Back to Authors

Mainali, Bigyan B.

0009-0004-5465-9246

Mayo Clinic

Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist

Citations 3

Prognostic implications of margin status in association with systemic treatment in a cohort study of patients with resection of colorectal liver metastases
Moaven, Omeed , Mainali, Bigyan B. , Valenzuela, Cristian D. , Corvera, Carlos U. , Wisneski, Andrew D. , Shen, Perry , Shen, Perry , Moaven, Omeed , Russell, Gregory B. , Cheung, Tan To , Cha, Charles , Stauffer, John

Journal of Surgical Oncology | August 26, 2024 | Volume: 130 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 1654-1661

10.1002/jso.27846 Get It

AbstractBackgroundThis study investigates the impact of margin status after colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) resection on outcomes of patients after neoadjuvant treatment versus those who underwent upfront resection.MethodsAn international collaborative database of CLM patients who underwent surgical resection was used. Proportional hazard regression models were created for single and multivariable models to assess the relationship between independent measures and median overall survival (mOS).ResultsR1 was associated with worse OS in the neoadjuvant group (mOS: 51.8 m for R0 vs. 26.0 m for R1; HR: 2.18). In the patients who underwent upfront surgery, R1 was not associated with OS. (mOS: 46.7 m for R0 vs. 42.6 m for R1). When patients with R1 in each group were stratified by adjuvant treatment, there was no significant difference in the neoadjuvant group, while in the upfront surgery group with R1, adjuvant treatment was associated with significant improvement in OS (mOS: 42.6 m for adjuvant vs. 25.0 m for no adjuvant treatment; HR: 0.21).ConclusionR1 is associated with worse outcomes in the patients who receive neoadjuvant treatment with no significant improvement with the addition of adjuvant therapy, likely representing an aggressive tumor biology. R1 did not impact OS in patients with upfront surgery who received postoperative chemotherapy.
Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Committee II for the Optimization of Surgical Education and Training in the United States
Johnson, Wali R. , Mainali, Bigyan B. , Chen, Xiaodong, Martin, Rebecca , Dawson-Amoah, Kwesi G, Doyle, Kathleen M., Ellis, Danielle , Fazzone, Brian , Hoefer, Lea , Riner, Andrea N. , Shin, Thomas , Yelorda, Kirbi , Kearse, LaDonna , Chen, Xiaodong, Alobuia, Wilson Mawutor , Anderson, Erik M., Martin, Rebecca, Caldwell, Katharine E. , Dawson-Amoah, Kwesi G., Ghio, Michael , Godfrey, Caroline M. , Gomes, Camilla , Niehaus, Hannah, Phelps, Hannah M. , Sharon, Cimarron E. , Coleman, Julia R.

Annals of Surgery | August 7, 2024 | Volume: 281 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 40-45

10.1097/sla.0000000000006483 Get It

Objective: This study aims to appraise recommendations from an expert panel of surgical educators on optimizing surgical education and training in the setting of contemporary challenges. Background: The Blue Ribbon Committee (BRC II), a group of surgical educators, was convened to make recommendations to optimize surgical training, considering the current changes in the landscape of surgical education. Surgical trainees were recruited to assess their impressions of the recommendations. Methods: A mixed-methods study design was employed, with a survey, followed by focus group interviews. Participating residents and fellows were recruited through a purposeful sampling approach. Descriptive statistics were applied to analyze the survey data, and a thematic data analysis on interview transcripts was employed. Results: The majority of trainee respondents (n=16) thought that all of the subcommittee recommendations should be included in the final BRC II recommendations and paper. According to the interviews, overall, the feedback from the trainees was positive, with particular excitement around work-life integration, education support and faculty development, and funding pitfalls. Some themes about concerns included a lack of clarity about the recommendations, concern about some recommendations being in conflict with one another, and a disconnect between the initial BRC II survey and the subsequent recommendations. Conclusions: The residents gathered for this focus group were encouraged by the thought, effort, and intention that gathered the surgical leaders across the country to make the recommendations. While the trainees wanted clarity on some areas, the overall opinion was in agreement with the recommendations.
Resection versus resection with ablation: Analysis from the colorectal liver operative metastasis international collaborative
Mainali, Bigyan B. , Valenzuela, Cristian D. , Moaven, Omeed , Piccolo, Nico R. Del, Corvera, Carlos U. , Wisneski, Andrew D. , Zarandi, Nima Pourhabibi , Dourado, Justin , Shen, Perry , Del Piccolo, Nico R, Shen, Perry , Moaven, Omeed , Stauffer, John , Cheung, Tan To , Cha, Charles , Russell, Gregory B.

Journal of Surgical Oncology | August 5, 2024 | Volume: 130 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 516-522

10.1002/jso.27789 Get It

AbstractBackgroundThermal ablation has recently become a key therapy for the treatment of colorectal liver metastasis (CLM). However, the role of ablation in combination with resection has not yet been firmly established. We hypothesize that in patients with CLM, those who undergo liver resection with ablation (RA) have similar outcomes compared with those who undergo liver resection only.MethodsWe reviewed a multicenter international database of 906 surgical procedures for CLM from 5 high volume hepatobiliary surgical units. Patients undergoing RA (n = 63) were matched based on the number of lesions and tumor size using a 1:1 balanced propensity score analysis with those having resection only (n = 63). Our primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease‐free survival (DFS).ResultsThe mean age of our cohort was 58 ± 11 years, with 43% females. With a median follow‐up of 70.8 months, patients in the resection and RA group had a median OS of 45.1 and 54.8 months (p = 0.71), respectively. The median DFS was 22.7 and 14.2 months (p = 0.045), respectively. Using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model, the treatment approach was not associated with OS (p = 0.94) or DFS (p = 0.059). A higher number of lesions is independently associated with worse DFS (hazard ratio: 1.12, p < 0.01). When there was disease recurrence, the region of recurrence was similar between the RA versus resection only groups (p = 0.27), but there was a shorter time to recurrence in the RA group (p = 0.002).ConclusionFor CLM, the treatment approach was not significantly associated with OS or DFS, while tumor biology likely played an important role. Prospective research on the quality and effectiveness of thermal ablation combined with hepatic resection is warranted.