Trends in minimally invasive and open inguinal hernia repair: an analysis of ACGME general surgery case logs.

BACKGROUND: Groin hernia repair is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures and is often performed by surgical interns and junior residents. While traditionally performed open, minimally invasive (MIS) groin hernia repair has become an increasingly popular approach. The purpose of this study was to determine the trends in MIS and open inguinal and femoral hernia repair in general surgery residency training over the past two decades. METHODS: Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) national case log data of general surgery residents from 1999 through 2022 were reviewed. We collected means and standard deviations of open and MIS inguinal and femoral hernia repairs. Linear regression and ANOVA were used to identify trends in the average annual number of open and MIS hernia repairs logged by residents. Cases were distinguished between level of resident trainees: surgeon-chief (SC) and surgeon-junior (SJ). RESULTS: From July 1999 to June 2022, the average annual MIS inguinal and femoral hernia repairs logged by general surgery residents significantly increased, from 7.6 to 47.9 cases (p < 0.001), and the average annual open inguinal and femoral hernia repairs logged by general surgery residents significantly decreased, from 51.9 to 39.7 cases (p < 0.001). SJ resident results were consistent with this overall trend. For SC residents, the volume of both MIS and open hernia repairs significantly increased (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ACGME case log data indicates a trend of general surgery residents logging overall fewer numbers of open inguinal and femoral hernia repairs, and a larger proportion of open repairs by chief residents. This trend warrants attention and further study as it may represent a skill or knowledge gap with significant impact of surgical training.

Trends in utilization of laparoscopic colectomy according to race: an analysis of the NIS database.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic colectomy has been associated with improved recovery and decreased complications when compared to an open approach. Consequently, the rates of laparoscopic colectomy have increased. Race has been identified as a factor that influences a patient's likelihood of undergoing laparoscopic colectomy. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to analyze the rates of laparoscopic colectomy stratified by race over time. METHODS: Patients were selected using procedure codes for colectomy within the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2009 to 2018. The primary independent variable was race (Black, BL; Hispanic, HI; White, WH), and the primary outcome was surgical approach (laparoscopic vs open). Covariates included age, sex, case complexity, insurance status, income, year of surgery, urbanicity, region, bedsize, and teaching status. We examined the univariable association of race with laparoscopic vs open colectomy with chi-square. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine the association of race with procedure type adjusting for covariates. All analyses were done using SAS (version 9.4, Cary, NC) with p < .05 considered significant. RESULTS: 267,865 patients (25,000 BL, 19,685 HI, and 223,180 WH) were identified. Laparoscopy was used in 47% of cases, and this varied significantly by race (BL 44%, HI 49%, WH 47%, p < .0001). After adjusting for covariates, Black patients had significantly lower adjusted odds of undergoing laparoscopic colectomy vs White patients (aOR 0.92, p < 0.0001). Utilization of laparoscopy was similar in Hispanic compared to White patients (aOR 1.00, p = 0.9667). Racial disparity in the adjusted odds of undergoing laparoscopic colectomy was persistent over time. CONCLUSION: Race was independently associated with the rate of laparoscopic colectomy, with Black patients less likely to receive laparoscopic surgery than White patients. This disparity persisted over a decade. Attention should be paid to increasing the rates of laparoscopic colectomy in under-represented populations in order to optimize surgical care and address racial disparities.

Association of Hyperchloremia and Acute Kidney Injury in Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury.

INTRODUCTION: Hypertonic saline is often used to treat patients with traumatic brain injury. It carries the undesired side effect of hyperchloremia, which has been linked to acute kidney injury (AKI). We sought to evaluate the relationship of hyperchloremia and AKI in this population and whether the absolute exposure to hyperchloremia, including maximal hyperchloremia and duration of hyperchloremia were associated with AKI. METHODS: A retrospective study of severe traumatic brain injury patients who received hypertonic saline at a single academic institution. Demographics, head abbreviated injury scale, development of hyperchloremia (Cl ≥ 115), duration of hyperchloremia, highest chloride level, duration of hypertonic saline use, admission GFR, and administration of nephrotoxic medications were abstracted. The outcome of interest was the association between renal function and hyperchloremia. RESULTS: A total of 123 patients were included in the study. Multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated that only duration of hyperchloremia (p = 0.014) and GFR on admission (p = 0.004) were independently associated with development of AKI. The number of days of hypertonic saline infusion (p = 0.79) without the persistence of hyperchloremia and highest serum chloride levels (p = 0.23) were not predictive of AKI development. DISCUSSION: In patients with traumatic brain injury, admission GFR and prolonged hyperchloremia rather than the highest chloride level or the duration of hypertonic saline infusion were associated with the development of AKI.

YouTube to Teach Central Lines, The Expert vs Learner Perspective.

PURPOSE: Instructional videos of medical procedures can be a useful guide for learners, demonstrating proper and safe technique. Open publishing sites such as YouTube are readily accessible, however the content is not peer reviewed and quality of videos vary greatly. Our aim was to evaluate a learner's ability to interpret the quality of openly published content by comparing their rating of the most popular central line insertion videos on YouTube to expert evaluations. METHOD: YouTube search results for "central line placement" sorted by views or relevance compiled a list of the four most common videos. A fifth gold standard video, published by the New England Journal, was included, however was not found in the top results. Eleven expert practitioners from varying medical specialties (Critical Care, Surgery, Anesthesia, & Emergency Medicine) evaluated the 5 videos, utilizing a 22-item Likert scaled questionnaire emphasizing: preparation, sterility, anatomy, technique, & complications. Videos were compared as a composite average of the individual items on the survey. The highest, lowest, and 3rd ranked videos were evaluated by 45 residents ("learners") in varying specialties (Internal Medicine, Emergency Medicine, Surgery, Anesthesia) and post graduate year (PGY). Learners assessed the videos using the same scale. A Welch T-test assessed statistical significance between the two groups. Subgroup analysis compared experts against different PGY and specialty cohorts. RESULTS: The lowest scored video among the experts and learners was the most popular on YouTube, with 858,933 views at the time of inclusion. Though lowest in rank, this video was judged higher by learners than the experts (2.63/5 vs 2.18/5, P = 0.0029). The 3rd ranked video by experts with 249,746 views on YouTube, was also rated higher by learners (3.77/5 vs 3.45/5, P = 0.0084). The gold standard video by NEJM had 320,580 views and was rated highest by both the experts and learners (4.37/5 vs 4.28/5, P = 0.518). Subgroup analysis showed similar results with learners rating the videos overall better than experts, this was particularly true in the PGY-1 subgroup. CONCLUSION: The most popular central line insertion video was the worst rated by both experts and learners. Learners rated all the videos better than the expert. YouTube videos demonstrating medical procedures including central line insertion should come from peer reviewed sources if they are to be incorporated into educational curriculum.

Attending guidance advised: educational quality of surgical videos on YouTube.

INTRODUCTION: YouTube is the most used platform for case preparation by surgical trainees. Despite its popular use, studies have noted limitations in surgical technique, safety, and vetting of these videos. This study identified the most viewed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) videos on YouTube and analyzed the ability of attendings, residents, and medical students to identify critical portions of the procedure, technique, and limitations of the videos. METHODS: An incognito search was conducted on YouTube using the term "laparoscopic cholecystectomy." Results were screened for length, publication date, and language. The top ten most viewed videos were presented to general surgery attendings, residents, and medical students at a single academic institution. Established rubrics were used for evaluation, including the Critical View of Safety (CVS) for LC, a modified Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) score, a task-specific checklist, and visual analog scales for case difficulty and operator competence. Educational quality and likelihood of video recommendation for case preparation were evaluated using a Likert scale. Attending assessments were considered the gold standard. RESULTS: Six attending surgeons achieved excellent internal consistency on CVS, educational quality, and likelihood of recommendation scales, with Cronbach alpha (⍺) of 0.93, 0.92, and 0.92, respectively. ⍺ was ≥ 0.7 in all the other scales measured. Attending evaluations revealed that only one of the ten videos attained all three established CVS criteria. Four videos demonstrated none of the CVS criteria. The mean educational quality (mEQ) was 4.63 on a 10-point scale. The mean likelihood of recommendation (mLoR) for case preparation was 2.3 on a 5-point scale. Senior resident assessments (Postgraduate Year (PGY)4 + , n = 12) aligned with attending surgeons, with no statistically significant differences in CVS attainment, mEQ, and mLoR. Junior residents (PGY1-3, n = 17) and medical students (MS3-4, n = 20) exhibited significant difference with attendings in CVS attainment, mEQ, and mLoR for more than half the videos. Both groups tended to overrate videos compared to attendings. CONCLUSION: YouTube is the most popular unvetted resource used for case presentation by surgical trainees. Attending evaluations revealed that the most viewed LC videos on YouTube did not attain the CVS, and were deemed as inappropriate for case preparation, with low educational value. Senior resident video assessments closely aligned with attendings, while junior trainees were more likely to overstate video quality and value. Attending guidance and direction of trainees to high-quality, vetted resources for surgical case preparation is needed. This may also suggest a need for surgical societies with platforms for video sharing to prioritize the creation and dissemination of high-quality videos on easily accessible public platforms.

The PrEDICT-DGE score as a simple preoperative screening tool identifies patients at increased risk for delayed gastric emptying after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: Morbidity after Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has remained unchanged over the past decade. Delayed Gastric Emptying (DGE) is a major contributor with significant impact on healthcare-costs, quality of life and, for malignancies, even survival. We sought to develop a scoring system to aid in easy preoperative identification of patients at risk for DGE. METHODS: The ACS-NSQIP dataset from 2014 to 2018 was queried for patients undergoing PD with Whipple or pylorus preserving reconstruction. 15,154 patients were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression to identify risk factors for DGE, which were incorporated into a prediction model. Subgroup analysis of patients without SSI or fistula (primary DGE) was performed. RESULTS: We identified 9 factors independently associated with DGE to compile the PrEDICT-DGE score: Procedures (Concurrent adhesiolysis, feeding jejunostomy, vascular reconstruction with vein graft), Elderly (Age>70), Ductal stent (Lack of biliary stent), Invagination (Pancreatic reconstruction technique), COPD, Tobacco use, Disease, systemic (ASA>2), Gender (Male) and Erythrocytes (preoperative RBC-transfusion). PrEDICT-DGE scoring strongly correlated with actual DGE rates (R2 = 0.95) and predicted patients at low, intermediate, and high risk. Subgroup analysis of patients with primary DGE, retained all predictive factors, except for age>70 (p = 0.07) and ASA(p = 0.30). CONCLUSION: PrEDICT-DGE scoring accurately identifies patients at high risk for DGE and can help guide perioperative management.

Impact of preoperative biliary drainage on 30 Day outcomes of patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy for malignancy.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) has been advocated to address the plethora of physiologic derangements associated with cholestasis. However, available literature reports mixed outcomes and is based on largely outdated and/or single-institution studies. METHODS: Patients undergoing PBD prior to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for periampullary malignancy between 2014-2018 were identified in the ACS-NSQIP pancreatectomy dataset. Patients with PBD were propensity-score-matched to those without PBD and 30-day outcomes compared. RESULTS: 8,970 patients met our inclusion criteria. 4,473 with obstruction and PBD were matched to 829 with no preoperative drainage procedure. In the non-jaundiced cohort, 711 stented patients were matched to 2,957 without prior intervention. PBD did not influence 30-day mortality (2.2% versus 2.4%) or major morbidity (19.8% versus 20%) in patients with obstructive jaundice. Superficial surgical site infections (SSIs) were more common with PBD (6.8% versus 9.2%), however, no differences in deep or organ-space SSIs were found. Patients without obstruction prior to PBD exhibited a 3-fold increase in wound dehiscence (0.5% versus 1.5%) additionally to increased superficial SSIs. CONCLUSION: PBD was not associated with an increase in 30-day mortality or major morbidity but increased superficial SSIs. PBD should be limited to symptomatic, profoundly jaundiced patients or those with a delay prior to PD.

Appropriate patient selection facilitates safe discharge from the PACU after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: an analysis of the AHSQC database.

BACKGROUND: The postoperative management of patients undergoing laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (VHR) remains relatively unknown. The purpose of our study was to determine if patient and hernia-specific factors could be used to predict the likelihood of hospital admission following laparoscopic VHR using the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative (AHSQC) database. METHODS: All patients who underwent elective, laparoscopic VHR with mesh placement from October 2015 through April 2019 were identified within the AHSQC database. Patients without clean wounds, those with chronic liver disease, and those without 30-day follow-up data were excluded from our analysis. Patient and hernia-specific variables were compared between patients who were discharged from the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) and patients who required hospital admission. Comparisons were also made between the two groups with respect to 30-day morbidity and mortality events. RESULTS: A total of 1609 patients met inclusion criteria; 901 (56%) patients were discharged from the PACU. The proportion of patients discharged from the PACU increased with each subsequent year. Several patient comorbidities and hernia-specific factors were found to be associated with postoperative hospital admission, including older age, repair of a recurrent hernia, a larger hernia width, longer operative time, drain placement, and use of mechanical bowel preparation. Patients who required hospital admission were more likely than those discharged from the PACU to be readmitted to the hospital within 30 days (4% vs. 2%, respectively) and to experience a 30-day morbidity event (18% vs. 8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patient- and hernia-specific factors can be used to identify patients who can be safely discharged from the PACU following laparoscopic VHR. Additional studies are needed to determine if appropriate patient selection for discharge from the PACU leads to decreased healthcare costs for laparoscopic VHR over the long-term.

Primary Fascial Closure During Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair Improves Patient Quality of Life: A Multicenter, Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have reported conflicting results with primary fascial closure (PFC) versus bridged repair during laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR). OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine whether when evaluated in a randomized controlled trial (RCT), PFC compared to bridged repair would improve patient quality of life (QoL). METHODS: In this blinded, multicenter RCT, patients scheduled for elective LVHR (hernia defects 3 to 10 cm on computed tomography scan) were randomized to PFC versus bridged repair. Primary outcome was change in QoL after LVHR using a validated, hernia-specific survey (1 = poor QoL and 100 = perfect QoL) that measures pain, function, cosmesis, and satisfaction. Secondary outcomes were postoperative surgical site occurrences (including hematoma, seroma, surgical site infection, and wound dehiscence), abdominal eventration, and hernia recurrence. The trial was powered to detect a difference in change in QoL of 7 points between the study groups. Outcomes were compared with Mann-Whitney U test or chi-square. RESULTS: A total of 129 patients underwent LVHR and 107 (83%) completed follow-up at 2 years. Patients from both groups were similar at baseline. On median follow-up of 24 months (range: 9-42), patients treated with LVHR-PFC had on average a 12-point higher improvement in QoL compared to bridged repair (improvement in QoL, 41.3 ± 31.5 vs 29.7 ±â€Š28.7, P value = 0.047). There were no differences in surgical site occurrence, eventration, or hernia recurrence between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing elective LVHR, the fascial defect should be closed. This is the first RCT demonstrating that PFC with LVHR significantly improves patient QoL. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02363790).

Use of Structured Presentation Formatting and NSQIP Guidelines Improves Quality of Surgical Morbidity and Mortality Conference.

BACKGROUND: Surgical Morbidity and Mortality (M&M) conference lacks a standardized structure across institutions. We compared implementation of structure and National Surgical Quality Improvement Program's (NSQIP) definitions to organize our M&M and identify cases for discussion versus the usually used method at many centers of case identification by an attending surgeon or resident. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospective study was performed, over a 10-wk period, to compare the identification of adverse events and the educational value of our M&M conference before and after implementation of structured NSQIP-defined presentations. Chart review was performed by a trained surgical clinical reviewer and trained NSQIP resident of all cases over the study period to identify NSQIP-defined occurrences. All presented M&Ms were evaluated for adequate reporting of adverse events and areas for improvement on a three-point scale. Surveys were administered before and after intervention to assess educational value to resident and faculty on a five-point Likert scale. Survey and presentation data were compared using Student's t-tests. P-values <0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: Before intervention, 15% of NSQIP-defined occurrences were identified compared with 81% after intervention (P < 0.01). Thirty-three percent of deaths (1 of 3) before intervention were identified versus 100% (4 of 4) identified after intervention. Surveys obtained from faculty, residents, and students of individual presentations found improved clarity and educational content in cases presented (2.6-2.8) and improved identification of etiology (2.5-2.8), learning points (2.1-2.7), and opportunities for prevention of future adverse events (2.1-2.6) (all P < 0.01). Residents and faculty overall found that the postintervention model better identified adverse events (3.0-3.7, P = 0.02), opportunities for prevention (2.8-3.3, P = . 04), and promoted improved transparency (2.9-3.8, P < 0.01). Eighty-five percent of participants supported the changes in M&M conference. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of a clearly defined structure using NSQIP definitions for morbidity and identification of every mortality in our M&M conference standardized identification of adverse events thus improving conference quality. Consideration of the use of this structure should be given to other surgical departmental M&Ms.

Elective Stoma Reversal Has a Higher Incidence of Postoperative Clostridium Difficile Infection Compared With Elective Colectomy: An Analysis Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and Targeted Colectomy Databases.

BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection is caused by the proliferation of a gram-positive anaerobic bacteria after medical or surgical intervention and can result in toxic complications, emergent surgery, and death. OBJECTIVE: This analysis evaluates the incidence of C difficile infection in elective restoration of intestinal continuity compared with elective colon resection. DESIGN: This was a retrospective database review of the 2015 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project and targeted colectomy database. SETTINGS: The intervention cohort was defined as the primary Current Procedural Terminology codes for ileostomy/colostomy reversal (44227, 44620, 44625, and 44626) and International Classification of Diseases codes for ileostomy/colostomy status (VV44.2, VV44.3, VV55.2, VV55.3, Z93.2, Z93.3, Z43.3, and Z43.2). PATIENTS: A total of 2235 patients underwent elective stoma reversal compared with 10403 patients who underwent elective colon resection. INTERVENTION: Multivariate regression modeling of the impact of stoma reversal on postoperative C difficile infection risk was used as the study intervention. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The incidence of C difficile infection in the 30 days after surgery was measured. RESULTS: The incidence of C difficile infection in the 30-day postoperative period was significantly higher (3.04% vs 1.25%; p < 0.001) in patients undergoing stoma reversal. After controlling for differences in cohorts, regression analysis suggested that stoma reversal (OR = 2.701 (95% CI, 1.966-3.711); p < 0.001), smoking (OR = 1.520 (95% CI, 1.063-2.174); p = 0.022), steroids (OR = 1.677 (95% CI, 1.005-2.779); p = 0.048), and disseminated cancer (OR = 2.312 (95% CI, 1.437-3.719); p = 0.001) were associated with C difficile infection incidence in the 30-day postoperative period. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited because it was a retrospective database review with observational bias. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo elective stoma reversal have a higher incidence of postoperative C difficile infection compared with patients who undergo an elective colectomy. Given the impact of postoperative C difficile infection, a heightened sense of suspicion should be given to symptomatic patients after stoma reversal. See at Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A553.

The effect of resident involvement on bariatric surgical outcomes: an ACS-NSQIP analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical residency training programs in the United States are modeled on the principle of graduated responsibility. Residents are given greater responsibility and autonomy in the operating room and during perioperative care as they gain surgical skills and progress through their training. The impact of this method of surgical training on patient outcomes remains unknown. The purpose of this study is to compare early patient morbidity and mortality after bariatric surgery in cases with and without resident participation using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. METHODS: All patients undergoing bariatric surgery from 2006 through 2010 were identified within the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. These patients were divided into three groups based on resident involvement in their surgery (no resident, senior-level resident, and junior-level resident). The effect of resident involvement and postgraduate year level on 30-d morbidity and mortality was investigated using composite outcomes, including cardiac events (acute myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation), pulmonary events (pneumonia, prolonged intubation, or unplanned reintubation), wound (superficial surgical site infection, deep surgical site infection, organ-space infection, or dehiscence), septic events (sepsis and septic shock), clotting events (pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis), and renal events (urinary tract infection and acute kidney injury requiring dialysis). Length of hospital stay, unplanned return to the operating room, and 30-d mortality were also investigated. RESULTS: A total of 19,616 patients underwent bariatric surgery from the year 2006 through 2010; 8960 (45.7%) procedures were performed with resident involvement, with 5406 (36.7%) of these cases involving a senior-level resident. Operations involving a senior-level resident were more likely to experience postoperative cardiac events (P < 0.006), pulmonary events (P = 0.03), wound events (P = 0.01), septic events (P < 0.002), renal events (P ≤ 0.01), prolonged operative time (P < 0.0001), and a prolonged length of hospital stay (P < 0.0001) than those that involved either no resident or a junior-level resident. CONCLUSIONS: Although bariatric operations involving senior-level residents have more statistically significant morbidity outcomes, these morbidity outcomes are related more to perioperative care rather than intraoperative resident involvement. This suggests that more emphasis on perioperative progressive responsibility may be needed to match operative oversight.

Ventral Hernia Management: Expert Consensus Guided by Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To achieve consensus on the best practices in the management of ventral hernias (VH). BACKGROUND: Management patterns for VH are heterogeneous, often with little supporting evidence or correlation with existing evidence. METHODS: A systematic review identified the highest level of evidence available for each topic. A panel of expert hernia-surgeons was assembled. Email questionnaires, evidence review, panel discussion, and iterative voting was performed. Consensus was when all experts agreed on a management strategy. RESULTS: Experts agreed that complications with VH repair (VHR) increase in obese patients (grade A), current smokers (grade A), and patients with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1C) ≥ 6.5% (grade B). Elective VHR was not recommended for patients with BMI ≥ 50 kg/m (grade C), current smokers (grade A), or patients with HbA1C ≥ 8.0% (grade B). Patients with BMI= 30-50 kg/m or HbA1C = 6.5-8.0% require individualized interventions to reduce surgical risk (grade C, grade B). Nonoperative management was considered to have a low-risk of short-term morbidity (grade C). Mesh reinforcement was recommended for repair of hernias ≥ 2 cm (grade A). There were several areas where high-quality data were limited, and no consensus could be reached, including mesh type, component separation technique, and management of complex patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although there was consensus, supported by grade A-C evidence, on patient selection, the safety of short-term nonoperative management, and mesh reinforcement, among experts; there was limited evidence and broad variability in practice patterns in all other areas of practice. The lack of strong evidence and expert consensus on these topics has identified gaps in knowledge where there is need of further evidence.

Laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repair in patients with chronic liver disease.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies demonstrated laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) to be associated with fewer short-term complications than open ventral hernia repair (OVHR). Little literature is available comparing LVHR and OVHR in chronic liver disease (CLD) patients. METHODS: Patients with model for end-stage liver disease score ≥9 who underwent elective ventral hernia repair in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database were included. 30-day outcomes were compared between LVHR and OVHR after adjusting for hernia disease severity, baseline comorbidities and demographic factors. RESULTS: A total of 3594 ventral hernia repairs were included, 536 (14.9 %) of which were LVHR. After adjusting for other confounders, LVHR was associated with a lower incidence of wound-related complications (0.23, 95 % CI 0.07-0.74, p = 0.01), shorter length of stay (mean 3.7 vs. 5.0 days, p < 0.01) than OVHR, but similar systemic complications (p = 0.77), bleeding complications (p = 0.69), unplanned reoperation (p = 0.74) or readmission (p = 0.40). Propensity score-matched comparison showed similar conclusions. Five hundred and sixty-two patients had ascites, among whom 35 (6.2 %) underwent LVHR. In this subcohort, LVHR was associated with higher mortality (OR 5.36, 95 % CI 1.00-28.60, p = 0.05), systemic complications (OR 7.03, 95 % CI 2.06-24.00, p < 0.01), and unplanned reoperation (OR 6.03, 95 % CI 1.51-24.12, p = 0.01) than OVHR. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with OVHR, LVHR is associated with similar short-term outcomes except for lower wound-related complications and shorter length of stay in CLD patients. However, when patients have ascites, LVHR is associated with higher mortality, systemic complications, and unplanned reoperation.

Nasogastric decompression not associated with a reduction in surgery or bowel ischemia for acute small bowel obstruction.

OBJECTIVES: Small bowel obstructions (SBOs) occur 300,000 times annually leading to $1.3 billion in cost. Approximately 20% of patients require a laparotomy to manage the obstruction and either prevent or treat intestinal ischemia. Early management may play a role in reducing these complications. Nasogastric decompression is commonly used for early management. Our primary objective was to determine if NGD was associated with lower rates of surgery, bowel ischemia or length of stay. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 181 ED patients with SBO from 9/2013 to 9/2015 in order to determine if nasogastric decompression was associated with a reduction in rates of surgery, bowel ischemia or hospital length of stay. RESULTS: Our subject population was 46% female, median age of 60.27% of patients received surgery. Nasogastric decompression was used in 51% of patients. There was no association with a reduction in rates of surgery (p=0.20) or bowel resection (p=0.41) with patients receiving Nasogastric decompression, and no difference in baseline characteristics. Nasogastric decompression was associated with a two-day increase in hospital length of stay. Factors that were significantly associated with surgical exploration of SBO were: female (OR 2.32 (95% CI: 1.01-5.31)) and "definite SBO" on CT (OR 3.29 (95% CI: 1.18-9.20)). Abnormal vital signs, obstipation, and lab values were not predictors of surgery. CONCLUSION: Nasogastric decompression is not associated with a reduction in need for surgery or bowel resection, but is associated with a 2-day increase in median LOS. Women were more likely to receive surgery than men.

Effects of experience and reference tools on laparoscopic length measurements.

INTRODUCTION: The accuracy of surgeons, and surgeons-in-training performing laparoscopic intestinal measurements is unknown. We evaluated the accuracy and precision of laparoscopic length measurements using a box-trainer model with and without the aid of a measuring tool. METHODS: Surgical attendings, residents, and medical students were studied. A 500 cm length of rope was placed within a laparoscopic box trainer. Subjects completed two length measurements (LM). Participants measured 150 cm of rope for LM #1 and repeated the task using a 10-cm suture as a reference for LM #2. Measurement accuracy was tested by comparing mean LM between training level groups using an independent t test. Measurement precision was tested by comparing the mean deviation of LM from 150 cm. RESULTS: 40 attendings, 40 residents, and 50 medical students were studied. In LM #1, there were no differences in mean length accuracy measured between training level groups. Residents significantly underestimated the true 150 cm length (p < 0.05). When LM #1 and LM #2 were compared, attending accuracy did not change but precision increased significantly (p < 0.01). Resident precision also significantly increased with the measuring tool (p < 0.001) and trended toward improved accuracy (p = 0.08). Student accuracy did not change, but a similar significant increase in precision was observed with the measurement tool (p = 0.001). Attendings performed both measurements faster than residents and students (p < 0.05). Residents performed faster than the students for both measurements (p < 0.05). Time for task completion significantly increased in medical students with the use of the measurement tool (p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that use of a measurement tool in laparoscopic length measurement will yield better precision with no effect on operative time or procedural flow in more experienced operators. Standardization of methods of use and optimal training techniques remains to be determined.

The effect of smoking on bariatric surgical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery is an effective long-term treatment for morbid obesity. Although smoking is known to increase postoperative complications, the independent effect of smoking on bariatric surgical outcomes is unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of smoking on bariatric surgical outcomes using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). STUDY DESIGN: Bariatric patients from 2005 to 2010 were identified in NSQIP for all types of bariatric procedures except adjustable gastric banding. Pre-treatment variables' univariate associations with smoking were examined with chi-square and t tests. Association of smoking with outcomes, corrected for relevant covariates, was tested with logistic regression within laparoscopic and open treatment groups. RESULTS: A total of 41,445 patients underwent bariatric surgery (35,696 laparoscopic; 5,749 open). After controlling for covariates, smoking significantly increased the risk of organ space infection, prolonged intubation, reintubation, pneumonia, sepsis, shock, and longer length of stay in all patients undergoing bariatric surgery. In the open bariatric surgery subgroup, smoking was associated with a significantly higher incidence of organ space infection, prolonged intubation, pneumonia, and length of stay. In the laparoscopic surgery subgroup, smokers had a significantly increased incidence of prolonged intubation, reintubation, sepsis, shock, and length of stay. Smoking did not significantly increase the risk of mortality for patients undergoing bariatric surgery. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that smoking is a modifiable preoperative risk factor that significantly increases the incidence of postoperative morbidity but not mortality in both laparoscopic and open bariatric surgery. Smoking cessation may minimize the risk of adverse outcomes. Future investigation is needed to identify the optimal length of preoperative smoking cessation.

Practice patterns in high-risk bariatric venous thromboembolism prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: In the morbidly obese population that undergoes bariatric surgery, venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Certain factors place a patient at higher risk for VTE. No consensus exists on VTE screening or prophylaxis for the high-risk patient. This report describes the results of a survey on VTE screening and prophylaxis patterns in high-risk bariatric surgery. METHODS: Members of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) were queried on factors that identified bariatric patients as high risk for VTE and on routine screening and prophylaxis practices. This included mechanical and chemical prophylaxis, duration of therapy, and use of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters. RESULTS: Of the 385 surgeons who responded to the survey, 81 % were bariatric surgeons, and the majority managed more than 50 cases annually. One or more of the following risk factors qualified patients as high risk: history of VTE, hypercoagulable status, body mass index (BMI) exceeding 55 kg/m(2), partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO(2)) lower than 60 mmHg, and severe immobility. Preoperative screening of patients for VTE was practiced routinely by 56 % of the surgeons, and 92.4 % used preoperative chemoprophylaxis. The most common agent used preoperatively was heparin (48 %), and Lovenox was most commonly used postoperatively (49 %). Whereas 48 % of the patients discontinued chemoprophylaxis at discharge, 43 % continued chemoprophylaxis as outpatients, and 47 % routinely screened for VTE postoperatively. Use of IVC filters was routine for 28 % of the patients, who most commonly removed them after 1-3 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes current practice patterns of VTE screening and prophylaxis in high-risk bariatric surgery. Nearly all surgeons agree on risk factors that qualify patients as high risk, but only half routinely screen patients preoperatively. Preoperative VTE chemoprophylaxis is used by nearly all surgeons, but the duration of therapy varies. Use of IVC filters is not routine, and postoperative screening was performed by less than half of the respondents. An understanding of current practice patterns yields insight into the rates of VTE and shows variability in the need for evidence-based prophylaxis and standardized screening.

Intraoperative small bowel length measurements and analysis of demographic predictors of increased length.

Few studies have measured small bowel length (SBL) in live humans and many textbooks base their "normal" SBL values on cadaver data. Here, we present a series of intraoperative SBL measurements and analyze predictors of increased length. SBL from ligament of Treitz to ileocecal valve was measured in patients undergoing laparotomy for colorectal resection. Patients with Crohn's disease and those who had undergone prior bowel resections were excluded. In the 240 patients studied, mean SBL was 506 ± 105 (285-845) cm. Height was positively associated with increased SBL (P < 0.001) and men had longer SBL than women (533 vs. 482 cm, P < 0.001). A multivariate linear regression model using patient sex, age, height and weight was significant (P = 0.001) and the predictors explained 8% of the variance in SBL. In this model, only height was independently predictive of increased SBL (P = 0.03). Correlation results differed between sexes. In men, height correlated with increased SBL (r = 0.20; P = 0.03), whereas in women it did not. In men, age had a positive correlation with SBL at a trend level (r = 0.17; P = 0.08), whereas in women age had a negative correlation with SBL (r = -0.18; P = 0.04). The mean SBL was 506 cm in live patients, as compared with the 600-700 cm range derived from prior cadaver studies. Male sex and height had positive correlations with SBL. SBL may decrease with age in women but not in men.

The Effect of Sizing Device Use During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy on Rates of Postoperative Dehydration and Other 30-day Complications: An Analysis of the ACS-MBSAQIP Database.

BACKGROUND: During laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), many surgeons use an intraoperative sizing device. However, the choice of intraoperative sizing device varies and the optimal choice or combination of sizing devices, such as a bougie or esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), is not known. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is an association between the use of a sizing device or a combination of sizing devices on rates of dehydration, bleeding, and staple line leak following LSG. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients between the ages of 18 to 80 who underwent elective LSG were identified using the American College of Surgeons Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (ACS-MBSAQIP) database from 2015 to 2019. Postoperative outcomes, including rates of dehydration, bleeding, and staple line leak, were compared across 4 groups: those that utilized bougie and EGD (both), those that utilized only bougie (bougie only), those that utilized only EGD (EGD only), and those that did not utilize either sizing device (neither). RESULTS: In all, 533,151 cases met the inclusion criteria. On univariate analysis, the bougie-only group experienced the highest rates of dehydration events. On multivariate analysis, the use of both sizing devices was associated with significantly lower odds of events related to dehydration versus bougie only (aOR 0.869, P =0.0002), and bougie only was associated with significantly higher odds of events related to dehydration versus EGD only (aOR 1.773, P =0.0006).The neither-sizing device group did not show any statistically significant differences in any of the comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Bougie use alone was associated with more dehydration-related complications, while EGD use demonstrated a protective effect. Not using a sizing device was associated with equivalent outcomes to all combinations of sizing devices. These findings highlight the need for the standardization of sizing devices during LSG and suggest that foregoing sizing devices may be a management option without early adverse sequelae.