to result in open conversions than are robotic surgeries – but robotic surgeries take more time to complete. Open surgeries may be best for advanced disease. But all in all, there are no overriding advantages or disadvantages to any of them, reported Dr. Xourafas, a research fellow in surgery at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston.
He and his colleagues used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement (NSQIP) database for detailed information on 1,815 distal pancreatectomies performed in 2014. These they separated into three groups: open (921), laparoscopic (694) and robotic (200).
There were no differences in baseline characteristics. Mean age of the patients was 62 years. More than 70% of each group had serious comorbidities. Significantly more in the open surgery group had lost 10% or more of their body weight since diagnosis; this was probably related to a higher rate of preoperative chemotherapy in this group, Dr. Xourafas said. Patients having open surgery also were more likely to have undergone radiation therapy.
There were significant, but mixed, differences in operative outcomes. Surgery was longest in the robotic group (243 minutes vs. 205 minutes in the laparoscopic group and 222 minutes in the open group.) Laparoscopic procedures were more likely to convert to open than were robotic (16% vs. 8%). Blood loss was significantly greater in the open group, with 21% needing transfusion vs. 5% laparoscopic and 6% robotic. Close to 100% of patients in the robotic and open groups needed no vascular resection and no reconstruction. In the open group, fewer patients (88%) had no vascular resection, and 84% required no reconstruction, suggesting that these cases were more advanced disease. This finding was also borne out by the larger percentage of tumors that staged at T3 or higher (34% in the open group vs. about 20% in the other groups). However, about half of each group had a malignant tumor subtype and lesion sizes were similar.
Surgical site infections were more common in the open group (10% vs. 7% of the other groups). The length of stay was longest in the open group (7 days vs. 5 in the other groups). The robotic group had the highest rate of pancreatic fistula (21%) although this was not significantly different from the open and laparoscopic rates (16% and 17%, respectively).
Overall morbidity was 45% in the open group, 36% in the laparoscopic group, and 37% in the robotic group. Mortality was 1.5% in the open group, 1% in the laparoscopic group, and 0.5% in the robotic group – not significantly different.
Dr. Xourafas had no financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
WASHINGTON – The three approaches to distal pancreatectomy – open, laparoscopic, and robotic – are equally safe and oncologically sound methods in properly selected patients, findings from a NSQIP database study show.
“The three approaches have specific indications for use and advantages in well-selected patients; therefore, demonstrating the superiority of one technique over another remains challenging,” said Dimitrios Xourafas, MD, in his presentation at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
Laparoscopic surgeries are more likely to result in open conversions than are robotic surgeries – but robotic surgeries take more time to complete. Open surgeries may be best for advanced disease. But all in all, there are no overriding advantages or disadvantages to any of them, reported Dr. Xourafas, a research fellow in surgery at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston.
He and his colleagues used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement (NSQIP) database for detailed information on 1,815 distal pancreatectomies performed in 2014. These they separated into three groups: open (921), laparoscopic (694) and robotic (200).
There were no differences in baseline characteristics. Mean age of the patients was 62 years. More than 70% of each group had serious comorbidities. Significantly more in the open surgery group had lost 10% or more of their body weight since diagnosis; this was probably related to a higher rate of preoperative chemotherapy in this group, Dr. Xourafas said. Patients having open surgery also were more likely to have undergone radiation therapy.
There were significant, but mixed, differences in operative outcomes. Surgery was longest in the robotic group (243 minutes vs. 205 minutes in the laparoscopic group and 222 minutes in the open group.) Laparoscopic procedures were more likely to convert to open than were robotic (16% vs. 8%). Blood loss was significantly greater in the open group, with 21% needing transfusion vs. 5% laparoscopic and 6% robotic. Close to 100% of patients in the robotic and open groups needed no vascular resection and no reconstruction. In the open group, fewer patients (88%) had no vascular resection, and 84% required no reconstruction, suggesting that these cases were more advanced disease. This finding was also borne out by the larger percentage of tumors that staged at T3 or higher (34% in the open group vs. about 20% in the other groups). However, about half of each group had a malignant tumor subtype and lesion sizes were similar.
Surgical site infections were more common in the open group (10% vs. 7% of the other groups). The length of stay was longest in the open group (7 days vs. 5 in the other groups). The robotic group had the highest rate of pancreatic fistula (21%) although this was not significantly different from the open and laparoscopic rates (16% and 17%, respectively).
Overall morbidity was 45% in the open group, 36% in the laparoscopic group, and 37% in the robotic group. Mortality was 1.5% in the open group, 1% in the laparoscopic group, and 0.5% in the robotic group – not significantly different.
Dr. Xourafas had no financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
WASHINGTON – The three approaches to distal pancreatectomy – open, laparoscopic, and robotic – are equally safe and oncologically sound methods in properly selected patients, findings from a NSQIP database study show.
“The three approaches have specific indications for use and advantages in well-selected patients; therefore, demonstrating the superiority of one technique over another remains challenging,” said Dimitrios Xourafas, MD, in his presentation at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
Laparoscopic surgeries are more likely to result in open conversions than are robotic surgeries – but robotic surgeries take more time to complete. Open surgeries may be best for advanced disease. But all in all, there are no overriding advantages or disadvantages to any of them, reported Dr. Xourafas, a research fellow in surgery at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston.
He and his colleagues used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement (NSQIP) database for detailed information on 1,815 distal pancreatectomies performed in 2014. These they separated into three groups: open (921), laparoscopic (694) and robotic (200).
There were no differences in baseline characteristics. Mean age of the patients was 62 years. More than 70% of each group had serious comorbidities. Significantly more in the open surgery group had lost 10% or more of their body weight since diagnosis; this was probably related to a higher rate of preoperative chemotherapy in this group, Dr. Xourafas said. Patients having open surgery also were more likely to have undergone radiation therapy.
There were significant, but mixed, differences in operative outcomes. Surgery was longest in the robotic group (243 minutes vs. 205 minutes in the laparoscopic group and 222 minutes in the open group.) Laparoscopic procedures were more likely to convert to open than were robotic (16% vs. 8%). Blood loss was significantly greater in the open group, with 21% needing transfusion vs. 5% laparoscopic and 6% robotic. Close to 100% of patients in the robotic and open groups needed no vascular resection and no reconstruction. In the open group, fewer patients (88%) had no vascular resection, and 84% required no reconstruction, suggesting that these cases were more advanced disease. This finding was also borne out by the larger percentage of tumors that staged at T3 or higher (34% in the open group vs. about 20% in the other groups). However, about half of each group had a malignant tumor subtype and lesion sizes were similar.
Surgical site infections were more common in the open group (10% vs. 7% of the other groups). The length of stay was longest in the open group (7 days vs. 5 in the other groups). The robotic group had the highest rate of pancreatic fistula (21%) although this was not significantly different from the open and laparoscopic rates (16% and 17%, respectively).
Overall morbidity was 45% in the open group, 36% in the laparoscopic group, and 37% in the robotic group. Mortality was 1.5% in the open group, 1% in the laparoscopic group, and 0.5% in the robotic group – not significantly different.
Dr. Xourafas had no financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Surgery was longest in the robotic group (243 minutes), but more patients in the open group needed transfusions (21% vs. 5% of the other groups).
Data source: The database review comprised 1,815 patients.
Disclosures: Dr. Xourafas had no financial disclosures.
Simulation model favors hernia surgery over watchful waiting
WASHINGTON – Surgical repair of ventral hernias at time of diagnosis is a more cost-effective approach than watchful waiting, according to the results of a state-transition microsimulation model presented by Lindsey Wolf, MD, at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
The benefit of surgical intervention, compared with observation or watchful waiting for reducible ventral hernias is not well described, reported Dr. Wolf, a general surgery resident at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston.
In the model, cost was represented in U.S. dollars and benefit was indicated by quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Both measures accumulated for individual patients over time and then were averaged and reported for an entire cohort of simulated patients, Dr. Wolf explained. Incremental cost effectiveness, a measure represented as a ratio of cost per QALY gained for each strategy, “provides context by allowing us to compare each strategy to the next best strategy,” explained Dr. Wolf.
Willingness to pay, a threshold set by the government that represents the maximum amount a payer is willing to spend for additional quality, was set at a threshold of $50,000 dollars per QALY, which is a “commonly accepted willingness-to pay-threshold,” she said.
The model’s primary outcomes were lifetime costs, QALYs from time of diagnosis, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.
“We built a state-transition microsimulation model which represents the different health states a patient can occupy at any point in time,” Dr. Wolf reported. “Using a yearly cycle, a cohort of patients were simulated through the model one at a time.”
All patients entered the model in an asymptomatic state. For each year there was a probability for a patient to transition from the current state to another state in the model.
Patients who underwent surgical repair at diagnosis were transitioned to the no-hernia state in the first year after undergoing surgery. Those in the watchful-waiting group stayed in the asymptotic state and each year there was a probability of becoming symptomatic. Of those who became symptomatic, there was a small probability that they would present with an incarcerated hernia and would require emergent surgery rather than elective surgery. Patients were subjected to perioperative mortality rates, as well as background yearly risk of death.
Cohort characteristics, hospital and other costs, perioperative mortality, and quality of life were derived from best available published studies and the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, the largest all-payer inpatient care database in the United States.
Overall, laparoscopic surgery at diagnosis was the optimal hernia repair strategy, reported Dr. Wolf.
Although laparoscopic surgery was the most expensive, it was also the most effective and, compared with watchful waiting – the least expensive and least effective strategy – the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was about $14,800 per QALY.
Open repair at diagnosis fell between the watchful-waiting and laparoscopic-repair strategies in terms of cost and effectiveness.
To understand the conditions in which the optimal strategy changed, the researchers performed sensitivity analysis using the net monetary benefit metric, which represented both costs and benefits in a single unit at a given willingness to pay threshold.
“For a cohort of high-risk patients, once the perioperative risk of death exceeds 3.4%, watchful waiting becomes the preferred strategy,” Dr. Wolf said. Watchful waiting also was the preferred strategy when the yearly risk of recurrence exceeded 24%.
A sensitivity analysis comparing quality of life for elective open and laparoscopic repair revealed that, when quality-of-life measures were similar between the two surgical repair groups, the open repair became the preferred strategy.
Finally, researchers performed probabilistic sensitivity analysis by simulating the cohort of 100,000 patients 100 times and each time deriving results that were similar – an indication of robust results.
“In conclusion, we found that, for a typical cohort of patients with ventral hernia, laparoscopic repair at diagnosis is very cost effective. As long-term outcomes for open and laparoscopic repair were very similar in the model, the decision between laparoscopic and open surgery depends on surgeon experience and preference for one method over another,” said Dr. Wolf.
This study was funded by the Resident Research Scholarship awarded by the American College of Surgeons. Dr. Wolf reported having no disclosures.
jcraig@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @jessnicolecraig
WASHINGTON – Surgical repair of ventral hernias at time of diagnosis is a more cost-effective approach than watchful waiting, according to the results of a state-transition microsimulation model presented by Lindsey Wolf, MD, at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
The benefit of surgical intervention, compared with observation or watchful waiting for reducible ventral hernias is not well described, reported Dr. Wolf, a general surgery resident at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston.
In the model, cost was represented in U.S. dollars and benefit was indicated by quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Both measures accumulated for individual patients over time and then were averaged and reported for an entire cohort of simulated patients, Dr. Wolf explained. Incremental cost effectiveness, a measure represented as a ratio of cost per QALY gained for each strategy, “provides context by allowing us to compare each strategy to the next best strategy,” explained Dr. Wolf.
Willingness to pay, a threshold set by the government that represents the maximum amount a payer is willing to spend for additional quality, was set at a threshold of $50,000 dollars per QALY, which is a “commonly accepted willingness-to pay-threshold,” she said.
The model’s primary outcomes were lifetime costs, QALYs from time of diagnosis, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.
“We built a state-transition microsimulation model which represents the different health states a patient can occupy at any point in time,” Dr. Wolf reported. “Using a yearly cycle, a cohort of patients were simulated through the model one at a time.”
All patients entered the model in an asymptomatic state. For each year there was a probability for a patient to transition from the current state to another state in the model.
Patients who underwent surgical repair at diagnosis were transitioned to the no-hernia state in the first year after undergoing surgery. Those in the watchful-waiting group stayed in the asymptotic state and each year there was a probability of becoming symptomatic. Of those who became symptomatic, there was a small probability that they would present with an incarcerated hernia and would require emergent surgery rather than elective surgery. Patients were subjected to perioperative mortality rates, as well as background yearly risk of death.
Cohort characteristics, hospital and other costs, perioperative mortality, and quality of life were derived from best available published studies and the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, the largest all-payer inpatient care database in the United States.
Overall, laparoscopic surgery at diagnosis was the optimal hernia repair strategy, reported Dr. Wolf.
Although laparoscopic surgery was the most expensive, it was also the most effective and, compared with watchful waiting – the least expensive and least effective strategy – the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was about $14,800 per QALY.
Open repair at diagnosis fell between the watchful-waiting and laparoscopic-repair strategies in terms of cost and effectiveness.
To understand the conditions in which the optimal strategy changed, the researchers performed sensitivity analysis using the net monetary benefit metric, which represented both costs and benefits in a single unit at a given willingness to pay threshold.
“For a cohort of high-risk patients, once the perioperative risk of death exceeds 3.4%, watchful waiting becomes the preferred strategy,” Dr. Wolf said. Watchful waiting also was the preferred strategy when the yearly risk of recurrence exceeded 24%.
A sensitivity analysis comparing quality of life for elective open and laparoscopic repair revealed that, when quality-of-life measures were similar between the two surgical repair groups, the open repair became the preferred strategy.
Finally, researchers performed probabilistic sensitivity analysis by simulating the cohort of 100,000 patients 100 times and each time deriving results that were similar – an indication of robust results.
“In conclusion, we found that, for a typical cohort of patients with ventral hernia, laparoscopic repair at diagnosis is very cost effective. As long-term outcomes for open and laparoscopic repair were very similar in the model, the decision between laparoscopic and open surgery depends on surgeon experience and preference for one method over another,” said Dr. Wolf.
This study was funded by the Resident Research Scholarship awarded by the American College of Surgeons. Dr. Wolf reported having no disclosures.
jcraig@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @jessnicolecraig
WASHINGTON – Surgical repair of ventral hernias at time of diagnosis is a more cost-effective approach than watchful waiting, according to the results of a state-transition microsimulation model presented by Lindsey Wolf, MD, at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
The benefit of surgical intervention, compared with observation or watchful waiting for reducible ventral hernias is not well described, reported Dr. Wolf, a general surgery resident at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston.
In the model, cost was represented in U.S. dollars and benefit was indicated by quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Both measures accumulated for individual patients over time and then were averaged and reported for an entire cohort of simulated patients, Dr. Wolf explained. Incremental cost effectiveness, a measure represented as a ratio of cost per QALY gained for each strategy, “provides context by allowing us to compare each strategy to the next best strategy,” explained Dr. Wolf.
Willingness to pay, a threshold set by the government that represents the maximum amount a payer is willing to spend for additional quality, was set at a threshold of $50,000 dollars per QALY, which is a “commonly accepted willingness-to pay-threshold,” she said.
The model’s primary outcomes were lifetime costs, QALYs from time of diagnosis, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.
“We built a state-transition microsimulation model which represents the different health states a patient can occupy at any point in time,” Dr. Wolf reported. “Using a yearly cycle, a cohort of patients were simulated through the model one at a time.”
All patients entered the model in an asymptomatic state. For each year there was a probability for a patient to transition from the current state to another state in the model.
Patients who underwent surgical repair at diagnosis were transitioned to the no-hernia state in the first year after undergoing surgery. Those in the watchful-waiting group stayed in the asymptotic state and each year there was a probability of becoming symptomatic. Of those who became symptomatic, there was a small probability that they would present with an incarcerated hernia and would require emergent surgery rather than elective surgery. Patients were subjected to perioperative mortality rates, as well as background yearly risk of death.
Cohort characteristics, hospital and other costs, perioperative mortality, and quality of life were derived from best available published studies and the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, the largest all-payer inpatient care database in the United States.
Overall, laparoscopic surgery at diagnosis was the optimal hernia repair strategy, reported Dr. Wolf.
Although laparoscopic surgery was the most expensive, it was also the most effective and, compared with watchful waiting – the least expensive and least effective strategy – the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was about $14,800 per QALY.
Open repair at diagnosis fell between the watchful-waiting and laparoscopic-repair strategies in terms of cost and effectiveness.
To understand the conditions in which the optimal strategy changed, the researchers performed sensitivity analysis using the net monetary benefit metric, which represented both costs and benefits in a single unit at a given willingness to pay threshold.
“For a cohort of high-risk patients, once the perioperative risk of death exceeds 3.4%, watchful waiting becomes the preferred strategy,” Dr. Wolf said. Watchful waiting also was the preferred strategy when the yearly risk of recurrence exceeded 24%.
A sensitivity analysis comparing quality of life for elective open and laparoscopic repair revealed that, when quality-of-life measures were similar between the two surgical repair groups, the open repair became the preferred strategy.
Finally, researchers performed probabilistic sensitivity analysis by simulating the cohort of 100,000 patients 100 times and each time deriving results that were similar – an indication of robust results.
“In conclusion, we found that, for a typical cohort of patients with ventral hernia, laparoscopic repair at diagnosis is very cost effective. As long-term outcomes for open and laparoscopic repair were very similar in the model, the decision between laparoscopic and open surgery depends on surgeon experience and preference for one method over another,” said Dr. Wolf.
This study was funded by the Resident Research Scholarship awarded by the American College of Surgeons. Dr. Wolf reported having no disclosures.
jcraig@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @jessnicolecraig
AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for laparoscopic surgery, compared with watchful waiting, was about $14,800 per QALY.
Data source: A state-transition microsimulation model of 100,000 people.
Disclosures: This study was funded by the Resident Research Scholarship awarded by the American College of Surgeons. Dr. Wolf reported having no disclosures.
Travel barriers can impede patient choice for pancreatectomy
AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
WASHINGTON – Patients who have the resources to travel to higher-volume hospitals for pancreatectomy have better outcomes than do those who opt to have the surgery in local, small-volume hospitals.
A 10-year review of travel patterns associated with pancreatectomy in California found those who didn’t travel were often elderly, black or Hispanic, and were either self-pay or had public insurance.
“It’s probably because these patients don’t have the resources [finances and transportation] to travel far to the best hospitals for their surgery and have to rely on the closest hospitals for better or for worse – and it seems more like the latter,” he said in an interview at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. “So what you see is there is an aspatial barrier to access [limited insurance], as well as spatial barriers to access.”
He and his mentor, David C. Chang, PhD, examined about 13,000 pancreatectomy records included in the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database from 2005 to 2014. The research was conducted at Harvard University and the Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
The majority of these patients (11,000) bypassed at least one hospital that offered pancreatectomy to reach their ultimate choice. After bypassing a median of seven facilities, they ended up traveling about 16 miles from home to reach their chosen hospital. Patients who stuck to the closest hospital traveled only about 3 miles.
Generally, bypassers tended to end up in higher-volume hospitals with better outcomes. About half had their pancreatectomy at a hospital that performed more than 20 per year; 40% were at a facility that performed in excess of 40 pancreatectomies annually. Almost 50% of the bypassers also had their surgery at a teaching hospital. The median length of stay at these facilities was 10 days, and they had a median pancreatectomy mortality rate of 3%.
In contrast, patients who didn’t travel ended up at lower-volume hospitals; 60% had their pancreatectomy at a hospital that performed fewer than 10 per year and 22% at a hospital that performed 10-20 per year. Only 18% were treated at an academic center. These hospitals had a significantly longer pancreatectomy length of stay (12 days) and significantly higher pancreatectomy mortality rate (6%).
Older patients were less likely to travel. The age difference came into play beginning at age 50 and grew stronger as patients aged.
Insurance status was highly associated with hospital destination. Privately insured patients were the most likely to travel to better hospitals, followed by those on Medicare. Patients on Medicaid and those who identified as self-pay were significantly less likely to travel. Minorities traveled far less as well; blacks were the least likely to travel from their home base.
In this time of value-based surgical outcomes, the study has some interesting implications, Dr. Fong said. Many health care systems are undertaking a volume pledge, which aims to funnel patients who need high-risk procedures to centers that perform a large number of them annually. But there is a flip side to that coin, which could, in essence, make things even tougher on patients who find travel challenging.
“The Volume Pledge aims to stop hospitals that are low volume in certain procedures from continuing to do them, on the basis that high-volume hospitals often do better in terms of outcomes. But there are very much unintended consequences of the pledge, such as hampering access to surgery. Because inevitably, you’ll increase distance needed to travel for each patient to get care if low-volume hospitals stopped offering their services.”
In his study, Dr. Fong found that some California counties had only one hospital that offered pancreatectomy, and that was a low-volume facility. If that hospital was forced to stop offering the procedure, patients with less resources could face even more obstacles to getting the treatment they need.
“Eliminating [low-volume hospital procedures] will have dire consequences. Our study showed that the elderly, racial/ethnic minorities, uninsured and those on Medicaid generally don’t travel for care, and this pledge may compound on that and widen disparity or even worse, some may not even get care as a result.”
Dr. Fong had no financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
WASHINGTON – Patients who have the resources to travel to higher-volume hospitals for pancreatectomy have better outcomes than do those who opt to have the surgery in local, small-volume hospitals.
A 10-year review of travel patterns associated with pancreatectomy in California found those who didn’t travel were often elderly, black or Hispanic, and were either self-pay or had public insurance.
“It’s probably because these patients don’t have the resources [finances and transportation] to travel far to the best hospitals for their surgery and have to rely on the closest hospitals for better or for worse – and it seems more like the latter,” he said in an interview at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. “So what you see is there is an aspatial barrier to access [limited insurance], as well as spatial barriers to access.”
He and his mentor, David C. Chang, PhD, examined about 13,000 pancreatectomy records included in the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database from 2005 to 2014. The research was conducted at Harvard University and the Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
The majority of these patients (11,000) bypassed at least one hospital that offered pancreatectomy to reach their ultimate choice. After bypassing a median of seven facilities, they ended up traveling about 16 miles from home to reach their chosen hospital. Patients who stuck to the closest hospital traveled only about 3 miles.
Generally, bypassers tended to end up in higher-volume hospitals with better outcomes. About half had their pancreatectomy at a hospital that performed more than 20 per year; 40% were at a facility that performed in excess of 40 pancreatectomies annually. Almost 50% of the bypassers also had their surgery at a teaching hospital. The median length of stay at these facilities was 10 days, and they had a median pancreatectomy mortality rate of 3%.
In contrast, patients who didn’t travel ended up at lower-volume hospitals; 60% had their pancreatectomy at a hospital that performed fewer than 10 per year and 22% at a hospital that performed 10-20 per year. Only 18% were treated at an academic center. These hospitals had a significantly longer pancreatectomy length of stay (12 days) and significantly higher pancreatectomy mortality rate (6%).
Older patients were less likely to travel. The age difference came into play beginning at age 50 and grew stronger as patients aged.
Insurance status was highly associated with hospital destination. Privately insured patients were the most likely to travel to better hospitals, followed by those on Medicare. Patients on Medicaid and those who identified as self-pay were significantly less likely to travel. Minorities traveled far less as well; blacks were the least likely to travel from their home base.
In this time of value-based surgical outcomes, the study has some interesting implications, Dr. Fong said. Many health care systems are undertaking a volume pledge, which aims to funnel patients who need high-risk procedures to centers that perform a large number of them annually. But there is a flip side to that coin, which could, in essence, make things even tougher on patients who find travel challenging.
“The Volume Pledge aims to stop hospitals that are low volume in certain procedures from continuing to do them, on the basis that high-volume hospitals often do better in terms of outcomes. But there are very much unintended consequences of the pledge, such as hampering access to surgery. Because inevitably, you’ll increase distance needed to travel for each patient to get care if low-volume hospitals stopped offering their services.”
In his study, Dr. Fong found that some California counties had only one hospital that offered pancreatectomy, and that was a low-volume facility. If that hospital was forced to stop offering the procedure, patients with less resources could face even more obstacles to getting the treatment they need.
“Eliminating [low-volume hospital procedures] will have dire consequences. Our study showed that the elderly, racial/ethnic minorities, uninsured and those on Medicaid generally don’t travel for care, and this pledge may compound on that and widen disparity or even worse, some may not even get care as a result.”
Dr. Fong had no financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
WASHINGTON – Patients who have the resources to travel to higher-volume hospitals for pancreatectomy have better outcomes than do those who opt to have the surgery in local, small-volume hospitals.
A 10-year review of travel patterns associated with pancreatectomy in California found those who didn’t travel were often elderly, black or Hispanic, and were either self-pay or had public insurance.
“It’s probably because these patients don’t have the resources [finances and transportation] to travel far to the best hospitals for their surgery and have to rely on the closest hospitals for better or for worse – and it seems more like the latter,” he said in an interview at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. “So what you see is there is an aspatial barrier to access [limited insurance], as well as spatial barriers to access.”
He and his mentor, David C. Chang, PhD, examined about 13,000 pancreatectomy records included in the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database from 2005 to 2014. The research was conducted at Harvard University and the Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
The majority of these patients (11,000) bypassed at least one hospital that offered pancreatectomy to reach their ultimate choice. After bypassing a median of seven facilities, they ended up traveling about 16 miles from home to reach their chosen hospital. Patients who stuck to the closest hospital traveled only about 3 miles.
Generally, bypassers tended to end up in higher-volume hospitals with better outcomes. About half had their pancreatectomy at a hospital that performed more than 20 per year; 40% were at a facility that performed in excess of 40 pancreatectomies annually. Almost 50% of the bypassers also had their surgery at a teaching hospital. The median length of stay at these facilities was 10 days, and they had a median pancreatectomy mortality rate of 3%.
In contrast, patients who didn’t travel ended up at lower-volume hospitals; 60% had their pancreatectomy at a hospital that performed fewer than 10 per year and 22% at a hospital that performed 10-20 per year. Only 18% were treated at an academic center. These hospitals had a significantly longer pancreatectomy length of stay (12 days) and significantly higher pancreatectomy mortality rate (6%).
Older patients were less likely to travel. The age difference came into play beginning at age 50 and grew stronger as patients aged.
Insurance status was highly associated with hospital destination. Privately insured patients were the most likely to travel to better hospitals, followed by those on Medicare. Patients on Medicaid and those who identified as self-pay were significantly less likely to travel. Minorities traveled far less as well; blacks were the least likely to travel from their home base.
In this time of value-based surgical outcomes, the study has some interesting implications, Dr. Fong said. Many health care systems are undertaking a volume pledge, which aims to funnel patients who need high-risk procedures to centers that perform a large number of them annually. But there is a flip side to that coin, which could, in essence, make things even tougher on patients who find travel challenging.
“The Volume Pledge aims to stop hospitals that are low volume in certain procedures from continuing to do them, on the basis that high-volume hospitals often do better in terms of outcomes. But there are very much unintended consequences of the pledge, such as hampering access to surgery. Because inevitably, you’ll increase distance needed to travel for each patient to get care if low-volume hospitals stopped offering their services.”
In his study, Dr. Fong found that some California counties had only one hospital that offered pancreatectomy, and that was a low-volume facility. If that hospital was forced to stop offering the procedure, patients with less resources could face even more obstacles to getting the treatment they need.
“Eliminating [low-volume hospital procedures] will have dire consequences. Our study showed that the elderly, racial/ethnic minorities, uninsured and those on Medicaid generally don’t travel for care, and this pledge may compound on that and widen disparity or even worse, some may not even get care as a result.”
Dr. Fong had no financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
Key clinical point:
Major finding: About 60% of patients who didn’t travel had surgery at a low-volume hospital with a higher mortality rate and longer length of stay.
Data source: The 10-year California database review comprised 13,000 patients.
Disclosures: Dr. Fong had no financial disclosures.
Readmissions after bariatric surgery more common among black patients
WASHINGTON – Readmissions after bariatric surgery are significantly higher among black patients than among whites.
The reasons aren’t entirely clear, but since long-term morbidity and mortality are equivalent, they are probably more related to socioeconomics than clinical factors, Matthew Whealon, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
“I think they are multifactorial,” said Dr. Whealon of the University of California, Irvine. “Some of it may be related to comorbidities, but other factors could be socioeconomic status, insurance status, access to primary care and follow-up care, even home support systems and patient expectations after surgery. I think it’s incumbent upon us to try and identify some of these risk factors and address them before surgery to reduce this disparity in readmissions.”
Black patients undergoing Roux-en-Y bypass were significantly younger (43 vs. 45 years), and more often women (86% vs. 78%). They also had significantly higher body mass index than did white patients (48 vs. 46 kg/m2). More black individuals had a BMI of 50 kg/m2 or higher.
There were no significant differences in the severity of comorbidities. About 70% of each group had severe comorbidities as classified by the American Anesthesiologists Society risk assessment profile.
However, those comorbidities were different. Among black patients, steroid use, heart failure, hypertension, and end-stage renal disease were significantly more common. Among white patients, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and bleeding disorders were more common.
There were no differences in 30-day mortality (less than 1% of each group); serious morbidity (3%) or any morbidity (5%); length of stay (2.4 days); or reoperation (2.6%).
However, readmissions were significantly more likely among black patients (8% vs. 5.6%). This translated to a 29% increased risk of readmission (OR 1.29).
Compared to whites, blacks who had a laparoscopic vertical sleeve gastrectomy were also significantly younger (42 vs. 45 years); more often women (87% vs. 76%); and heavier (BMI 47 vs. 45 kg/m2). Again, they were more likely to have a BMI of more than 50 kg/m2 (28% vs. 21%).
Significantly more were in the ASA class 3 of severe comorbidities (70% vs.66%). There were also differences in the comorbidities, with blacks more likely to have heart failure, hypertension, and end-stage renal disease, and whites more likely to have diabetes, smoking, dyspnea, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Among these patients, 30-day mortality was not different (less than 1%). Serious morbidity was also similar (about 2%), as was any morbidity (about 3%). The reoperation rate was the same (1.2%).
Length of stay was longer among black patients but this was not clinically significant, Dr. Whealon said: It still hovered right around 2 days.
But readmissions were significantly more common among blacks (5% vs. 3%). This difference translated to a 35% increased risk of readmission (odds ratio 1.35).
The nature of the NSQIP data makes it impossible to tease out any other factors that might have contributed to this finding. However, Dr. Whealon said, the equivalent findings on morbidity and mortality are very encouraging and represent a big improvement.
“We have done very well in driving down morbidity and mortality among these patients. Mortality rates are one tenth of what we were seeing a decade ago.”
This change hasn’t been well documented yet because many of the large studies showing racial and ethnic mortality disparities include data drawn from open bariatric surgery, which has been almost completely abandoned in favor of the much safer laparoscopic approaches.
Dr. Whealon had no financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
WASHINGTON – Readmissions after bariatric surgery are significantly higher among black patients than among whites.
The reasons aren’t entirely clear, but since long-term morbidity and mortality are equivalent, they are probably more related to socioeconomics than clinical factors, Matthew Whealon, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
“I think they are multifactorial,” said Dr. Whealon of the University of California, Irvine. “Some of it may be related to comorbidities, but other factors could be socioeconomic status, insurance status, access to primary care and follow-up care, even home support systems and patient expectations after surgery. I think it’s incumbent upon us to try and identify some of these risk factors and address them before surgery to reduce this disparity in readmissions.”
Black patients undergoing Roux-en-Y bypass were significantly younger (43 vs. 45 years), and more often women (86% vs. 78%). They also had significantly higher body mass index than did white patients (48 vs. 46 kg/m2). More black individuals had a BMI of 50 kg/m2 or higher.
There were no significant differences in the severity of comorbidities. About 70% of each group had severe comorbidities as classified by the American Anesthesiologists Society risk assessment profile.
However, those comorbidities were different. Among black patients, steroid use, heart failure, hypertension, and end-stage renal disease were significantly more common. Among white patients, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and bleeding disorders were more common.
There were no differences in 30-day mortality (less than 1% of each group); serious morbidity (3%) or any morbidity (5%); length of stay (2.4 days); or reoperation (2.6%).
However, readmissions were significantly more likely among black patients (8% vs. 5.6%). This translated to a 29% increased risk of readmission (OR 1.29).
Compared to whites, blacks who had a laparoscopic vertical sleeve gastrectomy were also significantly younger (42 vs. 45 years); more often women (87% vs. 76%); and heavier (BMI 47 vs. 45 kg/m2). Again, they were more likely to have a BMI of more than 50 kg/m2 (28% vs. 21%).
Significantly more were in the ASA class 3 of severe comorbidities (70% vs.66%). There were also differences in the comorbidities, with blacks more likely to have heart failure, hypertension, and end-stage renal disease, and whites more likely to have diabetes, smoking, dyspnea, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Among these patients, 30-day mortality was not different (less than 1%). Serious morbidity was also similar (about 2%), as was any morbidity (about 3%). The reoperation rate was the same (1.2%).
Length of stay was longer among black patients but this was not clinically significant, Dr. Whealon said: It still hovered right around 2 days.
But readmissions were significantly more common among blacks (5% vs. 3%). This difference translated to a 35% increased risk of readmission (odds ratio 1.35).
The nature of the NSQIP data makes it impossible to tease out any other factors that might have contributed to this finding. However, Dr. Whealon said, the equivalent findings on morbidity and mortality are very encouraging and represent a big improvement.
“We have done very well in driving down morbidity and mortality among these patients. Mortality rates are one tenth of what we were seeing a decade ago.”
This change hasn’t been well documented yet because many of the large studies showing racial and ethnic mortality disparities include data drawn from open bariatric surgery, which has been almost completely abandoned in favor of the much safer laparoscopic approaches.
Dr. Whealon had no financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
WASHINGTON – Readmissions after bariatric surgery are significantly higher among black patients than among whites.
The reasons aren’t entirely clear, but since long-term morbidity and mortality are equivalent, they are probably more related to socioeconomics than clinical factors, Matthew Whealon, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons.
“I think they are multifactorial,” said Dr. Whealon of the University of California, Irvine. “Some of it may be related to comorbidities, but other factors could be socioeconomic status, insurance status, access to primary care and follow-up care, even home support systems and patient expectations after surgery. I think it’s incumbent upon us to try and identify some of these risk factors and address them before surgery to reduce this disparity in readmissions.”
Black patients undergoing Roux-en-Y bypass were significantly younger (43 vs. 45 years), and more often women (86% vs. 78%). They also had significantly higher body mass index than did white patients (48 vs. 46 kg/m2). More black individuals had a BMI of 50 kg/m2 or higher.
There were no significant differences in the severity of comorbidities. About 70% of each group had severe comorbidities as classified by the American Anesthesiologists Society risk assessment profile.
However, those comorbidities were different. Among black patients, steroid use, heart failure, hypertension, and end-stage renal disease were significantly more common. Among white patients, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and bleeding disorders were more common.
There were no differences in 30-day mortality (less than 1% of each group); serious morbidity (3%) or any morbidity (5%); length of stay (2.4 days); or reoperation (2.6%).
However, readmissions were significantly more likely among black patients (8% vs. 5.6%). This translated to a 29% increased risk of readmission (OR 1.29).
Compared to whites, blacks who had a laparoscopic vertical sleeve gastrectomy were also significantly younger (42 vs. 45 years); more often women (87% vs. 76%); and heavier (BMI 47 vs. 45 kg/m2). Again, they were more likely to have a BMI of more than 50 kg/m2 (28% vs. 21%).
Significantly more were in the ASA class 3 of severe comorbidities (70% vs.66%). There were also differences in the comorbidities, with blacks more likely to have heart failure, hypertension, and end-stage renal disease, and whites more likely to have diabetes, smoking, dyspnea, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Among these patients, 30-day mortality was not different (less than 1%). Serious morbidity was also similar (about 2%), as was any morbidity (about 3%). The reoperation rate was the same (1.2%).
Length of stay was longer among black patients but this was not clinically significant, Dr. Whealon said: It still hovered right around 2 days.
But readmissions were significantly more common among blacks (5% vs. 3%). This difference translated to a 35% increased risk of readmission (odds ratio 1.35).
The nature of the NSQIP data makes it impossible to tease out any other factors that might have contributed to this finding. However, Dr. Whealon said, the equivalent findings on morbidity and mortality are very encouraging and represent a big improvement.
“We have done very well in driving down morbidity and mortality among these patients. Mortality rates are one tenth of what we were seeing a decade ago.”
This change hasn’t been well documented yet because many of the large studies showing racial and ethnic mortality disparities include data drawn from open bariatric surgery, which has been almost completely abandoned in favor of the much safer laparoscopic approaches.
Dr. Whealon had no financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @Alz_Gal
AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Black patients were 29% more likely to be readmitted after Roux-en-Y and 35% more likely to be readmitted after sleeve gastrectomy.
Data source: The NSQIP database review comprised about 62,000 surgeries.
Disclosures: Dr. Whealon had no financial disclosures.
Long-term opioid use uncommon among trauma patients
WASHINGTON – Patients with traumatic injuries don’t appear to be at undue risk of sustained opioid use, a large database review has demonstrated.
More than half of the 13,000 patients in the study were discharged on opioids, but they were able to discontinue them fairly rapidly, Muhammad Chaudhary, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. Within 3 months, less than one-third were still using the drugs, and 1 year later, only 1% were still taking an opioid pain medication.
Dr. Chaudhary examined opioid use among 13,624 patients included in the Tricare military insurance database. The patients were treated for traumatic injuries they received during 2007-2013. Most of the patients were men (82%), and the largest age group was 18- to 24-year-olds (39%). Military rank was used as a proxy for socioeconomic status in this study: 15% of the cohort had an officer rank, while the rest were junior or senior enlisted personnel.
The group was very healthy, with a median Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 0. They were somewhat seriously injured, however. The median Injury Severity Score was 13, and the range was 9-17. Anxiety and depression were uncommon (9% and 7%, respectively).
More than half the patients (54%) were discharged on an opioid medication. That percentage dropped very rapidly. By 90 days after discharge, just 9% of patients were still taking the drugs. By 1 year, only 1% were using opioids.
Dr. Chaudhary conducted a multivariate analysis that controlled for a number of factors, including age, gender, marital status, rank, mental health status, injury severity, comorbidities, and treatment environment. Two factors – black race and younger age (18-24 years) – significantly increased the likelihood of early opioid discontinuation (8% and 11%, respectively). There were no significant interactions with anxiety or depression.
Junior enlisted personnel – the proxy group for lower socioeconomic status – and those with a prolonged length of stay were significantly less likely to get off the medications, Dr. Chaudhary said.
“While we strongly believe that these factors should not be used to determine who can get opioids, it might make sense to enhance perioperative surveillance and engage pain management services early on in patients with risk factors, to reduce the risk of sustained opioid use,” he concluded.
Dr. Chaudhary had no financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @alz_gal
WASHINGTON – Patients with traumatic injuries don’t appear to be at undue risk of sustained opioid use, a large database review has demonstrated.
More than half of the 13,000 patients in the study were discharged on opioids, but they were able to discontinue them fairly rapidly, Muhammad Chaudhary, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. Within 3 months, less than one-third were still using the drugs, and 1 year later, only 1% were still taking an opioid pain medication.
Dr. Chaudhary examined opioid use among 13,624 patients included in the Tricare military insurance database. The patients were treated for traumatic injuries they received during 2007-2013. Most of the patients were men (82%), and the largest age group was 18- to 24-year-olds (39%). Military rank was used as a proxy for socioeconomic status in this study: 15% of the cohort had an officer rank, while the rest were junior or senior enlisted personnel.
The group was very healthy, with a median Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 0. They were somewhat seriously injured, however. The median Injury Severity Score was 13, and the range was 9-17. Anxiety and depression were uncommon (9% and 7%, respectively).
More than half the patients (54%) were discharged on an opioid medication. That percentage dropped very rapidly. By 90 days after discharge, just 9% of patients were still taking the drugs. By 1 year, only 1% were using opioids.
Dr. Chaudhary conducted a multivariate analysis that controlled for a number of factors, including age, gender, marital status, rank, mental health status, injury severity, comorbidities, and treatment environment. Two factors – black race and younger age (18-24 years) – significantly increased the likelihood of early opioid discontinuation (8% and 11%, respectively). There were no significant interactions with anxiety or depression.
Junior enlisted personnel – the proxy group for lower socioeconomic status – and those with a prolonged length of stay were significantly less likely to get off the medications, Dr. Chaudhary said.
“While we strongly believe that these factors should not be used to determine who can get opioids, it might make sense to enhance perioperative surveillance and engage pain management services early on in patients with risk factors, to reduce the risk of sustained opioid use,” he concluded.
Dr. Chaudhary had no financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @alz_gal
WASHINGTON – Patients with traumatic injuries don’t appear to be at undue risk of sustained opioid use, a large database review has demonstrated.
More than half of the 13,000 patients in the study were discharged on opioids, but they were able to discontinue them fairly rapidly, Muhammad Chaudhary, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. Within 3 months, less than one-third were still using the drugs, and 1 year later, only 1% were still taking an opioid pain medication.
Dr. Chaudhary examined opioid use among 13,624 patients included in the Tricare military insurance database. The patients were treated for traumatic injuries they received during 2007-2013. Most of the patients were men (82%), and the largest age group was 18- to 24-year-olds (39%). Military rank was used as a proxy for socioeconomic status in this study: 15% of the cohort had an officer rank, while the rest were junior or senior enlisted personnel.
The group was very healthy, with a median Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 0. They were somewhat seriously injured, however. The median Injury Severity Score was 13, and the range was 9-17. Anxiety and depression were uncommon (9% and 7%, respectively).
More than half the patients (54%) were discharged on an opioid medication. That percentage dropped very rapidly. By 90 days after discharge, just 9% of patients were still taking the drugs. By 1 year, only 1% were using opioids.
Dr. Chaudhary conducted a multivariate analysis that controlled for a number of factors, including age, gender, marital status, rank, mental health status, injury severity, comorbidities, and treatment environment. Two factors – black race and younger age (18-24 years) – significantly increased the likelihood of early opioid discontinuation (8% and 11%, respectively). There were no significant interactions with anxiety or depression.
Junior enlisted personnel – the proxy group for lower socioeconomic status – and those with a prolonged length of stay were significantly less likely to get off the medications, Dr. Chaudhary said.
“While we strongly believe that these factors should not be used to determine who can get opioids, it might make sense to enhance perioperative surveillance and engage pain management services early on in patients with risk factors, to reduce the risk of sustained opioid use,” he concluded.
Dr. Chaudhary had no financial disclosures.
msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com
On Twitter @alz_gal
AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: A year after discharge, only 1% of the patients were still using a prescription opioid pain medication.
Data source: A database review including 13,642 patients.
Disclosures: Dr. Chaudhary had no financial disclosures.