Impact of Patient- and Surgeon-Related Factors on Weight Loss after Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy-A Single-Center Study.

Background and Objectives: Surgical treatment for obesity is becoming increasingly popular. Surgeons have been trying to find a simple way to predict the type of surgical intervention that is best for a specific patient. This study aimed to determine the patient- and surgeon-related factors that affect weight loss after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Materials and Methods: A total of 129 patients underwent LSG in one surgical department. The following factors were analyzed: gender; age; highest preoperative and 6-month postoperative weight; the occurrence of obesity-related diseases, such as type 2 diabetes and hypertension; the number of surgeons involved in the surgery; and who performed the surgery, a resident or specialist. The outcomes also included length of hospital stay, operative time and complications. Statistical significance was defined as p ≤ 0.05. Results: A total of 129 patients (94 female) with a median age of 43 years and BMI of 43.1 kg/m2 underwent LSG, while a total of 109 (84.5%) patients achieved ≥50% of excess BMI loss (%EBMIL). Preoperative weight loss had no impact on %EBMIL (p = 0.95), operative time (p = 0.31) and length of hospital stay (p = 0.2). Two versus three surgeons in the operating team had no impact on surgery time (p = 0.1), length of stay (p = 0.98) and %EBMIL (p = 0.14). The operative time and length of hospital stay were similar for specialists and surgeons in training. %EBMIL was higher in the residents' surgery without statistical significance (p = 0.19). Complications occurred in 3.9% without mortality or leaks. Conclusions: Preoperative comorbidities, surgeons' experience and the number of surgeons in the operating team do not impact the complication rate, length of hospital stay, operative time and postoperative weight loss after LSG.

Assessing Surgeon Familiarity with the Commission on Cancer Operative Standards for Cancer Surgery.

BACKGROUND: In response to growing evidence that proper performance of operative techniques during cancer surgery is associated with improved patient outcomes, the American College of Surgeons (ACS) implemented six operative standards as part of Commission on Cancer (CoC) accreditation. This study aimed to assess surgeon familiarity with these standards when first introduced and 2 years after their adoption. METHODS: The ACS Cancer Surgery Standards Program distributed an anonymous 36-question survey to CoC-accredited cancer programs in 2021 and 2023. Questions specific to operative techniques determined the Surgery Score, and those specific to the accreditation standards determined the Standards Score. Mean scores were compared using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and t tests. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 376 surgeons in 2021 and 380 surgeons in 2023. The Surgery Scores were higher than the Standards Scores in 2021 and 2023. The surgeons who practiced at institutions with CoC accreditation had significantly higher Standards Scores than the surgeons at non-accredited institutions in 2021 (p = 0.005) and 2023 (p = 0.004), but not significantly different Surgery Scores. CONCLUSIONS: The baseline survey in 2021 demonstrated significant knowledge of technical aspects of cancer surgery among a broad surgeon base, but a need for greater understanding of the accreditation standards. The repeat survey distribution 2 years after rollout of the operative standards and associated educational programing showed increased awareness surrounding the operative standards in 2023 and a trend toward improvement in knowledge of the accreditation standards across all specialties. Further evaluation will be directed toward compliance with the accreditation standards.

Appropriate Use Criteria Committees: The professional society role in the development and implementation of Appropriate Use Criteria.

Vascular surgeons have the ability to manage and intervene on numerous vascular diseases of both the arterial and venous systems. With the growing number of interventions available as endovascular technology evolves, it is important to determine when a procedure is safely indicated for a vascular surgery patient. Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) offer synthesized clinical information and practice standards that can aid clinicians in making these management decisions. Professional societies, such as the Society for Vascular Surgery, bring experts in the field together to collaborate and create AUC for various vascular diseases and interventions. It is essential to publish these criteria in peer-reviewed journals, as well as make them available on public websites so the information is available to vascular surgeons and interventionalists from other specialties who also treat patients with vascular disease. Cardiology, interventional radiology, and interventional nephrology are some other specialties that perform procedures for vascular disease, and vascular interventions by nonsurgeon specialists continue to increase. The Society for Vascular Surgery has published AUC on intermittent claudication, carotid disease, and abdominal aneurysm management. These are intended to guide practice, but also have highlighted areas for improvement that would allow for more universal implementation of AUC in vascular patient care across medical specialties. Increased intersocietal participation and perhaps inclusion of government and other payer participation will allow professional society-sponsored AUC to evolve, resulting in coordinated, appropriate care for vascular surgery patients.

Metabolic and Bariatric Surgeon Criteria-An International Experts' Consensus.

PURPOSE: With the global epidemic of obesity, the importance of metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is greater than ever before. Performing these surgeries requires academic training and the completion of a dedicated fellowship training program. This study aimed to develop guidelines based on expert consensus using a modified Delphi method to create the criteria for metabolic and bariatric surgeons that must be mastered before obtaining privileges to perform MBS. METHODS: Eighty-nine recognized MBS surgeons from 42 countries participated in the Modified Delphi consensus to vote on 30 statements in two rounds. An agreement/disagreement among ≥ 70.0% of the experts was regarded to indicate a consensus. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 29 out of 30 statements. Most experts agreed that before getting privileges to perform MBS, surgeons must hold a general surgery degree and complete or have completed a dedicated fellowship training program. The experts agreed that the learning curves for the various operative procedures are approximately 25-50 operations for the LSG, 50-75 for the OAGB, and 75-100 for the RYGB. 93.1% of experts agreed that MBS surgeons should diligently record patients' data in their National or Global database. CONCLUSION: MBS surgeons should have a degree in general surgery and have been enrolled in a dedicated fellowship training program with a structured curriculum. The learning curve of MBS procedures is procedure dependent. MBS surgeons must demonstrate proficiency in managing postoperative complications, collaborate within a multidisciplinary team, commit to a minimum 2-year patient follow-up, and actively engage in national and international MBS societies.

Defining the role and impact of specialty surgeons in ensuring high-quality, accessible abdominal surgery: a report from the 2024 GI Surgery Summit.

BACKGROUND: The 2024 GI Surgery Summit brought together Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (SSAT), Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO), and Society of University Surgeons (SUS) members to assess the current state of gastrointestinal (GI) surgery. This report reviews the key discussions and recommendations after the dedicated plenary session that addressed challenges in providing high-quality, accessible GI surgery for all patients. METHODS: The Summit took place from January 14 to 16. During the plenary session "Defining the role and impact of specialty surgeons in ensuring high-quality, accessible abdominal surgery," leaders, rising leaders, and members of SSAT, SSO, and SUS met and discussed challenges in providing high-quality, accessible GI surgery. RESULTS: Actionable recommendations to address the challenges in providing high-quality, accessible GI surgical care were made, including engaging communities and patients, building alliances across hospitals and surgeons, and establishing standards of GI surgical care. CONCLUSION: Surgeons, hospital systems, and surgical societies can improve healthcare access and outcomes for all GI surgical patients.

Self-Reported Management of Inflammatory Breast Cancer Among the American Society of Breast Surgeons Membership: Consensus and Opportunities.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is rare and biologically aggressive. We sought to assess diagnostic and management strategies among the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) membership. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An anonymous survey was distributed to ASBrS members from March to May 2023. The survey included questions about respondents' demographics and information related to stage III and IV IBC management. Agreement was defined as a shared response by >80% of respondents. In areas of disagreement, responses were stratified by years in practice, fellowship training, and annual IBC patient volume. RESULTS: The survey was administered to 2337 members with 399 (17.1%) completing all questions and defining the study cohort. Distribution of years in practice was 26.0% 0-10 years, 26.6% 11-20 years and 47.4% > 20 years. Overall, 51.2% reported surgical oncology or breast fellowship training, 69.2% maintain a breast-only practice, and 73.5% treat < 5 IBC cases/year. Agreement was identified in diagnostic imaging, trimodal therapy, and mastectomy with wide skin excision for stage III IBC. Lack of agreement was identified in surgical management of the axilla; respondents with < 10 years in practice or fellowship training were more likely to perform axillary dissection for cN0-N2 stage III IBC. Locoregional management of stage IV IBC was variable. CONCLUSIONS: Among ASBrS members, there is consensus in diagnostic evaluation, treatment sequencing and surgical approach to the breast in stage III IBC. Differences exist in surgical management of the cN0-2 axilla with uptake of de-escalation strategies. Clinical trials are needed to evaluate oncologic safety of de-escalation in this high-risk population.

American Society of Transplant Surgeons Normothermic Regional Perfusion Standards: Abdominal.

BACKGROUND: Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) has emerged as a vital technique in organ procurement, particularly in donation after circulatory death (DCD) cases, offering the potential to optimize organ utilization and improve posttransplant outcomes. Recognizing its significance, the American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) convened a work group to develop standardized recommendations for abdominal NRP in the United States. METHODS: The workgroup, comprising experts in NRP, DCD, and transplantation, formulated recommendations through a collaborative process involving revisions and approvals by relevant committees and the ASTS council. Four key areas were identified for standardization: Preprocedure communication, NRP procedure, Terminology and documentation, and Mentorship/credentialing. RESULTS: The recommendations encompass a range of considerations, including preprocedure communication protocols to facilitate informed decision-making by transplant centers and organ procurement organizations, procedural guidelines for NRP teams, uniform terminology to clarify the NRP process, and standards for mentorship and credentialing of NRP practitioners. Specific recommendations address logistical concerns, procedural nuances, documentation requirements, and the importance of ongoing quality assurance. CONCLUSIONS: The standardized recommendations for abdominal NRP presented in this article aim to ensure consistency, safety, and efficacy in the organ procurement process. By establishing clear protocols and guidelines, the ASTS seeks to enhance organ utilization, honor donor wishes, and uphold public trust in the donation process. Implementation of these recommendations can contribute to the advancement of NRP practices and improve outcomes for transplant recipients.

Surgeon Skill and Perioperative Outcomes in Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy.

Importance: Technical skill in complex surgical procedures may affect clinical outcomes, and there is growing interest in understanding the clinical implications of surgeon proficiency levels. Objectives: To determine whether surgeon scores representing technical skills of robot-assisted kidney surgery are associated with patient outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study included 10 urological surgeons participating in a surgical collaborative in Michigan from July 2021 to September 2022. Each surgeon submitted up to 7 videos of themselves performing robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. Videos were segmented into 6 key steps, yielding 127 video clips for analysis. Each video clip was deidentified and distributed to at least 3 of the 24 blinded peer surgeons from the collaborative who also perform robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. Reviewers rated technical skill and provided written feedback. Statistical analysis was performed from May 2023 to January 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Reviewers scored each video clip using a validated instrument to assess technical skill for partial nephrectomy on a scale of 1 to 5 (higher scores indicating greater skill). For all submitting surgeons, outcomes from a clinical registry were assessed for length of stay (LOS) greater than 3 days, estimated blood loss (EBL) greater than 500 mL, warm ischemia time (WIT) greater than 30 minutes, positive surgical margin (PSM), 30-day emergency department (ED) visits, and 30-day readmission. Results: Among the 27 unique surgeons who participated in this study as reviewers and/or individuals performing the procedures, 3 (11%) were female, and the median age was 47 (IQR, 39-52) years. Risk-adjusted outcomes were associated with scores representing surgeon skills. The overall performance score ranged from 3.5 to 4.7 points with a mean (SD) of 4.1 (0.4) points. Greater skill was correlated with significantly lower rates of LOS greater than 3 days (-6.8% [95% CI, -8.3% to -5.2%]), EBL greater than 500 mL (-2.6% [95% CI, -3.0% to -2.1%]), PSM (-8.2% [95% CI, -9.2% to -7.2%]), ED visits (-3.9% [95% CI, -5.0% to -2.8%]), and readmissions (-5.7% [95% CI, -6.9% to -4.6%]) (P < .001 for all). Higher overall score was also associated with higher partial nephrectomy volume (ß coefficient, 11.4 [95% CI, 10.0-12.7]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this quality improvement study on video-based evaluation of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy, higher technical skill was associated with lower rates of adverse clinical outcomes. These findings suggest that video-based evaluation plays a role in assessing surgical skill and can be used in quality improvement initiatives to improve patient care.

Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) Trifecta Learning Curve for Surgeons with Previous Experience in Laparoscopy.

Background and Objectives: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a complex surgery with a steep learning curve (LC). No clear evidence exists for how previous laparoscopic experience affects the RARP LC. We report the LC of three surgeons with vast experience in laparoscopy (more than 400 procedures), analyzing the results of functional and oncological outcomes under the "Trifecta" concept (defined as the achievement of continence, potency, and oncological control free of biochemical recurrence). Materials and Methods: The surgical experience of the three surgeons from September 2021 to December 2022, involving 146 RARP consecutive patients in a single institution center, was evaluated prospectively. Erectile disfunction patients were excluded. ANOVA and chi-square test were used to compare the distribution of variables between the three surgeons. LC analysis was performed using the cumulative sum control chart (CUSUM) technique to achieve trifecta. Results: The median age was 65.42 (±7.34); the clinical stage were T1c (68%) and T2a (32%); the biopsy grades were ISUP 1 (15.9%), ISUP 2 (47.98), and ≥ISUP 3 (35%). The median surgical time was 132.8 (±32.8), and the mean intraoperative bleeding was 186 cc (±115). Complications included the following: Clavien-Dindo I 8/146 (5.47%); II 9/146 (6.16%); and III 3/146 (2.05%). Positive margins were reported in 44/146 (30.13%). The PSA of 145/146 patients (99%) at 6 months was below 0.08. Early continence was achieved in 101/146 (69.17%), 6-month continence 126/146 (86%), early potency 51/146 (34.9%), and 6-month potency 65/146 (44%). Surgeons "a", "b", and "c" performed 50, 47, and 49 cases, respectively. After CUSUM analysis, the "Trifecta" LC peak was achieved at case 19 in surgeon "a", 21 in surgeon "b", and 20 in surgeon "c". Conclusions: RARP LC to accomplish "Trifecta" can be significantly reduced in surgeons with previous experience in laparoscopy and be achieved at around 20 cases.

Factors Influencing Implementation of the Commission on Cancer's Breast Synoptic Operative Report (Alliance A20_Pilot9).

BACKGROUND: The technical aspects of cancer surgery have a significant impact on patient outcomes. To monitor surgical quality, in 2020, the Commission on Cancer (CoC) revised its accreditation standards for cancer surgery and introduced the synoptic operative reports (SORs). The standardization of SORs holds promise, but successful implementation requires strategies to address key implementation barriers. This study aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators to implementing breast SOR within diverse CoC-accredited programs. METHODS: In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 health care professionals across diverse CoC-accredited sites. The study used two comprehensive implementation frameworks to guide data collection and analysis. RESULTS: Successful SOR implementation was impeded by disrupted workflows, surgeon resistance to change, low prioritization of resources, and poor flow of information despite CoC's positive reputation. Participants often lacked understanding of the requirements and timeline for breast SOR and were heavily influenced by prior experiences with templates and SOR champion relationships. The perceived lack of monetary benefits (to obtaining CoC accreditation) together with the significant information technology (IT) resource requirements tempered some of the enthusiasm. Additionally, resource constraints and the redirection of personnel during the COVID-19 pandemic were noted as hurdles. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeon behavior and workflow change, IT and personnel resources, and communication and networking strategies influenced SOR implementation. During early implementation and the implementation planning phase, the primary focus was on achieving buy-in and initiating successful roll-out rather than effective use or sustainment. These findings have implications for enhancing standardization of surgical cancer care and guidance of future strategies to optimize implementation of CoC accreditation standards.

Putting the ready in readiness: A post hoc analysis of surgeon performance during a military mass casualty situation in Afghanistan.

BACKGROUND: All military surgeons must maintain trauma capabilities for expeditionary care contexts, yet most are not trauma specialists. Maintaining clinical readiness for trauma and mass casualty care is a significant challenge for military and civilian surgeons. We examined the effect of a prescribed clinical readiness program for expeditionary trauma care on the surgical performance of 12 surgeons during a 60-patient mass-casualty situation (MASCAL). METHODS: The sample included orthopedic (four) and general surgeons (eight) who cared for MASCAL victims at Hamad Karzai International Airport, Kabul, Afghanistan, on August 26, 2021. One orthopedic and two general surgeons had prior deployment experience. The prescribed program included three primary measures of clinical readiness: 1, expeditionary knowledge (examination score); 2, procedural skills competencies (performance assessment score); and 3, clinical activity (operative practice profile metric). Data were attained from program records for each surgeon in the sample. Each of the 60 patient cases was reviewed and rated (performance score) by the Joint Trauma System's Performance Improvement Branch, a military-wide performance improvement organization. All scores were normalized to facilitate direct comparisons using effect size calculations between each predeployment measure and MASCAL surgical care. RESULTS: Predeployment knowledge and clinical activity measures met program benchmarks. Baseline predeployment procedural skills competency scores did not meet program benchmarks; however, those gaps were closed through retraining, ensuring all surgeons met or exceeded the program benchmarks predeployment. There were very large effect sizes (Cohen's d ) between all program measures and surgical care score, confirming the relationship between the program measures and MASCAL trauma care provided by the 12 surgeons. CONCLUSION: The prescribed program measures ensured that all surgeons achieved predeployment performance benchmarks and provided high-quality trauma care to our nation's service members. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

Influence of external assessment on quality and safety in surgery: a qualitative study of surgeons' perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: Transparency about the occurrence of adverse events has been a decades-long governmental priority, defining external feedback to healthcare providers as a key measure to improve the services and reduce the number of adverse events. This study aimed to explore surgeons' experiences of assessment by external bodies, with a focus on its impact on transparency, reporting and learning from serious adverse events. External bodies were defined as external inspection, police internal investigation, systems of patient injury compensation and media. METHODS: Based on a qualitative study design, 15 surgeons were recruited from four Norwegian university hospitals and examined with individual semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed by deductive content analysis. RESULTS: Four overarching themes were identified, related to influence of external inspection, police investigation, patient injury compensation and media publicity, (re)presented by three categories: (1) sense of criminalisation and reinforcement of guilt, being treated as suspects, (2) lack of knowledge and competence among external bodies causing and reinforcing a sense of clashing cultures between the 'medical and the outside world' with minor influence on quality improvement and (3) involving external bodies could stimulate awareness about internal issues of quality and safety, depending on relevant competence, knowledge and communication skills. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: This study found that external assessment might generate criminalisation and scapegoating, reinforcing the sense of having medical perspectives on one hand and external regulatory perspectives on the other, which might hinder efforts to improve quality and safety. External bodies could, however, inspire useful adjustment of internal routines and procedures. The study implies that the variety and interconnections between external bodies may expose the surgeons to challenging pressure. Further studies are required to investigate these challenges to quality and safety in surgery.

Accuracy of Trauma Surgeons Prospective Estimation of the Injury Severity Score: A Pilot Study.

Injury Severity Score (ISS) has limited utility as a prospective predictor of trauma outcomes as it is currently scored by abstractors post-discharge. This study aimed to determine accuracy of ISS estimation at time of admission. Attending trauma surgeons assessed the Abbreviated Injury Scale of each body region for patients admitted during their call, from which estimated ISS (eISS) was calculated. The eISS was considered concordant to abstracted ISS (aISS) if both were in the same category: mild (<9), moderate (9-15), severe (16-25), or critical (>25). Ten surgeons completed 132 surveys. Overall ISS concordance was 52.2%; 87.5%, 30.8%, 34.8%, and 61.7% for patients with mild, moderate, severe, and critical aISS, respectively; unweighted k = .36, weighted k = .69. This preliminarily supports attending trauma surgeons' ability to predict severity of injury in real time, which has important clinical and research implications.

Correcting for Rater Effects in Operating Room Surgical Skills Assessment.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate and adjust for rater effects in operating room surgical skills assessment performed using a structured rating scale for nasal septoplasty. METHODS: We analyzed survey responses from attending surgeons (raters) who supervised residents and fellows (trainees) performing nasal septoplasty in a prospective cohort study. We fit a structural equation model with the rubric item scores regressed on a latent component of skill and then fit a second model including the rating surgeon as a random effect to model a rater-effects-adjusted latent surgical skill. We validated this model against conventional measures including the level of expertise and post-graduation year (PGY) commensurate with the trainee's performance, the actual PGY of the trainee, and whether the surgical goals were achieved. RESULTS: Our dataset included 188 assessments by 7 raters and 41 trainees. The model with one latent construct for surgical skill and the rater as a random effect was the best. Rubric scores depended on how severe or lenient the rater was, sometimes almost as much as they depended on trainee skill. Rater-adjusted latent skill scores increased with attending-estimated skill levels and PGY of trainees, increased with the actual PGY, and appeared constant over different levels of achievement of surgical goals. CONCLUSION: Our work provides a method to obtain rater effect adjusted surgical skill assessments in the operating room using structured rating scales. Our method allows for the creation of standardized (i.e., rater-effects-adjusted) quantitative surgical skill benchmarks using national-level databases on trainee assessments. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A Laryngoscope, 134:3548-3554, 2024.