Background:
Research derived from large-volume databases plays an increasing role in the development of clinical guidelines and health policy. In breast cancer research, the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results, National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, and Nationwide Inpatient Sample databases are widely used. This study aims to compare the trends in immediate breast reconstruction and identify the drawbacks and benefits of each database.
Methods:
Patients with invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ were identified from each database (2005–2012). Trends of immediate breast reconstruction over time were evaluated. Patient demographics and comorbidities were compared. Subgroup analysis of immediate breast reconstruction use per race was conducted.
Results:
Within the three databases, 1.2 million patients were studied. Immediate breast reconstruction in invasive breast cancer patients increased significantly over time in all databases. A similar significant upward trend was seen in ductal carcinoma in situ patients. Significant differences in immediate breast reconstruction rates were seen among races; and the disparity differed among the three databases. Rates of comorbidities were similar among the three databases.
Conclusions:
There has been a significant increase in immediate breast reconstruction; however, the extent of the reporting of overall immediate breast reconstruction rates and of racial disparities differs significantly among databases. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program report similar findings, with the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database reporting results significantly lower in several categories. These findings suggest that use of the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database may not be universally generalizable to the entire U.S. population.
The Next Accreditation System has been implemented nationwide for plastic surgery training programs. Milestone-based resident training is a new paradigm for residency training evaluation; programs are in the process of making this transition to find ways to make milestone data meaningful for faculty and residents.
Background:Rhinoplasty is 1 of the most common aesthetic and reconstructive plastic surgical procedures performed within the United States. Yet, data on functional reconstructive open and closed rhinoplasty procedures with or without spreader graft placement are not definitive as only a few studies have examined both validated measurable objective and subjective outcomes of spreader grafting during rhinoplasty. The aim of this study was to utilize previously validated measures to assess objective, functional outcomes in patients who underwent open and closed rhinoplasty with spreader grafting.Methods:We performed a retrospective review of consecutive rhinoplasty patients. Patients with internal nasal valve insufficiency who underwent an open and closed approach rhinoplasty between 2007 and 2016 were studied. The Cottle test and Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation survey was used to assess nasal obstruction. Patient-reported symptoms were recorded. Acoustic rhinometry was performed pre- and postoperatively. Average minimal cross-sectional area of the nose was measured.Results:One hundred seventy-eight patients were reviewed over a period of 8 years. Thirty-eight patients were included in this study. Of those, 30 patients underwent closed rhinoplasty and 8 open rhinoplasty. Mean age was 36.9 ± 18.4 years. The average cross-sectional area in closed and open rhinoplasty patients increased significantly (P = 0.019). There was a functional improvement in all presented cases using the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation scale evaluation.Conclusions:Closed rhinoplasty with spreader grafting may play a significant role in the treatment of nasal valve collapse. A closed approach rhinoplasty including spreader grafting is a viable option in select cases with objective and validated functional improvement.
Our study reveals that resident involvement in autologous breast reconstruction is not associated with increased morbidity and offers no evidence for a July effect. Notably, our results suggest that resident cases performed earlier in the academic year, when surgical attendings may offer more surveillance and oversight, is associated with decreased morbidity.
IntroductionNovel image-guided, minimally invasive techniques to evacuate intracerebral hematomas represent a promising new avenue in the management of this disease entity. To our knowledge, a direct comparison of the Penumbra Apollo (Penumbra Inc, Alameda, California, US) and Nico BrainPath (Indianapolis, Indiana, US) system has not yet been performed.MethodsA retrospective review of image-guided, minimally invasive evacuation of intracerebral hematomas performed at one academic institution in the United States between July 2015 and July 2017 was performed. Cases performed with the Apollo and BrainPath system were matched based on age, gender, hematoma location and laterality, and volume.ResultsTwenty-four patients underwent surgery using either of the two minimally invasive surgical systems and five cases in each group were matched for age, gender, hematoma location and laterality, and volume. Median time from symptom onset to evacuation was two days with a mean distance from the brain surface to the clot of approximately 40 millimeters in both groups. Both techniques achieved comparable clot evacuation. The functional outcome was poor with either technique with the majority of patients dependent or dead at last follow-up.ConclusionsIn the present, small, matched cohort study, both the Apollo and BrainPath techniques achieved satisfactory clot evacuation. Nevertheless, the functional outcome in this patient population remains poor in the majority of cases.
Purpose
Numerous experimental and targeted therapies are under investigation for patients with cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). Objective health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) data for patients receiving these therapies are limited.
Methods
Patients engaged in the Cholangiocarcinoma Foundation completed two validated HRQoL surveys: Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)‐Hepatobiliary and COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST).
Results
Two hundred eight patients were included. Seventy‐five percent had intrahepatic CCA and 57% underwent resection, of which 48% had disease recurrence. Twenty‐two percent enrolled in a clinical trial and 80% underwent molecular profiling, of which 29% received targeted therapy. While patients enrolled in a clinical trial or received targeted therapy reported similar HRQoL compared to those who did not, they reported higher financial toxicity (p = 0.05 and p = 0.01, respectively).
Conclusion
Enrollment in a clinical trial or receipt of targeted therapy do not affect a patient's physical, emotional, social, or functional well‐being. However, patients report higher financial burden. These therapies are mainly offered in the advanced setting after significant financial strain has been endured and are often only available at large academic centers, creating a physical barrier to access. These findings underscore the need to increase availability and eliminate physical and financial barriers that threaten access and utilization of personalized and progressive therapies.
Implementation of a telemedicine protocol allows for easy access to burn consultations, helps multidisciplinary collaboration, eases follow-ups, and shortens specialists' consult wait times. Real-time evaluation provides fast and flexible treatment, without long distance travels, for patients and their families. Telemedicine increases the frequency of follow-up, contributes to the esthetic outcome, and together with improved cost-effectiveness is beneficial for both the patient and healthcare system.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.