American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS): Annual Meeting

BALTIMORE – Anatomic repair did not outperform physiologic repair in patients with congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries (ccTGA), according to a study presented by Maryam Al-Omair, M.D., of the University of Toronto at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

Dr. Al-Omair and her colleagues hypothesized that patients undergoing anatomic repair for ccTGA would have superior systemic ventricular function and survival. However, their results showed that anatomic repair of ccTGA did not yield superior survival, compared with physiologic repair, and the long-term impact on systemic ventricular function was not certain.

Because of early evidence showing better outcomes of anatomic over physiologic repair for ccTGA, the surgical trend over time greatly favored the use of anatomic repair: At her team’s institution, anatomic repair went from 2.3% in the 1982-1989 period to 92.3% in the 2010-2015 period, Dr. Al-Omair said.

Their study assessed 200 patients (165 with biventricular ccTGA and 35 Fontan patients) who were managed from 1982 to 2015 at the Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto. The patient treatment groups were anatomic repair (38 patients), physiologic repair (89), single-ventricle (Fontan) repair (35), and palliated (no intracardiac repair) patients (38). The median follow-up was 3.4 years for anatomic repair, 13.5 years for physiologic repair, 7.5 years for single-ventricle repair, and 11.8 years with no repair (11.8 years), reflecting their change in practice.

The investigators followed the primary outcome of transplant-free survival and secondary outcomes of late systemic ventricular function and systemic atrioventricular valve function.

They found no significant difference in transplant-free survival at 20 years in the three repair groups assessed from 1892 to 2105: anatomic repair (58%), physiologic repair (71%), and single-ventricle (Fontan) repair (78%). Looking at the latter period of 2000-2015 for 10-year transplant-free survival, they found similar results: anatomic repair (77%), physiologic repair (85%), and single-ventricle (Fontan) repair (100%).

They also found that transplant-free survival in patients who required no intracadiac repair and had no associated lesions such as ventral septal defect or ventral septal defect with pulmonary stenosis was nearly 95% at 25 years.

A multivariate analysis showed no independent predictors of mortality among the three treatments, patient age at index operation, or period of treatment, as well as the need for a permanent pacemaker, or moderately to severely reduced ventricular function or moderate to severe valve regurgitation after the index operation, according to Dr. Al-Omair.

For the secondary outcome of late systemic ventricular function, a multivariate analysis showed that two of the variables were independent predictors: Index operation at or after 2000 was shown to be protective (hazard ratio, 0.152), while a negative association was seen with moderately to severely reduced ventricular function after the index operation (HR, 12.4).

For the secondary outcome of late systemic valve function, a multivariate analysis showed that three of the variables were independent predictors: Fontan operation (HR, 0.124) and index operation at or after 2000 (HR, 0.258) were shown to be protective, while a negative association was seen with moderately to severely reduced valve regurgitation after the index operation (HR, 9.00).

The researchers concluded that midterm Fontan survival was relatively favorable, pushing borderline repair may not be necessary, and “prophylactic banding” and the double-switch procedure should be looked on with caution for lower-risk patients.

“Our study also showed that survival was best in those having no associated lesions requiring operation, indicating that performing an anatomic repair for those not having associated lesions could be counterproductive,” Dr. Al-Omair concluded.

The webcast of the annual meeting presentation is available at www.aats.org.

Dr. Al-Omair reported that she and her colleagues had no relevant financial disclosures.

mlesney@frontlinemedcom.com

@ThoracicTweets

BALTIMORE – Anatomic repair did not outperform physiologic repair in patients with congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries (ccTGA), according to a study presented by Maryam Al-Omair, M.D., of the University of Toronto at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

Dr. Al-Omair and her colleagues hypothesized that patients undergoing anatomic repair for ccTGA would have superior systemic ventricular function and survival. However, their results showed that anatomic repair of ccTGA did not yield superior survival, compared with physiologic repair, and the long-term impact on systemic ventricular function was not certain.

Because of early evidence showing better outcomes of anatomic over physiologic repair for ccTGA, the surgical trend over time greatly favored the use of anatomic repair: At her team’s institution, anatomic repair went from 2.3% in the 1982-1989 period to 92.3% in the 2010-2015 period, Dr. Al-Omair said.

Their study assessed 200 patients (165 with biventricular ccTGA and 35 Fontan patients) who were managed from 1982 to 2015 at the Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto. The patient treatment groups were anatomic repair (38 patients), physiologic repair (89), single-ventricle (Fontan) repair (35), and palliated (no intracardiac repair) patients (38). The median follow-up was 3.4 years for anatomic repair, 13.5 years for physiologic repair, 7.5 years for single-ventricle repair, and 11.8 years with no repair (11.8 years), reflecting their change in practice.

The investigators followed the primary outcome of transplant-free survival and secondary outcomes of late systemic ventricular function and systemic atrioventricular valve function.

They found no significant difference in transplant-free survival at 20 years in the three repair groups assessed from 1892 to 2105: anatomic repair (58%), physiologic repair (71%), and single-ventricle (Fontan) repair (78%). Looking at the latter period of 2000-2015 for 10-year transplant-free survival, they found similar results: anatomic repair (77%), physiologic repair (85%), and single-ventricle (Fontan) repair (100%).

They also found that transplant-free survival in patients who required no intracadiac repair and had no associated lesions such as ventral septal defect or ventral septal defect with pulmonary stenosis was nearly 95% at 25 years.

A multivariate analysis showed no independent predictors of mortality among the three treatments, patient age at index operation, or period of treatment, as well as the need for a permanent pacemaker, or moderately to severely reduced ventricular function or moderate to severe valve regurgitation after the index operation, according to Dr. Al-Omair.

For the secondary outcome of late systemic ventricular function, a multivariate analysis showed that two of the variables were independent predictors: Index operation at or after 2000 was shown to be protective (hazard ratio, 0.152), while a negative association was seen with moderately to severely reduced ventricular function after the index operation (HR, 12.4).

For the secondary outcome of late systemic valve function, a multivariate analysis showed that three of the variables were independent predictors: Fontan operation (HR, 0.124) and index operation at or after 2000 (HR, 0.258) were shown to be protective, while a negative association was seen with moderately to severely reduced valve regurgitation after the index operation (HR, 9.00).

The researchers concluded that midterm Fontan survival was relatively favorable, pushing borderline repair may not be necessary, and “prophylactic banding” and the double-switch procedure should be looked on with caution for lower-risk patients.

“Our study also showed that survival was best in those having no associated lesions requiring operation, indicating that performing an anatomic repair for those not having associated lesions could be counterproductive,” Dr. Al-Omair concluded.

The webcast of the annual meeting presentation is available at www.aats.org.

Dr. Al-Omair reported that she and her colleagues had no relevant financial disclosures.

mlesney@frontlinemedcom.com

@ThoracicTweets

BALTIMORE – Anatomic repair did not outperform physiologic repair in patients with congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries (ccTGA), according to a study presented by Maryam Al-Omair, M.D., of the University of Toronto at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

Dr. Al-Omair and her colleagues hypothesized that patients undergoing anatomic repair for ccTGA would have superior systemic ventricular function and survival. However, their results showed that anatomic repair of ccTGA did not yield superior survival, compared with physiologic repair, and the long-term impact on systemic ventricular function was not certain.

Because of early evidence showing better outcomes of anatomic over physiologic repair for ccTGA, the surgical trend over time greatly favored the use of anatomic repair: At her team’s institution, anatomic repair went from 2.3% in the 1982-1989 period to 92.3% in the 2010-2015 period, Dr. Al-Omair said.

Their study assessed 200 patients (165 with biventricular ccTGA and 35 Fontan patients) who were managed from 1982 to 2015 at the Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto. The patient treatment groups were anatomic repair (38 patients), physiologic repair (89), single-ventricle (Fontan) repair (35), and palliated (no intracardiac repair) patients (38). The median follow-up was 3.4 years for anatomic repair, 13.5 years for physiologic repair, 7.5 years for single-ventricle repair, and 11.8 years with no repair (11.8 years), reflecting their change in practice.

The investigators followed the primary outcome of transplant-free survival and secondary outcomes of late systemic ventricular function and systemic atrioventricular valve function.

They found no significant difference in transplant-free survival at 20 years in the three repair groups assessed from 1892 to 2105: anatomic repair (58%), physiologic repair (71%), and single-ventricle (Fontan) repair (78%). Looking at the latter period of 2000-2015 for 10-year transplant-free survival, they found similar results: anatomic repair (77%), physiologic repair (85%), and single-ventricle (Fontan) repair (100%).

They also found that transplant-free survival in patients who required no intracadiac repair and had no associated lesions such as ventral septal defect or ventral septal defect with pulmonary stenosis was nearly 95% at 25 years.

A multivariate analysis showed no independent predictors of mortality among the three treatments, patient age at index operation, or period of treatment, as well as the need for a permanent pacemaker, or moderately to severely reduced ventricular function or moderate to severe valve regurgitation after the index operation, according to Dr. Al-Omair.

For the secondary outcome of late systemic ventricular function, a multivariate analysis showed that two of the variables were independent predictors: Index operation at or after 2000 was shown to be protective (hazard ratio, 0.152), while a negative association was seen with moderately to severely reduced ventricular function after the index operation (HR, 12.4).

For the secondary outcome of late systemic valve function, a multivariate analysis showed that three of the variables were independent predictors: Fontan operation (HR, 0.124) and index operation at or after 2000 (HR, 0.258) were shown to be protective, while a negative association was seen with moderately to severely reduced valve regurgitation after the index operation (HR, 9.00).

The researchers concluded that midterm Fontan survival was relatively favorable, pushing borderline repair may not be necessary, and “prophylactic banding” and the double-switch procedure should be looked on with caution for lower-risk patients.

“Our study also showed that survival was best in those having no associated lesions requiring operation, indicating that performing an anatomic repair for those not having associated lesions could be counterproductive,” Dr. Al-Omair concluded.

The webcast of the annual meeting presentation is available at www.aats.org.

Dr. Al-Omair reported that she and her colleagues had no relevant financial disclosures.

mlesney@frontlinemedcom.com

@ThoracicTweets

BALTIMORE – Wedge resection was associated with significantly improved overall 5-year survival, compared with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in patients with operable clinical Stage IA non–small cell lung cancer, according to a study of more than 8,000 patients.

Despite the fact that surgical resection has been the standard of care for early-stage non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), an increasing number of patients with potentially operable early-stage NSCLC are now being treated with SBRT, study investigator Dr. Babatunde A. Yerokun said at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

“Our data show that thoracic surgeons should be included in the evaluation of these patients, and operative candidates with ct1A NO MO NSCLC should continue to receive a wedge resection vs. SBRT when technically feasible,” said Dr. Yerokun of Duke University, Durham, N.C. “Prospective studies are needed to determine the appropriate role of SBRT in management of these patients,” he concluded.

Dr. Yerokun and his colleagues examined overall survival of patients with cT1N0 lung cancer who underwent SBRT or wedge resection as reported in the National Cancer Data Base from 2003 to 2011. Survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and propensity-score matched analysis. The researchers matched groups according to common prognostic covariates, including age, sex, race, education, insurance status, facility type, and Charlson/Deyo comorbidity score, as well as tumor histology, size, and location.

Patients identified as having cT1N0 NSCLC with a tumor less than 2 cm underwent SBRT (1,514 patients) or wedge resection (6,923). Compared with the wedge resection cohort, the SBRT patients were significantly older (74 vs. 69 years) and significantly more likely to be treated at an academic comprehensive cancer program (47% vs. 37%). The median Charlson/Deyo score was lower in the SBRT patients (0 vs. 1).

In unmatched analysis, SBRT was associated with significantly lower survival than wedge resection (5-year overall survival: 32% vs. 55%). In the propensity matching, all baseline covariates, including co-morbidity scores, facility type, and tumor size, were well balanced between the SBRT and wedge groups, with 1,398 patients in each group.

However, even in the matched groups, SBRT was associated with significantly lower 5-year overall survival than wedge (33% vs. 52%). When the investigators performed a propensity matched subgroup analysis in younger patients (age less than 60 years) who had a Charlson/Deyo score of 0, SBRT was associated with worse survival with a 5-year overall survival of 59% vs. 82% for SBRT and wedge resection, respectively.

Additionally, Dr. Yerokun and his colleagues conducted a sensitivity analysis comparing centers that performed predominately wedge resection with centers that performed predominately SBRT. After the exclusion of centers with low-volume and centers that conducted either 100% wedge resection or 100% SBRT only, centers that performed predominately wedge resection were more likely to have significantly better 3-year survival.

A video of the original presentation from the AATS Annual Meeting is available online.

Dr. Yerokun reported that he had no disclosures related to this presentation.

mlesney@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @ThoracicTweets

BALTIMORE – Wedge resection was associated with significantly improved overall 5-year survival, compared with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in patients with operable clinical Stage IA non–small cell lung cancer, according to a study of more than 8,000 patients.

Despite the fact that surgical resection has been the standard of care for early-stage non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), an increasing number of patients with potentially operable early-stage NSCLC are now being treated with SBRT, study investigator Dr. Babatunde A. Yerokun said at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

“Our data show that thoracic surgeons should be included in the evaluation of these patients, and operative candidates with ct1A NO MO NSCLC should continue to receive a wedge resection vs. SBRT when technically feasible,” said Dr. Yerokun of Duke University, Durham, N.C. “Prospective studies are needed to determine the appropriate role of SBRT in management of these patients,” he concluded.

Dr. Yerokun and his colleagues examined overall survival of patients with cT1N0 lung cancer who underwent SBRT or wedge resection as reported in the National Cancer Data Base from 2003 to 2011. Survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and propensity-score matched analysis. The researchers matched groups according to common prognostic covariates, including age, sex, race, education, insurance status, facility type, and Charlson/Deyo comorbidity score, as well as tumor histology, size, and location.

Patients identified as having cT1N0 NSCLC with a tumor less than 2 cm underwent SBRT (1,514 patients) or wedge resection (6,923). Compared with the wedge resection cohort, the SBRT patients were significantly older (74 vs. 69 years) and significantly more likely to be treated at an academic comprehensive cancer program (47% vs. 37%). The median Charlson/Deyo score was lower in the SBRT patients (0 vs. 1).

In unmatched analysis, SBRT was associated with significantly lower survival than wedge resection (5-year overall survival: 32% vs. 55%). In the propensity matching, all baseline covariates, including co-morbidity scores, facility type, and tumor size, were well balanced between the SBRT and wedge groups, with 1,398 patients in each group.

However, even in the matched groups, SBRT was associated with significantly lower 5-year overall survival than wedge (33% vs. 52%). When the investigators performed a propensity matched subgroup analysis in younger patients (age less than 60 years) who had a Charlson/Deyo score of 0, SBRT was associated with worse survival with a 5-year overall survival of 59% vs. 82% for SBRT and wedge resection, respectively.

Additionally, Dr. Yerokun and his colleagues conducted a sensitivity analysis comparing centers that performed predominately wedge resection with centers that performed predominately SBRT. After the exclusion of centers with low-volume and centers that conducted either 100% wedge resection or 100% SBRT only, centers that performed predominately wedge resection were more likely to have significantly better 3-year survival.

A video of the original presentation from the AATS Annual Meeting is available online.

Dr. Yerokun reported that he had no disclosures related to this presentation.

mlesney@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @ThoracicTweets

BALTIMORE – Wedge resection was associated with significantly improved overall 5-year survival, compared with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in patients with operable clinical Stage IA non–small cell lung cancer, according to a study of more than 8,000 patients.

Despite the fact that surgical resection has been the standard of care for early-stage non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), an increasing number of patients with potentially operable early-stage NSCLC are now being treated with SBRT, study investigator Dr. Babatunde A. Yerokun said at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

“Our data show that thoracic surgeons should be included in the evaluation of these patients, and operative candidates with ct1A NO MO NSCLC should continue to receive a wedge resection vs. SBRT when technically feasible,” said Dr. Yerokun of Duke University, Durham, N.C. “Prospective studies are needed to determine the appropriate role of SBRT in management of these patients,” he concluded.

Dr. Yerokun and his colleagues examined overall survival of patients with cT1N0 lung cancer who underwent SBRT or wedge resection as reported in the National Cancer Data Base from 2003 to 2011. Survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and propensity-score matched analysis. The researchers matched groups according to common prognostic covariates, including age, sex, race, education, insurance status, facility type, and Charlson/Deyo comorbidity score, as well as tumor histology, size, and location.

Patients identified as having cT1N0 NSCLC with a tumor less than 2 cm underwent SBRT (1,514 patients) or wedge resection (6,923). Compared with the wedge resection cohort, the SBRT patients were significantly older (74 vs. 69 years) and significantly more likely to be treated at an academic comprehensive cancer program (47% vs. 37%). The median Charlson/Deyo score was lower in the SBRT patients (0 vs. 1).

In unmatched analysis, SBRT was associated with significantly lower survival than wedge resection (5-year overall survival: 32% vs. 55%). In the propensity matching, all baseline covariates, including co-morbidity scores, facility type, and tumor size, were well balanced between the SBRT and wedge groups, with 1,398 patients in each group.

However, even in the matched groups, SBRT was associated with significantly lower 5-year overall survival than wedge (33% vs. 52%). When the investigators performed a propensity matched subgroup analysis in younger patients (age less than 60 years) who had a Charlson/Deyo score of 0, SBRT was associated with worse survival with a 5-year overall survival of 59% vs. 82% for SBRT and wedge resection, respectively.

Additionally, Dr. Yerokun and his colleagues conducted a sensitivity analysis comparing centers that performed predominately wedge resection with centers that performed predominately SBRT. After the exclusion of centers with low-volume and centers that conducted either 100% wedge resection or 100% SBRT only, centers that performed predominately wedge resection were more likely to have significantly better 3-year survival.

A video of the original presentation from the AATS Annual Meeting is available online.

Dr. Yerokun reported that he had no disclosures related to this presentation.

mlesney@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @ThoracicTweets

BALTIMORE – Approximately one in five patients is readmitted after esophagectomy, and leading risk factors for readmission are longer operative time, post-surgical ICU admission, and preoperative blood transfusions, according to a single-center study of 86 patients.

As one of the first reports on readmissions following esophagectomy with complete follow-up, this study, conducted at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., demonstrates that even in a high volume center with specialization in esophageal and foregut surgery, readmission after esophagectomy is not uncommon, researchers reported at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

“In the context of increasing pressures to reduce length of stay, we must also put in the effort to better understand our readmission rates and the important factors that affect them,” said study investigator Dr. Stephen Cassivi. “Reporting on ‘improved’ lengths of stay without accompanying data on readmission rates is not telling the whole story.”

According to the Mayo Clinic research team, identifying risk factors that predict readmissions might permit improved patient management and outcomes.

“Careful collection of data regarding patient outcomes, including unplanned hospital readmissions is essential to improve the quality of patient care since national databases can leave gaps in data regarding follow-up of these patients by failing to identify all readmissions after their surgery,” said Dr. Karen J. Dickinson, who presented the study at the meeting.

The study was designed such that all patients undergoing an elective esophagectomy between August 2013 and July 2014 were contacted directly to follow up on whether they had been readmitted to any medical institution within 30 days of dismissal from the Mayo Clinic. Among all patients who underwent esophagectomy during the one-year study period, 86 patients met the study inclusion criteria. Follow-up was complete in 100% of patients, according to Dr. Dickinson.

Median age of the patients at the time of surgery was 63 years, and the majority of patients were men (70 patients). The most common operative approach was transthoracic (Ivor Lewis) esophagectomy (72%); 7% of cases were performed using a minimally invasive approach. Overall 30-day mortality was 2% (2/86), and anastomotic leak occurred in 8% of the patients.

Median length of stay was 9 days, and the rate of unplanned 30-day readmission was 19% (16 patients). Of these patients, 88% were readmitted to the Mayo Clinic and 12% were readmitted to other medical institutions.

The most common reasons for readmission were due to respiratory causes such as dyspnea, pleural effusions or pneumonia and gastrointestinal causes, including bowel obstruction and anastomotic complications.

Using multivariable analysis, the researchers found that the factors significantly associated with unplanned readmission were postoperative ICU admission (13% in non-readmitted, 38% in admitted), perioperative blood transfusion (12% vs. 38%), and operative length (368 vs. 460 minutes). Importantly, initial hospital length of stay was not associated with the need for readmission. Furthermore, ASA score, sex, BMI, neoadjuvant therapy, and postoperative pain scores also were not associated with unplanned readmission.

“Identifying these risk factors in the perioperative and postoperative setting may provide opportunities for decreasing morbidity, improving readmission rates, and enhancing overall patient outcomes,” Dr. Dickinson concluded.

A video of this presentation at the AATS Annual Meeting is available online.

Dr. Dickinson and her colleagues reported having no relevant disclosures.

mlesney@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @ThoracicTweets

BALTIMORE – Approximately one in five patients is readmitted after esophagectomy, and leading risk factors for readmission are longer operative time, post-surgical ICU admission, and preoperative blood transfusions, according to a single-center study of 86 patients.

As one of the first reports on readmissions following esophagectomy with complete follow-up, this study, conducted at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., demonstrates that even in a high volume center with specialization in esophageal and foregut surgery, readmission after esophagectomy is not uncommon, researchers reported at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

“In the context of increasing pressures to reduce length of stay, we must also put in the effort to better understand our readmission rates and the important factors that affect them,” said study investigator Dr. Stephen Cassivi. “Reporting on ‘improved’ lengths of stay without accompanying data on readmission rates is not telling the whole story.”

According to the Mayo Clinic research team, identifying risk factors that predict readmissions might permit improved patient management and outcomes.

“Careful collection of data regarding patient outcomes, including unplanned hospital readmissions is essential to improve the quality of patient care since national databases can leave gaps in data regarding follow-up of these patients by failing to identify all readmissions after their surgery,” said Dr. Karen J. Dickinson, who presented the study at the meeting.

The study was designed such that all patients undergoing an elective esophagectomy between August 2013 and July 2014 were contacted directly to follow up on whether they had been readmitted to any medical institution within 30 days of dismissal from the Mayo Clinic. Among all patients who underwent esophagectomy during the one-year study period, 86 patients met the study inclusion criteria. Follow-up was complete in 100% of patients, according to Dr. Dickinson.

Median age of the patients at the time of surgery was 63 years, and the majority of patients were men (70 patients). The most common operative approach was transthoracic (Ivor Lewis) esophagectomy (72%); 7% of cases were performed using a minimally invasive approach. Overall 30-day mortality was 2% (2/86), and anastomotic leak occurred in 8% of the patients.

Median length of stay was 9 days, and the rate of unplanned 30-day readmission was 19% (16 patients). Of these patients, 88% were readmitted to the Mayo Clinic and 12% were readmitted to other medical institutions.

The most common reasons for readmission were due to respiratory causes such as dyspnea, pleural effusions or pneumonia and gastrointestinal causes, including bowel obstruction and anastomotic complications.

Using multivariable analysis, the researchers found that the factors significantly associated with unplanned readmission were postoperative ICU admission (13% in non-readmitted, 38% in admitted), perioperative blood transfusion (12% vs. 38%), and operative length (368 vs. 460 minutes). Importantly, initial hospital length of stay was not associated with the need for readmission. Furthermore, ASA score, sex, BMI, neoadjuvant therapy, and postoperative pain scores also were not associated with unplanned readmission.

“Identifying these risk factors in the perioperative and postoperative setting may provide opportunities for decreasing morbidity, improving readmission rates, and enhancing overall patient outcomes,” Dr. Dickinson concluded.

A video of this presentation at the AATS Annual Meeting is available online.

Dr. Dickinson and her colleagues reported having no relevant disclosures.

mlesney@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @ThoracicTweets

BALTIMORE – Approximately one in five patients is readmitted after esophagectomy, and leading risk factors for readmission are longer operative time, post-surgical ICU admission, and preoperative blood transfusions, according to a single-center study of 86 patients.

As one of the first reports on readmissions following esophagectomy with complete follow-up, this study, conducted at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., demonstrates that even in a high volume center with specialization in esophageal and foregut surgery, readmission after esophagectomy is not uncommon, researchers reported at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

“In the context of increasing pressures to reduce length of stay, we must also put in the effort to better understand our readmission rates and the important factors that affect them,” said study investigator Dr. Stephen Cassivi. “Reporting on ‘improved’ lengths of stay without accompanying data on readmission rates is not telling the whole story.”

According to the Mayo Clinic research team, identifying risk factors that predict readmissions might permit improved patient management and outcomes.

“Careful collection of data regarding patient outcomes, including unplanned hospital readmissions is essential to improve the quality of patient care since national databases can leave gaps in data regarding follow-up of these patients by failing to identify all readmissions after their surgery,” said Dr. Karen J. Dickinson, who presented the study at the meeting.

The study was designed such that all patients undergoing an elective esophagectomy between August 2013 and July 2014 were contacted directly to follow up on whether they had been readmitted to any medical institution within 30 days of dismissal from the Mayo Clinic. Among all patients who underwent esophagectomy during the one-year study period, 86 patients met the study inclusion criteria. Follow-up was complete in 100% of patients, according to Dr. Dickinson.

Median age of the patients at the time of surgery was 63 years, and the majority of patients were men (70 patients). The most common operative approach was transthoracic (Ivor Lewis) esophagectomy (72%); 7% of cases were performed using a minimally invasive approach. Overall 30-day mortality was 2% (2/86), and anastomotic leak occurred in 8% of the patients.

Median length of stay was 9 days, and the rate of unplanned 30-day readmission was 19% (16 patients). Of these patients, 88% were readmitted to the Mayo Clinic and 12% were readmitted to other medical institutions.

The most common reasons for readmission were due to respiratory causes such as dyspnea, pleural effusions or pneumonia and gastrointestinal causes, including bowel obstruction and anastomotic complications.

Using multivariable analysis, the researchers found that the factors significantly associated with unplanned readmission were postoperative ICU admission (13% in non-readmitted, 38% in admitted), perioperative blood transfusion (12% vs. 38%), and operative length (368 vs. 460 minutes). Importantly, initial hospital length of stay was not associated with the need for readmission. Furthermore, ASA score, sex, BMI, neoadjuvant therapy, and postoperative pain scores also were not associated with unplanned readmission.

“Identifying these risk factors in the perioperative and postoperative setting may provide opportunities for decreasing morbidity, improving readmission rates, and enhancing overall patient outcomes,” Dr. Dickinson concluded.

A video of this presentation at the AATS Annual Meeting is available online.

Dr. Dickinson and her colleagues reported having no relevant disclosures.

mlesney@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @ThoracicTweets

BALTIMORE – Surgeons’ adherence to select quality measures when treating stage IIIA non–small-cell lung cancer patients led to improved patient survival, according to a study presented at the 2016 annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

Researchers at Washington University in St. Louis identified 10,323 patients who received surgery for Stage IIIA NSCLC in the National Cancer Data Base from 2006 to 2010, and chose four quality measures that should have been met by surgeons: delivery of neoadjuvant multiagent chemotherapy (with or without radiation therapy); performing a lobectomy or greater resection; obtaining more than 10 lymph nodes, and achieving an R0 resection.

The researchers said 12.8% of patients met all four quality measures. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated improved overall median survival by number of quality measures obtained: 0 quality measures, 12.7 months; 1 quality measure, 25.0 months; 2 quality measures, 31.4 months; 3 quality measures, 36.6 months; and 4 quality measures, 43.5 months.

In an interview, Dr. Mark S. Allen, professor of surgery at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a discussant on the paper at AATS 2016, said the most striking result of the study was that such a low percentage of patients had all four quality measures performed for stage IIIA cancer. He called that finding “disappointing.”

“In general, [the study] shows there is still some work to be done to improve the quality when we operate on stage IIIA patients,” Dr. Allen said. “I’m not sure we do the greatest job of staging them clinically. When they are staged properly they probably do need preoperative chemotherapy, and I’m not sure we do that all the time.” He added that surgeon education about quality outcomes was critical to process improvement and patient outcomes.

Dr. Allen reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – Surgeons’ adherence to select quality measures when treating stage IIIA non–small-cell lung cancer patients led to improved patient survival, according to a study presented at the 2016 annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

Researchers at Washington University in St. Louis identified 10,323 patients who received surgery for Stage IIIA NSCLC in the National Cancer Data Base from 2006 to 2010, and chose four quality measures that should have been met by surgeons: delivery of neoadjuvant multiagent chemotherapy (with or without radiation therapy); performing a lobectomy or greater resection; obtaining more than 10 lymph nodes, and achieving an R0 resection.

The researchers said 12.8% of patients met all four quality measures. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated improved overall median survival by number of quality measures obtained: 0 quality measures, 12.7 months; 1 quality measure, 25.0 months; 2 quality measures, 31.4 months; 3 quality measures, 36.6 months; and 4 quality measures, 43.5 months.

In an interview, Dr. Mark S. Allen, professor of surgery at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a discussant on the paper at AATS 2016, said the most striking result of the study was that such a low percentage of patients had all four quality measures performed for stage IIIA cancer. He called that finding “disappointing.”

“In general, [the study] shows there is still some work to be done to improve the quality when we operate on stage IIIA patients,” Dr. Allen said. “I’m not sure we do the greatest job of staging them clinically. When they are staged properly they probably do need preoperative chemotherapy, and I’m not sure we do that all the time.” He added that surgeon education about quality outcomes was critical to process improvement and patient outcomes.

Dr. Allen reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – Surgeons’ adherence to select quality measures when treating stage IIIA non–small-cell lung cancer patients led to improved patient survival, according to a study presented at the 2016 annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

Researchers at Washington University in St. Louis identified 10,323 patients who received surgery for Stage IIIA NSCLC in the National Cancer Data Base from 2006 to 2010, and chose four quality measures that should have been met by surgeons: delivery of neoadjuvant multiagent chemotherapy (with or without radiation therapy); performing a lobectomy or greater resection; obtaining more than 10 lymph nodes, and achieving an R0 resection.

The researchers said 12.8% of patients met all four quality measures. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated improved overall median survival by number of quality measures obtained: 0 quality measures, 12.7 months; 1 quality measure, 25.0 months; 2 quality measures, 31.4 months; 3 quality measures, 36.6 months; and 4 quality measures, 43.5 months.

In an interview, Dr. Mark S. Allen, professor of surgery at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a discussant on the paper at AATS 2016, said the most striking result of the study was that such a low percentage of patients had all four quality measures performed for stage IIIA cancer. He called that finding “disappointing.”

“In general, [the study] shows there is still some work to be done to improve the quality when we operate on stage IIIA patients,” Dr. Allen said. “I’m not sure we do the greatest job of staging them clinically. When they are staged properly they probably do need preoperative chemotherapy, and I’m not sure we do that all the time.” He added that surgeon education about quality outcomes was critical to process improvement and patient outcomes.

Dr. Allen reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – A study comparing the causes and timing of death in high-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis suggests that transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may have significant advantages over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).

The research team, presenting their findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, revealed that death rates in the TAVR and SAVR cohorts in the CoreValve US Pivotal Trial High Risk Study were similar at 0-30 days and 91-365 days post procedure, but found that more SAVR patients died from day 31-90 related to bleeding, frailty, and comorbid diseases. The investigators concluded that this finding reflected the impact of the added strain of surgery over intravascular intervention for aortic valve replacement.

Dr. Craig Smith, chair of the department of surgery at NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center, and a discussant on the paper, said this study is the only randomized clinical trial to show inferiority of surgery to TAVR.

“The difference seems to reside in the recovery phase mortality, which they showed very well,” Dr. Smith said in a video interview. He predicted that the trial results would add to the momentum making TAVR the first choice for any patient who is high risk and at least an equivalent choice for patients who are considered intermediate risk.

“The big question on the horizon is what is the best thing to recommend to patients who we classify as low risk,” Dr. Smith said. “Unless something happens to the impressive results that TAVR is racking up, in a few years … approval will be granted for those who are low risk.”

Dr. Smith reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – A study comparing the causes and timing of death in high-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis suggests that transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may have significant advantages over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).

The research team, presenting their findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, revealed that death rates in the TAVR and SAVR cohorts in the CoreValve US Pivotal Trial High Risk Study were similar at 0-30 days and 91-365 days post procedure, but found that more SAVR patients died from day 31-90 related to bleeding, frailty, and comorbid diseases. The investigators concluded that this finding reflected the impact of the added strain of surgery over intravascular intervention for aortic valve replacement.

Dr. Craig Smith, chair of the department of surgery at NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center, and a discussant on the paper, said this study is the only randomized clinical trial to show inferiority of surgery to TAVR.

“The difference seems to reside in the recovery phase mortality, which they showed very well,” Dr. Smith said in a video interview. He predicted that the trial results would add to the momentum making TAVR the first choice for any patient who is high risk and at least an equivalent choice for patients who are considered intermediate risk.

“The big question on the horizon is what is the best thing to recommend to patients who we classify as low risk,” Dr. Smith said. “Unless something happens to the impressive results that TAVR is racking up, in a few years … approval will be granted for those who are low risk.”

Dr. Smith reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – A study comparing the causes and timing of death in high-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis suggests that transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may have significant advantages over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).

The research team, presenting their findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, revealed that death rates in the TAVR and SAVR cohorts in the CoreValve US Pivotal Trial High Risk Study were similar at 0-30 days and 91-365 days post procedure, but found that more SAVR patients died from day 31-90 related to bleeding, frailty, and comorbid diseases. The investigators concluded that this finding reflected the impact of the added strain of surgery over intravascular intervention for aortic valve replacement.

Dr. Craig Smith, chair of the department of surgery at NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center, and a discussant on the paper, said this study is the only randomized clinical trial to show inferiority of surgery to TAVR.

“The difference seems to reside in the recovery phase mortality, which they showed very well,” Dr. Smith said in a video interview. He predicted that the trial results would add to the momentum making TAVR the first choice for any patient who is high risk and at least an equivalent choice for patients who are considered intermediate risk.

“The big question on the horizon is what is the best thing to recommend to patients who we classify as low risk,” Dr. Smith said. “Unless something happens to the impressive results that TAVR is racking up, in a few years … approval will be granted for those who are low risk.”

Dr. Smith reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – The use of ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) may allow for the safe transplantation of lungs preserved for more than 12 hours, according to a study presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

A research team at the University of Toronto evaluated the outcomes of transplant patients who received a lung with a preservation time of over 12 hours between January 2006 and April 2015 and compared them to the general lung transplant population. Median hospital and ICU length of stay were similar between the two groups, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves between the two groups did not show any difference. Preservation time, donor P_O2, and use of EVLP were not significant variables affecting survival.

Dr. Bartley P. Griffith, chief of cardiac surgery at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, and a discussant on the paper at the meeting, said that the findings of the study open up the possibility of a more “planned” approach to transplantation.

“Anything that not only extends preservation time, but perhaps even improves quality of preservation, would be a godsend,” Dr. Griffith said in a video interview. He cautioned that the “devil is in the details,” and that the data had to be examined closely. Nevertheless, Dr. Griffith said transplant surgeons should be grateful for the important work done by the University of Toronto team.

Dr. Griffith reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – The use of ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) may allow for the safe transplantation of lungs preserved for more than 12 hours, according to a study presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

A research team at the University of Toronto evaluated the outcomes of transplant patients who received a lung with a preservation time of over 12 hours between January 2006 and April 2015 and compared them to the general lung transplant population. Median hospital and ICU length of stay were similar between the two groups, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves between the two groups did not show any difference. Preservation time, donor P_O2, and use of EVLP were not significant variables affecting survival.

Dr. Bartley P. Griffith, chief of cardiac surgery at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, and a discussant on the paper at the meeting, said that the findings of the study open up the possibility of a more “planned” approach to transplantation.

“Anything that not only extends preservation time, but perhaps even improves quality of preservation, would be a godsend,” Dr. Griffith said in a video interview. He cautioned that the “devil is in the details,” and that the data had to be examined closely. Nevertheless, Dr. Griffith said transplant surgeons should be grateful for the important work done by the University of Toronto team.

Dr. Griffith reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – The use of ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) may allow for the safe transplantation of lungs preserved for more than 12 hours, according to a study presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

A research team at the University of Toronto evaluated the outcomes of transplant patients who received a lung with a preservation time of over 12 hours between January 2006 and April 2015 and compared them to the general lung transplant population. Median hospital and ICU length of stay were similar between the two groups, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves between the two groups did not show any difference. Preservation time, donor P_O2, and use of EVLP were not significant variables affecting survival.

Dr. Bartley P. Griffith, chief of cardiac surgery at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, and a discussant on the paper at the meeting, said that the findings of the study open up the possibility of a more “planned” approach to transplantation.

“Anything that not only extends preservation time, but perhaps even improves quality of preservation, would be a godsend,” Dr. Griffith said in a video interview. He cautioned that the “devil is in the details,” and that the data had to be examined closely. Nevertheless, Dr. Griffith said transplant surgeons should be grateful for the important work done by the University of Toronto team.

Dr. Griffith reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – New research from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York could help surgeons better determine which patients with soft tissue sarcoma may benefit most from pulmonary metastasectomy.

The results of the research, presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, suggest that preoperative factors such as primary tumor histology and size, number of metastases, time from initial resection of the primary, absence of extrapulmonary disease, and thoracoscopic resection are associated with improved survival in STS patients.

Dr. Garrett L. Walsh, professor of surgery at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, and a discussant on the paper at the meeting, said the study was important because it showed the power of a prospective surgical database, retrospectively viewed in this particular case. He said that the Sloan Kettering research was likely “as good as it’s going to get,” given that a randomized controlled trial is unlikely ever to occur with STS patients.

“Trying to select the patients we think are going to do well with surgery has always been one of the challenging aspects of thoracic surgery,” Dr. Walsh said in a video interview. “This paper may help with better selection of patients from that large cohort who are referred to us for pulmonary metastasectomy.”

Dr. Walsh reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – New research from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York could help surgeons better determine which patients with soft tissue sarcoma may benefit most from pulmonary metastasectomy.

The results of the research, presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, suggest that preoperative factors such as primary tumor histology and size, number of metastases, time from initial resection of the primary, absence of extrapulmonary disease, and thoracoscopic resection are associated with improved survival in STS patients.

Dr. Garrett L. Walsh, professor of surgery at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, and a discussant on the paper at the meeting, said the study was important because it showed the power of a prospective surgical database, retrospectively viewed in this particular case. He said that the Sloan Kettering research was likely “as good as it’s going to get,” given that a randomized controlled trial is unlikely ever to occur with STS patients.

“Trying to select the patients we think are going to do well with surgery has always been one of the challenging aspects of thoracic surgery,” Dr. Walsh said in a video interview. “This paper may help with better selection of patients from that large cohort who are referred to us for pulmonary metastasectomy.”

Dr. Walsh reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – New research from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York could help surgeons better determine which patients with soft tissue sarcoma may benefit most from pulmonary metastasectomy.

The results of the research, presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, suggest that preoperative factors such as primary tumor histology and size, number of metastases, time from initial resection of the primary, absence of extrapulmonary disease, and thoracoscopic resection are associated with improved survival in STS patients.

Dr. Garrett L. Walsh, professor of surgery at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, and a discussant on the paper at the meeting, said the study was important because it showed the power of a prospective surgical database, retrospectively viewed in this particular case. He said that the Sloan Kettering research was likely “as good as it’s going to get,” given that a randomized controlled trial is unlikely ever to occur with STS patients.

“Trying to select the patients we think are going to do well with surgery has always been one of the challenging aspects of thoracic surgery,” Dr. Walsh said in a video interview. “This paper may help with better selection of patients from that large cohort who are referred to us for pulmonary metastasectomy.”

Dr. Walsh reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – Degenerative mitral regurgitation due to anterior or bileaflet prolapse can be treated with excellent results by both the traditional double orifice edge-to-edge repair or the implantation of artificial chordae, combined with ring annuloplasty, according to a study presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

Researchers at San Raffaele University Hospital in Milan undertook a long-term comparison between the two methods of degenerative MR repair and found no differences in outcomes in cases of bileaflet prolapse, whereas in isolated anterior leaflet prolapse, the double orifice repair actually appeared to be more effective.

Mitral valve repair is a very well-accepted modality to fix posterior leaflet prolapse, according to Dr. Marc Ruel, chief of cardiac surgery at the University of Ottawa Heart Institute and a discussant on the paper at the meeting. But anterior mitral leaflet prolapse is a much more challenging operation, he said, and surgeons are looking for a “foolproof” way to address it.

“The double orifice repair, for most surgeons, is a much simpler procedure than doing artificial chordae, so this is good news,” Dr. Ruel said. “It shows that a fairly reproducible way of repairing the mitral valve seems to work as well, and likely better in some lesions, than the more complex way of addressing it.”

Dr. Ruel, who discusses the study in this video interview, reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – Degenerative mitral regurgitation due to anterior or bileaflet prolapse can be treated with excellent results by both the traditional double orifice edge-to-edge repair or the implantation of artificial chordae, combined with ring annuloplasty, according to a study presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

Researchers at San Raffaele University Hospital in Milan undertook a long-term comparison between the two methods of degenerative MR repair and found no differences in outcomes in cases of bileaflet prolapse, whereas in isolated anterior leaflet prolapse, the double orifice repair actually appeared to be more effective.

Mitral valve repair is a very well-accepted modality to fix posterior leaflet prolapse, according to Dr. Marc Ruel, chief of cardiac surgery at the University of Ottawa Heart Institute and a discussant on the paper at the meeting. But anterior mitral leaflet prolapse is a much more challenging operation, he said, and surgeons are looking for a “foolproof” way to address it.

“The double orifice repair, for most surgeons, is a much simpler procedure than doing artificial chordae, so this is good news,” Dr. Ruel said. “It shows that a fairly reproducible way of repairing the mitral valve seems to work as well, and likely better in some lesions, than the more complex way of addressing it.”

Dr. Ruel, who discusses the study in this video interview, reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi

BALTIMORE – Degenerative mitral regurgitation due to anterior or bileaflet prolapse can be treated with excellent results by both the traditional double orifice edge-to-edge repair or the implantation of artificial chordae, combined with ring annuloplasty, according to a study presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

Researchers at San Raffaele University Hospital in Milan undertook a long-term comparison between the two methods of degenerative MR repair and found no differences in outcomes in cases of bileaflet prolapse, whereas in isolated anterior leaflet prolapse, the double orifice repair actually appeared to be more effective.

Mitral valve repair is a very well-accepted modality to fix posterior leaflet prolapse, according to Dr. Marc Ruel, chief of cardiac surgery at the University of Ottawa Heart Institute and a discussant on the paper at the meeting. But anterior mitral leaflet prolapse is a much more challenging operation, he said, and surgeons are looking for a “foolproof” way to address it.

“The double orifice repair, for most surgeons, is a much simpler procedure than doing artificial chordae, so this is good news,” Dr. Ruel said. “It shows that a fairly reproducible way of repairing the mitral valve seems to work as well, and likely better in some lesions, than the more complex way of addressing it.”

Dr. Ruel, who discusses the study in this video interview, reported no relevant financial disclosures.

rpizzi@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @richpizzi