Type II hiatal hernias: do they exist or are they actually parahiatal hernias?

BACKGROUND: Type II hiatal hernias (HH) are characterized by a portion of the gastric fundus located above the esophageal hiatus adjacent to the esophagus while the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) remains fixed below the esophageal hiatus. This type of HH has been called the "true" paraesophageal hernia (PEH) because the fundus appears to the side of the esophagus. In our experience, Type II HHs are occasionally identified on radiographic testing, however they are rarely, if ever, confirmed intraoperatively. This led to our question: Does Type II HH exist? METHODS: We searched for evidence of type II HH in three locations: 1. Retrospective review of all first-time PEH repairs (excluding Type I HHs and re-operative cases) performed at the University of Washington Medical Center from 1994 to 2021; 2. Operative videos available on YouTube and WebSurg websites; and 3. Abstracts from the SAGES annual meetings from 2005 to 2021. RESULTS: We found no evidence of Type II HH in any of our three searches. We performed 846 PEH repairs: 760 Type III, 75 Type IV, and 11 parahiatal. Upon website video review, we found only one possible type II hernia, though it too was likely a para-hiatal hernia. No video or case presentations of a type II HH were identified within SAGES annual meeting abstracts. CONCLUSION: Type II HHs do not exist as they are currently defined. Although uncommon, parahiatal hernia can easily be misinterpreted as Type II HH. We should consider changing the hiatal hernia classification system to prevent ongoing clinical confusion.

SAGES Foregut Surgery Masters Program: a surgeon's social media resource for collaboration, education, and professional development.

BACKGROUND: Facebook is a popular online social networking platform increasingly used for professional collaboration. Literature regarding use of Facebook for surgeon professional development and education is limited. The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) has established a Facebook group dedicated to discussion of surgery of the esophagus, stomach, and small intestine-the "SAGES Foregut Surgery Masters Program." The aim of this study is to examine how this forum is used for professional development, education, and quality improvement. METHODS: Member and post statistics were obtained from https://grytics.com , a Facebook group analytics service. All posts added to the Foregut forum since its creation in April 2015 through December 2016 were reviewed and categorized for content and topic. Posts were reviewed for potential identifiable protected health information. RESULTS: As of December 2016, there were 649 total members in the group. There have been a total of 411 posts and 4116 comments with a median of 10.1 comments/post (range 0-72). Posts were categorized as operative technique (64%), patient management (52%), continuing education (10%), networking (10%), or other (6%). Video and/or photos were included in 53% of posts with 4% of posts depicting radiologic studies and 13% with intraoperative photos or videos. An additional 40 posts included links to other pages, such as YouTube, journal articles, or the SAGES website. One post (0.2%) contained identifiable protected health information and was deleted once recognized by the moderators of the group. CONCLUSION: Social media is a unique, real-time platform where surgeons can learn, discuss, and collaborate towards the goal of optimal treatment of surgical disease. Active online surgical communities such as the SAGES Foregut Surgery Masters Program have the potential to enhance communication between surgeons and are a potential innovative adjunct to traditional methods of continuing surgical education. Surgical societies should adopt and promote professional and responsible use of social media.

Viewer discretion advised: is YouTube a friend or foe in surgical education?

BACKGROUND: In the current era, trainees frequently use unvetted online resources for their own education, including viewing surgical videos on YouTube. While operative videos are an important resource in surgical education, YouTube content is not selected or organized by quality but instead is ranked by popularity and other factors. This creates a potential for videos that feature poor technique or critical safety violations to become the most viewed for a given procedure. METHODS: A YouTube search for "Laparoscopic cholecystectomy" was performed. Search results were screened to exclude animations and lectures; the top ten operative videos were evaluated. Three reviewers independently analyzed each of the 10 videos. Technical skill was rated using the GOALS score. Establishment of a critical view of safety (CVS) was scored according to CVS "doublet view" score, where a score of ≥5 points (out of 6) is considered satisfactory. Videos were also screened for safety concerns not listed by the previous tools. RESULTS: Median competence score was 8 (±1.76) and difficulty was 2 (±1.8). GOALS score median was 18 (±3.4). Only one video achieved adequate critical view of safety; median CVS score was 2 (range 0-6). Five videos were noted to have other potentially dangerous safety violations, including placing hot ultrasonic shears on the duodenum, non-clipping of the cystic artery, blind dissection in the hepatocystic triangle, and damage to the liver capsule. CONCLUSIONS: Top ranked laparoscopic cholecystectomy videos on YouTube show suboptimal technique with half of videos demonstrating concerning maneuvers and only one in ten having an adequate critical view of safety. While observing operative videos can be an important learning tool, surgical educators should be aware of the low quality of popular videos on YouTube. Dissemination of high-quality content on video sharing platforms should be a priority for surgical societies.

Outcome trends and safety measures after 30 years of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and pooled data analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures, remains associated with significant major morbidity including bile leak and bile duct injury (BDI). The effect of changes in practice over time, and of interventions to improve patient safety, on morbidity rates is not well understood. The aim of this review was to describe current incidence rates and trends for BDI and other complications during and after LC, and to identify risk factors and preventative measures associated with morbidity and BDI. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, and Web of Science database searches and data extraction were conducted for studies which reported individual complications and complication rates following laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a representative population. Outcomes data were pooled. Meta-regression analysis was performed to assess factors associated with conversion, morbidity, and BDI rates. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-one studies reporting outcomes for 505,292 patients were included in the final quantitative synthesis. Overall morbidity, BDI, and mortality rates were 1.6-5.3%, 0.32-0.52%, and 0.08-0.14%, respectively. Reported BDI rates reduced over time (1994-1999: 0.69(0.52-0.84)% versus 2010-2015 0.22(0.02-0.40)%, p = 0.011). Meta-regression analysis suggested higher conversion rates in developed versus developing countries (4.7 vs. 3.4%), though a greater degree of reporting bias was present in these studies, with no other significant associations identified. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, trends suggest a reduction in BDI over time with unchanged morbidity and mortality rates. However, data and reporting are heterogenous. Establishment of international outcomes registries should be considered.