Structured Resident Training in Robotic Surgery: Recommendations of the Robotic Surgery Education Working Group.

OBJECTIVE: A universal resident robotic surgery training pathway that maximizes proficiency and safety has not been defined by a consensus of surgical educators or by surgical societies. The objective of the Robotic Surgery Education Working Group was to develop a universal curriculum pathway and leverage digital tools to support resident education. DESIGN: The two lead authors (JP and YN) contacted potential members of the Working Group. Members were selected based on their authorship of peer-review publications, their experience as minimally invasive and robotic surgeons, their reputations, and their ability to commit the time involved to work collaboratively and efficiently to reach consensus regarding best practices in robotic surgery education. The Group's approach was to reach 100% consensus to provide a transferable curriculum that could be applied to the vast majority of resident programs. SETTING: Virtual and in-person meetings in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Eight surgeons (2 females and 6 males) from five academic medical institutions (700-1541 beds) and three community teaching hospitals (231-607 beds) in geographically diverse locations comprised the Working Group. They represented highly specialized general surgeons and educators in their mid-to-late careers. All members were experienced minimally invasive surgeons and had national reputations as robotic surgery educators. RESULTS: The surgeons initially developed and agreed upon questions for each member to consider and respond to individually via email. Responses were collated and consolidated to present on an anonymized basis to the Group during an in-person day-long meeting. The surgeons self-facilitated and honed the agreed upon responses of the Group into a 5-level Robotic Surgery Curriculum Pathway, which each member agreed was relevant and expressed their convictions and experience. CONCLUSIONS: The current needs for a universal robotic surgery training curriculum are validated objective and subjective measures of proficiency, access to simulation, and a digital platform that follows a resident from their first day of residency through training and their entire career. Refinement of current digital solutions and continued innovation guided by surgical educators is essential to build and maintain a scalable, multi-institutional supported curriculum.

Common Components of General Surgery Robotic Educational Programs.

OBJECTIVE: Robotically assisted surgery has become more common in general surgery, but there is limited guidance from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) regarding this type of training. We sought to determine common elements and differences in the robotic educational curricula developed by general surgery residency programs. DESIGN: Robotic educational curricula were obtained from the 7 individuals who presented at the workshop, "Robotic Education in General Surgery" at the 2023 Association of Program Directors in Surgery annual meeting. RESULTS: All 7 general surgery programs had training beginning intern year, required online robotic modules, had at least 1 dedicated simulation training console not used for clinical purposes, and ran dry and wet (tissue) robotic labs at least annually. All programs had bedside and console surgeon case minimums and had administrative support to run the educational programs. Differences existed regarding how training intern year was executed, the simulations required, clinical practice minimum requirements, how progress was monitored over time, and how case numbers were tracked. Some programs had salary support for a director of robotic education. CONCLUSIONS: There are several common elements to robotic educational curricula in general surgery, however significant variation does exist between programs. Given the frequency of robotic use in general surgery and current lack of standardization, formal guidance from the ACGME specifically regarding robotic education in general surgery residency is warranted.

Is Robotic Console Time a Surrogate for Resident Operative Autonomy?

OBJECTIVE: Robotic-assisted surgery is an increasing part of general surgery training, but resident autonomy on the robotic platform can be hard to quantify. Robotic console time (RCT), the percentage of time the resident controls the console, may be an appropriate measure of resident operative autonomy. This study aims to characterize the correlation between objective resident RCT and subjectively scored operative autonomy. METHODS: Using a validated resident performance evaluation instrument, we collected resident operative autonomy ratings from residents and attendings performing robotic cholecystectomy (RC) and robotic inguinal hernia repair (IH) at a university-based general surgery program between 9/2020-6/2021. We then extracted RCT data from the Intuitive surgical system. Descriptive statistics, t-tests and ANOVA were performed. RESULTS: A total of 31 robotic operations (13 RC, 18 IH) performed by 4 attending surgeons and 8 residents (4 junior, 4 senior) were matched and included. 83.9% of cases were scored by both attending and resident. The average RCT per case was 35.6%(95% CI 13.0%,58.3%) for junior residents (PGY 2-3) and 59.7%(CI 51.1%,68.3%) for senior residents (PGY 4-5). The mean autonomy evaluated by residents was 3.29(CI 2.85,3.73) out of a maximum score of 5, while the mean autonomy evaluated by attendings was 4.12(CI 3.68,4.55). RCT significantly correlated with subjective evaluations of resident autonomy (r=0.61, p=0.0003). RCT also moderately correlated with resident training level (r=0.5306, p<0.0001). Neither attending robotic experience nor operation type significantly correlated with RCT or autonomy evaluation scores. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that resident console time is a valid surrogate for resident operative autonomy in robotic cholecystectomy and inguinal hernia repair. RCT may be a valuable measure in objective assessment of residents' operative autonomy and training efficiency. Future investigation into how RCT correlates with subjective and objective autonomy metrics such as verbal guidance or distinguishing critical operative steps is needed to validate the study findings further.

Robotic Enhanced-View Totally Extraperitoneal vs Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh Evaluation: 1-Year Exploratory Outcomes of the REVEAL Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with small- to medium-sized ventral hernias randomized to robotic enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) or robotic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (rIPOM) previously demonstrated comparable 30-day patient-reported outcomes. Here we report 1-year exploratory outcomes for this multi-center, patient-blinded randomized clinical trial. STUDY DESIGN: Patients with midline ventral hernias 7 cm wide or less undergoing mesh repair were randomized to robotic eTEP or rIPOM. Planned exploratory outcomes at 1 year include pain intensity (using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS 3a]), Hernia-Related Quality of Life Survey (HerQLes) scores, pragmatic hernia recurrence, and reoperation. RESULTS: One hundred randomized patients (51 eTEP, 49 rIPOM) reached a median 12-month follow-up (interquartile range 11 to 13) with 7% lost. After regression analysis adjusting for baseline scores, there was no difference in postoperative pain intensity at 1-year for eTEP compared with rIPOM (odds ratio [OR] 2.1 [95% CI 0.85 to 5.1]; p = 0.11). HerQLes scores were 15 points lower on average (ie less improved) at 1 year after eTEP repairs compared with rIPOM, a difference maintained after regression analysis (OR 0.31 [95% CI 0.15 to 0.67]; p = 0.003). Pragmatic hernia recurrence was 12.2% (6 of 49) for eTEP and 15.9% (7 of 44) for rIPOM (p = 0.834). In the first year, 2 eTEP and 1 rIPOM patients required reoperations related to their index repair (p = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: Exploratory analyses showed similar outcomes at 1 year in regard to pain, hernia recurrence, and reoperation. Abdominal wall quality of life at 1 year appears to favor rIPOM, and the possibility that an eTEP dissection is less advantageous in that regard should be the subject of future investigation.

Robotic eTEP versus IPOM evaluation: the REVEAL multicenter randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: For small to medium-sized ventral hernias, robotic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (rIPOM) and enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) repair have emerged as acceptable approaches that each takes advantage of robotic instrumentation. We hypothesized that avoiding mesh fixation in a robotic eTEP repair offers an advantage in early postoperative pain compared to rIPOM. METHODS: This is a multi-center, randomized clinical trial for patients with midline ventral hernias ≤ 7 cm, who were randomized to rIPOM or robotic eTEP. The primary outcome was pain (0-10) on the first postoperative day. Secondary outcomes included same-day discharge, length of stay, opioid consumption, quality of life, surgeon workload, and cost. RESULTS: Between November 2019 and November 2021, 100 patients were randomized (49 rIPOM, 51 eTEP) among 5 surgeons. Pain on the first postoperative day [median (IQR): 5 (4-6) vs. 5 (3.5-7), p = 0.66] was similar for rIPOM and eTEP, respectively, a difference maintained following adjustments for surgeon, operative time, baseline pain, and patient co-morbidities (difference 0.28, 95% CI - 0.63 to 1.19, p = 0.56). No differences in pain on the day of surgery, 7, and 30 days after surgery were identified. Same-day discharge, length of stay, opioid consumption, and 30-day quality of life were also comparable, though rIPOM required less surgeon workload (p < 0.001), shorter operative time [107 (86-139) vs. 165 (129-212) min, p < 0.001], and resulted in fewer surgical site occurrences (0 vs. 8, p = 0.004). The total direct costs for rIPOM and eTEP were comparable [$8282 (6979-11835) vs. $8680 (7550-10282), p = 0.52] as the cost savings for eTEP attributable to mesh use [$442 (434-485) vs. $69 (62-76), p = < 0.0001] were offset by increased expenses for operative time [$669 (579-861) vs. $1075 (787-1367), p < 0.0001] and use of more robotic equipment [$760 (615-933) vs. $946 (798-1203), p = 0.001]. CONCLUSION: The avoidance of fixation in a robotic eTEP repair did not reveal a benefit in postoperative pain to offset the shorter operative time and surgeon workload offered by rIPOM.

Outcomes of inpatient cholecystectomy among adults with cystic fibrosis in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic biliary and gallbladder disorders are common in adults with cystic fibrosis (CF) and the prevalence may rise with increasing CF transmembrane conductance regulator modulator use. Cholecystectomy may be considered, but the outcomes of cholecystectomy are not well described among modern patients with CF. AIM: To determine the risk profile of inpatient cholecystectomy in patients with CF. METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was queried from 2002 until 2014 to investigate outcomes of cholecystectomy among hospitalized adults with CF compared to controls without CF. A propensity weighted sample was selected that closely matched patient demographics, patient's individual comorbidities, and hospital characteristics. The propensity weighted sample was used to compare outcomes among patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Hospital outcomes of open and laparoscopic cholecystectomy were compared among adults with CF. RESULTS: A total of 1239 inpatient cholecystectomies were performed in patients with CF, of which 78.6% were performed laparoscopically. Mortality was < 0.81%, similar to those without CF (P = 0.719). In the propensity weighted analysis of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, there was no difference in mortality, or pulmonary or surgical complications between patients with CF and controls. After adjusting for significant covariates among patients with CF, open cholecystectomy was independently associated with a 4.8 d longer length of stay (P = 0.018) and an $18449 increase in hospital costs (P = 0.005) compared to laparoscopic cholecystectomy. CONCLUSION: Patients with CF have a very low mortality after cholecystectomy that is similar to the general population. Among patients with CF, laparoscopic approach reduces resource utilization and minimizes post-operative complications.

Emergency Presentations of Diverticulitis.

Acute diverticulitis is a common condition that has been increasing in incidence in the United States. It is associated with increasing age, but the pathophysiology of acute diverticulitis is still being elucidated. It is now believed to have a significant contribution from inflammatory processes rather than being a strictly infectious process. There are still many questions to be answered regarding the optimal management of acute diverticulitis because recent studies have challenged traditional practices, such as the routine use of antibiotics, surgical technique, and dietary restrictions for prevention of recurrence.

Surgeon-performed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Outcomes of 2392 procedures at two tertiary care centers.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a common procedure that, in the United States, is traditionally performed by gastroenterologists. We hypothesized that when performed by well-trained surgeons, ERCP can be performed safely and effectively. The objectives of the study were to assess the rate of successful cannulation of the duct of interest and to assess the 30-day complication and mortality rates. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 1858 patients who underwent 2392 ERCP procedures performed by five surgeons between August 2003 and June 2016 in two centers. Demographic and historical data, indications, procedure-related data and 30-day complication and mortality data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: The mean age was 53.4 (range 7-102) years and 1046 (56.3%) were female. 1430 (59.8%) of ERCP procedures involved a surgical endoscopy fellow. The most common indication was suspected or established uncomplicated common bile duct stones (n = 1470, 61.5%), followed by management of an existing biliary or pancreatic stent (n = 370, 15.5%) and acute biliary pancreatitis (n = 173, 7.2%). A therapeutic intervention was performed in 1564 (65.4%), a standard sphincterotomy in 1244 (52.0%), stent placement in 705 (29.5%) and stone removal in 638 (26.7%). When cannulation was attempted, the rate of successful cannulation was 94.1%. When cannulation was attempted during the patient's first ERCP the cannulation rate was 92.4%. 94 complications occurred (5.4%); the most common complication was post-ERCP pancreatitis in 75 (4.2%), significant gastrointestinal bleeding in 7 (0.4%), ascending cholangitis in 11 (0.6%) and perforation in 1 (0.05%). 11 mortalities occurred (0.5%) but none of which were ERCP-related. CONCLUSION: When performed by well-trained surgical endoscopists, ERCP is associated with high success rate and acceptable complication rates consistent with previously published reports and in line with societal guidelines.

Incidence of abdominal wall metastases following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement in patients with head and neck cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are an effective modality for enteral nutrition in patients with head and neck cancer; however, there have been documented case reports of "seeding" of the abdominal wall by the theoretic risk of dragging the tube along the tumor during PEG placement. The objective of this study is to determine the incidence and contributing risk factors leading to metastasis to the abdominal wall following PEG placement in patients with head and neck cancer. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on patients diagnosed with head and neck malignancy who underwent PEG placement between 1/5/2009 and 12/22/2014. Variables collected included development of abdominal wall metastases, type of malignancy and tumor characteristics, smoking history, PEG placement technique, and survival following recurrence. Data were then analyzed for overall trends. RESULTS: Out of 777 patients analyzed, a total of five patients with head and neck malignancy were identified with abdominal wall metastasis following PEG tube placement with an overall incidence of 0.64% over an average follow-up of 27.55 months. All of these patients underwent PEG tube insertion via a Pull technique. One patient was found to have a clinically evident and symptomatic stomal metastasis, while the other four patients had radiologically detected metastases either on CT or PET scan. All of the identified patients were found to have stage IV oral cancer at time of initial diagnosis of their head and neck malignancy, followed by widespread distant metastatic disease at time of presentation with their PEG site stomal metastasis. CONCLUSION: Abdominal wall metastases following PEG placement are a rare but serious complication in patients with head and neck malignancy.

Gastroesophageal reflux symptoms do not correlate with objective pH testing after peroral endoscopic myotomy.

INTRODUCTION: Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is an emerging treatment for esophageal achalasia. Postoperative reflux has been found in a significant number of patients, but it is unknown whether subjective reports of reflux correlate with objective pH testing. The purpose of this study was to compare the objective rate of reflux with standardized reflux symptom scales after POEM. Our hypothesis was that subjective symptoms would not correlate with objective measurement of reflux. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Data on all patients undergoing POEM were collected prospectively between August 2012 and June 2014 and included demographics, objective testing (48-h pH probe, manometry, endoscopy), as well as gastroesophageal reflux disease health-related quality of life (GERD-HRQL), GERD symptom scale (GERSS), and antacid use. RESULTS: Forty-three patients underwent POEM during the study period. The mean age was 53.5 ± 17.4 years with a BMI of 29.6 ± 8.4 kg/m(2), and 27 (63%) were male. Forty-two patients (98%) completed at least 6 months of follow-up, and 26 (60%) underwent repeat pH measurement. Dysphagia scores improved from 4 (0-5) at baseline to 0 (0-3) (p < 0.001). On follow-up pH testing, 11 (42%) were normal and 15 (58%) had elevated DeMeester scores. Postoperative GERSS or GERD-HRQL scores did not correlate with DeMeester scores on Spearman's rank-order tests (r = 0.02, p = 0.93 and r = 0.04, p = 0.50, respectively). Postoperative PPI use was not significantly associated with normal or abnormal pH testing: 5 of 7 (71%) patients who were taking PPIs postoperatively had abnormal DeMeester scores compared to 9 of 18 (50%) of patients who were not taking PPIs (p = 0.332). CONCLUSIONS: Peroral endoscopic myotomy provides excellent dysphagia relief for patients with achalasia, but is associated with a high rate of reflux on pH testing postoperatively. Subjective symptoms are not a reliable indicator of postoperative reflux. Routine pH testing should be considered in all patients following POEM.

Prior treatment does not influence the performance or early outcome of per-oral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia.

INTRODUCTION: Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is an emerging treatment for achalasia. Pneumatic dilation, botulinum toxin injection, and previous myotomy increase the difficulty of subsequent Heller myotomy, but their impact on POEM remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to compare patients who had undergone prior treatment for their achalasia to those undergoing POEM as an initial therapy. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: All patients undergoing POEM were entered into a prospective database from August 2012 to October 2014. Data collected included demographics, dysphagia and symptom survey scores, operative time, clips required for mucosotomy closure, perioperative complications and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Forty-five patients underwent POEM during the study period. Fifteen (30%) had undergone previous treatment (seven Botox injection, five pneumatic dilation and three Heller myotomy). Primary POEM patients were younger than those who had had prior treatment (mean age 46 ± 17 vs. 64 ± 12 years, p < 0.001), but gender, body mass index and ASA class were not significantly different. There were no conversions to Heller myotomy or perioperative complications in either group. Operative time for primary POEM was 103 ± 27 versus 102 ± 29 min following prior treatment (p = 0.84). Mucosotomy closure required a median 7 (4-16) and 8 (5-16) clips, respectively (p = 0.08). Length of stay was 1 day in each group. Median dysphagia scores decreased from 4 (0-5) to 1 (0-4) following primary POEM and 4 (0-5) to 0 (0-4) in the prior treatment group (p = 0.45) during a median follow-up of 10 months (5-17 months). All patients in each group expressed satisfaction with their procedure and would undergo the procedure again given the benefit of hindsight. CONCLUSION: Per-oral endoscopic myotomy is a safe and effective treatment for achalasia which improves dysphagia and disease-specific quality of life. Previous endoscopic or laparoscopic treatment of achalasia does not affect the performance or early outcome of POEM.

Endoscopic mucosal resection for staging and treatment of early esophageal carcinoma: a single institution experience.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has emerged for evaluation and treatment of esophageal nodules. We report our initial experience with EMR for T staging and management of early esophageal cancer. METHODS: We reviewed patients undergoing EMR for esophageal adenocarcinoma between 2008 and 2013. The primary outcome measure was needed for esophagectomy. Secondary outcomes included complete eradication of adenocarcinoma, recurrence or persistence of cancer, nodal status for those undergoing esophagectomy, and complications of endoscopic treatment. RESULTS: During the study period, 24 patients underwent EMR demonstrating carcinoma, and a grossly margin negative endoscopic resection was achieved in all cases. Ten patients (42 %) had evidence of submucosal invasion and were referred for esophagectomy. Patients with margin negative EMR (n = 10, 42 %) or positive radial margins (n = 4, 16 %) underwent endoscopic surveillance and treatment with radiofrequency ablation or repeat EMR as needed. Thirteen patients (93 %) with intramucosal cancer (IMC) have been successfully managed with ongoing endoscopic surveillance and treatment with a median follow-up of 15.5 months. One patient underwent esophagectomy due to recurrent IMC in the setting of long-segment multifocal high-grade dysplasia. There were no esophageal perforations, one patient developed a self-limited gastrointestinal hemorrhage following EMR, and one had an esophageal stricture following endoscopic management. CONCLUSIONS: IMC can be successfully managed endoscopically and thus esophagectomy is avoided in a significant proportion of patients. Endoscopic management may be utilized in the setting of complete resection or radial margin involvement without evidence of submucosal invasion. Close endoscopic follow-up is of paramount importance even in those with negative margins, because recurrent disease may occur following EMR in these patients.

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a cost comparison.

BACKGROUND: Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) should not cost more or less than traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). METHODS: Retrospective cost data were collected from the accounting records of a single institution. A direct comparison of LC and SILC was conducted. Data on the SILC cases converted to LC were included. The total operating room (OR) cost (actual cost to the hospital for equipment, time, and personnel) and the total OR charges (total derived from the OR cost plus a margin to cover overhead costs beyond material costs) were examined. The total hospital charges (OR charges plus hospital charges accrued in the perioperative period) also were included. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data, with p values less than 0.05 considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Over a period of 19 months, 116 cases of minimally invasive cholecystectomy were evaluated. Of the 116 patients, 48 underwent LC during the first half of that period, and 68 patients underwent SILC during the second half of that period. Nine of the single-incision procedures were converted to traditional LC, for a 13% conversion rate. The groups were well matched from a demographics standpoint, with no significant differences in age, gender, body mass index (BMI), diagnoses, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) class, or payment. Comparison of all attempted SILCs, including those converted, with all LCs showed no significant difference in cost category totals. A significant difference among all cost variables was found when SILCs were compared with SILCs that required conversion to LC. A significant difference among the cost variables also was found when LCs were compared with converted SILCs. CONCLUSION: The cost for SILC did not differ significantly from that for LC when standard materials were used and the duration of the procedure was considered. Converted cases were significantly more expensive than completed SILC and LC cases.

Surgical resident education: what is the department's price for commitment?

OBJECTIVE: The current recession has impacted all aspects of our economy. Some residency programs have experienced faculty salary cuts, furlough days, and cessation of funding for travel to academic meetings. This milieu forced many residency programs to reevaluate their commitment to resident education, particularly for those expenses not provided for by Direct Medical Education (DME) and Indirect Medical Education (IME) funds. The purpose of this study was to determine what price a Department of Surgery pays to fulfill its commitment to resident education. DESIGN: A financial analysis of 1 academic year was performed for all expenses not covered by DME or IME funds and is paid for by the faculty practice plan. These expenses were categorized and further analyzed to determine the funds required for resident-related scholarly activity. SETTING: A university-based general surgery residency program. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-eight surgical residents and a program coordinator. RESULTS: The departmental faculty provided $153,141 during 1 academic year to support the educational mission of the residency. This amount is in addition to the $1.6 million in faculty time, $850,000 provided by the federal government in terms of DME funds, and $14 million of IME funds, which are distributed on an institutional basis. Resident presentations at scientific meetings accounted for $49,672, and program coordinator costs of $44,190 accounted for nearly two-thirds of this funding. The departmental faculty committed $6400 per categorical resident. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to DME and IME funds, a department of surgery must commit significant additional monies to meet the educational goals of surgical residency.