The effect of surgeon volume on procedure selection in non–small cell lung cancer surgeries

Pneumonectomy for non-small cell lung cancer. A National Cancer Database analysis of geographic and temporal trends, outcomes, and associated factors

BACKGROUND

The circumstances under which pneumonectomy should be performed are controversial. This study aims to investigate national trends in pneumonectomy use to determine which patients, in what geographic areas, and under what clinical circumstances pneumonectomy is performed in the United States.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database and included all patients undergoing anatomic surgical resection for non-small cell lung cancer (2015-2020). The association between demographic and clinical factors and the use of pneumonectomy were investigated.

RESULTS

Who: A total of 128,421 patients were identified, of whom 738 (0.6%) underwent pneumonectomy. Those patients were younger (median 65 vs 68 years, P < .001), more often male (59.9% vs 44.9%, P < .001), more likely to be below median income level (44.2% vs 38.6%, P = .002), and more likely to have lower education indicators (53% vs 48.6%, P = .02) than those who underwent other anatomic resections. Notably, there was a decreasing trend in pneumonectomy use during the study period (0.9% down to 0.4%, P < .001). Where: Patients undergoing pneumonectomy were less likely to live in metropolitan areas (77.9% vs 81.7%, P = .008) and to live closer (<12 miles) to their treating facility (45% vs 49%, P = .02). Regional geographic differences also were identified (P < .001). Why: Patients who underwent pneumonectomy were more likely to have received neoadjuvant therapy (20.6% vs 5.3%, P < .001), to be clinically N (+) (39.3% vs 12.3%, P < .001), and to have more advanced tumors (cT3-4: 46.3% vs 11.3%, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Although primarily driven by advanced oncologic features, socioeconomic and geographic factors also were associated independently with the use of pneumonectomy. Standardizing pneumonectomy indications nationwide is crucial to prevent widening outcome gaps for patients with lung cancer.

National Thoracic Surgery Standards Implementation: Barriers, Enablers, and Opportunities

Background: Diagnosis and surgical treatment decision making for thoracic cancers is complex. Moreover, there is demonstrated variability in how each province in Canada delivers cancer care, resulting in disparities in patient outcomes. Recently, the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (CPAC) published pan-Canadian evidence-based standards for the care of thoracic surgery cancer patients. This study was undertaken to assess the degree to which these standards were currently met in practice and to further understand the determinants to their implementation nationally. Methods: This study was undertaken in two parts: (1) a national survey of thoracic surgeons to assess the perceived extent of implementation of these standards in their institution and province; and (2) formation of a focus group with a representative sample of thoracic surgeons across Canada in a qualitative study to understand the determinants of successful standards implementation. Results: 37 surgeons (33% response rate) participated in the survey; 78% were from academic hospitals. The top categories of standards that were under-implemented included (a) quality assurance processes, data collection and clinician audit and feedback, and (b) ongoing regional planning and workload assessments for thoracic surgeons, and (c) pathology turnaround time target of two weeks and the use of a standardized synoptic pathology report format. Enablers, barriers, and opportunities for standards implementation contextualized the discussion within the focus group. Conclusion: Study results demonstrated variation in the implementation of surgery standards across Canada and identified the determinants to the delivery of high quality surgical care. Future work will need to include the promotion and development of quality improvement strategies and effective resource allocation that is aligned with the implementation of thoracic cancer surgery standards in order to improve patient outcomes.

[Minimum volumes in surgical treatment of lung cancer : A survey of thoracic surgeons in Germany on the introduction of a minimum volume regulation for surgical treatment of lung cancer]

BACKGROUND

The Federal Joint Committee (G‑BA) is currently discussing the introduction of new minimum volume regulations (MVR) in Germany. The present study examined the current opinions of active thoracic surgeons regarding minimum volumes (MV) for the surgical treatment of lung cancer.

METHODS

The participating centers for the online survey were identified on the basis of the thoracic surgery departments in the 2017 hospital directory (Federal Statistical Office), lung cancer centers (German Cancer Society), certified centers of excellence for thoracic surgery (German Society for Thoracic Surgery), hospitals with a focus on lung surgery and German university hospitals. They were asked about the potential effects of MVR on the quality of results and quality of care, economic aspects and the structure of care. Furthermore, a recommendation for MV was requested and possible provisions for exemption were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 145 hospitals (response rate 85%) with 454 thoracic surgeons (response rate 54%) were surveyed. The results showed a high degree of approval for MV to improve the quality of results and 78.4% of the surgeons surveyed expected it to result in centralization of surgical care, although this would not lead to a deterioration in care according to 70.1% of the participants. Approximately 46.1% of the participants expected care to become more economical and 83.3% supported the introduction of an MVR, with the average recommended MV being 67 anatomical lung resections per center per year.

CONCLUSION

An MVR for the surgical treatment of lung cancer met with a high degree of approval among active thoracic surgeons. The MV that was called for (n = 67) was slightly below the prerequisite for primary surgical cases at a certified lung cancer center.

Association Between Treatment Facility Volume, Therapy Types, and Overall Survival in Patients With Stage IIIA Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

There is significant heterogeneity in the treatment of stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study evaluated the therapeutic and survival disparities in patients with stage IIIA NSCLC based on the facility volume using the National Cancer Database.

METHODS

Patients with stage IIIA NSCLC diagnosed from 2004 through 2015 were included. Facilities were classified by tertiles based on mean patients treated per year, with low-volume facilities treating ≤8 patients, intermediate-volume treating 9 to 14 patients, and high-volume treating ≥15 patients. Cox multivariate analysis was used to determine the volume-outcome relationship.

RESULTS

Analysis included 83,673 patients treated at 1,319 facilities. Compared with patients treated at low-volume facilities, those treated at high-volume centers were more likely to be treated with surgical (25% vs 18%) and trimodality (12% vs 9%) therapies. In multivariate analysis, facility volume was independently associated with all-cause mortality (P<.0001). Median overall survival by facility volume was 15, 16, and 19 months for low-, intermediate-, and high-volume facilities, respectively (P<.001). Compared with patients treated at high-volume facilities, those treated at intermediate- and low-volume facilities had a significantly higher risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.07-1.11] and 1.11 [95% CI, 1.09-1.13], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated for stage IIIA NSCLC at high-volume facilities were more likely to receive surgical and trimodality therapies and had a significant improvement in survival.

Does one size fit all? An evaluation of the 2018 Leapfrog Group minimal hospital and surgeon volume thresholds for lung surgery

BACKGROUND

In 2018, the Leapfrog Group set minimum annual lung cancer surgery hospital and surgeon volume thresholds of 40 and 15, respectively. We examined whether outcomes associated with these Leapfrog Group volume thresholds are comparable for patients at the extremes of age and comorbidities.

METHODS

We assessed lung cancer patients undergoing lobectomy or pneumonectomy in the New York and Florida State Inpatient Databases for 2007 to 2013. Multivariate logit models evaluated in-hospital mortality, complications, and prolonged length of stay. Median surgeon and hospital volumes were compared between "younger-healthier" (age 18-60 years, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index <1) and "older-sicker" patients (age >77 years, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index >3).

RESULTS

The 27,841 patients included 13,277 men (48%). The median patient age was 69 years (interquartile range, 61-77), and mortality was 2.1%. Patients treated by both low-volume surgeons (<15 annual cases) and at low-volume hospitals (<40) had the greatest risk of mortality (2.5%), except for the cohort of younger-healthier patients (mortality <2%). Mortality for older-sicker patients was highest for high-volume surgeons (12%), although higher hospital volume was protective. Increasing hospital volume was associated with decreased mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.997; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.995-0.998; P = .0103), complications (OR, 0.998; 95% CI, 0.997-0.999; P < .001), and prolonged length of stay (OR, 0.998; 95% CI, 0.997-1.00; P = .01); similarly, higher surgeon volume was associated with decreased mortality (OR, 0.997; 95% CI, 0.99-1.00; P = .03), complications (OR, 0.997; 95% CI, 0.994-1.00; P = .02), and prolonged length of stay (OR, 0.991; 95% CI, 0.986-0.995; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital volume has a greater effect on morbidity and mortality than surgeon volume especially for older-sicker patients, suggesting that Leapfrog Group volume guidelines should emphasize hospital volume over surgeon volume and may be less relevant for younger-healthier patients.

[Diagnosis and Treatment of Pulmonary Ground-glass Nodules]

Recent widespread use of high resolution computed tomography (HRCT) for the screening of lung cancer have led to an increase in the detection rate of very faint and smaller lesions known as ground-glass nodule (GGN). However, it had been proved that GGN was well associated with lung cancer in previous studies. Therefore, the classification, imaging characteristics, pathological type, follow-up, suggested managements and other clinical concerns of GGN were reviewed in this paper.
.

A Prospective Observational Study of Pulmonary Resection for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in Patients Older Than 75 Years

The operative morbidity rate in elderly patients with lung cancer is high in comparison to nonelderly patients, probably because of the increase in comorbidities that occurs with aging. However, previous reports were retrospective and were performed at single institutions; thus, the preoperative comorbidities and operative morbidity could not be fully assessed. We conducted a multi-institutional prospective observational study of elderly patients (>75 years of age) with a completely resected non-small cell lung cancer. From March 2014 to April 2015, 264 patients from 22 hospitals affiliated with the National Hospital Organization in Japan were prospectively registered in the present study. The primary end point was operative morbidity (National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0). The secondary end points were operative mortality and the risk factors for operative morbidity. Preoperative comorbidities were assessed according to the Adult Comorbidity Evaluation-27 index. The mean age at the time of surgery was 79.3 years (range 75-90 years). Forty-one percent of the patients were >80 years of age. Twenty-six percent underwent sublobar resection. The incidence of morbidities of any grade was 43.2% (90% confidence interval: 38.2%-48.2%). Respiratory system-related morbidity (19.3%), followed by cardiovascular system-related morbidity (10.2%), was the most common morbidity. The in-hospital mortality rate was 1.1% (3 of 264 patients). A multivariate analysis of the risk factors for operative morbidity showed that both Adult Comorbidity Evaluation-27 grade and the blood loss volume were significant factors. The results of the present prospective multi-institutional study should be used as a reference in the surgical treatment of elderly patients with lung cancer.

Safety of video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy for non-small-cell lung cancer in a low-volume unit

Several studies have demonstrated that for complex surgical procedures, surgeons who treat more patients have better outcomes than their lower-volume counterparts. The aim of this paper is to review the experience with video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomies in our small thoracic unit (group A), to understand whether our short-term results were different to the outcomes obtained by the same surgeon previously working in a high-volume unit (group B). 37 patients underwent VATS lobectomy. Hospital stay was on average 4.5 days (group A) versus 4.1 days (group B). Operative time and the number of ‘frozen sections’ were higher in group A. Hospital mortality was 0. VATS lobectomies are a safe approach in a low-volume unit formed by a single surgeon with a previous high-volume experience.