Orthopedic Oncology Experience During Residency

Trends in Case Volume Reported by Musculoskeletal Oncology Fellows in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-Accredited Training Programs: 2017 to 2022

INTRODUCTION

Increasingly, national accrediting bodies and professional societies for musculoskeletal oncology recognize the need for more standardized training. This study elucidates recent trends in reported case volume during Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited musculoskeletal oncology fellowship training relative to case minimum requirements.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of fellows at ACGME-accredited musculoskeletal oncology fellowships (2017 to 2022). Percentiles in reported case volumes were calculated across ACGME-defined case categories and temporal changes assessed by linear regression. Variability between the highest (90th percentile) and lowest (10th percentile) deciles was calculated as fold differences. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to estimate the number of fellows not meeting ACGME-defined case minimum requirements.

RESULTS

Case logs from 95 musculoskeletal oncology fellows were analyzed. From 2017 to 2022, total relevant oncology procedures increased from 191 ± 49 to 228 ± 73 (P = 0.066). Pediatric oncology accounted for a minority of cases (range, 6 to 8%). A mean of 222 total relevant oncology procedures were reported. Most were in management of metastatic disease (21%), soft-tissue resection/reconstruction (20%), and limb salvage (13%). Variability in total relevant oncology procedures was 2.6 and greatest in spine/pelvis (4.6), pediatric oncologic cases (4.4), and surgical management of complications (4.4). No clear trends were observed in case volume variability over the study period (P > 0.05). Analysis of case volume percentiles identified at least 30% of musculoskeletal oncology fellows not achieving minimum requirements for pediatric oncologic cases (n = 29 fellows) and 10% of fellows not achieving minimum requirements for total relevant oncology procedures (n = 10 fellows).

DISCUSSION

Results from this study may help future musculoskeletal oncology fellows and faculty identify potential areas to increase case exposure and reduce variability during fellowship training. More investigation is needed to determine evidence-based case minimum requirements including surgical learning curves and other competency-based assessment tools in musculoskeletal oncology.

Orthopaedic vs. Neurosurgery - Does a surgeon's specialty have an influence on 90-day complications following surgical intervention of spinal metastases?

OBJECTIVES

Spinal metastases are routinely managed and/or operated on by both orthopaedic surgeons and neurological surgeons. However, controversy still exists as to whether the operating surgeon's specialty has an impact on post-operative complication rates.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The 2007-2017 Humana Administrative Claims database was queried using Current Procedural Terminology codes to identify patients undergoing fusions, laminectomies or osteotomy/corpectomy for spinal metastases. Physician taxonomy codes were used to identify the operating surgeon's specialty (orthopaedic vs. neurosurgery). Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to assess difference in 90-day complications, readmissions and mortality between the two specialties while controlling for age, gender, race, co-morbidity burden, procedural characteristics (fusion, laminectomy and/or osteotomy/corpectomy) and type of primary cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 887 patients undergoing surgical intervention for spinal metastases were included - out of which 204 (23.0 %) patients were operated on by orthopaedic surgeons and 683 (77.0 %) by neurosurgeons. Following adjustment for difference in patient demographics and baseline clinical characteristics, no statistically significant differences were noted between the two specialties with regards to wound complications (p = 0.992), pulmonary complications (p = 0.461), cardiac complications (p = 0.631), thrombotic complications (p = 0.177), sepsis (p = 0.463), pneumonia (p = 0.767), urinary tract infection (p = 0.916), acute renal failure (p = 0.934), hardware complications (p = 0.892), emergency department visits (p = 0.934), 90-day readmissions (p = 0.277) and 90-day mortality (p = 0.786).

CONCLUSIONS

Based off our findings, it appears that a surgeon's specialty has no influence on intermediate-term complications following surgical intervention for spinal metastases. The findings of the study should support the need for maintaining access of patients to both specialties for appropriate surgical consultation.