Revisiting the "Weekend Effect" on Adult and Pediatric Liver and Kidney Offer Acceptance.

BACKGROUND Weekends can impose resource and manpower constraints on hospitals. Studies using data from prior allocation schemas showed increased adult organ discards on weekends. We examined the impact of day of the week on adult and pediatric organ acceptance using contemporary data. MATERIAL AND METHODS Retrospective analysis of UNOS-PTR match-run data of all offers for potential kidney and liver transplant from 1/1/2016 to 7/1/2021 were examined to study the rate at which initial offers were declined depending on day of the week. Risk factors for decline were also evaluated. RESULTS Of the total initial adult/pediatric liver and kidney offers, the fewest offers occurred on Mondays and Sundays. The decline rate for adult/pediatric kidneys was highest on Saturdays and lowest on Tuesdays. The decline rate for adult livers was highest on Saturday and lowest on Wednesday. In contrast, the decline rate for pediatric livers was highest on Tuesdays and lowest on Wednesdays. Independent risk factors from multivariate analysis of the adult/pediatric kidney and liver decline rate were analyzed. The weekend offer remains an independent risk factor for adult kidney and liver offer declines, but for pediatric offers, these were not significant independent risk factors. CONCLUSIONS Although allocation systems have changed, and the availability of kidneys and livers have increased in the USA over the past 5 years, the weekend effect remains significant for adult liver and kidney offers for declines. Interestingly, the weekend effect was not seen for pediatric liver and kidney offers.

Conversion therapy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and tumor downsizing to increase resection rates: A systematic review.

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is a devastating malignant neoplasm with dismal outcomes. Several therapeutic modalities have been used with variable success to downsize these tumors for resection. Neoadjuvant therapy such as chemoembolization and radioembolization offer promising options to manage tumor burden prior to resection. A systematic review of the literature was performed with a focus on conversion therapy for ICC and tumor downsizing to increase resection rates among patients who have an initially unresectable tumor. Of 132 patients with initially unresectable ICC, we identified 27 who underwent conversion therapy with surgical resection. Adequate tumor downsizing was achieved with chemotherapy, chemoembolization, radioembolization, or combination thereof. Although negative tumor margins were possible in some patients, recurrence rates and survival outcomes were inconsistently reported. Twenty-three of 27 patients were alive at last reported follow-up. Conversion therapy for initially unresectable ICC may offer adequate tumor downsizing for resection.

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic major liver resection: analysis of outcomes from a single center.

BACKGROUND: Debate exists regarding outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic hepatectomy. We reviewed and analyzed major hepatectomies (resection of ≥3 Couinaud liver segments) performed in a minimally invasive fashion at a single institution. METHODS: From 2011 to 2016, 473 major hepatectomy procedures were performed, of which 173 (37%) were performed in a minimally invasive fashion (57 robot-assisted and 116 laparoscopic). Patient demographics, operating statistics and outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: Patients undergoing robot-assisted versus laparoscopic hepatectomy were older (58.1 vs 53.2 years, respectively; p = 0.030), admitted to ICU postoperatively less frequently (43.9% vs 61.2%, respectively; p = 0.043), and readmitted less often within 90 days (7.0% vs 28.5%, respectively; p = 0.001). No significant differences were identified in relation to complications, blood loss, operative times, and length of stay. CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted is an effective alternative to laparoscopic major hepatectomy for resection of malignant and benign liver lesions. Robotic-assisted offers technical advantages compared to laparoscopic surgery including improved optic visualization, operative dexterity, and ease of dissection and suturing. This experience suggested that the robotic platform was associated with improved outcomes including reduced postoperative ICU admission and 90-day readmission.

Routine versus difficult cholecystectomy: using predictive analytics to assess patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program® (NSQIP) Surgical Risk. Calculator (SRC) estimates postoperative outcomes. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a specific predictive outcomes model for cholecystectomy procedures. METHODS: Patients who underwent cholecystectomy between 2008 and 2016 and were deemed too high risk for acute care general surgery (GS) and had surgery performed by the Division of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery (HPB) were identified. Outcomes of the HPB cholecystectomies were matched against cholecystectomies performed by GS. New predictive models for postoperative outcomes were constructed. Area under the curve was used to assess predictive accuracy for both models and internal validation was performed using bootstrap logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 169/934 (18%) cholecystectomies were identified as too high risk for GS. These 169 patients were matched with 126 patients who had cholecystectomy performed by GS. For GS and HPB cholecystectomies, the proposed model demonstrated better discriminative ability compared to the SRC based on ROC curves (proposed model: 0.589-0.982; SRC: 0.570-0.836) for each of the predicted outcomes. CONCLUSION: For patients undergoing cholecystectomy, customized models are superior for predicting individual perioperative risk and allow more accurate, patient-specific delivery of care.

Developing and validating a center-specific preoperative prediction calculator for risk of outcomes following major hepatectomy procedures.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons NSQIP® Surgical Risk Calculator (SRC) was developed to estimate postoperative outcomes. Our goal was to develop and validate an institution-specific risk calculator for patients undergoing major hepatectomy at Carolinas Medical Center (CMC). METHODS: Outcomes generated by the SRC were recorded for 139 major hepatectomies performed at CMC (2008-2016). Novel predictive models for seven postoperative outcomes were constructed and probabilities calculated. Brier score and area under the curve (AUC) were employed to assess accuracy. Internal validation was performed using bootstrap logistic regression. Logistic regression models were constructed using bivariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Brier scores showed no significant difference in the predictive ability of the SRC and CMC model. Significant differences in the discriminative ability of the models were identified at the individual level. Both models closely predicted 30-day mortality (SRC AUC: 0.867; CMC AUC: 0.815). The CMC model was a stronger predictor of individual postoperative risk for six of seven outcomes (SRC AUC: 0.531-0.867; CMC AUC: 0.753-0.970). CONCLUSION: Institution-specific models provide superior outcome predictions of perioperative risk for patients undergoing major hepatectomy. If properly developed and validated, institution-specific models can be used to deliver more accurate, patient-specific care.

Infantile Tubercular Meningitis With Brain Infarct.

A previously healthy 6-month-old Asian girl presented to the emergency department (ED) after 7 to 10 days of fever of 101 to 102°F, cough, and intermittent vomiting. Pneumonia was diagnosed and successfully treated, and the patient was discharged. She returned to the ED after her mother noticed mild facial asymmetry, left upper extremity weakness, and an episode of jerkiness. The mother then revealed that both she and the child's maternal grandmother, who also lived with the patient, had suffered chronic coughs in recent months. The mother's previous chest radiograph showed pulmonary tuberculosis. The patient's magnetic resonance imaging findings were consistent with a cerebrovascular event. Positive results on cerebrospinal fluid analysis, the mother's suspicious tuberculosis-like history, and the patient's clinical symptoms pointed heavily toward a diagnosis of tuberculous meningitis. A 4-drug antituberculosis regimen with dexamethasone was instituted and scheduled to continue for 12 months. However, the patient returned to the ED 2 months later after developing an obstructive hydrocephalus.

Reliability of adverse symptom event reporting by clinicians.

PURPOSE: Adverse symptom event reporting is vital as part of clinical trials and drug labeling to ensure patient safety and inform risk-benefit decision making. The purpose of this study was to assess the reliability of adverse event reporting of different clinicians for the same patient for the same visit. METHODS: A retrospective reliability analysis was completed for a sample of 393 cancer patients (42.8% men; age 26-91, M = 62.39) from lung (n = 134), prostate (n = 113), and Ob/Gyn (n = 146) clinics. These patients were each seen by two clinicians who independently rated seven Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) symptoms. Twenty-three percent of patients were enrolled in therapeutic clinical trials. RESULTS: The average time between rater evaluations was 68 min. Intraclass correlation coefficients were moderate for constipation (0.50), diarrhea (0.58), dyspnea (0.69), fatigue (0.50), nausea (0.52), neuropathy (0.71), and vomiting (0.46). These values demonstrated stability over follow-up visits. Two-point differences, which would likely affect treatment decisions, were most frequently seen among symptomatic patients for constipation (18%), vomiting (15%), and nausea (8%). CONCLUSION: Agreement between different clinicians when reporting adverse symptom events is moderate at best. Modification of approaches to adverse symptom reporting, such as patient self-reporting, should be considered.

Using confirmatory factor analysis to evaluate construct validity of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI).

CONTEXT: The Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) is a frequently used instrument designed to assess the patient-reported outcome of pain. The majority of factor analytic studies have found a two-factor (i.e., pain intensity and pain interference) structure for this instrument; however, because the BPI was developed with an a priori hypothesis of the relationship among its items, it follows that construct validity investigations should use confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this work was to establish the construct validity of the BPI using a CFA framework and demonstrate factorial invariance using a range of demographic variables. METHODS: A retrospective CFA was completed in a sample of individuals diagnosed with HIV/AIDS and cancer (n=364; 63% male; age 21-92 years, M=51.80). A baseline one-factor model was compared against two-factor and three-factor models (i.e., pain intensity, activity interference, and affective interference) that were developed based on the hypothetical design of the instrument. RESULTS: Fit indices for the three-factor model were statistically superior when compared with the one-factor model and marginally better when compared with the two-factor model. This three-factor structure was found to be invariant across disease, age, and ethnicity groups. CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide evidence to support a three-factor representation of the BPI, and the originally hypothesized two-factor structure. Such findings will begin to provide clinical trialists, pharmaceutical sponsors, and regulators with confidence in the psychometric properties of this instrument when considering its inclusion in clinical research.