Citations

AbstractObjectiveTo describe the outcomes of patients undergoing open stapler versus transoral rigid and flexible endoscopic therapies for symptomatic Zenker's diverticulum.Study DesignSingle institution retrospective review.SettingTertiary care academic hospital.MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated the outcomes of 424 consecutive patients who underwent Zenker's diverticulotomy via an open stapler, rigid endoscopic CO2 laser, rigid endoscopic stapler, rigid endoscopic harmonic scalpel, or flexible endoscopic technique from January 2006 to December 2020.ResultsA total of 424 patients (173 females, mean age 73.1 ± 11.2 years) from a single institution were included. A total of 142 patients (33%) underwent endoscopic laser treatment, 33 (8%) underwent endoscopic harmonic scalpel, 92 (22%) underwent endoscopic stapler, 70 (17%) underwent flexible endoscopic, and 87 (20%) underwent open stapler. All open and rigid endoscopic procedures and most of the flexible endoscopic procedures (65%) were performed under general anesthesia. The flexible endoscopic group had a higher percentage of procedure‐related perforation, defined as subcutaneous emphysema or contrast leak on imaging (14.3%). The recurrence rates were higher in the harmonic stapler, flexible endoscopic, and endoscopic stapler groups at 18.2%, 17.1%, and 17.4%, respectively, and lower in the open group (1.1%). Length of hospital stay and return to oral intake were similar among groups.ConclusionThe flexible endoscopic technique was associated with the highest rate of procedure‐related perforation, while the endoscopic stapler had the lowest number of procedural complications. Recurrence rates were higher among the harmonic stapler, flexible endoscopic, and endoscopic stapler groups and lower in the endoscopic laser and open groups. Prospective comparative studies with long‐term follow‐up are needed.

Introduction: Most studies evaluating gender disparities in surgical specialties as a career choice are limited to high-income countries and have largely evaluated surgical subspecialties in aggregate. Objective: This study aimed to describe gender-based differences in otolaryngology specialty selection amongst medical students, trainees, and attendings/consultants across both low- and middle-income (LMICs) and high-income countries. Materials and methods: An online cross-sectional survey with 2 arms was administered. The first arm asked medical students about gender-related factors that impact interest in otolaryngology. The second arm asked otolaryngology residents and attendings about gender-related factors that impacted otolaryngology specialty selection and career satisfaction. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient demographics and survey responses. Responses were compared by gender using χ2 and Fisher Exact tests. Subgroup analyses between gender and country income status were also conducted. Results: There were 67 medical student respondents (45% male, 54% female, 1.5% nonbinary) and 38 attending/consultant or resident respondents (47% male, 53% female, 0% nonbinary). Thirty-six (36%) of medical students were from LMICs, while 45% of attending/residents were from LMICs. Overall, the results demonstrated gender discrimination and gender-based barriers against female medical students considering otolaryngology and otolaryngologists worldwide that may not be recognized by their male colleagues. Conclusion: The results of these surveys highlight the need for continued education and anti-discrimination policy and advocacy in otolaryngology globally. This information can be leveraged to inform regionally specific research on gender disparities in the otolaryngology workforce and provide a foundation for initiatives to address gender disparities in otolaryngology programs.

The number of artificial intelligence (AI) tools for colonoscopy on the market is increasing with supporting clinical evidence. Nevertheless, their implementation is not going smoothly for a variety of reasons, including lack of data on clinical benefits and cost‐effectiveness, lack of trustworthy guidelines, uncertain indications, and cost for implementation. To address this issue and better guide practitioners, the World Endoscopy Organization (WEO) has provided its perspective about the status of AI in colonoscopy as the position statement. WEO Position Statement: Statement 1.1: Computer‐aided detection (CADe) for colorectal polyps is likely to improve colonoscopy effectiveness by reducing adenoma miss rates and thus increase adenoma detection; Statement 1.2: In the short term, use of CADe is likely to increase health‐care costs by detecting more adenomas; Statement 1.3: In the long term, the increased cost by CADe could be balanced by savings in costs related to cancer treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, palliative care) due to CADe‐related cancer prevention; Statement 1.4: Health‐care delivery systems and authorities should evaluate the cost‐effectiveness of CADe to support its use in clinical practice; Statement 2.1: Computer‐aided diagnosis (CADx) for diminutive polyps (≤5 mm), when it has sufficient accuracy, is expected to reduce health‐care costs by reducing polypectomies, pathological examinations, or both; Statement 2.2: Health‐care delivery systems and authorities should evaluate the cost‐effectiveness of CADx to support its use in clinical practice; Statement 3: We recommend that a broad range of high‐quality cost‐effectiveness research should be undertaken to understand whether AI implementation benefits populations and societies in different health‐care systems.

AbstractBackgroundCytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) is increasingly performed for peritoneal surface malignancies but remains associated with significant morbidity. Scant research is available regarding the impact of insurance status on postoperative outcomes.MethodsPatients undergoing CRS/HIPEC between 2000 and 2017 at 12 participating sites in the US HIPEC Collaborative were identified. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare the baseline characteristics, operative variables, and postoperative outcomes of patients with government, private, or no insurance.ResultsAmong 2268 patients, 699 (30.8%) had government insurance, 1453 (64.0%) had private, and 116 (5.1%) were uninsured. Patients with government insurance were older, more likely to be non‐white, and comorbid (p < 0.05). Patients with government (OR: 2.25, CI: 1.50−3.36, p < 0.001) and private (OR: 1.69, CI: 1.15−2.49, p = 0.008) insurance had an increased risk of complications on univariate analysis. There was no independent relationship on multivariate analysis. An American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 3 or 4, peritoneal carcinomatosis index score >15, completeness of cytoreduction score >1, and nonhome discharge were factors independently associated with a postoperative complication.ConclusionWhile there were differences in postoperative outcomes between the three insurance groups on univariate analysis, there was no independent association between insurance status and postoperative complications after CRS/HIPEC.