Citations

AbstractObjectivesThis needs assessment aimed to improve understanding of flexible endoscopic intubation training and practice in emergency medicine (EM), providing insights to educators and practice leaders seeking to improve education and practices.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, mixed‐methods needs assessment of emergency physicians (EPs) incorporating focus groups and a survey. Focus groups comprised community EPs, academic EPs, and resident EPs. We analyzed focus group transcripts using grounded theory, qualitatively describing EM endoscopic intubation. The qualitative analysis shaped our survey instrument, which we deployed in cross‐sectional fashion. We report survey data with descriptive statistics.ResultsFocus groups with 13 EPs identified three themes: indications for use of endoscopic intubation, factors impacting a physician's decision to endoscopically intubate, and attaining and maintaining endoscopic intubation competency. Of 257 surveyed EPs (33% response rate), 79% had received endoscopic intubation training during residency, though 82% had performed this procedure 10 or fewer times in their career. Despite 97% acknowledging the necessity of competency, only 23% felt highly confident in their ability to perform endoscopic intubation. Participants (93%) reported scarce opportunities to perform the procedure and identified factors believed to facilitate competency acquisition and maintenance, including opportunities to perform endoscopic intubation in practice (98%), local champions (93%), and performing nasopharyngoscopy (87%).ConclusionsWhile most EPs acknowledged the importance of competency in endoscopic intubation, they reported scarce procedural opportunities and commonly expressed low confidence. Further research is needed on this topic, and we propose avenues to enhance education and practices related to endoscopic intubation. These include development of robust procedural curricula, support of local champions, and incorporating nasopharyngoscopy into EM practice.

Abstract Rationale Inhibition of aromatase with anastrozole reduces pulmonary hypertension in experimental models. Objectives We aimed to determine whether anastrozole improved the 6-minute-walk distance (6MWD) at 6 months in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Methods We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II clinical trial of anastrozole in subjects with PAH at seven centers. Eighty-four postmenopausal women with PAH and men with PAH were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive anastrozole 1 mg or placebo by mouth daily, stratified by sex using permuted blocks of variable sizes. All subjects and study staff were masked. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in 6MWD at 6 months. By intention-to-treat analysis, we estimated the treatment effect of anastrozole using linear regression models adjusted for sex and baseline 6MWD. Assuming 10% loss to follow-up, we anticipated having 80% power to detect a difference in the change in 6MWD of 22 meters. Measurements and Main Results Forty-one subjects were randomized to placebo and 43 to anastrozole, and all received the allocated treatment. Three subjects in the placebo group and two in the anastrozole group discontinued the study drug. There was no significant difference in the change in 6MWD at 6 months (placebo-corrected treatment effect, −7.9 m; 95% confidence interval, −32.7 to 16.9; P = 0.53). There was no difference in adverse events between the groups. Conclusions Anastrozole did not show a significant effect on 6MWD compared with placebo in postmenopausal women with PAH and in men with PAH. Anastrozole was safe and did not have adverse effects. Clinical trial registered with www.clincialtrials.gov (NCT03229499).

Objective: To establish globally applicable benchmark outcomes for pelvic exenteration (PE) in patients with locally advanced primary rectal cancer (LARC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), using outcomes achieved at highly specialised centres. Background: PE is established as the standard of care for selected patients with LARC and LRRC. There are currently no available benchmarks against which surgical performance in PE can be compared for audit and quality improvement. Methods: This international multicentre retrospective cohort study included patients undergoing PE for LARC or LRRC at 16 highly experienced centres between 2018 and 2023. Ten outcome benchmarks were established in a lower-risk subgroup. Benchmarks were defined by the 75th percentile of the results achieved at the individual centres. Results: Seven hundred sixty-three patients underwent PE, of which 464 patients (61%) had LARCs and 299 (39%) had LRRCs. Five hundred forty-four patients (71%) who met predefined lower-risk criteria formed the benchmark cohort. For patients with LARC, the calculated benchmark threshold for major complication rate was ≤44%; Comprehensive Complication Index: ≤30.2; 30-day mortality rate: 0%; 90-day mortality rate: ≤4.3%; R0 resection rate: ≥79%. For patients with LRRC, the calculated benchmark threshold for major complication rate was ≤53%; Comprehensive Complication Index: ≤34.1; 30-day mortality rate: 0%; 90-day mortality rate: ≤6%; R0 resection rate: ≥77%. Conclusions: The reported benchmarks for PE in patients with LARC and LRRC represent the best available care for this patient group globally and can be used for rigorous assessment of surgical quality and to facilitate quality improvement initiatives at international exenteration centres.

Context.— Title 45, section 164.524 of the Code of Federal Regulations states that health care systems must provide patient health records upon that patient’s request. For complex testing, such as next-generation sequencing (NGS), this raises questions related to what data should be released and the laboratory considerations regarding the release of this data. Objective.— To describe the laboratory implications of releasing different NGS data files and the limitations for the clinical use of different NGS data files. Design.— The College of American Pathologists workgroup, composed of laboratorians with expertise regarding NGS testing, reviewed pertinent literature, including title 45, section 164.524, and the Health and Human Services “Guidance on Individuals’ Right to Access Health Information.” Results.— From an accreditation standpoint, validation of NGS includes both the wet bench and data processing (bioinformatics) portions, and appropriately validated laboratory testing is required to ensure quality patient results. NGS testing generates intermediate data files that have not completed the fully validated process but are often kept by the laboratory. These files may be requested by patients, but most patients will not be aware of the test validation process and the limitations of data that have not gone through a fully validated process. Conclusions.— Laboratories should encourage patients to receive their health data and to help individuals understand the content, uses, and limitations of laboratory data they have requested or received. NGS data used in a nonvalidated manner should not be used for clinical purposes without confirmation by a clinically validated method.

Background: The comparative effectiveness of decompression plus lumbar facet arthroplasty versus decompression plus instrumented lumbar spinal fusion in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and grade-I degenerative spondylolisthesis is unknown. Methods: In this randomized, controlled, Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption trial, we assigned patients who had single-level lumbar spinal stenosis and grade-I degenerative spondylolisthesis to undergo decompression plus lumbar facet arthroplasty (arthroplasty group) or decompression plus fusion (fusion group). The primary outcome was a predetermined composite clinical success score. Secondary outcomes included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg pain, Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ), Short Form (SF)-12, radiographic parameters, surgical variables, and complications. Results: A total of 321 adult patients were randomized in a 2:1 fashion, with 219 patients assigned to undergo facet arthroplasty and 102 patients assigned to undergo fusion. Of these, 113 patients (51.6%) in the arthroplasty group and 47 (46.1%) in the fusion group who had either reached 24 months of postoperative follow-up or were deemed early clinical failures were included in the primary outcome analysis. The arthroplasty group had a higher proportion of patients who achieved composite clinical success than did the fusion group (73.5% versus 25.5%; p < 0.001), equating to a between-group difference of 47.9% (95% confidence interval, 33.0% to 62.8%). The arthroplasty group outperformed the fusion group in most patient-reported outcome measures (including the ODI, VAS back pain, and all ZCQ component scores) at 24 months postoperatively. There were no significant differences between groups in surgical variables or complications, except that the fusion group had a higher rate of developing symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration. Conclusions: Among patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and grade-I degenerative spondylolisthesis, lumbar facet arthroplasty was associated with a higher rate of composite clinical success than fusion was at 24 months postoperatively. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Objective: To develop and analyze a risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) chart as a potential method to monitor individual surgeon performance in robotic total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer. Background: Currently, surgeons lack real-time tools to monitor and enhance their performance beyond residency completion. While national quality programs exist, granular, individual-level data are crucial for continuous improvement. Previous studies suggest cumulative sum charts hold promise in identifying performance trends and outliers. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed data from 640 robotic TME cases performed by 12 surgeons at 2 institutions. RA-CUSUM charts were generated for 3 outcomes: (1) complications, (2) operative time, and (3) length of stay. Results: The overall RA-CUSUM curves for operative time and complications showed an initial learning phase, followed by a plateau or downward slope, indicating proficiency or improvement. However, individual surgeon curves revealed significant heterogeneity. Three surgeons consistently excelled in operative time, while 5 minimized complications most effectively. Potential quality improvement could be implemented to drive performance toward positive outliers. No differences were found in unadjusted outcomes, including conversion, number of lymph nodes harvested, and positive circumferential margins. Conclusions: The RA-CUSUM chart is a promising method for identifying individual surgeon performance in robotic TME. It could help surgeons, teams, and leaders identify improvement areas and benchmark themselves against positive outliers. Further studies are needed to explore the potential of RA-CUSUM for implementing interventions to improve surgical quality.