Do Oncologic Outcomes From Head and Neck Versus Truncal and Extremity Melanoma Differ? A Single-Institution Single-Subspecialty Experience.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes are thought to be worse in head and neck (H&N) melanoma patients. However, definitive evidence of inferior outcomes in H&N melanoma in the modern era is lacking. We sought to ascertain whether H&N melanomas carry a worse prognosis than melanomas of other sites. METHODS: All patients who underwent excision for primary melanoma by fellowship-trained surgical oncologists at a single institution from 2014 to 2020 were queried from the electronic medical record. Patients who had AJCC eighth edition stage I-III disease were included. RESULTS: Of 1127 patients, 28.7% had primary H&N melanoma. H&N patients were more likely to be male, older, and present with more advanced AJCC stage. Median follow-up was 20.0 months (IQR 26.4). On multivariable analyses controlling for other variables, H&N melanoma was associated with worse RFS. Notably, H&N melanoma was not associated with worse MSS, DMFS, or OS on univariate or multivariable analyses. Among patients who recurred, H&N patients were significantly more likely to recur locally compared to non-H&N patients. On subgroup analysis, scalp melanoma was also associated with worse RFS compared to patients with melanoma in locations other than the scalp. When patients with scalp melanoma were excluded from analysis, non-scalp H&N RFS was not significantly different from the non-H&N group on univariate or multivariable analyses. DISCUSSION: In this series from a high-volume tertiary referral center, the differences in rates and sites of recurrence between H&N and non-H&N melanoma do not impact melanoma-specific or overall survival, suggesting that H&N melanoma patients should be treated similarly with respect to regional and systemic therapies.

Risk factors for return visits in children discharged with tracheostomy.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine associations between demographic and clinical characteristics and rate of unplanned returns to system (RTS) in pediatric patients discharged with tracheostomy. METHODS: Medical records were examined for pediatric patients discharged after tracheostomy placement between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2015. Exclusion criteria included death or decannulation prior to discharge and lack of follow-up through 180 days post-discharge. Readmissions were grouped by time interval after discharge (within 30 days or within 31-180 days). Chi-squared analysis and Fisher's Exact Test were utilized to determine associations between patient characteristics, rate and frequency of RTS, and type of admission (Emergency Department [ED] or inpatient [IP]). RESULTS: One hundred twenty-one patients were eligible for the study, and 80 (66.1 %) had an unanticipated RTS during the follow-up period. Patients with early RTS had a higher total number of RTS. Patients with two or more RTS were more likely to be younger, while patients with five or more RTS were more likely to have greater organ system involvement and cardiovascular (CV) disease in particular. Patients presenting with GI diagnoses were more likely to be discharged from the ED. The rate of RTS remained constant throughout the time period examined. CONCLUSION: Pediatric patients discharged with tracheostomy are medically complex and at high risk of RTS, especially for respiratory and GI problems. This risk does not decrease after the initial post-discharge period and long-term follow-up is warranted. Younger patients and patients with history of early RTS are at highest risk for repeat RTS and should be identified for closer outpatient care.

Is prolonged monitoring necessary? An updated approach to infantile hemangioma treatment with oral propranolol.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Infantile hemangiomas (IH) are the most common soft-tissue tumors in childhood, occurring in up to 1 in 10 infants. Oral propranolol has been well established as the first-line treatment of complicated hemangiomas; however, variability in the administration protocol remains. We sought to evaluate our current propranolol treatment protocols to determine if the level of monitoring and follow-up predicts immediate or future adverse events by comparing one in-person visit vs two in-person visits versus teledermatology for treatment initiation and dose escalation. METHODS: We analyzed retrospective data on 279 patients diagnosed with IH and treated with oral propranolol on an in-person or virtual telemedicine outpatient basis from January 01, 2015 through May 31, 2020. Data were collected via chart review on all aspects of patient demographics, treatment indication, treatment initiation, adverse events, and follow-up visits. RESULTS: Two monitoring visits (Protocol 1) versus one (Protocol 2) was not associated with decreased adverse outcomes (P = .255). The odds of having an adverse event in Protocol 1 compared to Protocol 2 was insignificant (OR: 0.64; CI: 0.30-1.38). The most frequently reported adverse event among patients in both protocols was sleep disturbance. However, it did not vary significantly among the groups (P = .980, OR: 0.98, CI: 0.35-2.69). CONCLUSION: Prolonged in-office monitoring of propranolol initiation and dose escalation (Protocol 1) may not be necessary for the setting of adequate prescreening as it does not predict immediate or future adverse events.

Implementation and Evaluation of a Virtual Elective in Otolaryngology in the Time of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate a virtual otolaryngology medical student elective created during the COVID-19 crisis with the intention of teaching the basic tenets of otolaryngology and increasing exposure to the specialty. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Emory University School of Medicine. METHODS: A 1-week virtual otolaryngology curriculum was offered to third- and fourth-year medical students that centered on the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation's handbook Primary Care in Otolaryngology (fourth edition). The course covered a variety of topics and was conducted remotely via online video conferencing software. We applied multiple teaching modalities and surveyed students regarding the effectiveness of the course. Mixed methods analysis was employed to analyze the course data. RESULTS: Twelve students participated; 67% reported their baseline precourse understanding of otolaryngology in the "poor-fair" range. After the course, 92% of students reported increased understanding, with 42% and 58% reporting "good" and "very good" understanding, respectively. Following completion of the course, posttest scores on summative assessments were significantly higher than pretest scores (P < .001). Ninety-two percent of students reported either "increased" or "greatly increased" interest in otolaryngology postcourse. Qualitative survey results revealed students' appreciation of course organization, formative assessments, and case-based learning. CONCLUSIONS: An otolaryngology elective administered through a virtual format can be effective at providing an educational experience and garnering interest in the field. Positive exposure to otolaryngology can increase medical students' interest in pursuing the specialty and expand their general knowledge of consultation, diagnosis, and management in otolaryngology.