Evaluation of the Educational Environment of a Cadaver Course in Robotic Colorectal Surgery: A Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: The educational environment is a crucial metric of medical education that affects the course participants' motivation, achievement, happiness and success. The aim of this study was to evaluate the educational environment of a cadaver course in robotic colorectal surgery by comparing the perceptions of the participating residents to those of the participating surgeons. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study carried out in 2017. Participants from the U.S. and Europe attended a course using eight fresh frozen cadaver torsos with no prior abdominal surgery. After course completion, participants anonymously completed 50-item Dundee Ready Educational Environment Measure (DREEM) questionnaires to evaluate five components of the educational environment: perception of learning, perception of teachers, academic self-perception, perception of atmosphere, and social self-perception. Internal consistency of the questionnaire was assessed using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Mean scores were compared using an independent samples t-test. RESULTS: Twenty of 24 participants completed the DREEM questionnaire, consisting of 9 residents and 11 surgeons (12 from the U.S., 8 from Europe). The internal consistency of the questionnaire was excellent (alpha=0.97). The mean total score was excellent for both residents and surgeons, and the difference between the groups was not significant (154.1±25.8 vs. 168.1±18.9, p=0.197). Perception of learning was significantly better among surgeons ("teaching highly thought of") than among residents ("a more positive perception") (40.5±3.6 vs. 35.7±5.6, p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the residents' perception of learning may have been negatively influenced by the participation of surgeons in the same cadaver station.

Simulated transanal NOTES sigmoidectomy training improves the responsiveness of surgical endoscopists.

BACKGROUND: There is no evidence demonstrating the feasibility of colorectal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) resection with currently available endoscopic instrumentation. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the responsiveness of surgical endoscopists to simulated transanal NOTES sigmoidectomy training. DESIGN: Participants were trained in simulated NOTES sigmoidectomy by using disposable abdominal trays with tattooed sigmoid cancer in a hybrid simulator. SETTING: Endoscopy simulation laboratory in a university hospital. INTERVENTIONS: NOTES sigmoidectomy included 8 steps performed transanally with 2 colonoscopes, endoscopic scissors, and clip applier: (1) colonoscopic viscerotomy with a balloon; (2) retroperitoneal dissection; (3) left ureter identification, inferior mesenteric vessels division; (4) colonoscopy; (5) splenic flexure mobilization; (6) left side of the colon/rectal mobilization; (7) transanal specimen transection; (8) extracorporeal colorectal anastomosis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Responsiveness was defined as a change in performance over time and assessed comparing baseline testing with unmentored final testing. Content-valid measures included the length of the specimen, the distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge, and the proximal and distal resection margins and operating time (minutes). RESULTS: Four participants performed 21 resections. Tumor distance from the anal verge was 29.2 cm (range 26-2.5 cm). Operating time overall (127.5 vs 74 minutes, P = .068), viscerotomy (17.5 vs 9 minutes, P = .197), colonoscopy (4.5 vs 3.5 minutes, P = .655), flexure mobilization (19.5 vs 10 minutes, P = .144), colon mobilization (20 vs 14.5 minutes, P = .461), specimen extraction (9.5 vs 8.5 minutes, P = .465), and anastomosis (14 vs 11 minutes, P = .715) times improved. LIMITATIONS: Ceiling effects because of fixed anatomy. CONCLUSIONS: Simulated NOTES sigmoidectomy training affected responsiveness of surgical endoscopists with a 42% reduction in operating time.

No rectopexy versus rectopexy following rectal mobilization for full-thickness rectal prolapse: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: No randomized controlled trial has compared no rectopexy with rectopexy for external full-thickness rectal prolapse. OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to test the hypothesis that recurrence rates following no rectopexy are not inferior to those following rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse. DESIGN: This was a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to no rectopexy or rectopexy. The end point was recurrence rates defined as the presence of external full-thickness rectal prolapse after surgery. A prerandomized controlled trial meta-analysis suggested a sample size of 251 patients based on a 15% expected difference in the 5-year cumulative recurrence rate. Recurrence-free curves were generated and compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test, respectively. Data were presented as median (range). SETTING: This study was conducted in 41 tertiary centers in 21 countries. PATIENTS: Patients with prior surgery for rectal prolapse or pelvic floor descent were not included. INTERVENTIONS: The no-rectopexy arm was defined as abdominal surgery with rectal mobilization only. The rectopexy arm was defined as abdominal surgery with mobilization and rectopexy. Sigmoid resection was not randomized and was added in the presence of constipation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Two hundred fifty-two patients with external full-thickness rectal prolapse were randomly assigned to undergo no rectopexy or rectopexy in 41 centers. All patients but one underwent the allocated intervention. One hundred sixteen no-rectopexy patients were comparable to 136 rectopexy patients for age (P = .21), body mass index (P = .61), ASA grade (P = .29), and previous abdominal surgery (P = .935), but not for sex (P = .013) and external full-thickness rectal prolapse length (8 (1-25) cm vs 5 (1-20) cm, P = .026). Sigmoid resection was performed more frequently in the no-rectopexy arm (P < .001). There was no significant difference in complication rates (11% vs 17.9%; P = .139). The mortality rate was 0.8%. The loss of patients to 5-year follow-up was 10.3%. Actuarial analysis demonstrated a significant difference in 5-year recurrence rates between study arms (8.6% vs 1.5%) (log-rank, P = .003). LIMITATIONS: Limitations were the high proportion of male patients, randomization timing, the lack of standardization for rectopexy technique, and the 10% loss to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence rates following no rectopexy are inferior to those following rectopexy for external full-thickness rectal prolapse.

Colonoscopic injection for murine solid cecal cancer model.

BACKGROUND: The validity of current animal colon cancer models is questionable. This study was performed to evaluate whether colonoscopic injection of a murine colon cancer cell line into the cecal wall of immunocompetent rats leads to a solid tumor. METHODS: A bolus of bowel prep was given to BD-IX rats. Anesthesia was injected intraperitoneally. Video fiberscope allowed for irrigation and suction. Failure was inability to reach/inject cecum. Procedure was performed by four surgeons; 100 µl of colon tumor cell suspension (DHD/K12TRb; 10 million cells in 0.1 ml) was injected into cecal wall with 23-gauge needle placed on 3 mm wire resulting in a blister. Rats were allowed to recover. Solid tumor growth was measured at scheduled necropsy at 4 weeks. Sample size (107 rats: type I error 0.05; power 80%) was based on a pilot study. Data were presented as median (range). RESULTS: A total of 107 male BD-IX retired breeders weighing 356 g (range 256-432 g) underwent colonoscopy with submucosal injection of cecal wall. A single solid cecal cancer was identified in 98 (91.5%) rats at scheduled necropsy. Histology confirmed adenocarcinoma with tumor size of 4 mm (range 2.6-8.4 mm). Peritoneal carcinomatosis was found in ten (9.3%) rats. Distant metastases were found in three (2.8%) rats. Complications occurred in four (3.8%) rats: two aspirations and two colon perforations. CONCLUSIONS: A solid cecal tumor without carcinomatosis or metastasis has been developed by colonoscopic injection of a rat colon cancer cell line in 79% of immunocompetent rats.

A meta-analysis of DaVinci Si versus Xi in colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate whether adoption of DaVinci Xi® had any impact upon intra- and postoperative metrics in colorectal surgery. METHODS: The Pubmed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and MEDLINE (Ovid) databases were systematically searched. Operating time as well as docking and surgeon console times were the primary endpoints. Conversion and postoperative complication rates were the secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Six studies totaling 610 patients (320 Si and 290 Xi) were included. Total operating time [MD (95% CI) = 30.553 (15.071, 46.035); p < 0.001], docking time [MD (95% CI) = 4.178 (2.120, 6.235); p < 0.001] and surgeon console time [MD (95% CI) = 17.246 (-0.479, 34.971); p = 0.056] were longer in DaVinci Si® as compared to DaVinci Xi® . No significant difference was found in conversion (p = 0.816) and postoperative complication rates (p = 0.405). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis found that the adoption of DaVinci Xi® was associated with significantly decreased total operating time as well as docking and surgeon console times. Conversion and complication rates were similar.

Acute scrotum caused by sigmoid diverticulitis.

BACKGROUND: Abscesses are one of many complications of diverticulitis and can be found intra-abdominally or in the pelvis. METHODS: Case report and review of the pertinent English-language literature. RESULTS: We describe an unusual presentation of a diverticular abscess, tracking down the inguinal canal and causing acute scrotum possibly secondary to a hernia. CONCLUSION: A deviation from the usual clinical presentation of diverticulitis should prompt the physician to obtain further radiologic evaluation. Computed tomography scanning is recommended, especially when an abscess is suspected.

Laparoscopy in Non-Trauma Abdominal Emergencies.

The role for laparoscopy has evolved throughout the years and more evidence has become available to support its use in abdominal emergencies. Although the literature has expanded and more randomized controlled trials are available, skepticism persists concerning the use of laparoscopy in emergency situations. We attempt to provide the readers with a concise review and highlight the most relevant issues and available evidence in seven different non-trauma abdominal emergencies.