Practice Variation in Utilization of Flap or Graft Reconstruction Among Veterans Affairs Surgeons After Extirpation of Keratinocyte Carcinoma on the Nose.

BACKGROUND: Practice variation has been well documented across the US health care system but has not been explored in reconstructive surgical choice after keratinocyte carcinoma (KC) extirpation. OBJECTIVE: Assess practice variation in utilization of complex (flap or graft) reconstruction after excision of KC on the nose among a multidisciplinary group of reconstructive surgeons (Mohs micrographic and plastic surgery). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomly selected subset of surgically treated, routine, primary, invasive KCs on the nose between 2000 to 2012 at the Veterans Affairs (VA)-Boston Healthcare System were assessed. Patient factors, tumor factors, and individual surgeons with sufficient case volume were fit to a multivariate logistic regression model to assess between-surgeon differences in the odds of performing a complex reconstruction. RESULTS: Ten surgeons met the case volume threshold for analysis, encompassing 338 KC on the nose excised and reconstructed from 2000 to 2012. After adjusting for patient age, tumor diameter, and location, 6 surgeons performed significantly more complex reconstructions than the reference surgeon, and the case-adjusted predicted probability of complex reconstruction ranged from 7% to 99% (p ≤ .0001). CONCLUSION: Marked practice variation in reconstruction choice exists among surgeons after extirpation of KC on the nose at one VA health care system. High-quality comparative studies regarding optimal nasal reconstruction after extirpation of KC are needed.

Total Margin-Controlled Excision is Superior to Standard Excision for Keratinocyte Carcinoma on the Nose: A Veterans Affairs Nested Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Keratinocyte carcinoma (KC), including basal and squamous cell carcinoma, is the most common human malignancy. Limited real-world data have compared surgical outcome or cost between total margin-controlled excision (TMCE) and standard excision (SE), the two most common treatments for invasive KC. We compared reconstruction, margin status, and cost between TMCE and SE for KC on the nose at a Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system. METHODS: Randomly selected primary KCs on the nose ≤3 cm that were confined to soft tissue, without nerve or lymphovascular invasion, and treated with SE or TMCE between 2000 and 2010, were assessed. Utilization of flap or graft reconstruction and margin status following all surgical attempts were recorded. Costs were based on Current Procedural Terminology codes standardized to 2019 Medicare payments. RESULTS: Overall, 148 cases were included in each treatment group. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, although SE tumor median diameter was 1 mm larger. SE was associated with increased utilization of flap or graft reconstruction (odds ratio 2.05, 95% confidence interval 1.16-3.59, p = 0.01). Positive margins were present in 24% of SEs initially and remained positive after the final recorded excision in 9% of cases. No positive final margins were noted in TMCE cases. SE cost per tumor was significantly higher than TMCE ($429.03 ± 143.55; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical management of KC with SE is associated with increased reconstruction complexity, a significant risk of positive margins, and higher cost compared with TMCE. The 23% risk of positive margins supports National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for the treatment of high-risk KC with TMCE, unless delayed reconstruction is employed.

Direct and indirect patient costs of dermatology clinic visits and their impact on access to care and provider preference.

The direct and indirect costs of dermatology clinic visits are infrequently quantified. Indirect costs, such as the time spent traveling to and from appointments and the value of lost earnings from time away from work, are substantial costs that often are not included in economic analyses but may pose barriers to receiving care. Due to the national shortage of dermatologists, patients may have to wait longer for appointments or travel further to see dermatologists outside of their local community, resulting in high time and travel costs for patients. Patients' lost time and earnings comprise the opportunity cost of obtaining care. A monetary value for this opportunity cost can be calculated by multiplying a patient's hourly wage by the number of hours that the patient dedicated to attending the dermatology appointment. Using a single institution survey, this study quantified the direct and indirect patient costs, including opportunity costs and time burden, associated with dermatology clinic visits to better appreciate the impact of these factors on health care access and dermatologic provider preference.

Apremilast and Secukinumab Combined Therapy in a Patient With Recalcitrant Plaque Psoriasis.

We report a 67-year-old Caucasian man with a long-term history of recalcitrant plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis who was initiated on a treatment regimen of apremilast and secukinumab after failing multiple topical, photo, and systemic therapies. This combination provided significant skin improvement with minimal drug side effects.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2016;15(5):648-649.