Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM) and Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy with Dor Fundoplication for Esophagogastric Junction Outflow Obstruction (EGJOO): a Comparison of Outcomes and Impact on Physiology.

INTRODUCTION: Esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO) is an esophageal motility disorder characterized by failure of lower esophageal sphincter (LES) relaxation with preserved peristalsis. Studies have shown that Heller myotomy with Dor fundoplication (HMD) and per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) are effective treatments for EGJOO. However, there is paucity of data comparing the efficacy and impact of these two procedures. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare outcomes and impact on esophageal physiology in patients undergoing HMD or POEM for primary EGJOO. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of patients who underwent either HMD or POEM for primary EGJOO at our institution between 2013 and 2021. Favorable outcome was defined as an Eckardt score ≤ 3 at 1 year after surgery. GERD-HRQL questionnaire, endoscopy, pH monitoring, and high-resolution manometry (HRM) results at baseline and 1 year after surgery were compared pre- and post-surgery and between groups. Objective GERD was defined as DeMeester score > 14.7 or LA grade C/D esophagitis. RESULTS: The final study population consisted of 52 patients who underwent HMD (n = 35) or POEM (n = 17) for EGJOO. At a mean (SD) follow-up of 24.6 (15.3) months, favorable outcome was achieved by 30 (85.7%) patients after HMD and 14 (82.4%) after POEM (p = 0.753). After HMD, there was a decrease GERD-HRQL total score (31 (22-45) to 4 (0-19); p < 0.001), and objective reflux (54.2 to 25.9%; p = 0.033). On manometry, there was a decrease in LES resting pressure (48 (34-59) to 13 (8-17); p < 0.001) and IRP (22 (17-28) to 8 (3-11); p < 0.001), but esophageal body characteristics did not change (p > 0.05). Incomplete bolus clearance improved (70% (10-90) to 10% (0-40); p = 0.010). After POEM, there was no change in the GERD-HRQL total score (p = 0.854), but objective reflux significantly increased (0 to 62%; p < 0.001). On manometry, there was a decrease in LES resting pressure (43 (30-68) to 31 (5-34); p = 0.042) and IRP (23 (18-33) to 12 (10-32); p = 0.048), DCI (1920 (1600-5500) to 0 (0-814); p = 0.035), with increased failed swallows (0% (0-30) to 100% (10-100); p = 0.032). Bolus clearance did not improve (p = 0.539). Compared to HMD, POEM had a longer esophageal myotomy length (11 (7-15)-vs-5 (5-6); p = 0.001), more objective reflux (p = 0.041), lower DCI (0 (0-814)-vs-1695 (929-3101); p = 0.004), and intact swallows (90 (70-100)-vs-0 (0-40); p = 0.006), but more failed swallows (100 (10-100); p = 0.018) and incomplete bolus clearance (90 (90-100)-vs-10 (0-40); p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Peroral endoscopic myotomy and Heller myotomy with Dor fundoplication are equally effective at relieving EGJOO symptoms. However, POEM causes worse reflux and near complete loss of esophageal body function.

Operating room team training using simulation: Hope or hype?

BACKGROUND: This study sought to determine the long-term impact of multidisciplinary simulated operating room (OR) team training. METHOD: Two-wave survey study (immediate post-training survey 2010-2017, follow-up 2018). Differences across time, specialty, and experience with adverse events were assessed using chi-square and t -tests. RESULTS: Immediately after training, more than 90% of respondents found simulation scenarios realistic and reported team training would provide safer patient care. However, follow-up participants reported less enthusiasm toward training, with 58% stating they would like to take similar training again. A majority of participants (77%) experienced adverse events after training; those reporting adverse events reported more positive long-term evaluations. CONCLUSIONS: Simulated OR team training is initially highly valued by participants and is perceived as contributing to patient safety. Diminution of participant enthusiasm over time suggests that repeat training requirements be reconsidered, and less costly, alternative methods (such as asynchronous learning or virtual reality) should be explored.

Virtual reality operating room with AI guidance: design and validation of a fire scenario.

BACKGROUND: Operating room (OR) fires are uncommon but disastrous events. Inappropriate handling of OR fires can result in injuries, even death. Aiming to simulate OR fire emergencies and effectively train clinicians to react appropriately, we have developed an artificial intelligence (AI)-based OR fire virtual trainer based on the principle of the "fire triangle" and SAGES FUSE curriculum. The simulator can predict the user's actions in the virtual OR and provide them with timely feedback to assist with training. We conducted a study investigating the validity of the AI-assisted OR fire trainer at the 2019 SAGES Learning Center. METHODS: Fifty-three participants with varying medical experience were voluntarily recruited to participate in our Institutional Review Board approved study. All participants were asked to contain a fire within the virtual OR. Participants were then asked to fill out a 7-point Likert questionnaire consisting of ten questions regarding the face validation of the AI-assisted OR fire simulator. Shapiro-Wilk tests were conducted to test normality of the scores for each trial. A Friedman's ANOVA with post hoc tests was used to evaluate the effect of multiple trials on performance. RESULTS: On a 7-point scale, eight of the ten questions were rated a mean of 6 or greater (72.73%), especially those relating to the usefulness of the simulator for OR fire-containing training. 79.25% of the participants rated the degree of usefulness of AI guidance over 6 out of 7. The performance of individuals improved significantly over the five trials, χ2(4) = 119.89, p < .001, and there was a significant linear trend of performance r = .97, p = 0.006. A pairwise analysis showed that only after the introduction of AI did performance improve significantly. CONCLUSIONS: The AI-guided OR fire trainer offers the potential to assess OR personnel and teach the proper response to an iatrogenic fire scenario in a safe, repeatable, immersive environment.

Surgeons With Five or More Actual Cricothyrotomies Perform Significantly Better on a Virtual Reality Simulator.

BACKGROUND: Discriminating performance of learners with varying experience is essential to developing and validating a surgical simulator. For rare and emergent procedures such as cricothyrotomy (CCT), the criteria to establish such groups are unclear. This study is to investigate the impact of surgeons' actual CCT experience on their virtual reality simulator performance and to determine the minimum number of actual CCTs that significantly discriminates simulator scores. Our hypothesis is that surgeons who performed more actual CCT cases would perform better on a virtual reality CCT simulator. METHODS: 47 clinicians were recruited to participate in this study at the 2018 annual conference of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons. We established groups based on three different experience thresholds, that is, the minimal number of CCT cases performed (1, 5, and 10), and compared simulator performance between these groups. RESULTS: Participants who had performed more clinical cases manifested higher mean scores in completing CCT simulation tasks, and those reporting at least 5 actual CCTs had significantly higher (P = 0.014) simulator scores than those who had performed fewer cases. Another interesting finding was that classifying participants based on experience level, that is, attendings, fellows, and residents, did not yield statistically significant differences in skills related to CCT. CONCLUSIONS: The simulator was sensitive to prior experience at a threshold of 5 actual CCTs performed.

Less pain and earlier discharge after implementation of a multidisciplinary enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) may be complicated by postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting, with consequent increases in length of stay (LOS), decreased patient satisfaction, and higher costs. While enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been in circulation for many years, there is no standard ERAS protocol for bariatric surgery. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively and compared to a historical control. All patients undergoing LSG, ages 18 to 75, were included in the pathway; those with preoperative chronic opioid use were excluded from our results. Statistical analysis was performed using t-statistics and chi-squared test. Ninety patients undergoing LSG, performed by a single surgeon, were included in our ERAS group from November 26, 2018, to April 30, 2019, and were compared to a historical control of 570 patients who underwent LSG over the previous 5 years (pre-ERAS). Measured outcomes included discharge opioid prescriptions issued, hospital length of stay, 30-day readmissions, reoperations, morbidity, and mortality. RESULTS: Ten (11%) ERAS patients vs 100% of pre-ERAS patients received opioid prescriptions upon, or after, discharge (p < 0.001). The ERAS group LOS decreased to 1.36 days vs 2.40 days in the pre-ERAS group (p < 0.001). 30-day readmission rates were 0% for ERAS patients vs 3.09% for pre-ERAS patients (p = 0.149). 30-day reoperation rates were 0% for ERAS patients vs 0.54% for pre-ERAS patients (p = 1). Thirty-day morbidity rates were 3.33% (3) for ERAS patients vs 3.27% for pre-ERAS patients (p = 1); there was no 30-day mortality in either group. CONCLUSION: ERAS for LSG results in a clinical and statistically significant reduction in postoperative opioid use and LOS, without increasing 30-day readmissions, reoperations, morbidity, or mortality.