RESUMO

PURPOSE: Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after breast cancer diagnosis is increasingly used to improve locoregional staging, particularly among women with dense breasts, extensive ductal carcinoma in situ, and lobular histology. The goals of this study were to (1) assess whether use of preoperative MRI varies by race and insurance type; and (2) determine whether preoperative MRI is associated with downstream surgical management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of women with stage 0-III breast cancer who were treated with surgical resection within our academic health system (2016-2019). Patients were categorized by race and insurance type. The primary outcome was receipt of preoperative MRI. Secondary outcomes included surgery extent (lumpectomy v mastectomy) and receipt of a second operation. RESULTS: A total of 1,410 women (27% Black, 73% White; 67% private insurance, 26% Medicare, 6% Medicaid) were included. Black patients were significantly less likely to undergo preoperative MRI than White patients (odds ratio [OR], 0.54 [95% CI, 0.38 to 0.76]; P < .001). There was no association between insurance type and preoperative MRI (Medicare v private: OR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.52 to 1.15]; P = .208; Medicaid v private: OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.36 to 1.25]; P = .210). White patients who underwent preoperative MRI were less likely to undergo lumpectomy versus those who did not (OR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.37 to 0.76]; P < .001). Likelihood of re-excision was lower for Black women who had undergone MRI versus those who had not (OR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.20 to 0.93]; P = .031). CONCLUSION: Black patients were less likely than White patients to undergo preoperative MRI, yet Black women who underwent MRI were less likely to require re-excision. Standardizing preoperative MRI use may mitigate provider- and system-level biases and promote more equitable care.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Federal regulations require a history and physical (H&P) update performed 30 days or less before a planned procedure. We evaluated the use and burdens of H&P update visits by determining impact on operative management, suitability for telehealth, and visit time and travel burden. STUDY DESIGN: We identified H&P update visits performed in our health system during 2019 for 8 surgical specialties. As available, up to 50 visits per specialty were randomly selected. Primary outcomes were interval changes in history, examination, or operative plan between the initial and updated H&P notes, and visit suitability for telehealth, as determined by 2 independent physician reviewers. Clinic time was captured, and round-trip driving time and distance between patients' home and clinic ZIP codes were estimated. RESULTS: We identified 8,683 visits and 362 were randomly selected for review. Documented changes were most commonly identified in histories (60.8%), but rarely in physical examinations (11.9%) and operative plans (11.6%). Of 362 visits, 359 (99.2%) visits were considered suitable for telehealth. Median clinic time was 52 minutes (interquartile range 33.8 to 78), driving time was 55.6 minutes (interquartile range 35.5 to 85.5), and driving distance was 20.2 miles (interquartile range 8.5 to 38.4). At the health system level, patients spent an estimated aggregate 7,000 hours (including 4,046 hours of waiting room and travel time) and drove 142,273 miles to attend in-person H&P update visits in 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Given their minimal impact on operative management, regulatory requirements for in-person H&P updates should be reconsidered. Flexibility in update timing and modality might help defray the substantial burdens these visits impose on patients.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Introduction: Adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is a notoriously aggressive cancer with a dismal prognosis, especially for patients with metastatic disease. Metastatic ACC is classically a contraindication to operative management. Here, we evaluate the impact of primary tumor resection and metastasectomy on survival in metastatic ACC. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with metastatic ACC (2010-2019) utilizing the National Cancer Database. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Cox proportional hazards models were developed to evaluate the associations between surgical management and survival. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to account for selection bias in receipt of surgery. Results: Of 976 subjects with metastatic ACC, 38% underwent surgical management. Median OS across all patients was 7.6 months. On multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression, primary tumor resection alone (HR: 0.523; p<0.001) and primary resection with metastasectomy (HR: 0.372; p<0.001) were significantly associated with improved OS. Metastasectomy alone had no association with OS (HR: 0.909; p=0.740). Primary resection with metastasectomy was associated with improved OS over resection of the primary tumor alone (HR: 0.636; p=0.018). After PSM, resection of the primary tumor alone remained associated with improved OS (HR 0.593; p<0.001), and metastasectomy alone had no survival benefit (HR 0.709; p=0.196) compared with non-operative management; combined resection was associated with improved OS over primary tumor resection alone (HR 0.575, p=0.008). Conclusion: In metastatic ACC, patients may benefit from primary tumor resection alone or in combination with metastasectomy, however further research is required to facilitate appropriate patient selection.

Assuntos

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop and validate an instrument to measure Belonging in Surgery among surgical residents. BACKGROUND: Belonging is the essential human need to maintain meaningful relationships and connections to one's community. Increased belongingness is associated with better well-being, job performance, and motivation to learn. However, no tools exist to measure belonging among surgical trainees. METHODS: A panel of experts adapted a belonging instrument for use among United States surgery residents. After administration of the 28-item instrument to residents at a single institution, a Cronbach alpha was calculated to measure internal consistency, and exploratory principal component analyses were performed. Multiple iterations of analyses with successively smaller item samples suggested the instrument could be shortened. The expert panel was reconvened to shorten the instrument. Descriptive statistics measured demographic factors associated with Belonging in Surgery. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 52% (114 responses). The Cronbach alpha among the 28 items was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.93-0.96). The exploratory principal component analyses and subsequent Promax rotation yielded 1 dominant component with an eigenvalue of 12.84 (70% of the variance). The expert panel narrowed the final instrument to 11 items with an overall Cronbach alpha of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.86, 0.92). Belonging in Surgery was significantly associated with race (Black and Asian residents scoring lower than White residents), graduating with one's original intern cohort (residents who graduated with their original class scoring higher than those that did not), and inversely correlated with resident stress level. CONCLUSIONS: An instrument to measure Belonging in Surgery was validated among surgical residents. With this instrument, Belonging in Surgery becomes a construct that may be used to investigate surgeon performance and well-being.

Assuntos