Citations

AbstractObjectiveThe aim of this study was to analyze a publicly available sample of rule-based phenotype definitions to characterize and evaluate the variability of logical constructs used.Materials and MethodsA sample of 33 preexisting phenotype definitions used in research that are represented using Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources and Clinical Quality Language (CQL) was analyzed using automated analysis of the computable representation of the CQL libraries.ResultsMost of the phenotype definitions include narrative descriptions and flowcharts, while few provide pseudocode or executable artifacts. Most use 4 or fewer medical terminologies. The number of codes used ranges from 5 to 6865, and value sets from 1 to 19. We found that the most common expressions used were literal, data, and logical expressions. Aggregate and arithmetic expressions are the least common. Expression depth ranges from 4 to 27.DiscussionDespite the range of conditions, we found that all of the phenotype definitions consisted of logical criteria, representing both clinical and operational logic, and tabular data, consisting of codes from standard terminologies and keywords for natural language processing. The total number and variety of expressions are low, which may be to simplify implementation, or authors may limit complexity due to data availability constraints.ConclusionsThe phenotype definitions analyzed show significant variation in specific logical, arithmetic, and other operators but are all composed of the same high-level components, namely tabular data and logical expressions. A standard representation for phenotype definitions should support these formats and be modular to support localization and shared logic.

Introduction: Radical nephroureterectomy with bladder cuff excision (BCE) is the standard of care all high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinomas. With continued advancements, robot-assisted segmental ureteral resection can be employed for ureteral tumors for ipsilateral renal preservation. Herein, we are presenting our experience of different techniques classified by the affected ureteral segment, along with perioperative and intermediate to long-term functional and oncologic outcomes. Methods: From January 2008 to June 2021, a total of 17 patients underwent robot-assisted renal preserving excisional procedures for ureteral tumors. We collected and analyzed baseline, perioperative and follow-up outcomes parameters from our prospectively maintained institutional database. Eleven patients underwent segmental ureterectomy (SU) with BCE and ureteroneocystostomy with psoas hitch, five patients underwent SU with ureteroureteral anastomosis with/without psoas hitch, and one patient underwent ileal patch interposition after segmental ureteral excision. Results: Although majority of the patients had inconclusive or low-grade pathology on initial ureteroscopic biopsies, 73.33% of the patients were found to have high-grade tumors on final pathology report. Median tumor size was 2.7 cm (1–5.5 cm), and the median operative duration was 193 minutes (142–400 minutes). None of the procedures required conversion to open. Overall, only one patient (5.9%) had Clavien–Dindo grade ≥ III complication (pelvic abscess). At median follow-up of 41 months (7–156 months), four patients (26.67%) developed urothelial recurrences out of which only one patient required nephroureterectomy. Overall survival and nephroureterectomy-free survival were 86.67% and 92.31%, respectively. Conclusions: Our study provides a comprehensive review of various surgical approaches of robot-assisted renal sparing management for ureteral tumors. These procedures are surgically safe, feasible, and effective with satisfactory oncologic outcomes at intermediate to long-term follow-up. These procedures may be safely employed in select patients with a localized ureteral tumor to salvage the ipsilateral kidney and estimated glomerular filtration rate.

27 Background: In the US, two million people are referred to urologists for the evaluation of microscopic hematuria (MH). MH guidelines were revised in 2020 by the American Urological Association, recommending that only patients at high risk for malignancy based on age, smoking history, or urinalysis receive computed tomography (CT) imaging. We found in previous studies that providers continued to use CT for patients with low-to-intermediate risk, representing low-value care. To understand reasons for continued CT use for patients with low-to-intermediate risk MH, we assessed determinants of low-value care in a concurrent mixed-method study. Methods: We stratified patients with a urology consultation within 180 days of a urinalysis documented in one academic medical center’s electronic health record between 1/1/15 and 7/1/21 into high-, intermediate-, and low-risk categories and validated risk designation in a chart review of a 5% subsample. We defined low-value care as CT for patients with low-to-intermediate-risk MH. To assess determinants of low-value MH care, we conducted semi-structured interviews with primary, urology, and gynecology providers (n = 7) identified through our professional networks. Results: Six hundred nineteen patients were referred to urology for MH. 58.6% were high-risk, 33.6% intermediate-risk, 4.4% low-risk, and 3.4% were undefined. 15.9% of intermediate-risk (n = 33) and 11.1% of low-risk (n = 3) patients received CT. Of the 14 patients referred to urology post-guideline change, none with low-to-intermediate-risk received CT. Interviews demonstrated substantial variation in approaches to MH evaluation. Urologists were largely aware of the revised guideline but noted inappropriate evaluation before referral, unnecessary referrals, and inefficiency in evaluation following referral. Lacking accessible data for risk stratification, other providers’ approaches were varied but driven by a common goal of ruling out renal malignancy, based on medical school training and institutional norms. Conclusions: Low-value care was limited but persistent and may be driven by a lack of resources to support risk-stratified MH evaluation, including accessible risk stratification data and clear guidelines for appropriate evaluation. This is consistent with a lack of practical guidance for implementing MH evaluation guidelines. In future studies, we will develop strategies to facilitate risk-stratified MH evaluation in practice.

Abstract Background Despite multiple randomized trials, the role of perioperative chemotherapy in colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM) is still under debate. In this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), we aim to evaluate the efficacy of perioperative systemic therapies for patients with CRLM. Methods We searched various databases for abstracts and full-text articles published from database inception through May 2021.We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the addition of perioperative (post, pre, or both) systemic therapies to surgery alone in patients with CRLM. The outcomes were compared according to the chemotherapy regimen using a random effects model. Outcomes of interest included disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Results Seven RCTs with a total of 1504 patients with CRLM were included. Six studies included post-operative treatment and one evaluated perioperative (pre- and postoperative) therapy. Fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy was the most used systemic therapy. NMA showed benefit of adding perioperative therapy to surgery in terms of DFS (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.84). However, these findings did not translate into a statistically significant OS benefit (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.05). NMA did not show any advantage of one regimen over another including oxaliplatin or irinotecan. Conclusions This systematic review and NMA of 7 RCTs found that the addition of perioperative systemic treatment for resectable CRLM could improve disease-free survival but not overall survival. Based on the findings, addition of perioperative treatment in resectable CRLM should be individualized weighing the risks and benefits.

Abstract Objective The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping review of publications that explored blockchain technology in the context of interoperability and challenges of electronic health record (EHR) implementations. We synthesize the literature regarding standards and security, specifically regulation, regulatory operability, and conformance to standards. We review open practitioner questions that were not addressed in the studies as directions for further research. Materials and Methods We conducted a literature search in the OVID databases (Medline and Embase) on terms blockchain, implementation, interoperability, EHRs, security, and standards. The search resulted in 152 nonduplicate, peer-reviewed manuscripts, of which 15 were relevant to our objective and included for synthesis. Results Based on the search results, we analyzed the adoption of blockchain technology in the healthcare systems and challenges to EHR implementation of blockchain. From the synthesized research, we categorized and reported compelling factors of blockchain for EHR integration using current knowledge on blockchain research standardization and architectural challenges. Discussion Our research showed promise in implementing blockchain technology associated with EHRs, especially with Health Information Exchanges. The studies relevant for both EHR (n = 5) and blockchain (n = 10) reported compelling factors and limitations of the architecture. Security (n = 4) and interoperability (n = 4) features were reported as compelling requirements with lingering challenges. Standardization literature (n = 3) reported implementation challenges. Conclusion This study shows promise in implementing blockchain technology within EHR systems. The adoption is increasing; however, multiple implementation challenges remain from architectural perspectives (eg, scalability and performance), to security challenges (eg, legal requirements), and standard perspectives including patient-matching problems.

Abstract Objectives To develop and validate a standards-based phenotyping tool to author electronic health record (EHR)-based phenotype definitions and demonstrate execution of the definitions against heterogeneous clinical research data platforms. Materials and Methods We developed an open-source, standards-compliant phenotyping tool known as the PhEMA Workbench that enables a phenotype representation using the Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) and Clinical Quality Language (CQL) standards. We then demonstrated how this tool can be used to conduct EHR-based phenotyping, including phenotype authoring, execution, and validation. We validated the performance of the tool by executing a thrombotic event phenotype definition at 3 sites, Mayo Clinic (MC), Northwestern Medicine (NM), and Weill Cornell Medicine (WCM), and used manual review to determine precision and recall. Results An initial version of the PhEMA Workbench has been released, which supports phenotype authoring, execution, and publishing to a shared phenotype definition repository. The resulting thrombotic event phenotype definition consisted of 11 CQL statements, and 24 value sets containing a total of 834 codes. Technical validation showed satisfactory performance (both NM and MC had 100% precision and recall and WCM had a precision of 95% and a recall of 84%). Conclusions We demonstrate that the PhEMA Workbench can facilitate EHR-driven phenotype definition, execution, and phenotype sharing in heterogeneous clinical research data environments. A phenotype definition that integrates with existing standards-compliant systems, and the use of a formal representation facilitates automation and can decrease potential for human error.

Diabetes is one of the main causes of the rising cases of blindness in adults. This microvascular complication of diabetes is termed diabetic retinopathy (DR) and is associated with an expanding risk of cardiovascular events in diabetes patients. DR, in its various forms, is seen to be a powerful indicator of atherosclerosis. Further, the macrovascular complication of diabetes leads to coronary artery disease (CAD). Thus, the timely identification of cardiovascular disease (CVD) complications in DR patients is of utmost importance. Since CAD risk assessment is expensive for low-income countries, it is important to look for surrogate biomarkers for risk stratification of CVD in DR patients. Due to the common genetic makeup between the coronary and carotid arteries, low-cost, high-resolution imaging such as carotid B-mode ultrasound (US) can be used for arterial tissue characterization and risk stratification in DR patients. The advent of artificial intelligence (AI) techniques has facilitated the handling of large cohorts in a big data framework to identify atherosclerotic plaque features in arterial ultrasound. This enables timely CVD risk assessment and risk stratification of patients with DR. Thus, this review focuses on understanding the pathophysiology of DR, retinal and CAD imaging, the role of surrogate markers for CVD, and finally, the CVD risk stratification of DR patients. The review shows a step-by-step cyclic activity of how diabetes and atherosclerotic disease cause DR, leading to the worsening of CVD. We propose a solution to how AI can help in the identification of CVD risk. Lastly, we analyze the role of DR/CVD in the COVID-19 framework.

ABSTRACT Introduction Peyronie's Disease (PD) can coexist with erectile dysfunction (ED). International guidelines recommend that management of PD include an assessment of each patient's ability to initiate and sustain erection. PD causes significant stress to the patient and his partner; that distress may limit their ability to assess adequacy of penile rigidity. Further complicating evaluations based on history is the fact that PDE5-Inhibitor use is common. Objective The primary aim of this study is to non-invasively assess vascular erectile integrity in the setting of PD. Methods 1490 patients who underwent intracavernous injection (ICI) followed by Color Doppler Duplex Ultrasound (CDDU) at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. CDDU findings were recorded following injection of low dose alprostadil (10-20 mcg) and again after a period of privacy and visual sexual stimulation. CCDU findings including peak systolic velocities (PSV), and resistive indices (RIs) were recorded. Arterial insufficiency (AI) was defined as either a post-stimulation PSV < 25 cm/sec (severe AI) or a PSV 25-34.9, RI ≥ 0.9(mild AI). Cavernous Venous Occlusion Disease (CVOD) was defined as post-stimulation PSV ≥ 35 cm/sec with RI < 0.9. Mixed was defined as post-stimulation PSV 25-34.9 with RI < 0.9. Vascular normal was defined as post-stim PSV ≥ 35 with RI ≥ 0.9. Results Our cohort of 1490 patients included 900 (60.4%) with a complaint of both PD + ED; 461 (30.9%) with complaint of ED only and 129 (8.7%) with complaint of PD only. Following ICI with PGE1, 310 men were found to have PD and 767 were found to have PD + ED. Patients with a CDDU confirmed diagnosis of PD alone were younger (median: 56.9 vs. 60.8 y, p < 0.001), less likely to have hypertension [103/310 (33.2%) vs. 365/767 (47.6%), p < 0.001], less likely to have used PDE-5 inhibitor [219/310 (70.6%) vs. 616/767 (80.3%), p < 0.001], and less likely to have failed to a PDE-5 inhibitor [142/219 (64.8%) vs. 484/616 (78.6%, p < 0.001]. Diabetes was slightly more common in men with PD + ED compared to PD [270 (35.2%) vs. 94 (30.3%), p = 0.063], but not statistically significant. CDDU diagnoses for men with ED + PD were: AI 262/767 (34.2%), CVOD 305/767 (39.8%), mixed vascular ED 200/767 (26.1%). By definition all men with PD alone were vascular normal. Self-assessments by SHIM scores were abnormal in both groups ED + PD and PD [median(interquartile range): 10 (5 – 17) vs. 14 (8 – 20), p< 0.001]. Conclusions By history alone, patients with ED + PD vs. PD only can't reliably be identified. This is likely related to the distress caused by PD and the tendency to physicians to treat or patients to self-medicate all erectile complaints with PDE5-Inhibitors. For non-invasive treatments distinguishing between ED + PD vs. PD is not critical. Before any patient is triaged to surgical intervention an evidence-based assessment of vascular erectile integrity should be performed. In our cohort of men, Doppler analysis demonstrated that at least 6 out of 10 PD patients have some form of vascular ED. Disclosure No