Esophageal cancer in octogenarians: Should esophagectomy be done?

INTRODUCTION: Esophagectomy is the treatment of choice for esophageal cancer. In octogenarians data is conflicting. We evaluated postoperative outcomes and long-term survival of octogenarians and their younger counterparts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database including consecutive patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy at a large referral, academic center between 2012 and 2021. Subgroups were designed according to age (<70, 70-79, and ≥ 80). RESULTS: A total of 359 patients underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, 223 (62%) aged <70, 107 (30%) aged 70-79 and 29 (8%) aged ≥80. Octogenarians had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] scores (p = 0.001), and fewer received neoadjuvant therapy (p = 0.04). Octogenarians experienced more major complications (P < 0.001) with significantly higher 30-day mortality rate (P = 0.001). In a multivariable analysis, major complications were associated with higher risk of being discharged to a rehabilitation center (odds ratio [OR] 14.839, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.921-44.747, p < 0.001) while age was not. Overall survival was reduced in octogenarians, with a 50th percentile survival of 10 months compared to 32 and 26 months in patients age < 70 and 70-79, respectively (p = 0.014). In a multivariable analysis, age ≥ 80 (hazard ratio [HR] 4.478 95% CI 2.151-9.322, p < 0.001), cancer stage (HR 1.545, 95% CI 1.095-2.179, p = 0.013), and postoperative major complications (HR 2.705 95% CI 1.913-3.823, p < 0.001) were independently associated with reduced survival. DISCUSSION: Our study showed that octogenarians had significantly higher postoperative major complications compared to younger age groups. Overall survival was significantly reduced in these patients, probably due to an increased rate of perioperative mortality. Better patient selection and preparation may improve postoperative outcomes and increase long-term survival.

Some Nursing Screening Tools Can Be Used to Assess High-Risk Older Adults Who Undergo Colorectal Surgery for Cancer.

AIM: Life expectancy and incidence of cancer among older adults are increasing. The aim of this study was to assess whether routinely used nursing screening tools can predict surgical outcomes in older adults with colorectal cancer. METHODS: Data of patients who underwent elective colorectal cancer surgery at Rabin Medical Center during the years 2014-2016 were collected retrospectively. Patients were divided into study group (age 80-89 y), and control group (age 60-69 y) for comparing surgical outcomes and six-month mortality. In the study group, screening tool scores were evaluated as potential predictors of surgical outcomes. These included Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), Admission Norton Scale Scores (ANSS), Morse Fall Scale (MFS), and Charlson Co-morbidity Index (CCI). RESULTS: The study group consisted of 77 patients, and the control group consisted of 129 patients. Postoperative mortality and morbidity were similar in both groups. Nursing screening tools did not predict immediate postoperative outcomes in the study group. MUST and CCI were predictors for six-month mortality. CCI score was 9.43±2.44 in those who died within six months from surgery compared to 7.07 ±1.61 in those who were alive after six months (p<0.05). Post-operative complications were not associated with increased 30-day mortality. Advanced grade complications were associated with an increased six-month mortality (RR=1.37, 95% CI 0.95-1.98, p=0.013). CONCLUSION: Different screening tools for high-risk older adults who are candidates for surgery have been developed, with the caveat of necessitating skilled physicians and resources such as time. Routinely used nursing screening tools may be helpful in better patient selection and informed decision making. These tools, specifically MUST and CCI who were found to predict six-month survival, can be used to additionally identify high-risk patients by the nursing staff and promote further evaluation. This can be a valuable tool in multidisciplinary and patient-centered care.

Estimating Risk of Venous-Thromboembolic Events in Hospitalized Medical Patients: Comparison between 2008 and 2012 Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Prophylaxis for hospitalized venous-thromboembolic events (VTEs) is frequently underutilized, in part due to lack of a simple risk assessment model (RAM). OBJECTIVES: To compare patient selection and administration of VTE prophylaxis according to the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) 2008 guidelines versus the newer 2012 guidelines, and assess the feasibility of developing simpler local RAMs. METHODS: We conducted a prospective assessment of VTE risk among 300 unselected consecutive patients admitted to a medical hospital ward, using the 2008 and 2012 ACCP guidelines. The frequency and relative weight of each risk factor in the 2012 ACCP guidelines were used to develop a local VTE RAM. RESULTS: VTE prophylaxis was indicated by the 2008 and 2012 ACCP guidelines in 40% and 42% of the cohort respectively, and was administered in 28% and 26% of eligible patients, respectively. Contraindication to VTE prophylaxis was found in 29% of patients according to both guidelines. In comparison to the 2008 guidelines, sensitivity and specificity of the 2012 guidelines were 96% and 88%, respectively. A local RAM based on the following concise score, comprising age, malignancy and immobility, correctly identified 99% of at-risk patients based on the 2012 guidelines, with a sensitivity and specificity of 98% and 95%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both guidelines performed to a similar degree and were poorly implemented in daily practice. A simplified RAM accurately identified the vast majority of these eligible patients. The development of local RAMs is feasible and may result in higher utilization rates.

Base excess as a predictor for injury severity in pediatric trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Base excess is considered a predictor of mortality and severity of injury in trauma patients. Base excess had been widely examined in different settings. Only few studies have examined the role of base excess in pediatric trauma patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the value of admission base excess in pediatric trauma patients with respect to intensive care unit (ICU) admission rate and length of hospital stay. METHODS: A retrospective study of pediatric trauma patients was conducted at a Level II trauma center. All patients aged 0-16 years for which a trauma team was activated over the years 2006-2009 were included. Study database included admission base excess, mechanism of injury, location and nature of injury, injury severity score, length of hospital stay, and ICU admission. RESULTS: The study group consisted of 359 patients. There was a weak linear correlation between admission base excess, length of stay in the hospital, and ICU admission. Base excess seemed to show a stronger correlation for the youngest age group (0-6 years) and no correlation for the middle age group. There was a positive but weak correlation (R Spearman = 0.26) between admission base excess and Injury Severity Score (ISS). However, 40% of the children with an ISS score >25 had normal admission base excess values. The area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic curves of base excess for predicting ICU admission was 0.66. CONCLUSIONS: The admission base excess in pediatric trauma patients seems to be a weak prognostic factor in our facility.