Midterm Outcomes: A Comprehensive Approach to Surgery for Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction in obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is caused by a constellation of abnormalities. This study reviewed outcomes of a comprehensive approach to correct these abnormalities during surgery. METHODS: This was a single-institution study of patients with HCM who underwent septal myectomy from 2016 to 2023. Their New York Heart Association functional classification and most recent echocardiogram that estimated LVOT gradient and mitral valve function were tracked. RESULTS: The study included 103 patients with a mean age of 54 years (interquartile range, 40-67 years) and common comorbidities: hypertension (50%) and atrial fibrillation (25%). On average, the preprocedure resting echocardiogram showed an LVOT gradient of 36.4 mm Hg and moderate or severe mitral regurgitation in 50.5% of patients. All patients underwent septal myectomy, and associated abnormalities contributing to LVOT obstruction were addressed. Elongation of the anterior leaflet of the mitral valve was typically treated with papillary muscle realignment (72%). Aberrant papillary muscle heads and elongated secondary chordae tendineae contributing to systolic anterior motion were resected (66%). Myocardial bands, including apicoseptal bands contributing to LVOT obstruction, were resected (68%). With an average follow-up of 4 years, 91% of patients were considered to be in New York Heart Association functional class I or II. Long-term echocardiographic follow-up showed a mean peak LVOT gradient of 11 mm Hg (interquartile range, 4-13 mm Hg). Only 1 patient had more than mild mitral regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive surgical approach to HCM that addresses the entire constellation of abnormalities associated with HCM, including mitral valve anterior leaflet elongation, aberrant or displaced mitral valve subvalvular apparatus, and myocardial bands, leads to outstanding midterm outcomes.

Combined Breast and Lung Cancer Screening Among Dual-Eligible Women: A Descriptive Study.

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer is consistently the leading cause of cancer death among women in the United States, yet lung cancer screening (LCS) rates remain low. By contrast, screening mammography rates are reliably high, suggesting that screening mammography can be a "teachable moment" to increase LCS uptake among dual-eligible women. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective survey study conducted at two academic institutions. Patients undergoing screening mammography were evaluated for LCS eligibility and offered enrollment in a pilot dual-cancer screening program. A series of surveys was administered to characterize participants' knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes about LCS before and after undergoing dual screening. Data were descriptively summarized. RESULTS: Between August 2022 and July 2023, 54 LCS-eligible patients were enrolled. The study cohort was 100% female and predominantly White (81%), with a median age of 57 y and median of 36 pack-y of smoking. Survey results showed that 98% felt they were at risk for lung cancer, with most (80%) motivated by early detection of potential cancer. Regarding screening barriers, 58% of patients lacked knowledge about LCS eligibility and 47% reported concerns about screening cost. Prior to undergoing LCS, 87% of patients expressed interest in combined breast and lung screening. Encouragingly, after LCS, 84% were likely or very likely to undergo dual screening again and 93% found the shared decision-making visit helpful or very helpful. CONCLUSIONS: Pairing breast and LCS is a feasible, acceptable intervention that, along with increasing patient and provider education about LCS, can increase LCS uptake and reduce lung cancer mortality.

Impacts of Positive Margins and Surgical Extent on Outcomes After Early-Stage Lung Cancer Resection.

BACKGROUND: Sublobar resection of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is increasingly considered appropriate but may compromise margins compared with lobectomy. This study evaluated resection extent, margin status, and survival in patients with clinical stage I NSCLC. METHODS: Patients with clinical T1-2 N0 M0 NSCLC in the National Cancer Database (2006-2020) who were treated with primary surgery were compared stratified by margin status. The potential benefit of radiation was explored in subgroup analysis of patients who underwent sublobar resection with positive margins. RESULTS: Positive margins occurred in 5089 (2.8%) of 181,824 patients and were more common in sublobar resections compared with lobectomy (4.3% vs 2.4%; P < .001). Sublobar resection had the strongest association with positive margins in multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.91-2.23; P < .001). Patients with positive margins were more likely to undergo both adjuvant chemotherapy (16% vs 13%; P < .001) and radiation (17% vs 1%; P < .001) but had worse survival in univariate analysis (44.0% 5-year overall survival vs 69.2%; P < .001) and multivariable Cox analysis (hazard ratio, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.63-1.78; P < .001) in the entire cohort, as well as in a univariate subset analysis of lobectomy (46.9% vs 70.4%; P < .001) and sublobar resection (37.5% vs 64.1%; P < .001). Postoperative radiation for patients who underwent sublobar resection with positive margins did not improve 5-year overall survival (36.3% for irradiated patients vs 38.3% for nonirradiated patients; P = .57), and patients who underwent sublobar resection with positive margins who were treated with radiation had survival inferior to that of patients who underwent lobectomy with negative margins. CONCLUSIONS: Positive margins occur more frequently after sublobar resection of clinical stage I NSCLC compared with lobectomy. Patients with positive margins have worse survival than patients who undergo complete resection and are not rescued by postoperative radiation.

Measurements of Impoverishing and Catastrophic Surgical Health Expenditures in Low- and Middle-Income Countries and Reduction Interventions in the Last 30 Years: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 33 million people suffer catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) from surgery and/or anesthesia costs. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate catastrophic and impoverishing expenditure associated with surgery and anesthesia in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS: We performed a systematic review of all studies from 1990 to 2021 that reported CHE in LMICs for treatment of a condition requiring surgical intervention, including cesarean section, trauma care, and other surgery. RESULTS: 77 studies met inclusion criteria. Tertiary facilities (23.4%) were the most frequently studied facility type. Only 11.7% of studies were conducted in exclusively rural health-care settings. Almost 60% of studies were retrospective in nature. The cost of procedures ranged widely, from $26 USD for a cesarean section in Mauritania in 2020 to $74,420 for a pancreaticoduodenectomy in India in 2018. GDP per capita had a narrower range from $315 USD in Malawi in 2019 to $9955 USD in Malaysia in 2015 (Median = $1605.50, interquartile range = $1208.74). 35 studies discussed interventions to reduce cost and catastrophic expenditure. Four of those studies stated that their intervention was not successful, 18 had an unknown or equivocal effect on cost and CHE, and 13 concluded that their intervention did help reduce cost and CHE. CONCLUSIONS: CHE from surgery is a worldwide problem that most acutely affects vulnerable patients in LMICs. Existing efforts are insufficient to meet the true need for affordable surgical care unless assistance for ancillary costs is given to patients and families most at risk from CHE.

Randomized controlled trials in lung cancer surgery: How are we doing?

Objective: Randomized control trials are considered the highest level of evidence, yet the scalability and practicality of implementing randomized control trials in the thoracic surgical oncology space are not well described. The aim of this study is to understand what types of randomized control trials have been conducted in thoracic surgical oncology and ascertain their success rate in completing them as originally planned. Methods: The ClinicalTrials.gov database was queried in April 2023 to identify registered randomized control trials performed in patients with lung cancer who underwent surgery (by any technique) as part of their treatment. Results: There were 68 eligible randomized control trials; 33 (48.5%) were intended to examine different perioperative patient management strategies (eg, analgesia, ventilation, drainage) or to examine different intraoperative technical aspects (eg, stapling, number of ports, port placement, ligation). The number of randomized control trials was relatively stable over time until a large increase in randomized control trials starting in 2016. Forty-four of the randomized control trials (64.7%) were open-label studies, 43 (63.2%) were conducted in a single facility, 66 (97.1%) had 2 arms, and the mean number of patients enrolled per randomized control trial was 236 (SD, 187). Of 21 completed randomized control trials (31%), the average time to complete accrual was 1605 days (4.4 years) and average time to complete primary/secondary outcomes and adverse events collection was 2125 days (5.82 years). Conclusions: Given the immense investment of resources that randomized control trials require, these findings suggest the need to scrutinize future randomized control trial proposals to assess the likelihood of successful completion. Future study is needed to understand the various contributing factors to randomized control trial success or failure.

Barriers to Completing Low Dose Computed Tomography Scan for Lung Cancer Screening.

INTRODUCTION: Annual low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening has been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality in high-risk individuals by detecting the disease at an earlier stage. This study aims to assess the barriers to completing LDCT in a cohort of patients who were determined eligible for lung cancer screening (LCS). METHODS: We performed a single institution, mixed methods, cross-sectional study of patients who had a LDCT ordered from July to December 2022. We then completed phone surveys with patients who did not complete LDCT to assess knowledge, attitude, and perceptions toward LCS. RESULTS: We identified 380 patients who met inclusion criteria, including 331 (87%) who completed LDCT and 49 (13%) who did not. Patients who completed a LDCT and those who did not were similar regarding age, sex, race, primary language, household income, body mass index, median pack years, and quit time. Positive predictors of LDCT completion were: meeting USPSTF guidelines (97.9% vs 81.6%), being married (58.3% vs 44.9%), former versus current smokers (55% vs 41.7%), personal history of emphysema (60.4% vs 42.9%), and family history of lung cancer (13.9% vs 4.1%) (all P < .05). Of the patients who participated in the phone survey, only 7% of respondents thought they were high risk for developing lung cancer despite attending a shared decision-making visit and only 10% wanted to re-schedule their LDCT. CONCLUSION: There exist barriers to completing LDCT even after patients are identified as eligible and complete a shared decision-making visit secondary to knowledge barriers, misperceptions, and patient disinterest.

Harnessing Opportunity: Pilot Intervention to Improve Lung Cancer Screening for Women Undergoing Breast Screening Mammography.

Introduction: The screening mammogram could be a "teachable moment" to improve lung cancer screening (LCS) uptake. The aim of our project was to combine patient self-referral with eligibility identification by providers as a two-pronged approach to increase rates of LCS among eligible women. Methods: LCS education materials were created to stimulate patient education and encourage self-referral. Chart review of patients scheduled for screening mammography was performed to identify patients who met LCS criteria. The primary outcome was rate of acceptance of targeted interventions as measured by qualitative survey material and rate of LCS uptake. Results: Between August 2022 and August 2023, 116 patients were identified by providers for potential eligibility for LCS and 34 patients (29.3%) deemed eligible based on the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force 2021 guidelines. There were 19 patients (56%) who completed LCS with three patients (16%) with screen-detected nodules that led to further workup. Post-implementation qualitative survey results reveal that 100% of the participants rated their shared decision-making visit experience as "very helpful" and 67% responded "very likely" to seek simultaneous breast and LCS in the future. Informational materials were rated as 80% favorable among all respondents; however, the rate of self-referral alone was 0%. The combined rates of eligible patients lost to follow-up or refusal was 24%. Conclusion: The self-referral aspect of the intervention revealed that patients are unlikely to self-refer for LCS. Nevertheless, patients undergoing screening mammograms individually identified for LCS were very responsive to learning more about dual screening.

The Impact of Immunotherapy Use in Stage IIIA (T1-2N2) NSCLC: A Nationwide Analysis.

Introduction: Multiple clinical trials have revealed the benefit of immunotherapy (IO) for NSCLC, including unresectable stage III disease. Our aim was to investigate the impact of IO use on treatment and outcomes of potentially resectable stage IIIA NSCLC in a broader nationwide patient cohort. Methods: We queried the National Cancer Database (2004-2019) for patients with stage IIIA (T1-2N2) NSCLC. Treatment and survival were evaluated with descriptive statistics, logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and Cox proportional hazards modeling. Results: Overall, 5.5% (3777 of 68,335) of patients received IO. IO use was uncommon until 2017, but by 2019, it was given to 40.1% (1544 of 2308) of stage IIIA patients. The increased use of IO after 2017 was associated with increased definitive chemoradiation treatment (54.2% [6800 of 12,535] from years 2017 to 2019 versus 46.9% [26,251 of 55,914] from 2004 to 2016, p < 0.001) and less use of surgery (18.1% [2266 of 12,535] from years 2017 to 2019 versus 22.0% [12,300 of 55,914] from 2004 to 2016, p < 0.001). IO treatment was associated with significantly better 5-year survival in the entire cohort (36.9% versus 23.4%, p < 0.001) and the subsets of patients treated with chemoradiation (37.2% versus 22.7%, p < 0.001) and surgery (48.6% versus 44.3%, p < 0.001). Pneumonectomy use decreased with increased IO treatment (5.1% of surgical patients [116 of 2266] from years 2017 to 2019 versus 9.2% [1127 of 12,300] from 2004 to 2016, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Increased use of IO was associated with a change in treatment patterns and improved survival for patients with stage IIIA(N2) NSCLC.

Lepidic-Type Lung Adenocarcinomas: Is It Safe to Observe for Growth Before Treating?

BACKGROUND: Lepidic-type adenocarcinomas (LPAs) can be multifocal, and treatment is often deferred until growth is observed. This study investigated the potential downside of that strategy by evaluating the relationship of nodal involvement with tumor size and survival. METHODS: The impact of tumor size on lymph node involvement and survival was evaluated for National Cancer Database patients who underwent surgery without induction therapy as primary treatment for cT1-3 N0 M0 histologically confirmed LPA from 2006 to 2019 by using logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox analyses. RESULTS: Positive nodes occurred in 442 of 8286 patients (5.3%). The incidence of having positive nodes approximately doubled with each 1-cm increment increase in size. Patients with positive nodes were more likely to have larger tumors (27 mm vs 20 mm, P < .001) and clinical ≥T2 disease (40.7% vs 26.8%, P < .001) compared with node-negative patients. However, tumor size was the only significant independent predictor of having positive nodal disease in logistic regression analysis, and this association grew stronger with each incremental centimeter increase in size. Patients with positive nodes were more likely to undergo adjuvant radiotherapy (23.5% vs 1.1%, P < .001) and chemotherapy (72.9% vs 7.9%, P < .001), and expectedly, had worse survival compared with the node-negative group in univariate (5-year overall survival, 50.9% vs 81.1%, P < .001) and multivariable (hazard ratio, 2.56; 95% CI, 2.14-3.05; P < .001) analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Nodal involvement is relatively uncommon in early-stage LPAs but steadily increases with tumor size and is associated with dramatically worse survival. These data can be used to inform treatment decisions when evaluating LPA patients.

Evaluating Global Surgery Partnerships From Low and Middle Income Country Perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about perceptions of low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) partners regarding global surgery collaborations with high-income countries (HICs). METHODS: A survey was distributed to surgeons from LMICs to assess the nature and perception of collaborations, funding, benefits, communication, and the effects of COVID-19 on partnerships. RESULTS: We received 19 responses from LMIC representatives in 12 countries on three continents. The majority (83%) had participated in collaborations within the past 5 y with 39% of collaborations were facilitated virtually. Clinical and educational partnerships (39% each) were ranked most important by respondents. Sustainability of the partnership was most successfully achieved in domains of education/training (78%) and research (61%). The majority (77%) of respondents reported expressing their needs before HIC team arrival. However, 54% of respondents were the ones to initiate the conversation and only 47% said HIC partners understood the overall environment well at arrival to LMIC. Almost all participants (95%) felt a formal process of collaboration and a structured partnership would benefit all parties in assessing needs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, 87% of participants reported continued collaborations; however, 44% of partners felt that relationships were weaker, 31% felt relationships were stronger, and 25% felt they were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides a snapshot of LMIC surgeons' perspectives on collaboration in global surgery. Independent of location, LMIC partners cite inadequate structure for long-term collaborations. We propose a formal pathway and initiation process to assess resources and needs at the outset of a partnership.

Surgical revision of the postesophagectomy gastric conduit to address poor emptying.

Introduction: The configuration of the gastric conduit after esophagectomy can lead to chronic gastrointestinal and respiratory issues. Surgical revision of the gastric conduit has been described in small series but appears to be infrequently used. We investigated outcomes of revising dilated or redundant conduit in patients with severe quality-of-life issues. Methods: We identified all patients from 2016 to 2022 at our institution who underwent gastric conduit revision after previous esophagectomy either at our or another institution. Chart review was performed to assess prerevision course and perioperative outcomes. Pre- and postrevision imaging was compared for all patients to assess the impact of surgery on anatomic configuration. Patient-reported gastrointestinal and respiratory issues before and after surgery were examined. Results: The use of right thoracotomy combined with laparotomy to reduce redundancy and improve gastric emptying was performed in 8 patients. The symptoms necessitating reoperation included intolerance to oral intake and poor gastric emptying associated with both acute and chronic aspiration episodes. The median length of stay was 8 [4, 25] days, and there were no perioperative mortalities. Seven (87.5%) patients were tolerating oral intake at discharge. All patients had improvement in their prerevision symptoms on follow-up. Conclusions: Gastric conduit revision can improve severe postesophagectomy gastrointestinal and respiratory symptoms in patients with dilated/redundant conduits with limited perioperative morbidity.

Usability of ENTRUST as an Assessment Tool for Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs): A Mixed Methods Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: As the American Board of Surgery transitions to a competency-based model of surgical education centered upon entrustable professional activities (EPAs), there is a growing need for objective tools to determine readiness for entrustment. This study evaluates the usability of ENTRUST, an innovative virtual patient simulation platform to assess surgical trainees' decision-making skills in preoperative, intra-operative, and post-operative settings. DESIGN: This is a mixed-methods analysis of the usability of the ENTRUST platform. Quantitative data was collected using the system usability scale (SUS) and Likert responses. Analysis was performed with descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, and multivariable linear regression. Qualitative analysis of open-ended responses was performed using the Nielsen-Shneiderman Heuristics framework. SETTING: This study was conducted at an academic institution in a proctored exam setting. PARTICIPANTS: The analysis includes n = 47 (PGY 1-5) surgical residents who completed an online usability survey following the ENTRUST Inguinal Hernia EPA Assessment. RESULTS: The ENTRUST platform had a median SUS score of 82.5. On bivariate and multivariate analyses, there were no significant differences between usability based on demographic characteristics (all p > 0.05), and SUS score was independent of ENTRUST performance (r = 0.198, p = 0.18). Most participants agreed that the clinical workup of the patient was engaging (91.5%) and felt realistic (85.1%). The most frequent heuristics represented in the qualitative analysis included feedback, visibility, match, and control. Additional themes of educational value, enjoyment, and ease-of-use highlighted participants' perspectives on the usability of ENTRUST. CONCLUSIONS: ENTRUST demonstrates high usability in this population. Usability was independent of ENTRUST score performance and there were no differences in usability identified in this analysis based on demographic subgroups. Qualitative analysis highlighted the acceptability of ENTRUST and will inform ongoing development of the platform. The ENTRUST platform holds potential as a tool for the assessment of EPAs in surgical residency programs.

Measurements of Surgical Volume in Low- and Middle-Income Countries, a Systematic Review.

Background: Surgical volume is a surgical indicator that was described in the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery (LCoGS) and the World Bank World Development Indicators as an important metric for tracking the delivery of surgical care. Objectives: We aimed to characterize the reports on surgical volume (SV) in the existing literature by using a systematic review to assess studies that examine surgical procedures as a ratio of a population (procedures/100,000 population). Methods: The PRISMA guideline was employed in the systematic review of articles that addressed the measurement of SV in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), with the primary outcome of surgical procedures/100,000 population. Findings: The search result consisted of 6,657 preliminary studies. Following the title and abstract screening, 6,464 articles were excluded, and the remaining 193 were included in the full text review. From the full text review of the 193, only 26 of these articles defined SV as the ratio of number of procedures per population of the catchment/geographical area. The reported SV was a mean of 765, with an SD of 1260 operations per 100,000. The median SV was 180 (min = 0.900, max = 4470). Conclusion: Our findings support the LCoGS assessment of the gap in surgical care. The target for SV is 5000 per 100,000 population, compared to the average of 765 per 100,000 population as found in this review. The challenges for assessing surgical volume gaps are vast, including the nature of written records, which limits SV reports to an absolute number of procedures per year without a reference to the catchment population. For the purpose of tracking SV, we recommend using proxies that account for the capacity of facilities to deliver care regardless of the catchment population.

Myocardial extracellular volume fraction is positively associated with activated monocyte subsets among cART-treated persons living with HIV in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Despite treatment with combination antiretroviral therapy (cART), persons living with HIV (PLWH) are at higher risk of cardiac structural abnormalities that may presage clinical heart failure, including myocardial fibrosis. This study assessed whether circulating cellular and soluble protein markers of immune activation cross-sectionally associate with myocardial fibrosis among cART-treated PLWH in South Africa. METHODS: Participants were enrolled in Khayelitsha township near Cape Town, SA. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging was performed. Plasma protein biomarkers were measured using enzyme-linked immunoassays and monocyte phenotypes were evaluated using flow cytometry. Associations were assessed using multivariable linear and logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 69 cART-treated PLWH, mean (SD) age was 48 (10) years, 71% were female, and time since HIV diagnosis was 9 (6) years. Evidence of left ventricular fibrosis by late gadolinium enhancement was present in 74% of participants and mean (SD) extracellular volume fraction (ECV) was 30.9 (5.9)%. Degree of myocardial fibrosis/inflammation measured by ECV was positively associated with percentages of circulating non-classical and intermediate monocyte phenotypes reflecting inflammation and tissue injury. CONCLUSION: These data generate hypotheses on possible immune mechanisms of HIV-associated non-ischemic myocardial disease, specifically among cART-treated PLWH in sub-Saharan Africa, where the majority of the HIV burden exists globally.

Emergency department thoracotomy in children: A Pediatric Trauma Society, Western Trauma Association, and Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma systematic review and practice management guideline.

BACKGROUND: The role of emergency department resuscitative thoracotomy (EDT) in traumatically injured children has not been elucidated. We aimed to perform a systematic review and create evidence-based guidelines to answer the following PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) question: should pediatric patients who present to the emergency department pulseless (with or without signs of life [SOL]) after traumatic injuries (penetrating thoracic, penetrating abdominopelvic, or blunt) undergo EDT (vs. no EDT) to improve survival and neurologically intact survival? METHODS: Using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology, a group of 12 pediatric trauma experts from the Pediatric Trauma Society, Western Trauma Association, and Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma assembled to perform a systematic review. A consensus conference was conducted, a database was queried, abstracts and manuscripts were reviewed, data extraction was performed, and evidence quality was determined. Evidence tables were generated, and the committee voted on guideline recommendations. RESULTS: Three hundred three articles were identified. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria and were used for guideline creation, providing 319 pediatric patients who underwent EDT. No data were available on patients who did not undergo EDT. For each PICO, the quality of evidence was very low based on the serious risk of bias and serious or very serious imprecision. CONCLUSION: Based on low-quality data, we make the following recommendations. We conditionally recommend EDT when a child presents pulseless with SOL to the emergency department following penetrating thoracic injury, penetrating abdominopelvic injury and after blunt injury if emergency adjuncts point to a thoracic source. We conditionally recommend against EDT when a pediatric patient presents pulseless without SOL after penetrating thoracic and penetrating abdominopelvic injury. We strongly recommend against EDT in the patient without SOL after blunt injury.

Achieving global surgical excellence: an evidence-based framework to guide surgical quality improvement programs in low and middle income countries.

Objectives: There is a lack of evidence-based guidelines for enhancing global surgical care delivery. We propose a set of recommendations to serve as a framework to guide surgical quality improvement and scale-up initiatives in low and middle income countries (LMICs). Methods: From January-December 2019, we reviewed the available literature and their application toward LMIC settings. The first initiative was the establishment of Best Practices Recommendations intended to summarize best-level evidence around quality improvement processes that have shown to decrease morbidity and mortality in LMICs. The GRADE level of evidence and strength of the recommendation were assigned in accordance with the WHO handbook for guidelines development. The second initiative was the scale-up of principles and practices by establishing international expert consensus on the optimal organization of surgical services in LMICs using a modified Delphi methodology. Results: Recommendations for three topic areas were established: reducing surgical site infections, improving quality of trauma systems, and interventions to reduce maternal and perinatal mortality. 27 studies were included in a quantitative synthesis and meta-analysis for interventions reducing surgical site infections, 27 studies for interventions improving the quality of trauma systems, and 14 studies for interventions reducing maternal and perinatal mortality. Using Delphi methodology, an international expert panel established consensus that district hospitals should place the highest priority on developing surgical services for low complexity, high volume conditions. At the national level, emergency and essential surgical care should be integrated within national Universal Health Coverage frameworks. Conclusions: This project fills a critical cap in the rapidly developing field of global surgery: gathering evidence-based, practical, and cost-effective solutions that will serve as a guide for the efficient planning and allocation of resources necessary to promote quality and safe essential surgical services in LMICs.

The impact of neoadjuvant immunotherapy on perioperative outcomes and survival after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Objective: Immunotherapy for esophageal cancer is relatively novel but increasingly used. This study evaluated the early use of immunotherapy as an adjunct to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy before esophagectomy for locally advanced disease. Methods: Perioperative morbidity (composite of mortality, hospitalization ≥21 days, or readmission) and survival of patients with locally advanced (cT3N0M0, cT1-3N + M0) distal esophageal cancer in the National Cancer Database from 2013 to 2020 who underwent neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemoradiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy alone followed by esophagectomy were evaluated using logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier curves, Cox proportional hazards methods, and propensity-matched analysis. Results: Immunotherapy was used in 165 (1.6%) of 10,348 patients. Younger age (odds ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.81; P < .001) predicted immunotherapy use, which slightly delayed time from diagnosis to surgery versus chemoradiation alone (immunotherapy 148 [interquartile range, 128-177] days vs chemoradiation 138 [interquartile range, 120-162] days, P < .001). There were no statistically significant differences between the immunotherapy and chemoradiation groups for the composite major morbidity index (14.5% [24/165] vs 15.6% [1584/10,183], P = .8). Immunotherapy was associated with a significant improvement in median overall survival (69.1 months vs 56.3 months, P = .005) and 3-year overall survival in univariate analysis (65.6% [95% confidence interval, 57.7-74.5] vs 55.0% [53.9-56.1], P = .005), and independently predicted improved survival in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio 0.68 [95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.89], P = .006). Propensity-matched analysis also showed that immunotherapy use was not associated with increased surgical morbidity (P = .5) but was associated with improved survival (P = .047). Conclusions: Neoadjuvant immunotherapy use before esophagectomy for locally advanced esophageal cancer did not lead to worse perioperative outcomes and shows promising results on midterm survival.