National survey of mentorship in Canadian general surgery residency programs: Where are we and what do we need?

Background: The benefits of mentorship on residents are well established. The current state of mentorship in General Surgery (GS) residency programs in Canada is unknown. The objectives of this study were to obtain GS residents’ and program directors’ (PD) perspectives on resident mentorship.Study Design: An electronic survey was developed and distributed to all 601 GS residents in Canada. All 17 PDs were invited for telephone interviews.Results: A total of 179 of the 601 residents responded. Ninety-seven percent (n=173) felt mentorship was important. Only 67% (n=116) identified a mentor and only 53% (n=62) reported a mentorship program. Most who identified a mentor (n=87/110, 79%) were satisfied with the mentorship received. Significant variations in mentorship existed between demographic subgroups and mentorship program types. Overall, residents (n=121, 74%) favoured having a required mentorship program.A total of 11 out of 17 PDs participated in the telephone interviews. The majority of PDs (n=9, 82%) were satisfied with current resident mentorship but most acknowledged that barriers exist (n=8, 73%).Conclusion: GS programs in Canada should ensure they are providing equal opportunities for mentorship across demographic subgroups. Programs are encouraged to examine both their program’s and their residents’ needs as well as local barriers to improve mentorship.

Survival by histology among patients with bone and soft tissue sarcoma who undergo metastasectomy: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Metastasectomy is performed on a select cohort of patients with advanced and/or recurrent bone and soft tissue sarcomas because of the potential for long term relapse free and overall survival associated with the procedure. However, the evidence supporting metastasectomy is difficult to summarize without a systematic examination of existing literature. The objective of this systematic review will be to examine survival among both adults and children with advanced and recurrent bone and STS who undergo metastasectomy. Methods: We designed and registered a study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis. We will include data from survival studies (e.g., randomized trials, cohort studies, routine case registries, and case control) conducted in children and adults with advanced and recurrent bone and soft tissue sarcoma who undergo metastasectomy. The primary outcome will be overall survival. Secondary outcomes will be 30-day post-operative mortality, recurrence-free survival, time off systemic therapy, and patient-reported outcomes including quality of life end points where available. Literature searches will be performed in multiple electronic databases including Ovid MEDLINE ® (1946 to present), Ovid EMBASE (1974 to present), Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Grey literature will be identified through searching references, conference abstracts, Papers First, and Google Scholar. Two investigators will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. Full-text articles selected for analysis will be assessed for quality and risk of bias. If feasible, we will conduct a random effects meta-analysis. Estimates will be stratified according to histology comparing survival based on organ of metastasectomy. Additional analysis will be conducted to explore the potential sources of heterogeneity according to various patient, disease, and treatment characteristics (e.g., metastasis status, age, disease burden, and concomitant interventions). Discussion: This systematic review and meta-analysis will identify, evaluate, and integrate data on survival of metastasectomy of bone and soft tissue sarcoma by organ of metastasis. Our findings may have implications for clinicians, patients, and their families when considering selection for resection of oligometastatic disease in de novo, or recurrent bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Implications for future research will be identified to improve the outcomes of these complex patients. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019126906Other UBCNon UBCReviewedFacult

Metastasectomy in Leiomyosarcoma: A Systematic Review and Pooled Survival Analysis

This study assesses the survival in patients undergoing metastasectomy for leiomyosarcoma (LMS) and compares the outcomes by the site of metastasectomy. We conducted a systematic review and pooled survival analysis of patients undergoing metastasectomy for LMS. Survival was compared between sites of metastasectomy. We identified 23 studies including 573 patients undergoing metastasectomy for LMS. The pooled median survival was 59.6 months (95% CI 33.3 to 66.0). The pooled median survival was longest for lung metastasectomy (72.8 months 95% CI 63.0 to 82.5), followed by liver (34.8 months 95% CI 22.3 to 47.2), spine (14.1 months 95% CI 8.6 to 19.7), and brain (14 months 95% CI 6.7 to 21.3). Two studies compared the survival outcomes between patients who did, versus who did not undergo metastasectomy; both demonstrated a significantly improved survival with metastasectomy. We conclude that surgery is currently being utilized for LMS metastases to the lung, liver, spine, and brain with acceptable survival. Although low quality, comparative studies support a survival benefit with metastasectomy. In the absence of randomized studies, it is impossible to determine whether the survival benefit associated with metastasectomy is due to careful patient selection rather than a surgical advantage; limited data were included about patient selection

A Bayesian reanalysis of the Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial

Background Timing of initiation of kidney-replacement therapy (KRT) in critically ill patients remains controversial. The Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial compared two strategies of KRT initiation (accelerated versus standard) in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury and found neutral results for 90-day all-cause mortality. Probabilistic exploration of the trial endpoints may enable greater understanding of the trial findings. We aimed to perform a reanalysis using a Bayesian framework. Methods We performed a secondary analysis of all 2927 patients randomized in multi-national STARRT-AKI trial, performed at 168 centers in 15 countries. The primary endpoint, 90-day all-cause mortality, was evaluated using hierarchical Bayesian logistic regression. A spectrum of priors includes optimistic, neutral, and pessimistic priors, along with priors informed from earlier clinical trials. Secondary endpoints (KRT-free days and hospital-free days) were assessed using zero–one inflated beta regression. Results The posterior probability of benefit comparing an accelerated versus a standard KRT initiation strategy for the primary endpoint suggested no important difference, regardless of the prior used (absolute difference of 0.13% [95% credible interval [CrI] − 3.30%; 3.40%], − 0.39% [95% CrI − 3.46%; 3.00%], and 0.64% [95% CrI − 2.53%; 3.88%] for neutral, optimistic, and pessimistic priors, respectively). There was a very low probability that the effect size was equal or larger than a consensus-defined minimal clinically important difference. Patients allocated to the accelerated strategy had a lower number of KRT-free days (median absolute difference of − 3.55 days [95% CrI − 6.38; − 0.48]), with a probability that the accelerated strategy was associated with more KRT-free days of 0.008. Hospital-free days were similar between strategies, with the accelerated strategy having a median absolute difference of 0.48 more hospital-free days (95% CrI − 1.87; 2.72) compared with the standard strategy and the probability that the accelerated strategy had more hospital-free days was 0.66. Conclusions In a Bayesian reanalysis of the STARRT-AKI trial, we found very low probability that an accelerated strategy has clinically important benefits compared with the standard strategy. Patients receiving the accelerated strategy probably have fewer days alive and KRT-free. These findings do not support the adoption of an accelerated strategy of KRT initiation

Regional Practice Variation and Outcomes in the Standard Versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) Trial: A Post Hoc Secondary Analysis.

ObjectivesAmong patients with severe acute kidney injury (AKI) admitted to the ICU in high-income countries, regional practice variations for fluid balance (FB) management, timing, and choice of renal replacement therapy (RRT) modality may be significant.DesignSecondary post hoc analysis of the STandard vs. Accelerated initiation of Renal Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02568722).SettingOne hundred-fifty-three ICUs in 13 countries.PatientsAltogether 2693 critically ill patients with AKI, of whom 994 were North American, 1143 European, and 556 from Australia and New Zealand (ANZ).InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsTotal mean FB to a maximum of 14 days was +7199 mL in North America, +5641 mL in Europe, and +2211 mL in ANZ (p p p p p p p p = 0.007).ConclusionsAmong STARRT-AKI trial centers, significant regional practice variation exists regarding FB, timing of initiation of RRT, and initial use of continuous RRT. After adjustment, such practice variation was associated with lower ICU and hospital stay and 90-day mortality among ANZ patients compared with other regions