Utilization and Outcomes of Patients with Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases in the Medicare Population

Aggressive treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) after colectomy is increasing in the last two decades with reports of improved survival. Multiple treatment options are available for CRLM but their use and utility remains unknown. Methods: Using SEER-Medicare linked database (1991-2005), we identified 7131 patients who had undergone colectomy with CRLM. Demographic, clinical and tumor factors were examined as determinants of therapy. Treatment options consisted of surgery (resection, ablation) or chemotherapy. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine predictors of overall survival after colectomy. Results:635 patients (8.9%) underwent liver directed surgery defined as either a liver resection (n=495), ablation (n=216) or both (n=76) for CRLM. 322 patients (51%) were female and 313 (49%) were male. 147 patients (23%) were SES 1, 230 patients (36%) were SES 2, and 258 (41%) were SES 3. There was a survival advantage to receiving liver surgery or chemotherapy in selected patients with CRLM (p Conclusion: In the Medicare population, patients with CRLM who receive potentially curative therapy such as resection, ablation or chemotherapy experience a substantial survival advantage; despite this only 8.9% of patients received directed therapy for their metastasis. Barriers to treatment and its underutilization must be identified to improve survival in patients diagnosed with CRLM after colectomy

Development and Validation of a Clinical Scoring System to Differentiate Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Diarrhea-Predominant Irritable Bowel Disease

Background: There is no validated scoring system for differentiating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) from irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Studies variably report clinical measures such as radiology, endoscopy, inflammatory markers, and symptoms to separate IBS from IBD. Our study seeks to create a system to IBD patients from IBS. The “REBISS” score incorporates various clinical criteria used commonly for diagnosis. We also studied a second system called “REBISS-PCP” focusing on a subset of criteria that are available to PCPs when faced with this challenge. Methods: This study was approved by the UMass IRB. Two cohorts were identified: 24 IBD patients (Group1) and 24 IBS patients (Group2). Subjects in Group1 were patients with Crohn’s or ulcerative colitis. Subjects in Group2 were identified as having IBS based on ROME III criteria. Retrospective analysis was performed and a score was calculated. One point is assigned for having: radiological findings consistent with IBD, endoscopic findings of inflammation or ulceration, biopsy findings consistent with IBD, elevated inflammatory markers, weight loss, hematochezia, extra-intestinal signs/symptoms, palpable mass on exam, and perianal disease. The maximum score is 10 points. For the REBISS-PCP score, the same clinical criteria were studied with the exclusion of endoscopic and biopsy findings. Maximum score for that system is 8 points. A likelihood ratio chi-square test was performed for both cohorts and scoring systems. Results: The REBISS scoring system showed a significant differentiation of the two cohorts in regards to scoring distribution (chi-square value = 59.8; p\u3c0.0001). The REBISS-PCP scoring system also found a significant differentiation of the two cohorts (chi-square value = 35.7;p\u3c 0.0001). Discussion: The REBISS scoring system could be used to standardize IBD and IBSd populations in an academic research setting, while both the REBISS and REBISS-PCP scoring system could be used as a screening tool in clinical practice

A New Look at the Volume and Outcome Relationship in Surgery for Colorectal Cancer

Purpose: Surgeon and hospital factors have a significant impact on treatment outcomes for colorectal cancer (CRC). Limited research has been done to assess cost and quality of treatment by surgeon-volume. We aim to identify the surgeon factors impacting cost and quality of surgical care for CRC. Methods: The University HealthSystem Consortium database was queried for patients who underwent colon resection for cancer from 2008 to 2012. Patients were grouped by surgeon-volume. Outcomes of interest were postoperative complications, ICU admission, readmission rate, inpatient hospital length of stay (LOS) and direct hospital cost. Average surgeon-volume per year was categorized as high (\u3e6) or low (16) based on the distribution of surgeon-volume. Results: 29,972 patients over age 18 were identified for inclusion. 25,426 underwent resection by high-volume surgeons (HVS) and 4,547 by low-volume surgeons (LVS). LVS were more likely to admit patients to the ICU than HVS (21% v 33%, p Conclusions: Surgeons who perform greater than 6 colectomies per year for colon cancer are more likely to use laparoscopy, less likely to admit patients to the ICU, have lower complication and readmission rates, and shorter LOS. Hospital cost is significantly lower in patients operated on by high volume surgeons. As health care costs continue to escalate and health care reform efforts gain momentum, factors leading to high-quality, cost-effective care need to be identified

Progenitor cell mobilizing treatments prevent experimental transplant arteriosclerosis

Comment on: Progenitor cell mobilizing treatments prevent experimental transplant arteriosclerosis. [J Surg Res. 2012

Centre volume and resource consumption in liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: Using SRTR/UNOS data, it has previously been shown that increased liver transplant centre volume improves graft and patient survival. In the current era of health care reform and pay for performance, the effects of centre volume on quality, utilization and cost are unknown. METHODS: Using the UHC database (2009-2010), 63 liver transplant centres were identified that were organized into tertiles based on annual centre case volume and stratified by severity of illness (SOI). Utilization endpoints included hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), cost and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: In all, 5130 transplants were identified. Mortality was improved at high volume centres (HVC) vs. low volume centres (LVC), 2.9 vs. 3.4%, respectively. HVC had a lower median LOS than LVC (9 vs. 10 days, P \u3c 0.0001), shorter median ICU stay than LVC and medium volume centres (MVC) (2 vs. 3 and 3 days, respectively, P \u3c 0.0001) and lower direct costs than LVC and MVC ($90,946 vs.$98,055 and $101,014, respectively, P \u3c 0.0001); this effect persisted when adjusted for severity of illness. CONCLUSIONS: This UHC-based cohort shows that increased centre volume results in improved long-term post-liver transplant outcomes and more efficient use of hospital resources thereby lowering the cost. A better understanding of these mechanisms can lead to informed decisions and optimization of the pay for performance model in liver transplantation

Surgeon volume and elective resection for colon cancer: an analysis of outcomes and use of laparoscopy

BACKGROUND: Surgeon volume may be an important predictor of quality and cost outcomes. We evaluated the association between surgeon volume and quality and cost of surgical care in patients with colon cancer. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective study of patients who underwent resection for colon cancer, using data from the University HealthSystem Consortium from 2008 to 2011. Outcomes evaluated included use of laparoscopy, ICU admission, postoperative complications, length of stay, and total direct hospital costs by surgeon volume. Surgeon volume was categorized according to high (HVS), medium (MVS), and low (LVS) average annual volumes. RESULTS: A total of 17,749 patients were included in this study. The average age of the cohort was 65 years and 51% of patients were female. After adjustment for potential confounders, compared with LVS, HVS and MVS were more likely to use laparoscopy (HVS, odds ratio [OR] 1.27, 95% CI 1.15, 1.39; MVS, OR 1.16 95% CI 1.65, 1.26). Postoperative complications were significantly lower in patients operated on by HVS than LVS (OR 0.77 95% CI 0.76, 0.91). The HVS patients were less likely to require reoperation than those in the LVS group (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53, 0.92) Total direct costs were $927 (95$1,567 to -$287) lower in the HVS group compared with the LVS group. CONCLUSIONS: Higher quality, lower cost care was achieved by HVS in patients undergoing surgery for colon cancer. An assessment of differences in processes of care by surgeon volume may help further define the mechanism for this observed association. rights reserved