Acute clinical and financial outcomes of esophagectomy at safety-net hospitals in the United States

Utilization of minimally invasive colectomy at safety-net hospitals in the United States

BACKGROUND

Prior literature has reported inferior surgical outcomes and reduced access to minimally invasive procedures at safety-net hospitals. However, this relationship has not yet been elucidated for elective colectomy. We sought to characterize the association between safety-net hospitals and likelihood of minimally invasive resection, perioperative outcomes, and costs.

METHODS

All adult (≥18 years) hospitalization records entailing elective colectomy were identified in the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Centers in the top quartile of safety-net burden were considered safety-net hospitals (others: non-safety-net hospitals). Multivariable regression models were developed to assess the impact of safety-net hospitals status on key outcomes.

RESULTS

Of ∼532,640 patients, 95,570 (17.9%) were treated at safety-net hospitals. The safety-net hospitals cohort was younger and more often of Black race or Hispanic ethnicity. After adjustment, care at safety-net hospitals remained independently associated with reduced odds of minimally invasive surgery (adjusted odds ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.87-0.97). The interaction between safety-net hospital status and race was significant, such that Black race remained linked with lower odds of minimally invasive surgery at safety-net hospitals (reference: White race). Additionally, safety-net hospitals was associated with greater likelihood of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.34, confidence interval 1.04-1.74) and any perioperative complication (adjusted odds ratio 1.15, confidence interval 1.08-1.22), as well as increased length of stay (β+0.26 days, confidence interval 0.17-0.35) and costs (β+$2,510, confidence interval 2,020-3,000).

CONCLUSION

Care at safety-net hospitals was linked with lower odds of minimally invasive colectomy, as well as greater complications and costs. Black patients treated at safety-net hospitals demonstrated reduced likelihood of minimally invasive surgery, relative to White patients. Further investigation is needed to elucidate the root causes of these disparities in care.

National outcomes of expedited discharge following esophagectomy for malignancy

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.

The effects of smoking history on robotic transhiatal esophagectomy patient outcomes

Esophageal resection for the treatment of esophageal cancer generally entails high rates of morbidity and mortality. Patients with a smoking history have increased post-operative complications following esophagectomy. This study was undertaken to determine how smoking or a history of smoking can affect perioperative outcomes and morbidity following robotic transhiatal esophagectomy. 75 patients were prospectively followed and divided; 44 patients actively smoking or with a history of significant smoking were classified as 'smokers', while the other 31 patients were classified as 'non-smokers'. Significance was determined at a p-value of ≤ 0.05 and data are presented as median (mean ± SD). 'Smokers' averaged 70(70 ± 7.8) years, 89% male, with 82% undergoing neoadjuvant therapy. 'Nonsmokers' averaged 68(69 ± 7.8) years, 74% male, and 74% receiving neoadjuvant therapy. BMI and ASA class showed no significant difference between the cohorts. 'Smokers' had an operative time of 341(343 ± 91.0) minutes and a blood loss of 150(191 ± 140.0) mL; 'nonsmokers' had 291(298 ± 65.9) minutes and 100(140 ± 120.9) mL, respectively (p = 0.02 for operative time). Tumor size and AJCC staging were similar for both cohorts. No significant differences were noted in postoperative complications, Clavien-Dindo score ≥ III, in-hospital mortality, length of stay, or 30-day readmissions. Survival rates were comparable. Hospital costs for 'smokers' were $33,131(41,091 ± 23,465.17) and $34,896 (62,154 ± 65,839.53) for 'nonsmokers' (p = 0.05). Profit/loss was $-23,155 (- 15,137 ± 35,819.29) for smokers and $-23,720 (- 16,716 ± 50,864.64) for nonsmokers. Current or past 'smokers' had longer operative times and lower costs following robotic transhiatal esophagectomy, with no significant difference in postoperative complications or survival compared to 'non-smokers'.