Surgical experience and identification of errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Surgical errors are acts or omissions resulting in negative consequences and/or increased operating time. This study describes surgeon-reported errors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Intraoperative videos were uploaded and annotated on Touch SurgeryTM Enterprise. Participants evaluated videos for severity using a 10-point intraoperative cholecystitis grading score, and errors using Observational Clinical Human Reliability Assessment, which includes skill, consequence, and mechanism classifications. RESULTS: Nine videos were assessed by 8 participants (3 junior (specialist trainee (ST) 3-5), 2 senior trainees (ST6-8), and 3 consultants). Participants identified 550 errors. Positive relationships were seen between total operating time and error count (r2 = 0.284, P < 0.001), intraoperative grade score and error count (r2 = 0.578, P = 0.001), and intraoperative grade score and total operating time (r2 = 0.157, P < 0.001). Error counts differed significantly across intraoperative phases (H(6) = 47.06, P < 0.001), most frequently at dissection of the hepatocystic triangle (total 282; median 33.5 (i.q.r. 23.5-47.8, range 15-63)), ligation/division of cystic structures (total 124; median 13.5 (i.q.r. 12-19.3, range 10-26)), and gallbladder dissection (total 117; median 14.5 (i.q.r. 10.3-18.8, range 6-26)). There were no significant differences in error counts between juniors, seniors, and consultants (H(2) = 0.03, P = 0.987). Errors were classified differently. For dissection of the hepatocystic triangle, thermal injuries (50 in total) were frequently classified as executional, consequential errors; trainees classified thermal injuries as step done with excessive force, speed, depth, distance, time or rotation (29 out of 50), whereas consultants classified them as incorrect orientation (6 out of 50). For ligation/division of cystic structures, inappropriate clipping (60 errors in total), procedural errors were reported by junior trainees (6 out of 60), but not consultants. For gallbladder dissection, inappropriate dissection (20 errors in total) was reported in incorrect planes by consultants and seniors (6 out of 20), but not by juniors. Poor economy of movement (11 errors in total) was reported more by consultants (8 out of 11) than trainees (3 out of 11). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that surgical experience influences error interpretation, but the benefits for surgical training are currently unclear.

What's new for trauma haemorrhage management?

Uncontrolled haemorrhage is the leading cause of preventable death from injury and is a major contributor to the global burden of disease. The majority of deaths resulting from bleeding occur within the first 3 hours of hospital admission, and the window for meaningful intervention is therefore extremely small. Resuscitative efforts during active bleeding should focus on maintaining haemostatic function with blood product transfusion and early administration of tranexamic acid. Achieving control of haemorrhage is the overarching treatment priority and may require temporising measures before definitive surgical or radiological intervention. This review summarizes the contemporary approaches to resuscitation of bleeding trauma patients, options for achieving haemorrhage control, and current areas of active research including organ protective resuscitation and suspended animation.