Minimally invasive microwave ablation provides excellent long-term outcomes for otherwise inaccessible hepatocellular cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Thermal ablation can be used as a bridge to transplant or with curative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We report our experience with laparoscopic ablation of HCC in patients deemed inaccessible by the percutaneous approach. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of surgical ablations from 2009 to 2017. Patient demographics, disease and treatment characteristics, and outcomes were abstracted from the medical record. Kaplan-Meier modeling was performed for survival and recurrence. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were included with a median age of 62 (interquartile range [IQR], 57-67). Most patients were male (76%) and Caucasian (70%). Ninety-seven percent had underlying cirrhosis. Median model for end stage liver disease-sodium was 9.5 (IQR, 8-12). The median maximal diameter of ablated lesions was 2.6 cm (IQR, 1.8-3.0). Thirty-nine lesions were ablated; 97% were completed laparoscopically. The median maximal diameter of the ablation zone was 4.8 cm (IQR, 3.8-5.7) with a median difference of ablation zone to the tumor of 2.0 cm (IQR, 1.5-2.75). Twelve patients received additional treatment. Median disease-free survival was 66.7 months and median follow-up 42.9 months. Disease recurrence occurred in 13 patients (39%)-systemic recurrence in 6%, intrahepatic recurrence in 27% and local recurrence in 6%. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic thermal ablation of HCC is safe and provides good oncologic outcomes for otherwise inaccessible tumors.

Electronically Triggered Sepsis Alert in Non-Intensive Care Inpatients Using Modified Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Criteria: A Retrospective Observational Study with In-Depth Analysis of Surgical Patients.

Background: Our center initiated an electronic Sepsis Best Practice Alert (sBPA) protocol to aid in early sepsis detection and treatment. However, surgery alters peri-operative physiology, which may trigger an sBPA for noninfectious causes. This study aimed to provide early evaluation of automated sBPA utility in surgical patients. Methods: This study was a retrospective review of the outcomes of patients admitted to the University of Minnesota Medical Center (but not to the intensive care unit) from August 2015-March 2016 and compared how the sBPA performed in those having and not having surgery. An sBPA prompted nursing to draw blood for an immediate lactate assay if two modified systemic inflammatory response syndrome (mSIRS) criteria or three mSIRS criteria within 24 hours after surgery were met. Physicians were notified if the lactate concentration was >2 mmol/L. Further review was performed of data collected prospectively on the surgical patients. Results: A total of 10,335 patients were admitted (2,158 surgery and 8,177 non-surgery). Of these, 33% of the surgery patients and 35% of the patients not having surgery triggered sBPAs. In surgery patients, 13% of lactate concentrations were >2 mmol/L versus 25% in patients not having surgery. An sBPA was triggered more frequently after procedures with a wound class of 4 (5% vs. 2%), emergency operation (23% vs. 10%), and longer operations (280 min vs. 222 min (p < 0.05 for all). Surgery patients triggering sBPAs had longer hospital stays (9.6 vs. 4.4 days; p < 0.05), more surgical site infections (7% vs. 2%; p < 0.05), and a similar mortality rate (3% vs. 4%; p = 0.15) than those who did not trigger an sBPA. Conclusion: An sBPA fired in a third of all inpatients, and an sBPA that prompted lactate measurements was less likely to be abnormal in surgery patients than in those not having surgery. There was no difference in the mortality rate in surgical patients who fired and those who did not; however, the sBPA did identify patients with a more complicated post-operative course. Further refinements of the electronic trigger should increase BPA specificity.

The Association between Insurance Status and Acceptance of Chlamydia Screening By Teenagers Who Present for Preventive Care Visits.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether providers offer chlamydia screening to teenagers and/or whether screening is accepted at different rates depending on insurance type. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Academic center serving urban and suburban patients between April 2009 and October 2011. PARTICIPANTS: Nine hundred eighty-three health maintenance visits for asymptomatic, insured female adolescents aged 15-19 years. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Dichotomous dependent variables of interest indicated whether chlamydia screening was: (1) offered; and (2) accepted. The key independent variable insurance type was coded as 'public' if Medicaid or Medicaid Managed Care and 'private' if a commercial plan. χ(2) and logistic regression analyses were used to assess the significance of differences in screening rates according to insurance type. RESULTS: Of asymptomatic health-maintenance visits 933 (95%) had a documented sexual history and 339 (34%) had a documented history of sexual activity. After excluding those who had a documented chlamydia screen in the 12 months before the visit (n = 79; 23%), 260 visits met eligibility for chlamydia screening. Only 169 (65%) of eligible visits had chlamydia screening offered and there was no difference in offer of screening according to insurance type. Significantly more visits covered by public insurance had chlamydia screening accepted (98%) than those covered by private insurance (82%). Controlling for demographic factors, the odds of accepted chlamydia screening was 8 times higher in visits covered by public insurance than those with private insurance. CONCLUSION: Although publically and privately insured teens were equally likely to be offered chlamydia screening, publically insured teens were significantly more likely to accept screening. Future research should investigate reasons for this difference in screening acceptance. These findings have implications for interventions to improve chlamydia screening because more adolescents are covered by parental insurance under the Affordable Care Act.