Citations

ABSTRACT Objectives To characterize practice patterns and outcomes in the management of low‐ and intermediate‐grade salivary gland carcinoma prior to the existence of treatment guidelines. Methods Analysis of a registry of patients who underwent parotid and submandibular gland resections for low‐and intermediate‐grade carcinomas between 2010 and 2019. Results Of all 786 patients included in the study, 726 (92%) had preoperative imaging and 653 (83%) had preoperative biopsy. Of the 729 patients with parotid gland cancer, the majority underwent superficial ( n = 384, 53%) or total ( n = 254, 35%) parotidectomy. In patients with facial nerve preservation, total parotidectomy was associated with a significant increase in transient facial weakness (72/177 (41%) vs. 82/311 (26%), RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.50–0.84, p < 0.05) and permanent facial nerve weakness (23/176 (13%) vs. 16/301 (5%), RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22–0.75, p < 0.05) compared to superficial parotidectomy. Adjuvant radiation therapy ( RT ) was delivered to 285 (36%) patients. The proportion of patients receiving adjuvant RT declined significantly over the time period from 2015 to 2019 compared to 2010 to 2014 at 162/504 (32%) and 123/282 (44%), respectively ( RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61–0.89, p < 0.05). When comparing the time periods from 2015 to 2019 and 2010 to 2014, there was no significant difference in local control rates ( RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.26–1.04, p = 0.06) or regional control rates ( RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.26–2.13, p = 0.58). Conclusions Management of low‐ and intermediate‐grade salivary cancer from 2010 to 2019 was variable, which is expected given the rarity and heterogeneity of the disease and the lack of treatment guidelines prior to 2021. Most patients with parotid malignancies underwent superficial or total parotidectomy. The extent of parotidectomy had an impact on facial nerve function outcomes. Delivery of adjuvant radiation trended down with time. The data presented here will support dissemination of the guidelines and provide data that could inform future trials. Level of Evidence 2b.

Objective: This study investigates Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols’ impact on long-term opioid and sedative use following mastectomy with or without implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR). Background: ERAS protocols for patients undergoing mastectomy with or without IBBR are associated with decreased length of stay, increased rate of same-day discharge, decreased postoperative pain, and decreased postoperative opioid requirements. However, less is known about their effect on opioid and sedative use beyond 90 days after surgery. Methods: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing mastectomy with or without IBBR at a single institution between January 2013 and December 2019. Mastectomy ERAS protocols were implemented in February 2017, creating 2 groups: pre-ERAS and ERAS. Baseline characteristics and prevalence of chronic opioid and sedative use were compared. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression predicted factors associated with increased odds of chronic opioid and sedative use. Results: A total of 756 patients were evaluated: 405 pre-ERAS and 351 ERAS. Post-ERAS, chronic opioid use decreased in opioid-naive (40% vs 30%, P=0.024) and opioid-tolerant patients (58% vs 37%, P=0.002), with no increase in chronic sedative use. There were decreased odds of chronic opioid use for all ERAS patients (OR=0.57, 95% CI: 0.42–0.76), and of IBBR patients, those receiving subcutaneous implants (OR=0.31, 95% CI: 0.20–0.48). There was increased chronic opioid-use odds if undergoing bilateral surgery (OR=1.54, 95% CI: 1.14–2.08), 2-stage reconstruction (OR=9.78, 95% CI: 5.94-16.09), and for patients with higher PACU pain scores (OR=1.09, 95% CI: 1.03–1.14) or >150 discharge OMEs (OR=2.63, 95% CI: 1.48–4.68). Conclusion: ERAS protocols for mastectomy patients with or without IBR are associated with decreases in chronic opioid use, without concomitant increases in chronic sedative use.

ImportancePostoperative radiation therapy for close surgical margins in low- to intermediate-grade salivary carcinomas lacks multi-institutional supportive evidence.ObjectiveTo evaluate the oncologic outcomes for low- and intermediate-grade salivary carcinomas with close and positive margins.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThe American Head and Neck Society Salivary Gland Section conducted a retrospective cohort study from 2010 to 2019 at 41 centers. Margins were classified as R0 (negative), R1 (microscopically positive), or R2 (macroscopically positive). R0 margins were subclassified into clear (&amp;gt;1 mm) or close (≤1 mm). Data analysis was performed from June to October 2023.Main Outcomes and MeasuresMain outcomes were risk factors for local recurrence.ResultsA total of 865 patients (median [IQR] age at surgery, 56 [43-66] years; 553 female individuals [64%] and 312 male individuals [36%]) were included. Of these, 801 (93%) had parotid carcinoma and 64 (7%) had submandibular gland carcinoma, and 748 (86%) had low-grade tumors and 117 (14%) had intermediate-grade tumors, with the following surgical margins: R0 in 673 (78%), R1 in 168 (19%), and R2 in 24 (3%). Close margins were found in 395 of 499 patients with R0 margins (79%), for whom margin distances were measured. A total of 305 patients (35%) underwent postoperative radiation therapy. Of all 865 patients, 35 (4%) had local recurrence with a median (IQR) follow-up of 35.3 (13.9-59.1) months. In patients with close margins as the sole risk factor for recurrence, the local recurrence rates were similar between those who underwent postoperative radiation therapy (0 of 46) or observation (4 of 165 [2%]). Patients with clear margins (n = 104) had no recurrences. The local recurrence rate in patients with R1 or R2 margins was better in those irradiated (2 of 128 [2%]) compared to observed (13 of 64 [20%]) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01-0.24). Multivariable analysis for local recurrence found the following independent factors: age at diagnosis (HR for a 10-year increase in age, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.06-1.67), R1 vs R0 (HR, 5.21; 95% CI, 2.58-10.54), lymphovascular invasion (HR, 4.47; 95% CI, 1.43-13.99), and postoperative radiation therapy (HR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.04-0.29). The 3-year local recurrence-free survivals for the study population were 96% vs 97% in the close margin group.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study of patients with low- and intermediate-grade major salivary gland carcinoma, postoperative radiation therapy for positive margins was associated with decreased risk of local recurrence. In isolation from other risk factors for local recurrence, select patients with close surgical margins (≤1 mm) may safely be considered for observation.

Background: Lymphovenous anastomosis (LVA) is an accepted microsurgical treatment for lymphedema of the upper extremity (UE). This study summarizes and analyzes recent data on the outcomes associated with LVA for UE lymphedema at varying degrees of severity. Methods: A literature search was conducted in the PubMed database to extract articles published through June 19, 2020. Studies reporting data on postoperative improvement in limb circumference/volume or subjective improvement in quality of life for patients with primary or secondary lymphedema of the UE were included. Extracted data consisted of demographic data, number of patients and upper limbs, duration of symptoms before LVA, surgical technique, follow-up, and objective and subjective outcomes. Results: A total of 92 articles were identified, of which 16 studies were eligible for final inclusion comprising a total of 349 patients and 244 upper limbs. The average age of patients ranged from 38.4 to 64 years. The duration of lymphedema before LVA ranged from 9 months to 7 years. The mean length of follow-up ranged from 6 months to 8 years. Fourteen studies reported an objective improvement in limb circumference or volume measurements following LVA, ranging from 0% to 100%. Patients included had varying severity of lymphedema, ranging from Campisi stage I to IV. The maximal improvement in objective measurements was found in patients with lower stage lymphedema. Conclusion: LVA is a safe, effective technique for the treatment of UE lymphedema refractory to decompressive treatment. Results of LVA indicate greater efficacy in earlier stages of lymphedema before advanced lymphatic sclerosis.

11033 Background: Breast enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols emphasize multimodal analgesia to decrease pain and expedite home recovery, but variability remains for same-day discharge and pain management. The purpose of this qualitative study is to examine how residents learn and apply breast surgery ERAS protocols, how they conceptualize pain management for breast surgery patients, and what influences their decision to discharge a patient home on the day of surgery. Methods: A semi-structured interview guide was adapted from existing instruments in the pain management qualitative literature. Surgical residents who rotated on the breast surgery service within the previous 12 months were interviewed by a single researcher. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, de-identified, and independently inductively coded by two researchers. A codebook was developed and refined using the constant comparative method until interrater reliability (Cohen’s kappa) reached greater than 0.9. Codes were grouped into coding categories and explored for thematic analysis. Results: Twelve interviews were completed with plastic and general surgery residents. Participants spanned post-graduate years 1-4. Preferred discharge narcotic regimens for mastectomy patients ranged from 5-30 tablets of 5mg oxycodone and participants rarely reported the same quantity. Ultimately, 365 primary codes were collapsed into 26 parent codes, with a Cohen’s kappa of 0.93. Six emerging themes were identified. Three themes describe how participants learned through a mixture of templated care, formal education, and informal experiential learning. Two themes delineate how residents would teach breast surgery ERAS protocols: by emphasizing buy-in and by connecting the impetus behind ERAS with the implementation in daily workflow. One theme illustrates the patient-centered culture and how that impacts postoperative management and same-day discharges. Conclusions: Residents learn breast surgery ERAS and postoperative pain management from imitating their seniors, observing patient encounters, completing templated orders, and translating concepts from other ERAS services, more so than from a formal lecture. When implementing new same-day discharge protocols for mastectomy patients, it is important to consider how informal learning and local culture influence postoperative pain management and discharge rates.

Purpose Development of appropriate reimbursement models for breast reconstruction in the United States requires an understanding of relevant economic trends. The purpose of this study is to evaluate longitudinal patterns in Medicare reimbursement for frequently performed breast reconstruction procedures between 2000 and 2019. Methods Reimbursement data for 15 commonly performed breast reconstruction procedures were analyzed using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool for each Current Procedural Terminology code. By utilizing changes to the US consumer price index, monetary data were adjusted for inflation to 2019 US dollars. Inflation-adjusted trends were used to calculate average annual and total percentage changes in reimbursement over time. Results From 2000 to 2019, average adjusted reimbursement for all procedures fell by 13.32%. All procedures demonstrated a negative adjusted reimbursement rate other than immediate insertion of breast prosthesis, which increased by 55.37%. The largest mean decrease was observed in breast reconstruction with other technique (−28.63%), followed by single pedicle transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap (−26.02%), single pedicle transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap with microvascular anastomosis (−23.33%), latissimus dorsi flap (−19.65%), and free flap reconstruction (−19.36%). Conclusions There has been a steady yet substantial decline in Medicare reimbursement for the majority of breast reconstruction procedures over the last 20 years. Given increasing medical costs and the financial uncertainty of the US health care system, an understanding of Medicare reimbursement trends is vital for policymakers, administrators, and physicians to develop agreeable reimbursement models that facilitate growth and economic vitality of breast reconstruction in the United States.

Abstract Background Microsurgery is being increasingly utilized across surgical specialties, including plastic surgery. Microsurgical techniques require greater time and financial investment compared with traditional methods. This study aimed to evaluate 20-year trends in Medicare reimbursement and utilization for commonly billed reconstructive microsurgery procedures from 2000 to 2019. Methods Microsurgical procedures commonly billed by plastic surgeons were identified. Reimbursement data were extracted from The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for each current procedural terminology (CPT) code. All monetary data were adjusted for inflation to 2019 U.S. dollars. The average annual and total percentage changes in reimbursement were calculated based on these adjusted trends. To assess utilization trends, CMS physician/supplier procedure summary files were queried for the number of procedures billed by plastic surgeons from 2010 to 2018. Results After adjusting for inflation, the average reimbursement for all procedures decreased by 26.92% from 2000 to 2019. The greatest mean decrease was observed in CPT 20969 free osteocutaneous flaps with microvascular anastomosis (−36.93%). The smallest mean decrease was observed in repair of blood vessels with vein graft (−9.28%). None of the included procedures saw an increase in reimbursement rate over the study period. From 2000 to 2019, the adjusted reimbursement rate for all procedures decreased by an average of 1.35% annually. Meanwhile, the number of services billed to Medicare by plastic surgeons across the included CPT codes increased by 42.17% from 2010 to 2018. Conclusion This is the first study evaluating 20-year trends in inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement and utilization in reconstructive microsurgery. Reimbursement for all included procedures decreased over 20% during the study period, while number of services increased. Increased consideration of these trends will be important for U.S. policymakers, hospitals, and surgeons to assure continued access and reconstructive options for patients.

Background: Medicare reimbursement trends across multiple surgical subspecialties have been analyzed; however, little has been reported regarding the long-term trends in reimbursement of hand surgery procedures. The aim of this study is to analyze trends in Medicare reimbursement for commonly performed hand surgeries. Methods: Using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File, we determined the 20 hand surgery procedure codes most commonly billed to Medicare in 2016. Reimbursement rates were collected and analyzed for each code from The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool for years 2000 to 2019. We compared the change in reimbursement rate for each procedure to the rate of inflation in US dollars, using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) over the same time period. Results: The reimbursement rate for each procedure increased on average by 13.9% during the study period while the United States CPI increased significantly more by 46.7% ( P < .0001). When all reimbursement data were adjusted for inflation to 2019 dollars, the average reimbursement for all included procedures in this study decreased by 22.6% from 2000 to 2019. The average adjusted reimbursement rate for all procedures decreased by 21.92% from 2000 to 2009 and decreased by 0.86% on average from 2009 to 2019 ( P < .0001). Conclusion: When adjusted for inflation, Medicare reimbursement for hand surgery has steadily decreased over the past 20 years. It will be important to consider the implications of these trends when evaluating healthcare policies and the impact this has on access to hand surgery.