Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Primary pancreatic signet ring cell carcinoma (SRCC) is a rare histologic variant of pancreatic carcinoma. A population-based analysis of pancreatic SRCC was performed to determine the predictive effects of epidemiological factors and treatment interventions on overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS). MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry was searched for pancreatic SRCC cases diagnosed between January 1, 1973 and December 31, 2013. Statistical analysis was performed using the Fisher exact test, χ analysis, Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS:The mean age among 497 patients was 66.6 years (SD, 11.9). Most patients were white (82.7%) and male (54.5%). The 1-, 2-, and 5-year OS rates were 17%, 9%, and 4%, respectively, while the corresponding 1-, 2-, and 5-year rates for DSS were 18%, 10%, and 5%, respectively. On univariable analysis; age, site, grade, stage, and treatment were predictive of OS and DSS (P<0.05). On multivariable analysis; radiation improved OS and DSS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.592 and 0.589, respectively), pancreatectomy improved OS and DSS (aHR, 0.360 and 0.355, respectively), and combination therapy improved OS and DSS (aHR, 0.295 and 0.286, respectively). Age, site, and stage were also independent predictors of OS and DSS. Subgroup analysis demonstrated treatment to be an independent predictor of OS and DSS in localized/regional disease, in distant disease, and in patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2013. CONCLUSIONS:Age, site, stage, and treatment independently predict OS and DSS in pancreatic SRCC.

BACKGROUND:Hospital readmissions are tied to financial penalties and thus significantly influence health-care policy. Many current studies on readmissions lack national representation by not tracking readmissions across hospitals. The recently released Nationwide Readmission Database is one of the most comprehensive national sources of readmission data available, making it an invaluable resource to understand this critically important health policy issue. METHODS:The Nationwide Readmission Database for 2013 and 2014 was queried for adult patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (441.4) undergoing endovascular (39.71) or open (38.44) repair. Outcomes examined were overall/initial admission mortality and overall/30-day readmissions. Multivariate logistic regression for these outcomes was also performed on multiple readmission factors. RESULTS:Fifty-three thousand four hundred seventeen patients underwent abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (47,431 endovascular aortic repair [EVAR] versus 5,986 open surgical repair [OSR]). Significant differences were found for EVAR versus OSR on overall readmissions, initial admission cost, readmission costs, length of stay, days to readmission, and overall/initial admission mortality. Multivariate logistic regression analysis found that length of stay > 30, Charlson Comorbidity Index > 1, discharge disposition, and female sex were all significant predictors of 30-day readmission. Repair type was significantly associated with 30-day readmissions; however, it was not a significant factor for overall readmissions. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:There are significant differences in costs, prognosis, and readmission rates for EVAR versus OSR. Given that these differences are being used to create "acceptable" readmission rates, disbursement quotas among hospitals, and subsequent penalties for providers outside the expected rates, it is only prudent to obtain the most accurate information to guide those policies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Care management/epidemiological, level IV.

OBJECTIVE:Current guidelines recommend treating patients with cocaine-associated chest pain, unstable angina, or myocardial infarction similarly to patients with traditional acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Risk stratifying these patients could potentially reduce unnecessary procedures and improve resource utilization. METHODS:This is a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 258 patients presenting with cocaine-associated ACS who underwent cardiac catheterization in a community teaching hospital between 2006 and 2015. The primary outcome was the prevalence of acute obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) requiring percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting compared with that of patients with normal coronary or nonobstructive disease. RESULTS:Of the studied population, 36% had obstructive CAD requiring intervention and 64% were found to have normal coronaries or nonobstructive disease. Significant risk factors for obstructive CAD were older age, history of CAD, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, and troponin elevation. A logistic model was developed based on these variables, applied to the studied population, and was found to have 93% sensitivity in predicting the likelihood of obstructive CAD. CONCLUSIONS:Cardiac catheterization in patients presenting with cocaine-associated ACS may be overutilized. A predictive model based on clinical risk factors may help individualize patient care and reduce unnecessary invasive diagnostic interventions.

BACKGROUND:Intravenous (IV) proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are the standard medical treatment in acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (ANVGIB). Optimal route of PPI delivery has been questioned. AIM/OBJECTIVE:The aim was to perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis for the endpoints of risk of rebleeding, length of stay (LOS), surgery (ROS), mortality, and total units of blood transfused (UBT) among trials evaluating acid suppressive medications in ANVGIB. METHODS:A total of 39 studies using IV PPI drip, IV scheduled PPI, oral PPI, H2-receptor antagonists, and placebo were identified. Network meta-analysis was used for indirect comparisons and Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods for calculation of probability superiority. RESULTS:No difference was observed between IV PPI drip and scheduled IV PPI for mortality (relative risk=1.11; 95% credibility interval, 0.56-2.21), LOS (0.04, -0.49 to 0.44), ROS (1.27, 0.64-2.35) and risk of rebleeding within 72 hours, 1 week, and 1 month [(0.98, 0.48-1.95), (0.59, 0.13-2.03), (0.82, 0.28-2.16)]. Oral PPIs were as effective as IV scheduled PPIs and IV PPI drip for LOS (0.22, -0.61 to 0.79 and 0.16, -0.56 to 0.80) and UBT (-0.25, -1.23 to 0.65 and -0.06, -0.71 to 0.65) and superior to IV PPI drip for ROS (0.30, 0.10 to 0.78). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Scheduled IV PPIs were as effective as IV PPI drip for most outcomes. Oral PPIs were comparable to scheduled IV for LOS and UBT and superior to IV PPI drip for ROS. Conclusions should be tempered by low frequency endpoints such as ROS, but question the need for IV PPI drip in ANVGIB.

BACKGROUND:The purpose of this study was to compare payment trends between cardiothoracic surgeons and interventional cardiologists using the Open Payments website made available for the public by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Data were extracted from the second release of the Open Payments database, which includes payments made between August 1, 2013 and December 31, 2014. Total payments to individual physicians were aggregated based on specialty, region of the country, and payment type. The Gini index was calculated for each specialty to measure income disparity. A Gini index of 1 indicates all the payments went to one individual, whereas a Gini index of 0 indicates all individuals received equal payments. RESULTS:During the study period of interest, data were made available for 3587 (80%) cardiothoracic surgeons compared with 2957 (99%) interventional cardiologists. Mean total payments to cardiothoracic surgeons were $7770 (standard deviation, $52,608) compared with a mean of $15,221 (standard deviation, $98,828) for interventional cardiologists. The median total payments to cardiothoracic surgeons was $1050 (interquartile range, $233-$3612) compared with $1851 (interquartile range, $607-$5462) for interventional cardiologists. The overall Gini index was 0.932, whereas the Gini index was 0.862 for interventional cardiologists and 0.860 for cardiothoracic surgeons. CONCLUSIONS:The vast majority of interventional cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons received payments from drug and device manufacturers. The mean total payments to interventional cardiologists were higher than any other specialty. However, like cardiothoracic surgery, they were among the most equitably distributed compared with other specialties.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Catheter ablation for rhythm control has emerged as a successful therapeutic option for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF), though it has not been well studied in octogenarians. This study evaluates its safety in octogenarians in a community hospital and reviews the benefits of rhythm control. METHODS:Among 1,592 patients undergoing AF ablation, 84 octogenarian were identified. The primary outcome was normal sinus rhythm (NSR) on electrocardiogram at discharge. Secondary outcomes were periprocedural complications and markers and risks of reablation compared to younger cohorts. RESULTS:An NSR on discharge occurred in 83 patients. Three patients required pacing for symptomatic sinus bradycardia, complete heart block, and symptomatic junctional bradycardia, respectively. Reablation for recurrent AF occurred in 23 octogenarians. Using the octogenarians as reference, the relative risk (RR) of 1 reablation was not significantly different among the age groups 70-79, 60-69, and <60 years. The RR of 2 reablations was greater in the octogenarian group (RR 0.26 [95% CI 0.09-0.71, p = 0.008], 0.42 [95% CI 0.17-1.04, p = 0.06], and 0.27 [95% CI 0.1-0.75, p = 0.01], respectively). Coronary artery disease (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02-0.68, p = 0.026) and percutaneous coronary intervention (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02-0.63, p = 0.021) were markers for reablation. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:AF catheter ablation achieved an NSR with minimal periprocedural complications. The benefits of rhythm control should be considered in treatment.

BACKGROUND:Telemetry is increasingly used to monitor hospitalized patients with lower intensities of care, but its effect on in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) outcomes in non-critical care patients is unknown. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVE:Telemetry utilization in non-critical care patients does not affect IHCA outcomes. METHODS:A retrospective cohort analysis of all patients in non-critical care beds that experienced a cardiac arrest in a university-affiliated teaching hospital during calendar years 2011 and 2012 was performed. Data were collected as part of AHA Get With the Guidelines protocol. The independent variable and exposure studied were whether patients were on telemetry or not. Telemetry was monitored from a central location. The primary endpoint was return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and the secondary end point was survival to discharge. RESULTS:Of 123 IHCA patients, the mean age was 75±15 and 74 (61%) were male. 80 (65%) patients were on telemetry. Baseline demographics were similar except for age; patients on telemetry were younger with mean age of 70.3 vs. 76.8 in the non-telemetry group (p=0.024). 72 patients (60%) achieved ROSC and 46 (37%) achieved survival to discharge. By univariate analysis, there was no difference between patients that had been on telemetry vs. no telemetry in ROSC (OR=1.13, p=0.76) or survival to discharge (OR=1.18, p=0.67). Similar findings were obtained with multivariate analysis for ROSC (0.91, p=0.85) and survival to discharge (OR=0.92, p=0.87). CONCLUSIONS:The use of cardiac telemetry in non-critical care beds, when monitored remotely in a central location, is not associated with improved IHCA outcomes.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Macrolides are of unique interest in preventing COPD exacerbations because they possess a variety of antibacterial, antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties. Recent research has generated renewed interest in prophylactic macrolides to reduce the risk of COPD exacerbations. Little is known about how well these recent findings fit within the context of previous research on this subject. The purpose of this article is to evaluate, via exploratory meta-analysis, whether the overall consensus favors prophylactic macrolides for prevention of COPD exacerbations. METHODS:EMBASE, Cochrane and Medline databases were searched for all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Six RCTs were identified. The primary endpoint was incidence of COPD exacerbations. Secondary endpoints including mortality, hospitalization rates, adverse events and likelihood of having at least one COPD exacerbation were also examined. RESULTS:There was a 37% relative risk reduction (RR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.45-0.87, p value = 0.005) in COPD exacerbations among patients taking macrolides compared to placebo. Furthermore, there was a 21% reduced risk of hospitalization (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.69-0.90, p-value = 0.01) and 68% reduced risk of having at least one COPD exacerbation (RR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.21-0.54, p-value = 0.001) among patients taking macrolides versus placebo. There was also a trend toward decreased mortality and increased adverse events among patients taking macrolides but these were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS:Prophylactic macrolides are an effective approach for reducing incident COPD exacerbations. There were several limitations to this study including a lack of consistent adverse event reporting and some degree of clinical and statistical heterogeneity between studies.

The goal of this paper was to assess whether, given the opportunity, physicians/researchers would try to profit (by trading stocks) from information that only they were made privy to. The Annual ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology) Conference, the largest annual oncology conference, provided the perfect venue to fully explore this question. Up until 2008, ASCO abstracts were released exclusively to ASCO members (i.e., physicians, oncologists) two weeks prior to the conference, and many speculated about unusual trading patterns during these two weeks. In 2008, in response to concerns about such illicit activities, ASCO changed this policy (by distributing these abstracts instead to the general public). We decided to take a closer look at these trading patterns to determine the true impact of ASCO's 2008 decision and whether the differences prior to and following 2008 reveal something about the likelihood of physicians/researchers to profit from "privileged information."