BACKGROUND: The impact of surgeon and hospital operative volume on esophagectomy outcomes is well-described; however, studies examining the influence of surgeon specialty remain limited. Therefore, we evaluated the impact of surgeon specialty on short-term outcomes following esophagectomy for cancer. METHODS: The 2016-2019 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS NSQIP) was queried to identify all patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surgeon specialty was categorized as general (GS) or thoracic (TS). Entropy balancing was used to generate sample weights that adjust for baseline differences between GS and TS patients. Weights were subsequently applied to multivariable linear and logistic regressions, which were used to evaluate the independent association of surgeon specialty with 30-day mortality, complications, and postoperative length of stay. RESULTS: Of 2657 esophagectomies included for analysis, 54.1% were performed by TS. Both groups had similar distributions of age, sex, and body mass index. TS patients more frequently underwent transthoracic esophagectomy, while GS patients more commonly received minimally invasive surgery. After adjustment, surgeon specialty was not associated with altered odds of 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.10 p = 0.73) or anastomotic leak (AOR 0.87, p = 0.33). However, TS patients exhibited a 40-min reduction in operative duration and faced greater odds of perioperative transfusion, relative to GS. CONCLUSION: Among ACS NSQIP participating centers, surgeon specialty influenced operative duration and blood product utilization, but not mortality and anastomotic leak. Our results support the relative safety of esophagectomy performed by select GS and TS.

Background

Sociodemographic disparities in atrial fibrillation (AF) management and thromboembolic prophylaxis have previously been reported, which may involve inequitable access to left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) during cardiac surgery. The present study aimed to evaluate the association of LAAO utilization with sex, race, and hospital region among patients with AF undergoing heart valve operations.

Methods

Adults with AF undergoing valve replacement/repair in the 2012-2019 National Inpatient Sample were identified and stratified based on concurrent LAAO. Multivariable linear and logistic regressions were developed to identify factors associated with LAAO utilization. Mortality, complications including stroke and thromboembolism, hospitalization costs and length of stay (LOS) were secondarily assessed.

Results

Of 382,580 patients undergoing valve operations, 18.7% underwent concomitant LAAO. Over the study period, the proportion of female patients receiving LAAO significantly decreased from 44.8% to 38.9% (p<0.001). Upon risk adjustment, female (AOR 0.93 [95% CI 0.89-0.97]) and Black patients (0.91 [0.83-0.99]) had significantly reduced odds of undergoing LAAO compared to males and Whites, respectively. Additionally, hospitals in the Midwest (1.38 [1.24-1.51]) and West (1.26 [1.15-1.36]) had increased likelihood of LAAO whereas Northeast hospitals (0.85 [0.77-0.94)] had decreased odds relative to the South. Furthermore, LAAO was associated with decreased stroke (0.71 [0.60-0.84]) and thromboembolism (0.68 [0.54-0.86]), $4,200 reduction in costs and 1-day decrement in LOS.

Conclusions

Female and Black patients had significantly lower odds while Midwest and Western hospitals had greater odds of LAAO utilization. Enhancing access to LAAO during valvular surgery is warranted to improve clinical and financial outcomes for patients with AF.

BACKGROUND: Expedited discharge following esophagectomy is controversial due to concerns for higher readmissions and financial burden. The present study aimed to evaluate the association of expedited discharge with hospitalization costs and unplanned readmissions following esophagectomy for malignant lesions. METHODS: Adults undergoing elective esophagectomy for cancer were identified in the 2014-2019 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Patients discharged by postoperative day 7 were considered Expedited and others as Routine. Patients who did not survive to discharge or had major perioperative complications were excluded. Multivariable regression models were constructed to assess association of expedited discharge with index hospitalization costs as well as 30- and 90-day non-elective readmissions. RESULTS: Of 9,886 patients who met study criteria, 34.6% comprised the Expedited cohort. After adjustment, female sex (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.71, p = 0.001) and increasing Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (AOR 0.88/point, p<0.001) were associated with lower odds of expedited discharge, while laparoscopic (AOR 1.63, p<0.001, Ref: open) and robotic (AOR 1.67, p = 0.003, Ref: open) approach were linked to greater likelihood. Patients at centers in the highest-tertile of minimally invasive esophagectomy volume had increased odds of expedited discharge (AOR 1.52, p = 0.025, Ref: lowest-tertile). On multivariable analysis, expedited discharge was independently associated with an $8,300 reduction in hospitalization costs. Notably, expedited discharge was associated with similar odds of 30-day (AOR 1.10, p = 0.40) and 90-day (AOR 0.90, p = 0.70) unplanned readmissions. CONCLUSION: Expedited discharge after esophagectomy was associated with decreased costs and unaltered readmissions. Prospective studies are necessary to robustly evaluate whether expedited discharge is appropriate for select patients undergoing esophagectomy.