Defining a minimum hospital volume threshold for minimally invasive colon cancer resections.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic colectomy is considered the standard of care in colon cancer treatment when appropriate expertise is available. However, guidelines do not delineate what experience is required to implement this approach safely and effectively. This study aimed to establish a data-derived, hospital-level annual volume threshold for laparoscopic colectomy at which patient outcomes are optimized. METHODS: This evaluation included 44,157 stage I to III adenocarcinoma patients aged ≥40 years who underwent laparoscopic colon resection between 2010 and 2015 within the National Cancer Database. The primary outcome was overall survival, with 30- and 90-day mortality, duration of stay, days to receipt of chemotherapy, and number of lymph nodes examined as secondary. Segmented logistic and Cox regression models were used to identify volume thresholds which optimized these outcomes. RESULTS: In hospitals performing ≥30 laparoscopic colectomies per year there were incremental improvements in overall survival for each additional resection beyond 30. Hospitals performing ≥30 procedures/year demonstrated improved 30-day mortality (1.3% vs 1.7%, P < .001), 90-day mortality (2.3% vs 2.9%, P < .001), and overall survival (84.3% vs 82.3%, P < .001). Those hospitals performing <30 procedures/year had no significant benefit in overall survival. Thresholds were not identified for any other outcomes. Results were comparable in colon cancer patients with stage IV or multiple cancers. CONCLUSION: A high-volume hospital threshold of ≥30 cases/year for laparoscopic colectomies is associated with improved patient survival and outcomes. A minimum volume standard may help providers determine which approach is most suitable for their hospital's practice as open procedures may yield better oncologic results in low volume settings.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy at a Non-high-volume Center and Efforts to Perform Safe Surgery.

AIM: The aim of the current study was to investigate whether the artery-first approach (AFA) improved surgical outcomes of pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) at our non-high-volume center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data on 121 consecutive patients who underwent PD between January 2009 and December 2018. The perioperative data of 49 patients who underwent conventional PD (conventional group) and 72 patients who underwent PD via artery-first approach were analyzed and compared to assess the effectiveness of the AFA. RESULTS: Although no significant difference was observed between the two groups overall, in those with pancreatic cancer, the duration of surgery, intraoperative blood loss and transfusion rate in the AFA group (n=33) were significantly lower than those for the conventional group (n=11) (p=0.011, p=0.021 and p=0.038 respectively). CONCLUSION: AFA can be used to reduce the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and transfusion rate in patients with pancreatic cancer.

Travel Time to a High Volume Center Negatively Impacts Timing of Care in Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Regionalization of rectal cancer surgery may lead to worse disease free survival owing to longer travel time to reach a high volume center yet no study has evaluated this relationship at a single high volume center volume center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective review of rectal cancer patients undergoing surgery from 2009 to 2019 at a single high volume center. Patients were divided into two groups based on travel time. The primary outcome was disease-free survival (DFS). Additional outcomes included treatment within 60 d of diagnosis, completeness of preoperative staging, and evaluation by a colorectal surgeon prior to initiation of treatment. RESULTS: A lower proportion of patients with long travel time began definitive treatment within 60 d of diagnosis (74.0% versus 84.0%, P= 0.01) or were seen by the treating colorectal surgeon before beginning definitive treatment (74.8% versus 85.4%, P < 0.01). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, patients with long travel time were significantly less likely to begin definitive treatment within 60 d of diagnosis (OR = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.31-0.93) or to be evaluated by a colorectal surgeon prior to initiating treatment (OR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.25-0.80). There were no significant differences in DFS based on travel time. CONCLUSIONS: Although patients with long travel times may be vulnerable to delayed, lower quality rectal cancer care, there is no difference in DFS when definitive surgery is performed at a high volume canter. Ongoing research is needed to identify explanations for delays in treatment to ensure all patients receive the highest quality care.

Trauma Center Outcomes After Transition From Level 2 to Level 1: A National Trauma Data Bank Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous US-based studies have shown that a trauma center designation of level 1 is associated with improved patient outcomes. However, most studies are cross-sectional, focus on volume-related issues and are direct comparisons between levels. This study investigates the change in patient characteristics when individual trauma centers transition from level 2 to level 1 and whether the patients have similar outcomes during the initial period of the transition. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective cohort study that analyzed hospital and patient records included in the National Trauma Data Bank from 2007 to 2016. Patient characteristics were compared before and after their hospitals transitioned their trauma level. Mortality; complications including acute kidney injury, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cardiac arrest with CPR, deep surgical site infection, deep vein thrombosis, extremity compartment syndrome, surgical site infection, osteomyelitis, pulmonary embolism, and so on; ICU admission; ventilation use; unplanned returns to the OR; unplanned ICU transfers; unplanned intubations; and lengths of stay were obtained following propensity score matching, comparing posttransition years with the last pretransition year. RESULTS: Sixteen trauma centers transitioned from level 2 to level 1 between 2007 and 2016. One was excluded due to missing data. After transition, patient characteristics showed differences in the distribution of race, comorbidities, insurance status, injury severity scores, injury mechanisms, and injury type. After propensity score matching, patients treated in a trauma center after transition from level 2 to 1 required significantly fewer ICU admissions and had lower complication rates. However, significantly more unplanned intubations, unplanned returns to the OR, unplanned ICU transfers, ventilation use, surgical site infections, pneumonia, and urinary tract infections and higher mortality were reported after the transition. CONCLUSIONS: Trauma centers that transitioned from level 2 to level 1 had lower overall complications, with fewer patients requiring ICU admission. However, higher mortality and more surgical site infections, pneumonia, urinary tract infections, unplanned intubations, and unplanned ICU transfers were reported after the transition. These findings may have significant implications in the planning of trauma systems for administrators and healthcare leaders.

Optimal surgeon and hospital volume thresholds to reduce mortality and length of stay for CABG.

OBJECTIVE: We used nationwide population-based data to identify optimal hospital and surgeon volume thresholds and to discover the effects of these volume thresholds on operative mortality and length of stay (LOS) for coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: General acute care hospitals throughout Taiwan. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 12,892 CABG patients admitted between 2011 and 2015 were extracted from Taiwan National Health Insurance claims data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Operative mortality and LOS. Restricted cubic splines were applied to discover the optimal hospital and surgeon volume thresholds needed to reduce operative mortality. Generalized estimating equation regression modeling, Cox proportional-hazards modeling and instrumental variables analysis were employed to examine the effects of hospital and surgeon volume thresholds on the operative mortality and LOS. RESULTS: The volume thresholds for hospitals and surgeons were 55 cases and 5 cases per year, respectively. Patients who underwent CABG from hospitals that did not reach the volume threshold had higher operative mortality than those who received CABG from hospitals that did reach the volume threshold. Patients who underwent CABG with surgeons who did not reach the volume threshold had higher operative mortality and LOS than those who underwent CABG with surgeons who did reach the volume threshold. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to identify the optimal hospital and surgeon volume thresholds for reducing operative mortality and LOS. This supports policies regionalizing CABG at high-volume hospitals. Identifying volume thresholds could help patients, providers, and policymakers provide optimal care.

Outcomes of Complex Gastrointestinal Cancer Resection at US News & World Report Top-Ranked vs Non-Ranked Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: The US News & World Report (USNWR) annual ranking of the best hospitals for gastroenterology and gastrointestinal surgery offers direction to patients and healthcare providers, especially for recommendations on complex medical and surgical gastrointestinal (GI) conditions. The objective of this study was to examine the outcomes of complex GI cancer resections performed at USNWR top-ranked, compared to non-ranked, hospitals. STUDY DESIGN: Using the Vizient database, data for patients who underwent esophagectomy, gastrectomy, and pancreatectomy for malignancy between January and December 2018 were reviewed. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed according to USNWR rank status. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes include length of stay, mortality index (observed-to-expected mortality ratio), rate of serious complication, and cost. Secondary analysis was performed for outcomes of patients who developed serious complications. RESULTS: There were 3,054 complex GI cancer resections performed at 42 top-ranked hospitals vs 3,608 resections performed at 198 non-ranked hospitals. The mean annual case volume was 73 cases at top-ranked hospitals compared to 18 cases at non-ranked hospitals. Compared with non-ranked hospitals, top-ranked hospitals had lower in-hospital mortality (0.96% vs 2.26%, respectively, p < 0.001) and lower mortality index (0.71 vs 1.53, respectively). There were no significant differences in length of stay, rate of serious complications, or direct cost between groups. In patients who developed serious morbidity, top-ranked hospitals had a lower mortality compared with non-ranked hospitals (8.2% vs 16.8%, respectively, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Within the context of complex GI cancer resection, USNWR top-ranked hospitals performed a 4-fold higher case volume and were associated with improved outcomes. Patients with complex GI-related malignancies may benefit from seeking surgical care at high-volume regional USNWR top-ranked hospitals.

Editor's Choice - Optimal Threshold for the Volume-Outcome Relationship After Open AAA Repair in the Endovascular Era: Analysis of the International Consortium of Vascular Registries.

OBJECTIVE: As open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair (OAR) rates decline in the endovascular era, the endorsement of minimum volume thresholds for OAR is increasingly controversial, as this may affect credentialing and training. The purpose of this analysis was to identify an optimal centre volume threshold that is associated with the most significant mortality reduction after OAR, and to determine how this reflects contemporary practice. METHODS: This was an observational study of OARs performed in 11 countries (2010 - 2016) within the International Consortium of Vascular Registry database (n = 178 302). The primary endpoint was post-operative in hospital mortality. Two different methodologies (area under the receiving operating curve optimisation and Markov chain Monte Carlo procedure) were used to determine the optimal centre volume threshold associated with the most significant mortality improvement. RESULTS: In total, 154 912 (86.9%) intact and 23 390 (13.1%) ruptured AAAs were analysed. The majority (63.1%; n = 112 557) underwent endovascular repair (EVAR) (OAR 36.9%; n = 65 745). A significant inverse relationship between increasing centre volume and lower peri-operative mortality after intact and ruptured OAR was evident (p < .001) but not with EVAR. An annual centre volume of between 13 and 16 procedures per year was associated with the most significant mortality reduction after intact OAR (adjusted predicted mortality < 13 procedures/year 4.6% [95% confidence interval 4.0% - 5.2%] vs. ≥ 13 procedures/year 3.1% [95% CI 2.8% - 3.5%]). With the increasing adoption of EVAR, the mean number of OARs per centre (intact + ruptured) decreased significantly (2010 - 2013 = 35.7; 2014 - 2016 = 29.8; p < .001). Only 23% of centres (n = 240/1 065) met the ≥ 13 procedures/year volume threshold, with significant variation between nations (Germany 11%; Denmark 100%). CONCLUSION: An annual centre volume of 13 - 16 OARs per year is the optimal threshold associated with the greatest mortality risk reduction after treatment of intact AAA. However, in the current endovascular era, achieving this threshold requires significant re-organisation of OAR practice delivery in many countries, and would affect provision of non-elective aortic services. Low volume centres continuing to offer OAR should aim to achieve mortality results equivalent to the high volume institution benchmark, using validated data from quality registries to track outcomes.

Vascular Surgery Practice Guidelines during COVID-19 Pandemic in a Setting of High Work Volume Against Limited Resources: Perspective of a Developing Country.

BACKGROUND: The situation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the Indian subcontinent is worsening. In Bangladesh, rate of new infection has been on the rise despite limited testing facility. Constraint of resources in the health care sector makes the fight against COVID-19 more challenging for a developing country like Bangladesh. Vascular surgeons find themselves in a precarious situation while delivering professional services during this crisis. With the limited number of dedicated vascular surgeons in Bangladesh, it is important to safeguard these professionals without compromising emergency vascular care services in the long term. To this end, we at the National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases and Hospital, Dhaka, have developed a working guideline for our vascular surgeons to follow during the COVID-19 pandemic. The guideline takes into account high vascular work volume against limited resources in the country. METHODS: A total of 307 emergency vascular patients were dealt with in the first 4 COVID-19 months (March through June 2020) according to the working guideline, and the results were compared with the 4 pre-COVID-19 months. Vascular trauma, dialysis access complications, and chronic limb-threatening ischemia formed the main bulk of the patient population. Vascular health care workers were regularly screened for COVID-19 infection. RESULTS: There was a 38% decrease in the number of patients in the COVID-19 period. Treatment outcome in COVID-19 months were comparable with that in the pre-COVID-19 months except that limb loss in the chronic limb-threatening ischemia patients was higher. COVID-19 infection among the vascular health care professionals was low. CONCLUSIONS: Vascular surgery practice guidelines customized for the high work volume and limited resources of the National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases and Hospital, Dhaka were effective in delivering emergency care during COVID-19 pandemic, ensuring safety of the caregivers. Despite the fact that similar guidelines exist in different parts of the world, we believe that the present one is still relevant on the premises of a deepening COVID-19 crisis in a developing country like Bangladesh.

Deferring Elective Urologic Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Patients' Perspective.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the perspective of urological patients on the possibility to defer elective surgery due to the fear of contracting COVID-19. METHODS: All patients scheduled for elective urological procedures for malignant or benign diseases at 2 high-volume centers were administered a questionnaire, through structured telephone interviews, between April 24 and 27, 2020. The questionnaire included 3 questions: (1) In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, would you defer the planned surgical intervention? (2) If yes, when would you be willing to undergo surgery? (3) What do you consider potentially more harmful for your health: the risk of contracting COVID-19 during hospitalization or the potential consequences of delaying surgical treatment? RESULTS: Overall, 332 patients were included (51.5% and 48.5% in the oncology and benign groups, respectively). Of these, 47.9% patients would have deferred the planned intervention (33.3% vs 63.4%; P < .001), while the proportion of patients who would have preferred to delay surgery for more than 6 months was comparable between the groups (87% vs 80%). These answers were influenced by patient age and American Society of Anesthesiologists score (in the Oncology group) and by the underlying urological condition (in the benign group). Finally, 182 (54.8%) patients considered the risk of COVID-19 potentially more harmful than the risk of delaying surgery (37% vs 73%; P < .001). This answer was driven by patient age and the underlying disease in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reinforce the importance of shared decision-making before urological surgery, leveraging patients' values and expectations to refine the paradigm of evidence-based medicine during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Quality Improvement for Surgical Resection of Pancreatic Head Adenocarcinoma : Hospital and Surgeon Predictors of Higher Than Expected R1 Resection Using the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: The mainstay of treatment for pancreatic cancer is surgical resection; however, positive surgical margins remain commonplace. We identified hospitals with higher than predicted rates of positive margins and isolated factors that caused this discordance. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients with head of the pancreas adenocarcinoma in the National Cancer Database between 2004 and 2015. A nomogram was used to calculate the observed to expected positive margin rates (O/E) for facilities. If the O/E differed significantly (P < .05), it was considered an outlier. RESULTS: Among a total of 19 968 patients, 24.3% had positive margins. Among hospitals with lower than expected positive margin rates, 73.6% were academic or research programs, 17% were comprehensive community cancer programs, and none were community cancer programs (P = .0002). Within the group with higher than expected positive margin rates, 47% were comprehensive community cancer programs and 38.6% were academic or research programs (P = .0002). The mean hospital volume was higher in the low positive margin group (110.4 vs 48.8, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Facility type and hospital volume can predict improvement in the O/E ratio for margin positivity in pancreatic adenocarcinoma resection. Surgeons should consider referral to academic or research facilities with higher case volumes for improved surgical resection.

Mortality and complication management after surgery for colorectal cancer depending on the DKG minimum amounts for hospital volume.

BACKGROUND: The German Cancer Society ("Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft"; DKG) certifies on a volunteer base colorectal cancer centers based on, among other things, minimum operative amounts (at least 30 oncological colon cancer resections and 20 oncological rectal cancer resections per year). In this work, nationwide hospital mortality and death after documented complications ('Failure to Rescue' = FtR) were evaluated depending on the fulfillment of the minimum amounts. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of the nationwide hospital billing data (DRG data, 2012-2017). Categorization is based on the DKG minimum quantities (fully, partially or not fulfilled). RESULTS: Of 287,227 patients analyzed, 56.5% were operated in centers that met the DKG minimum amounts. The overall hospital mortality rate was 5.0%. In centers which met the minimum quantities, it was significantly lower (4.3%) than in hospitals which partially (5.7%) or not (6.2%) met the minimum quantities. The risk-adjusted hospital mortality rate for patients in hospitals who meet the minimum amount was 20% lower (OR 0.80; 95% CI [0.74-0.87], p < 0.001). For complications, both surgical and non-surgical, there was an unadjusted and adjusted lower FtR in hospitals that met the minimum amounts (e.g. anastomotic leak: 11.2% vs. 15.6%, p < 0.001; pulmonary artery embolism 21.3% vs. 28.2%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: There is a 1/3 lower mortality and FtR rate after surgery for a colon or rectal cancer in centers fulfilling the DKG minimum amounts. The presented data implicate that there is an urgent need for a nationwide centralization program.

Optimizing biliary outcomes in living donor liver transplantation: Evolution towards standardization in a high-volume center.

Biliary complications have always been a dreaded cause of morbidity after living donor liver transplantation. While intrinsic variations in both graft and recipient biliary anatomy remain a significant factor to the difficulty of biliary reconstruction, our institution has taken advantage of its high volume of cases to critically review and evaluate modifiable operative risk factors, in particular, our surgical protocols. We present herein, the evolution of our reconstructive biliary technique from conventional methods to our current standard of microsurgical biliary reconstruction for both graft and recipient ducts. Over this period of transition, our center has created a classification system for biliary reconstruction that decreased the biliary complication rates from 40.0% to 10.2%.

Industry-Wide Survey of Academic Anesthesiology Departments Provides Up-to-Date Benchmarking Data on Surgical Anesthesia Productivity.

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking group surgical anesthesia productivity continues to be an important but challenging goal for anesthesiology groups. Benchmarking is important because it provides objective data to evaluate staffing needs and costs, identify potential operating room management decisions that could reduce costs or improve efficiency, and support ongoing negotiations and discussions with health system leadership. Unfortunately, good and meaningful benchmarking data are not readily available. Therefore, a survey of academic anesthesiology departments was done to provide current benchmarking data. METHODS: A survey of members of the Society of Academic Associations of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine (SAAAPM) was performed. The survey collected data by facility and included type of facility, number and type of staff and anesthetizing sites each weekday, and the billed American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) units and number of cases over 12 months. The facility types included academic medical center (AMC), community hospital (Community), children's hospital (Children), and ambulatory surgical center (ASC). All anesthesia care billed using ASA units were included, except for obstetric anesthesia. Any care not billed or billed using relative value units (RVUs) were excluded. Percentage of nonoperating room anesthetizing sites, staffing ratio, and surgical anesthesia productivity measurements "per case" and "per site" were calculated. RESULTS: Of the 135 society members, 63 submitted complete surveys for 140 facilities (69 AMC, 26 Community, 7 Children, and 38 ASC). In the survey, overall median productivity for AMC and Children was similar (12,592 and 12,364 total ASA units per anesthetizing site), while the ASC had the lowest median overall productivity (8911 total ASA units per anesthetizing site). By size of facility, in the survey, the smaller facilities (<10 sites, ASC or non-ASC) had lower median overall productivity as compared to larger facilities. For AMC and Children, >20% of anesthetizing sites were nonoperating room anesthetizing sites. Anesthesiology residents worked primarily in AMC and Children. In ASC and Community, residents worked only in 18% and 35% of facilities, respectively. More than half the AMCs reported at least 1 break certified nurse anesthetist (CRNA) each day. CONCLUSIONS: To make data-driven decisions on clinical productivity, anesthesiology leaders need to be able to make meaningful comparisons at the facility level. For a group that provides care in multiple facilities, one can make internal comparisons among facilities and follow measurements over time. It is valuable for leaders to also be compare their facilities with industry-wide measurements, in other words, benchmark their facilities. These results provide benchmarking data for academic anesthesiology departments.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the daily management of biotechnological therapy in inflammatory bowel disease patients: Reorganisational response in a high-volume Italian inflammatory bowel disease centre.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a major clinical as well as organisational impact on the national health-care system in Italy, particularly in high-volume hospitals which are usually active for many essential clinical needs, including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Here, we report major clinical and organisational challenges at a high-volume Italian IBD centre one month after the start of the Italian government's restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. All routine follow-up IBD visits of patients in remission were cancelled or rescheduled for 8-12 weeks' time. However, access to the hospital for therapy or for unstable/relapsing patients was not considered postponable. Everyone attending the centre (e.g. physicians, nurses, administrative personnel and patients) were advised to respect the general recommended rules for hand hygiene and social distancing, to disclose if they had a fever or cough or flu-like symptoms and to wear a surgical mask and gloves. At the entrance of the therapy area, a control station was set up in order to double-check all patients with a clinical interview and conduct thermal scanning. A total of 1451 IBD patients under biotechnological or experimental therapy actively followed in the CEMAD IBD centre were included in the study. About 65% of patients maintained their appointment schedules without major problems, while in 20% of cases planned infusions were delayed because of the patient's decision or practical issues. About 10% of patients receiving subcutaneous therapy were allowed to collect their medicine without a follow-up visit. Finally, 10% of patients living outside the Lazio region requested access to their therapy at a local centre closer to their home. At present, five patients have been found to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection but with minimal symptoms, 22 are in 'quarantine' for contact considered to be 'at risk' for the infection. Up to now, none of them has experienced significant symptoms. This study represents the first observational detailed report about short-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patient organisation and management in a high-volume IBD centre.

Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomy: Patient Selection, Volume Criteria, and Training Programs.

INTRODUCTION: There has been a rapid development in minimally invasive pancreas surgery in recent years. The most recent innovation is robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. Several studies have suggested benefits as compared to the open or laparoscopic approach. This review provides an overview of studies concerning patient selection, volume criteria, and training programs for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy and identified knowledge gaps regarding barriers for safe implementation of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Pubmed search was conducted concerning patient selection, volume criteria, and training programs in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. RESULTS: A total of 20 studies were included. No contraindications were found in patient selection for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. The consensus and the Miami guidelines advice is a minimum annual volume of 20 robotic pancreatoduodenectomy procedures per center, per year. One training program was identified which describes superior outcomes after the training program and shortening of the learning curve in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. CONCLUSION: Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy is safe and feasable for all indications when performed by specifically trained surgeons working in centers who can maintain a minimum volume of 20 robotic pancreatoduodenectomy procedures per year. Large proficiency-based training program for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy seem essential to facilitate a safe implementation and future research on robotic pancreatoduodenectomy.

Predictors of Overnight Admission After Laparoscopic Myomectomy in a High-Volume Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery Setting.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Our primary goal was to uncover preoperative and intraoperative risk factors that prevented same-day discharge (SDD) after myomectomy in a setting where SDD was the standard of care. Uncovered predictors would serve to enhance patient counseling and medical optimization before surgery. DESIGN: Single-center retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Urban university hospital center, by fellowship-trained minimally invasive gynecologic surgeons. PATIENTS: A total of 315 consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive myomectomy between March 2012 and May 2018. INTERVENTION: Minimally invasive myomectomy. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Preoperative and intraoperative characteristics were collected for analysis as predictors of SDD vs overnight admission. Comparisons of demographic, clinical, imaging, and operative characteristics were made using appropriate statistical methods for normally distributed, skewed, and categorical variables. Length of stay was analyzed as a categorical variable, SDD vs overnight admission. A logistic regression model was used to evaluate SDD vs any overnight stay. Out of the 315 patients undergoing laparoscopic myomectomy, 208 (66.03%) were discharged on the same day, and 107 (33.96%) were admitted for at least 1 day after surgery. The patients were more likely to be admitted overnight if they were of Asian ethnicity (p = .01), or if they had a lower preoperative Hct (36.15 vs 37.57; p < .003). An increase in any myoma characteristic metric was associated with overnight stay after surgery; these included mean myoma weight (512.0 g vs 310.1 g; p < .001), estimated size of the largest myoma on imaging (9.01 cm vs 7.77 cm; p < .001), and number of myomas removed (6.59 vs 5.57; p = .021). Other statistically significant differences between the overnight admission and SDD groups were mean estimated blood loss (599.4 mL vs 221.9 mL; p < .001), operative time (224.4 minutes vs 140.9 minutes; p < .001), and surgery end time (15:02 hours vs 12:43 hours; p < .001). Intraoperative complications associated with overnight admission were estimated blood loss >1 L (p < .001) and any intraoperative transfusion (p < .001). The adjusted logistic regression model identified an increase in operative time (by 60 minutes) and later surgery end time (by 60 minutes) as predictors of an overnight stay, whereas an 5% increase in preoperative hematocrit was associated with a 34% decrease in odds for an overnight stay. CONCLUSION: Perioperative factors, such as preoperative hematocrit, and myoma characteristics, as well as intraoperative factors, such as prolonged operative time and surgery end-time, are independent predictors of overnight hospital admission after minimally invasive myomectomy. Our present data can be used to provide better patient counseling before surgery.

Safe Introduction of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy at a Medium Volume Center.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Minimally invasive esophagectomy is a favored alternative in high-volume centers. We evaluated the introduction of, and transition to, minimally invasive esophagectomy at a medium volume tertiary referral center (10-20 esophagectomies annually) with focus on surgical results. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy or open transthoracic surgery for carcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction (Siewert I and II) during 2007-2016 were retrospectively studied. Sorted on surgical approach, perioperative data, surgical outcomes, and postoperative complications were analyzed and multivariate regression models were used to adjust for possible confounders. RESULTS: One hundred and sixteen patients were included, 51 minimally invasive esophagectomy (21 hybrid and 30 totally minimally invasive) and 65 open resections. The groups were well matched. However, higher body mass index, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and cervical anastomosis were more frequent in the minimally invasive esophagectomy group. Minimally invasive esophagectomy was associated with less peroperative bleeding (384 vs 607 mL, p = 0.036) and reduced length of stay (14 vs 15 days, p = 0.042). Duration of surgery, radical resection rate, and postoperative complications did not differ between groups. Lymph node yield was higher in the minimally invasive esophagectomy group, 18 (13-23) vs 12 (8-16), p < 0.001, confirmed in a multivariate regression model (adjusted odds ratio 3.15, 95% class interval 1.11-8.98, p = 0.032). CONCLUSION: The introduction of minimally invasive esophagectomy at a medium volume tertiary referral center resulted in superior lymph node yield, less peroperative blood loss and shorter length of stay, without compromising the rate of radical resection, or increasing the complication rate.