American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on primary endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies for adults with obesity.

This joint ASGE-ESGE guideline provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) in the management of obesity. The document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. It evaluates the efficacy and safety of EBMT devices and procedures that currently have CE mark or FDA-clearance/approval, or that had been approved within five years of document development. The guideline suggests the use of EBMTs plus lifestyle modification in patients with a BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m2, or with a BMI of 27.0-29.9 kg/m2 with at least 1 obesity-related comorbidity. Furthermore, it suggests the utilization of intragastric balloons and devices for endoscopic gastric remodeling (EGR) in conjunction with lifestyle modification for this patient population.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on primary endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies for adults with obesity.

This joint ASGE-ESGE guideline provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) in the management of obesity. The document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. It evaluates the efficacy and safety of EBMT devices and procedures that currently have CE mark or FDA-clearance/approval, or that had been approved within five years of document development. The guideline suggests the use of EBMTs plus lifestyle modification in patients with a BMI of ≥30 kg/m2, or with a BMI of 27.0-29.9 kg/m2 with at least 1 obesity-related comorbidity. Furthermore, it suggests the utilization of intragastric balloons and devices for endoscopic gastric remodeling (EGR) in conjunction with lifestyle modification for this patient population.

Effect of gender discordance on surgical outcomes in predominantly female patient surgeries in NYS.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary evidence demonstrates female surgeons have improved post-operative outcomes compared to male colleagues despite underrepresentation in surgery. This study explores the effect of patient-surgeon gender discordance on outcomes in three specialties with high female patient populations: bariatric, foregut, colorectal. METHODS: This is a retrospective study using the New York State (NYS) SPARCS database and first study evaluating outcomes based on surgeon/patient concordance in NYS. Bariatric, foregut, and colorectal surgery cases from 2013 to 2017 were identified. RESULTS: Bariatric: female patients (FP) with CC had lower 30-day readmissions but higher complications compared with DC. Male patients (MP) with CC trended towards higher 30-day readmissions but lower complications compared with DC. FP received significantly better influence from CC in 30-day readmission, but disadvantages in complications. There was no significant difference in LOS or ED visits between CC and DC groups for either FP or MP. Foregut: FP with CC had lower LOS, 30-day readmissions, and 30-day ED visits compared with DC. MP showed opposite trends between CC and DC, although non-significant. The benefit from concordance was pronounced in FP compared to MP in LOS, 30-day readmissions, and 30-day ED visit. Concordance vs discordance did not significantly affect complications within either FP or MP group. Colorectal: the difference between CC and DC was not significant within FP or MP groups in any outcomes. When comparing the difference of 30-day readmissions in CC vs DC between FP and MP, there is a significant difference. CONCLUSION(S): Overall, our results show DC between patient and surgeon has significant effect on patient outcomes. A negative effect is seen for female patients in certain specialties, most pronounced in foregut surgery. This emphasizes need for surgeons to be conscious of care provided to opposite gender patients and underscores increasing female surgeons in high FP fields.

EAES/SAGES evidence-based recommendations and expert consensus on optimization of perioperative care in older adults.

BACKGROUND: As the population ages, more older adults are presenting for surgery. Age-related declines in physiological reserve and functional capacity can result in frailty and poor outcomes after surgery. Hence, optimizing perioperative care in older patients is imperative. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways and Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) may influence surgical outcomes, but current use and impact on older adults patients is unknown. The aim of this study was to provide evidence-based recommendations on perioperative care of older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery. METHODS: Expert consensus determined working definitions for key terms and metrics related to perioperative care. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was performed using the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases for 24 pre-defined key questions in the topic areas of prehabilitation, MIS, and ERAS in major abdominal surgery (colorectal, upper gastrointestinal (UGI), Hernia, and hepatopancreatic biliary (HPB)) to generate evidence-based recommendations following the GRADE methodology. RESULT: Older adults were defined as 65 years and older. Over 20,000 articles were initially retrieved from search parameters. Evidence synthesis was performed across the three topic areas from 172 studies, with meta-analyses conducted for MIS and ERAS topics. The use of MIS and ERAS was recommended for older adult patients particularly when undergoing colorectal surgery. Expert opinion recommended prehabilitation, cessation of smoking and alcohol, and correction of anemia in all colorectal, UGI, Hernia, and HPB procedures in older adults. All recommendations were conditional, with low to very low certainty of evidence, with the exception of ERAS program in colorectal surgery. CONCLUSIONS: MIS and ERAS are recommended in older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery, with evidence supporting use in colorectal surgery. Though expert opinion supported prehabilitation, there is insufficient evidence supporting use. This work has identified evidence gaps for further studies to optimize older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery.

An American Board of Surgery Pilot of Video Assessment of Surgeon Technical Performance in Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The American Board of Surgery (ABS) sought to investigate the suitability of video-based assessment (VBA) as an adjunct to certification for assessing technical skills. BACKGROUND: Board certification is based on the successful completion of a residency program coupled with knowledge and reasoning assessments. VBA is a new modality for evaluating operative skills that have been shown to correlate with patient outcomes after surgery. METHODS: Diplomates of the ABS were initially assessed for background knowledge and interest in VBA. Surgeons were then solicited to participate in the pilot. Three commercially available VBA platforms were identified and used for the pilot assessment. All participants served as reviewers and reviewees for videos. After the interaction, participants were surveyed regarding their experiences and recommendations to the ABS. RESULTS: To the initial survey, 4853/25,715 diplomates responded. The majority were neither familiar with VBA, nor the tools used for operative assessments. Two hundred seventy-four surgeons actively engaged in the subsequent pilot. One hundred sixty-nine surgeons completed the postpilot survey. Most participants found the process straightforward. Of the participants, 74% felt that the feedback would help their surgical practice. The majority (81%) remain interested in VBA for continuing medical education credits. Using VBA in continuous certification could improve surgeon skills felt by 70%. Two-thirds of participants felt VBA could help identify and remediate underperforming surgeons. Identified barriers to VBA included limitations for open surgery, privacy issues, and technical concerns. CONCLUSIONS: VBA is promising as an adjunct to the current board certification process and should be further considered by the ABS.

Demographic and practice patterns among minimally invasive surgery fellowship graduates.

INTRODUCTION: Previous reports show that over 85% of general surgery residents choose to pursue fellowship training after completing residency. There continues to be an increase interest among general surgery residents in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) fellowship. Moreover, demographic disparities, particularly gender disparities continue to persist among surgical sub-specialties. In this study, we evaluated the gender disparities and practice patterns among graduating MIS fellows. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: MIS fellows were surveyed, and 169 results were received from fellows who completed training in the years: 2010, 2015-2019. Surveys collected were used to create a descriptive analysis of the demographics, practice patterns and job finding measures. Loglinear regression model was performed to assess gender trend variation over training years. RESULTS: Fellows self-reported gender showed 65% male, 30% female, and 5% prefer not to say. The cohort of participants was described as 45.3% white, 5.3% African American, and 6.5% Hispanic or Latino. Further, results showed 87.1% of fellows work in MIS surgery with 91.8% reporting their fellowship experience facilitated their ability to find a job. Most alumni pursue a comprehensive MIS practice. Moreover, the proportion of female fellows increased from 29 to 41%, but this increase over time was not significant using loglinear regressions [p-value = 0.0810, Relative risk = 1.1994 (95% CI 0.9778, 1.4711)]. CONCLUSION: Overall, there is good evidence to support that fellowship training facilitates future career advancements. Further, MIS fellows have differential practice patterns. Finally, females remain underrepresented among the MIS fellows which should call for leadership action to bridge these gaps.

Internal hernia trends following gastric bypass surgery.

BACKGROUND: Internal hernia is a well-known complication of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), with reported rates ~ 5% within three months to three years after surgery. Internal hernia through a mesenteric defect can lead to small bowel obstruction. Mesenteric defects began to be more routinely closed, often considered standard practice by 2010. To our knowledge, there are no large population-based studies looking at rates of internal hernia post-LRYGB. This study utilizes a statewide database to characterize the trends of internal hernia post-LRYGB over the last two decades in multiple centers. METHODS: LRYGB procedure records between January 2005 and September 2015 were extracted from the New York SPARCS database. Exclusion criteria included age < 18, in-hospital deaths, bariatric revision procedures, and internal hernia repair during the same hospitalization as LRYGB. Time to internal hernia was calculated from initial LRYGB hospital stay to admission date of the first internal hernia repair record. A multivariable proportional sub-distribution hazards model was utilized to analyze the trend of internal hernia incidence within three-year post-LRYGB. RESULTS: 46,918 patients were identified between 2005 and 2015, with 2950 (6.29) undergoing internal hernia repair post-LRYGB by the end of 2018. The cumulative incidence of internal hernia repair at the 3rd-year post-LRYGB was 4.80% (95% CI: 4.59%-5.02%). By the end of the 13th year, the longest follow-up period, the cumulative incidence was 12.00% (95% CI: 11.30%-12.70%). Overall, there was a decreasing trend over time of undergoing internal hernia repair within three-year post-LRYGB (HR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.93-0.96), after adjusting for confounding factors. CONCLUSION: This multicenter study maintains the rate of internal hernia following LRYGB reported in smaller studies and provides a longer follow-up period demonstrating decreasing occurrences of internal hernia after bypass as a function of year of index operation. This data is important as internal hernia continues to be a complication post-LRYGB.

Socioeconomic disparities in the utilization of primary robotic hernia repair.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine socioeconomic disparities in the utilization of primary robotic hernia repair (RHR), utilizing statewide population-level data. It was funded by the SAGES Robotic Surgery Research Grant. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) administrative database was used to identify adult patients who underwent primary open, laparoscopic, and robotic hernia repair (inguinal, femoral, umbilical, ventral) from 2010 through 2016. Utilization trends were compared between the surgical approaches, assessing for difference in age, sex, race, insurance status, and socioeconomic status (as defined by median income for zip code). Multivariable regression models were used with statistical significance set at 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 280,064 patients underwent primary hernia repair: n = 216,892 (77.4%) open, n = 61,037 (21.8%) laparoscopic, and n = 2,135 (0.8%) robotic. After adjusting for confounding variables, senior age (OR 1.01, p = 0.002), male sex (OR 1.35, p < 0.001), and non-Hispanic race (OR 1.3-1.54, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with the use of robotic compared to open or laparoscopic surgery. Additionally, patients with commercial insurance were more likely to undergo RHR compared to those with Medicare (OR 1.32) or Medicaid (OR 1.54) (p < 0.0001). Income was significantly correlated with RHR such that every $10,000 increase in income would increase the odds of having RHR by 6% (OR 1.06, p < 0.0001). Academic facilities were also associated with a significantly higher likelihood of utilizing RHR (OR 1.88, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: There are significant socioeconomic disparities in the utilization of robotic compared to laparoscopic or open hernia repair. While the robotic approach is overall increasing in popularity, adoption of new technology should not be limited to specific socioeconomic cohorts of the population. Recognizing these disparities is a necessary first step in providing equal and consistent care.

[S073]-The impact of interval appendectomy timing on follow-up adverse outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the timing of interval appendectomy (IA) and its impact on post-operative outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed for adult patients diagnosed with appendicitis between 2006 and 2017. IA was defined as a follow-up appendectomy > 1 week and < 2 years after the initial presentation. Time intervals were divided into 4 groups based on patient quartiles: 1-6 weeks, 7-9 weeks, 10-15 weeks, and > 15 weeks. The primary outcome measure was length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes included 30-day readmission and IA post-operative complications. Tertiary outcomes included 30-day mortality and colonoscopy suggesting neoplasm or Inflammatory Bowel Disease. RESULTS: A total of 5069 patients' records whose interval appendectomy fell > 1 week and < 2 years after initial presentation were analyzed. Among them, 1006 (19.85%) underwent an initial percutaneous abscess drainage at diagnosis. The median timing for IA was 9.2 weeks. Patients with IA at 1-6 weeks were more likely to have longer LOS when compared to 7-9 weeks (ratio 1.33, 95% CI 1.2-1.48) and 10-15 weeks (ratio 1.38, 95% CI 1.25-1.52). IA between 7 and 9 weeks (ratio 0.81, 95% CI 0.73-0.89) and 10-15 weeks (ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.71-0.86) was associated with significantly shorter LOS compared to those receiving the operation after 15 weeks. Further, patients requiring abscess drainage (ratio 1.2, 95% CI 1.13-1.34) or those with comorbidities (ratio 1.51, 95% CI 1.39-1.63) were more likely to have longer LOS at IA. Socioeconomic and demographic differences including Black, Hispanic, and those with Medicare and Medicaid insurance had a greater LOS after their IA. CONCLUSION: LOS remains lowest among patients undergoing IA between 7-9 weeks and 10-15 weeks after initial appendicitis presentation. Patients with lower socioeconomic status or from racial minorities had a longer LOS after IA.

Postoperative outcomes for sleeve gastrectomy patients with positive pH-defined GERD.

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a possible side effect of sleeve gastrectomy (SG). However, procedure selection for patients with GERD and risk factors for morbidity after bypass surgeries is complex. For patients with a preoperative GERD diagnosis, literature related to worsening postoperative symptoms is discordant. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effects of SG on patients with pre-operative GERD confirmed through pH testing. SETTING: University Hospital, United States. METHODS: This was a single-center case-series. SG patients with preoperative pH testing were compared based on DeMeester scoring. Preoperative demographics, endoscopy results, need for conversion surgery, and changes in gastrointestinal quality of life (GIQLI) scores were compared. Two-sample independent t-tests assuming unequal variances were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Twenty SG patients had preoperative pH testing. Nine patients were GERD positive; median DeMeester score 26.7 (22.1-31.15). Eleven patients were GERD negative, with a median DeMeester score of 9.0 (4.5-13.1). The two groups had similar median BMI, preoperative endoscopic findings and use of GERD medications. Concurrent hiatal hernia repair was performed in 22% of GERD positive vs. 36% of GERD negative patients, (p = 0.512). Two patients in the GERD positive cohort required conversion to gastric bypass (22%), while none in the GERD negative cohort did. No significant postoperative differences were noted in GIQLI, heartburn, or regurgitation symptoms. CONCLUSION: Objective pH testing may allow the differentiation of patients who would be higher risk for need for conversion to gastric bypass. For patients with mild symptoms, but negative pH testing, SG may represent a durable option.

SAGES perspective: professional medical associations, commercial interests, and conflicts of interest.

BACKGROUND: Professional medical associations (PMAs) have an essential role in advancing medical care and health. PMAs promote skills training, clinical standards, and other important educational activities. Most often, PMAs are not-for-profit entities that rely upon funding from industry to help cover the costs of these valuable activities. Equally important, innovation and progress in surgery require physician collaboration with industry throughout the product development process. SAGES has opined that, with appropriate Conflict of Interest (COI) disclosure and management processes, PMA educational activities can be both scientifically and ethically sound. METHODS: SAGES has developed and implemented comprehensive and stringent processes for managing potential COI within the organization, at the annual meeting, and in developing educational offerings. This document reviews the SAGES COI processes and results 2009-2021. RESULTS: Implementation of the SAGES COI disclosure and management processes reduced the reported perceived incidence of bias at the annual meeting from 4.4-6.2% (2008-2010) to 1.2-2.2% (2011-2013). Recent comparison of reported disclosures revealed a rise in number of speakers with financial relationships and an increase in reporting of disclosures in presentations without an associated increase in need for conflict resolution by the COI committee. Despite good overall adherence to COI policies, SAGES was recently cited for non-compliance with ACCME standards related to inclusion of faculty with ownership interest. This experience highlighted the potential for discordance in the interpretation of whether disclosures relate to specific CME content. SAGES COI processes have since been updated to reflect the more stringent 2020 ACCME Standards that exclude speakers and planners with ownership interest from any CME activity. CONCLUSIONS: The SAGES experience with disclosure and mitigation of financial relationships highlights the challenges of validating the accuracy of physician disclosures and establishing the relevance of financial relationships to the content of accredited educational activities. SAGES will continue to streamline its COI disclosure process with specific focus on aligning all financial disclosures among the various reporting platforms.

The durability of revisional sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass after previous adjustable gastric band.

BACKGROUND: Patients with adjustable gastric banding (AGB) often require revision to one-stage or two-stage sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). OBJECTIVE: To compare the long-term durability of revisional SG and RYGB, in terms of subsequent revision or conversion (RC). METHODS: The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative Systems dataset was queried from 2006 to 2013 for patients who underwent primary SG and RYGB, one-stage, and two-stage conversion from AGB to SG and RYGB. Patients who required RC were identified. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard model was used to compare the RC risk among these groups. RESULTS: 13,749 had primary SG, 621 one-stage, and 321 two-stage AGB to SG. 31,814 had primary RYGB, 555 one-stage, and 248 two-stage AGB to RYGB. The estimated 5-year cumulative RC incidence rate was significantly lower after primary surgery than after prior AGB (one-stage AGB to SG 14.4%, two-stage AGB to SG 11.6%, primary SG 5.2%, one-stage AGB to RYBG 3.4%, two-stage AGB to RYGB 2.9%, and primary RYGB 1.1%, p-value < 0.0001). RYGB and SG did not differ significantly in terms of the elevation effect of one- and two-stage AGB conversion over primary surgeries (RYGB vs SG: one stage vs primary ratio of HR = 0.97, 95% CI = [0.58, 1.63], p-value = 0.9153; two stage vs primary ratio of HR = 1. 02, 95% CI = [0.50, 2.07], p-value = 0.9596). CONCLUSION: RC after AGB to SG or RYGB is more frequent compared to primary surgeries with procedures following AGB to SG being more common than AGB to RYGB. However, that difference was proportionally similar to the RC rate ratio differences noted for primary SG and RYGB.

Increased incidence of marginal ulceration following conversion of sleeve gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a multi-institutional experience.

BACKGROUND: Marginal ulcer (MU) formation is a serious complication following Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB). Incidental data suggested a higher incidence of MU following conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to RYGB (S-RYGB). Herein, we evaluate the incidence of MU after primary versus secondary RYGB. METHODS: After IRB approval, each institution's electronic medical record and MBSAQIP database were queried to retrospectively identify adult patients who underwent primary RYGB (P-RYGB), Gastric Banding to RYGB (B-RYGB), or S-RYGB between 2014 and 2019, with minimum 1 year follow-up. Patient demographics, operative data, and post-operative outcomes were compared. Numeric variables were compared via two-sample t test, Wilcoxon test or Kruskal Wallis rank sum test. Two-sample proportion test or Fisher's exact test was employed for categorical and binary variables. p < 0.05 marked statistical significance. RESULTS: 748 patients underwent RYGB: P-RYGB n = 584 [78.1%]; B-RYGB n = 98 [13.1%]; S-RYGB n = 66 [8.8%]. Most patients were female (83.2%). Mean age was 45.7 years. Forty-six (n = 6.1%) patients developed MU, a median of 14 ± 32.2 months (range 0.5-82) post-operatively. Incidence of MU was significantly higher for patients undergoing S-RYGB (n = 9 [13.6%]), compared to P-RYGB (n = 34 [5.8%]) and B-RYGB (n = 3 [3.1%]) (p = 0.023). Median time (months) to MU was significantly shorter for patients who underwent S-RYGB (5 ± 6) compared to P-RYGB or B-RYGB (19 ± 37.5) (p = 0.035). Among those who developed MU, there was no significant difference in H. pylori status, NSAID, steroid, or tobacco use, irrespective of operation performed. CONCLUSION: In this multi-institutional cohort, patients who underwent S-RYGB had a significantly higher incidence of MU than those with P-RYGB or B-RYGB. Further research is needed to elucidate its pathophysiology and prevention strategies.

The impact of interval cholecystectomy timing after percutaneous transhepatic cholecystostomy on post-operative adverse outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore how timing of interval of cholecystectomy (IC) after percutaneous transhepatic cholecystostomy tube (PTC) placement impacts post-operative outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective database analysis of New York State SPARCs database of IC between 2005 and 2015. The timing for IC ranged between > 1 week and < 2 years. Patients undergoing this procedure were further divided into quartiles using 4-time intervals; 1-5 weeks (Q1), 5-8 weeks (Q2), 8-12 weeks(Q3), and > 12 weeks(Q4). The study's primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes included discharge status, 30-day readmission, 30-day ED visit, and 90-day reoperation, surgery type, complication, and bile duct injury. Multivariable regression models were used to compare patients across the four-time intervals after adjusting for confounding factors. RESULTS: A total of 1038 patients with a history of PTC followed by IC between > 1 week and < 2 years were included in the final analysis. The median time to IC was 7.7 weeks. Q2 and Q3 both had a significantly higher median LOS of 3 days versus Q1 and Q4 at median of 5 days (p < 0.0001). Patients from racial and ethnic minorities (e.g., African Americans and Hispanics) were more likely to get their IC after 12 weeks (p < 0.05). Further, Black patients had a significantly higher median LOS than White, non-Hispanic patients (8 days vs 4 days, p < 0.0001) and were more likely to have open procedure. Multivariable regression analysis identified shorter LOS during Q2 (Ratio, 0.76, 95%, 0.67-0.87, p < 0.0001), and Q3 (Ratio 0.75, 95% CI, 065-0.86, p < 0.0001) compared to those who got their IC in Q4. Similar findings exist when comparing Q2 and Q3 to those receiving treatment during Q1. CONCLUSION: A time interval of 5-12 weeks between PTC and IC was associated with a decreased LOS. This study also suggests the persistence of racial disparities among these patients.

Implementation of entrustable professional activities into fellowship council accredited programs: a pilot project.

OBJECTIVE: The Fellowship Council (FC) is transitioning to a competency-based medical education (CBME) model, including the introduction of Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) for training and assessment of Fellows. This study describes the implementation process employed by the FC during a ten-month pilot project and presents data regarding feasibility and perceived value. METHODS: The FC coordinated the development of EPAs in collaboration with the sponsoring societies for Advanced GI/MIS, Bariatrics, Foregut, Endoscopy and Hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) fellowships encompassing the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases of care for key competencies. Fifteen accredited fellowship programs participated in this project. The assessments were collected through a unique platform on the FC website. Programs were asked to convene a Clinical Competency Committee (CCC) on a quarterly basis. The pilot group met monthly to support and improve the process. An exit survey evaluated the perceived value of EPAs. RESULTS: The 15 participating programs included 18 fellows and 106 faculty. A total of 655 assessments were initiated with 429 (65%) completed. The average (SD) number of EPAs completed for each fellow was 24(18); range 0-72. Intraoperative EPAs were preferentially completed (71%). The average(SD) time for both the fellow and faculty to complete an EPA was 27(78) hours. Engagement increased from 39% of fellows completing at least one EPA in September to 72% in December and declining to 50% in May. Entrustment level increased from 6% of EPAs evaluated as "Practice Ready" in September to 75% in June. The exit survey was returned by 63% of faculty and 72% of fellows. Overall, 46% of fellows and 74% of program directors recommended full-scale implementation of the EPA framework. CONCLUSION: A competency-based assessment framework was developed by the FC and piloted in several programs. Participation was variable and required ongoing strategies to address barriers. The pilot project has prepared the FC to introduce CBME across all FC training programs.

Weight loss and clinical outcomes following primary versus secondary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a multi-institutional experience.

BACKGROUND: Revisional bariatric surgeries are increasing for weight recurrence and return of co-morbidities. Herein, we compare weight loss and clinical outcomes following primary Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (P-RYGB), adjustable gastric banding to RYGB (B-RYGB), and sleeve gastrectomy to RYGB (S-RYGB) to determine if primary versus secondary RYGB offer comparable benefits. METHODS: Participating institutions' EMRs and MBSAQIP databases were used to identify adult patients who underwent P-/B-/S-RYGB from 2013 to 2019 with a minimum one-year follow-up. Weight loss and clinical outcomes were assessed at 30 days, 1 year, and 5 years. Our multivariable model controlled for year, institution, patient and procedure characteristics, and excess body weight (EBW). RESULTS: 768 patients underwent RYGB: P-RYGB n = 581 [75.7%]; B-RYGB n = 106 [13.7%]; S-RYGB n = 81 [10.5%]. The number of secondary RYGB procedures increased in recent years. The most common indications for B-RYGB and S-RYGB were weight recurrence/nonresponse (59.8%) and GERD (65.4%), respectively. Mean time from index operation to B-RYGB or S-RYGB was 8.9 and 3.9 years, respectively. After adjusting for EBW, 1 year %TWL (total weight loss) and %EWL (excess weight loss) were greater after P-RYGB (30.4%, 56.7%) versus B-RYGB (26.2%, 49.4%) or S-RYGB (15.6%, 37%). Overall comorbidity resolution was comparable. Secondary RYGB patients had a longer adjusted mean length of stay (OR 1.17, p = 0.071) and a higher risk of pre-discharge complications or 30-day reoperation. CONCLUSION: Primary RYGB offers superior short-term weight loss outcomes compared to secondary RYGB, with decreased risk of 30-day reoperation.

SAGES/AHPBA guidelines for the use of minimally invasive surgery for the surgical treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).

BACKGROUND: Colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) occur in roughly half of patients with colorectal cancer. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has become an increasingly acceptable and utilized technique for resection in these patients, but there is a lack of specific guidelines on the use of MIS hepatectomy in this setting. A multidisciplinary expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations regarding the decision between MIS and open techniques for the resection of CRLM. METHODS: Systematic review was conducted for two key questions (KQ) regarding the use of MIS versus open surgery for the resection of isolated liver metastases from colon and rectal cancer. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the GRADE methodology by subject experts. Additionally, the panel developed recommendations for future research. RESULTS: The panel addressed two KQs, which pertained to staged or simultaneous resection of resectable colon or rectal metastases. The panel made conditional recommendations for the use of MIS hepatectomy for both staged and simultaneous resection when deemed safe, feasible, and oncologically effective by the surgeon based on the individual patient characteristics. These recommendations were based on low and very low certainty of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: These evidence-based recommendations should provide guidance regarding surgical decision-making in the treatment of CRLM and highlight the importance of individual considerations of each case. Pursuing the identified research needs may help further refine the evidence and improve future versions of guidelines for the use of MIS techniques in the treatment of CRLM.

Surgical approach to microwave and radiofrequency liver ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastases less than 5 cm: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) represent the two most common malignant neoplasms of the liver. The objective of this study was to assess outcomes of surgical approaches to liver ablation comparing laparoscopic versus percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA), and MWA versus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in patients with HCC or CRLM lesions smaller than 5 cm. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted across seven databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane, to identify all comparative studies between 1937 and 2021. Two independent reviewers screened for eligibility, extracted data for selected studies, and assessed study bias using the modified Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Random effects meta-analyses were subsequently performed on all available comparative data. RESULTS: From 1066 records screened, 11 studies were deemed relevant to the study and warranted inclusion. Eight of the 11 studies were at high or uncertain risk for bias. Our meta-analyses of two studies revealed that laparoscopic MW ablation had significantly higher complication rates compared to a percutaneous approach (risk ratio = 4.66; 95% confidence interval = [1.23, 17.22]), but otherwise similar incomplete ablation rates, local recurrence, and oncologic outcomes. The remaining nine studies demonstrated similar efficacy of MWA and RFA, as measured by incomplete ablation, complication rates, local/regional recurrence, and oncologic outcomes, for both HCC and CRLM lesions less than 5 cm (p > 0.05 for all outcomes). There was no statistical subgroup interaction in the analysis of tumors < 3 cm. CONCLUSION: The available comparative evidence regarding both laparoscopic versus percutaneous MWA and MWA versus RFA is limited, evident by the few studies that suffer from high/uncertain risk of bias. Additional high-quality randomized trials or statistically matched cohort studies with sufficient granularity of patient variables, institutional experience, and physician specialty/training will be useful in informing clinical decision making for the ablative treatment of HCC or CRLM.

SAGES/AHPBA guidelines for the use of microwave and radiofrequency liver ablation for the surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma or colorectal liver metastases less than 5 cm.

BACKGROUND: Primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) represent the liver's two most common malignant neoplasms. Liver-directed therapies such as ablation have become part of multidisciplinary therapies despite a paucity of data. Therefore, an expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations regarding the use of microwave ablation (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for HCC or CRLM less than 5 cm in diameter in patients ineligible for other therapies. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted for six key questions (KQ) regarding MWA or RFA for solitary liver tumors in patients deemed poor candidates for first-line therapy. Subject experts used the GRADE methodology to formulate evidence-based recommendations and future research recommendations. RESULTS: The panel addressed six KQs pertaining to MWA vs. RFA outcomes and laparoscopic vs. percutaneous MWA. The available evidence was poor quality and individual studies included both HCC and CRLM. Therefore, the six KQs were condensed into two, recognizing that these were two disparate tumor groups and this grouping was somewhat arbitrary. With this significant limitation, the panel suggested that in appropriately selected patients, either MWA or RFA can be safe and feasible. However, this recommendation must be implemented cautiously when simultaneously considering patients with two disparate tumor biologies. The limited data suggested that laparoscopic MWA of anatomically more difficult tumors has a compensatory higher morbidity profile compared to percutaneous MWA, while achieving similar overall 1-year survival. Thus, either approach can be appropriate depending on patient-specific factors (very low certainty of evidence). CONCLUSION: Given the weak evidence, these guidelines provide modest guidance regarding liver ablative therapies for HCC and CRLM. Liver ablation is just one component of a multimodal approach and its use is currently limited to a highly selected population. The quality of the existing data is very low and therefore limits the strength of the guidelines.

Timing of cholecystectomy following cholecystostomy tube placement for acute cholecystitis: a retrospective study aiming to identify the optimal timing between a percutaneous cholecystostomy and cholecystectomy to reduce the number of poor surgical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Our study aims to identify the optimal timing between a percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) and cholecystectomy to reduce the number of poor surgical outcomes. BACKGROUND: Biliary disease is a common surgical disease and laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the preferred strategy for the management of acute cholecystitis. However, in high-risk surgical patients, a PC tube may be placed instead. In the 2018 Tokyo Guidelines, the optimal timing of cholecystectomy following a PC has been identified as an important future research question. METHODS: This is a retrospective study that focuses on identifying the ideal timing of cholecystectomy after PC tube placement to minimize complications. Poor surgical outcomes were measured as 90-day reoperations, 30-day readmissions, 30-day emergency department (ED) visits, length of stay (LOS), and discharge destination. Patients were selected from the New York SPARCS database from 2005 to September 30, 2015. RESULTS: 1213 records that consisted of both PC and cholecystectomy were collected. No significant differences in 30-day readmissions, 90-day reoperations, and 30-day ED visits in relation to timing between PC and cholecystectomy were found. Additionally, the decision to replace or not replace dislodged PC tubes was not associated with 90-day reoperation, 30-day readmission, 30-day ED visit, LOS, or discharge destination. However, discharge destination and LOS were significantly different between early intervention of 3 days or less between PC and cholecystectomy and late intervention of more than 14 days with late intervention being associated with shorter LOS and more home discharges. CONCLUSION: Performing a cholecystectomy more than 14 days after a PC is associated with better surgical outcomes.