Scoping review for the SAGES EAES joint collaborative on sustainability in surgical practice.

BACKGROUND: Surgical care in the operating room (OR) contributes one-third of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in healthcare. The European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) initiated a joint Task Force to promote sustainability within minimally invasive gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted by searching MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase via Elsevier, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus on August 25th, 2023 to identify articles reporting on the impact of gastrointestinal surgical care on the environment. The objectives were to establish the terminology, outcome measures, and scope associated with sustainable surgical practice. Quantitative data were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We screened 22,439 articles to identify 85 articles relevant to anesthesia, general surgical practice, and gastrointestinal surgery. There were 58/85 (68.2%) cohort studies and 12/85 (14.1%) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies. The most commonly measured outcomes were kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents (kg CO2eq), cost of resource consumption in US dollars or euros, surgical waste in kg, water consumption in liters, and energy consumption in kilowatt-hours. Surgical waste production and the use of anesthetic gases were among the largest contributors to the climate impact of surgical practice. Educational initiatives to educate surgical staff on the climate impact of surgery, recycling programs, and strategies to restrict the use of noxious anesthetic gases had the highest impact in reducing the carbon footprint of surgical care. Establishing green teams with multidisciplinary champions is an effective strategy to initiate a sustainability program in gastrointestinal surgery. CONCLUSION: This review establishes standard terminology and outcome measures used to define the environmental footprint of surgical practices. Impactful initiatives to achieve sustainability in surgical practice will require education and multidisciplinary collaborations among key stakeholders including surgeons, researchers, operating room staff, hospital managers, industry partners, and policymakers.

Perspectives on sustainability among surgeons: findings from the SAGES-EAES sustainability in surgical practice task force survey.

BACKGROUND: Surgical care significantly contributes to healthcare-associated greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). Surgeon attitudes about mitigation of the impact of surgical practice on environmental sustainability remains poorly understood. To better understand surgeon perspectives globally, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery established a joint Sustainability in Surgical Practice (SSP) Task Force and distributed a survey on sustainability. METHODS: Our survey asked about (1) surgeon attitudes toward sustainability, (2) ability to estimate the carbon footprint of surgical procedures and supplies, (3) concerns about the negative impacts of sustainable interventions, (4) willingness to change specific practices, and (5) preferred educational topics and modalities. Questions were primarily written in Likert-scale format. A clustering analysis was performed to determine whether survey respondents could be grouped into distinct subsets to inform future outreach and education efforts. RESULTS: We received 1024 responses, predominantly from North America and Europe. The study revealed that while 63% of respondents were motivated to enhance the sustainability of their practice, less than 10% could accurately estimate the carbon footprint of surgical activities. Most were not concerned that sustainability efforts would negatively impact their practice and showed readiness to adopt proposed sustainable practices. Online webinars and modules were the preferred educational methods. A clustering analysis identified a group particularly concerned yet willing to adopt sustainable changes. CONCLUSION: Surgeons believe that operating room waste is a critical issue and are willing to change practice to improve it. However, there exists a gap in understanding the environmental impact of surgical procedures and supplies, and a sizable minority have some degree of concern about potential adverse consequences of implementing sustainable policies. This study uniquely provides an international, multidisciplinary snapshot of surgeons' attitudes, knowledge, concerns, willingness, and preferred educational modalities related to mitigating the environmental impact of surgical practice.

Quality of Reporting on Anastomotic Leaks in Colorectal Cancer Trials: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Although attempts have been made in the past to establish consensus regarding the definitions and grading of the severity of colorectal anastomotic leakage, widespread adoption has remained limited. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review of the literature was conducted with the objective of examining the various elements used to report and define anastomotic leakage in colorectal cancer resections. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: A systematic review, using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library Database, of all published randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses containing data related to adult patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery and reporting anastomotic leakage as a primary or secondary outcome, with a definition of anastomotic leakage included. OUTCOMES: Definitions of anatomotic leakage, clinical symptoms, radiological modalities and findings, findings at reoperation, as well as grading terminology or classifications for anastomotic leakage. RESULTS: Of the 471 articles reporting anastomotic leakage as a primary or secondary outcome, a definition was reported in 95 studies (45 randomized controlled trials, 13 systematic reviews, and 37 meta-analyses), involving a total of 346,140 patients. Of these 95 articles, 68% reported clinical signs and symptoms of anastomotic leakage, 26% biochemical criteria, 63% radiological modalities, 62% radiological findings, and 13% findings at reintervention. Only 45% (n = 43) of included studies reported grading of anastomotic leakage severity or leak classification, and 41% (n = 39) included a timeframe for reporting. LIMITATIONS: There was a high heterogeneity between the included studies. CONCLUSION: This evidence synthesis confirmed incomplete and inconsistent reporting of anastomotic leakage across the published colorectal cancer literature. There is a great need for the development and implementation of a consensus framework for defining, grading, and reporting anastomotic leakage. REGISTRATION: Prospectively registered at PROSPERO ID 454660.

Development and evaluation of a societal core robotic surgery accreditation curriculum for the UK.

Standardised proficiency-based progression is the cornerstone of safe robotic skills acquisition, however, is currently lacking within surgical training curricula. Expert consensuses have defined a modular pathway to accredit surgeons. This study aimed to address the lack of a formal, pre-clinical core robotic skills, proficiency-based accreditation curriculum in the UK. Novice robotic participants underwent a four-day pre-clinical core robotic skills curriculum incorporating multimodal assessment. Modifiable-Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (M-GEARS), VR-automated performance metrics (APMs) and Objective Clinical Human Reliability Analysis (OCHRA) error methodology assessed performance at the beginning and end of training. Messick's validity concept and a curriculum evaluation model were utilised. Feedback was collated. Proficiency-based progression, benchmarking, tool validity and reliability was assessed through comparative and correlational statistical methods. Forty-seven participants were recruited. Objective assessment of VR and dry models across M-GEARS, APMs and OCHRA demonstrated significant improvements in technical skill (p < 0.001). Concurrent validity between assessment tools demonstrated strong correlation in dry and VR tasks (r = 0.64-0.92, p < 0.001). OCHRA Inter-rater reliability was excellent (r = 0.93, p < 0.001 and 81% matched error events). A benchmark was established with M-GEARS and for the curriculum at 80%. Thirty (63.82%) participants passed. Feedback was 5/5 stars on average, with 100% recommendation. Curriculum evaluation fulfilled all five domains of Messick's validity. Core robotic surgical skills training can be objectively evaluated and benchmarked to provide accreditation in basic robotic skills. A strategy is necessary to enrol standardised curricula into national surgical training at an early stage to ensure patient safety.

Laparoscopic and robotic surgery for colorectal cancer in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: As life expectancy has been increasing, older patients are becoming more central to the healthcare system, leading to more intensive care use and longer hospital stays. Nevertheless, advancements in minimally invasive surgical techniques offer safe and effective options for older patients with colorectal diseases. This study aims to provide comprehensive evidence on the role of minimally invasive surgery in treating colorectal diseases in older patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All articles directly compared the minimally invasive approach with open surgery in patients aged ≥65 years. The present metanalysis took 30-day complications as primary outcomes. Length of hospital stay, readmission, and 30-day mortality were also assessed, as secondary outcomes. Further subgroup analyses were carried out based on surgery setting, lesion features, and location. RESULTS: After searching the main databases, 84 articles were included. Evaluation of 30-day complications rate, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality significantly favored minimally invasive approaches. The outcome readmission did not show any significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: The current metanalysis demonstrates clear advantages of minimally invasive techniques over open surgery in colorectal procedures for older patients, particularly in reducing complications, mortality, and hospitalization. This suggests that prioritizing these techniques, based on available expertise and facilities, could improve outcomes and quality of care for older patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

Exhaled volatile organic compounds in the detection of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

There is an apparent need for novel non-invasive colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests that are more acceptable to patients and can reliably detect CRC or reduce the number of unnecessary colonoscopies performed in cancer-free patients. An emerging number of studies demonstrate the potential value of exhaled volatile organic compounds (VOCs) as a diagnostic and triaging test for CRC. A systematic appraisal and meta-analysis of the published evidence was done to determine whether exhaled VOCs can be used in the detection and screening of CRC. Nine electronic databases were searched from inception of the databases until August 2020. Quantitative and descriptive data of CRC patients and healthy control (HC) participants who underwent VOCs breath analysis was extracted. In addition, where possible, sampling methods, analytical platforms, processors, and specific breath biomarkers found in each study were recorded. Fourteen articles were included in the systematic review with 491 colorectal patients and 754 HC participants (n=1245). Sub-group meta-analysis was conducted on nine of those articles and the pooled sensitivity was estimated to be 0.89 (95 % CI = 0.80-0.99) whereas specificity was 0.83 (95 % CI = 0.74-0.92). Heterogeneity of pooled sensitivity and specificity was estimated as I2=11.11 %. Although this study was limited by small sample size and different analytical platforms, the proposed future framework resolves such limitations and standardizes future research. It is reasonable to deduce that VOCs breath analysis is certainly a field of research that can progress to replace traditional methods within the framework of CRC screening and diagnosis.

Sustainability in surgical practice: a collaborative call toward environmental sustainability in operating rooms.

BACKGROUND: The healthcare system plays a pivotal role in environmental sustainability, and the operating room (OR) significantly contributes to its overall carbon footprint. In response to this critical challenge, leading medical societies, government bodies, regulatory agencies, and industry stakeholders are taking measures to address healthcare sustainability and its impact on climate change. Healthcare now represents almost 20% of the US national economy and 8.5% of US carbon emissions. Internationally, healthcare represents 5% of global carbon emissions. US Healthcare is an outlier in both per capita cost, and per capita greenhouse gas emission, with almost twice per capita emissions compared to every other country in the world. METHODS: The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) established the Sustainability in Surgical Practice joint task force in 2023. This collaborative effort aims to actively promote education, mitigation, and innovation, steering surgical practices toward a more sustainable future. RESULTS: Several key initiatives have included a survey of members' knowledge and awareness, a scoping review of terminology, metrics, and initiatives, and deep engagement of key stakeholders. DISCUSSION: This position paper serves as a Call to Action, proposing a series of actions to catalyze and accelerate the surgical sustainability leadership needed to respond effectively to climate change, and to lead the societal transformation towards health that our times demand.

EAES/SAGES evidence-based recommendations and expert consensus on optimization of perioperative care in older adults.

BACKGROUND: As the population ages, more older adults are presenting for surgery. Age-related declines in physiological reserve and functional capacity can result in frailty and poor outcomes after surgery. Hence, optimizing perioperative care in older patients is imperative. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways and Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) may influence surgical outcomes, but current use and impact on older adults patients is unknown. The aim of this study was to provide evidence-based recommendations on perioperative care of older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery. METHODS: Expert consensus determined working definitions for key terms and metrics related to perioperative care. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was performed using the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases for 24 pre-defined key questions in the topic areas of prehabilitation, MIS, and ERAS in major abdominal surgery (colorectal, upper gastrointestinal (UGI), Hernia, and hepatopancreatic biliary (HPB)) to generate evidence-based recommendations following the GRADE methodology. RESULT: Older adults were defined as 65 years and older. Over 20,000 articles were initially retrieved from search parameters. Evidence synthesis was performed across the three topic areas from 172 studies, with meta-analyses conducted for MIS and ERAS topics. The use of MIS and ERAS was recommended for older adult patients particularly when undergoing colorectal surgery. Expert opinion recommended prehabilitation, cessation of smoking and alcohol, and correction of anemia in all colorectal, UGI, Hernia, and HPB procedures in older adults. All recommendations were conditional, with low to very low certainty of evidence, with the exception of ERAS program in colorectal surgery. CONCLUSIONS: MIS and ERAS are recommended in older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery, with evidence supporting use in colorectal surgery. Though expert opinion supported prehabilitation, there is insufficient evidence supporting use. This work has identified evidence gaps for further studies to optimize older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery.

A review of minimal access surgery provision and training within the United Kingdom.

When combined with healthcare pressures, the exponential growth of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has impacted UK-based training outcomes, including the learning curve to competency. Aim: To ascertain the current provision of RAS and investigate differences in access to minimal access surgical (MAS) facilities and training across the UK. A two-armed electronic survey was conducted. The first arm questioned clinical leads regarding robotic practice and future training provisions. The second investigated trainee and trainers' perceptions of MAS training and facilities. 64% (52/81) of responding trusts utilise a robotic system. The majority (68% [55/81]) have plans to expand or acquire a system within 3 years. 171 responses from 112 UK and Republic of Ireland hospitals were collected for Arm 2. Laparoscopic categories queried whether trainees had access to a formal curriculum, training days and sim-boxes. Most consultants (51.9%) and trainees (51.6%) reported that there was no formal local training curriculum for robotic surgery. Combined responses demonstrated 42.1% (n = 195/463) said "yes", 39.5% (n = 183) "no" and 18.4% (n = 85) "don't know". For combined robotic categories (simulation, training days and operative lists) 28.3% (n = 134/473) responded "yes", 51.6% (n = 244) said "no" and 20.1% (n = 95) said "don't know". This study provides insight into the current provision of robotic-assisted surgery at UK trusts and highlights the need to facilitate regular clinical training and equitable access to MAS simulation within a formal curriculum. This may aid regulation of training in parallel with the expansion of robotic practice and avoid a significant skill acquisition gap and risks to patient safety.

European Robotic Surgery Consensus (ERSC): Protocol for the development of a consensus in robotic training for gastrointestinal surgery trainees.

BACKGROUND: The rapid adoption of robotic surgical systems across Europe has led to a critical gap in training and credentialing for gastrointestinal (GI) surgeons. Currently, there is no existing standardised curriculum to guide robotic training, assessment and certification for GI trainees. This manuscript describes the protocol to achieve a pan-European consensus on the essential components of a comprehensive training programme for GI robotic surgery through a five-stage process. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In Stage 1, a Steering Committee, consisting of international experts, trainees and educationalists, has been established to lead and coordinate the consensus development process. In Stage 2, a systematic review of existing multi-specialty robotic training curricula will be performed to inform the formulation of key position statements. In Stage 3, a comprehensive survey will be disseminated across Europe to capture the current state of robotic training and identify potential challenges and opportunities for improvement. In Stage 4, an international panel of GI surgeons, trainees, and robotic theatre staff will participate in a three-round Delphi process, seeking ≥ 70% agreement on crucial aspects of the training curriculum. Industry and patient representatives will be involved as external advisors throughout this process. In Stage 5, the robotic training curriculum for GI trainees will be finalised in a dedicated consensus meeting, culminating in the production of an Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document. REGISTRATION DETAILS: The study protocol has been registered on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/br87d/).

Objective assessment tools in laparoscopic or robotic-assisted gynecological surgery: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: There is a growing emphasis on proficiency-based progression within surgical training. To enable this, clearly defined metrics for those newly acquired surgical skills are needed. These can be formulated in objective assessment tools. The aim of the present study was to systematically review the literature reporting on available tools for objective assessment of minimally invasive gynecological surgery (simulated) performance and evaluate their reliability and validity. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic search (1989-2022) was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science in accordance with PRISMA. The trial was registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) ID: CRD42022376552. Randomized controlled trials, prospective comparative studies, prospective single-group (with pre- and post-training assessment) or consensus studies that reported on the development, validation or usage of assessment tools of surgical performance in minimally invasive gynecological surgery, were included. Three independent assessors assessed study setting and validity evidence according to a contemporary framework of validity, which was adapted from Messick's validity framework. Methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the modified medical education research study quality instrument (MERSQI) checklist. Heterogeneity in data reporting on types of tools, data collection, study design, definition of expertise (novice vs. experts) and statistical values prevented a meaningful meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 19 746 titles and abstracts were screened of which 72 articles met the inclusion criteria. A total of 37 different assessment tools were identified of which 13 represented manual global assessment tools, 13 manual procedure-specific assessment tools and 11 automated performance metrices. Only two tools showed substantive evidence of validity. Reliability and validity per tool were provided. No assessment tools showed direct correlation between tool scores and patient related outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Existing objective assessment tools lack evidence on predicting patient outcomes and suffer from limitations in transferability outside of the research environment, particularly for automated performance metrics. Future research should prioritize filling these gaps while integrating advanced technologies like kinematic data and AI for robust, objective surgical skill assessment within gynecological advanced surgical training programs.

A Unique Mutation in the Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator (CFTR) Gene Causing Cystic Fibrosis in a Pakistani Child: A Case Highlighting the Need for More Awareness.

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a recessively inherited disease most commonly seen in Caucasians. The mutations in the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) gene are responsible for the condition, and to date, more than 2000 mutations have been published in the literature. The most common mutation worldwide is F508del. Here, we reported a five-year-old child who presented to the clinic with a chronic cough. Her newborn screening for CF was negative, including 139 mutation panels done in India. The sweat chloride test was positive, and CF gene sequencing was reported as c.2489dup p. (Glu831GLYFS *5) homozygotes mutation in the CFTR gene (Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM) *602421). To the best of our knowledge, this gene was first described and published in the literature.

Assessment and application of non-technical skills in robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Undeniably, robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has become very popular in recent decades, but it has introduced challenges to the workflow of the surgical team. Non-technical skills (NTS) have received less emphasis than technical skills in training and assessment. The systematic review aimed to update the evidence on the role of NTS in robotic surgery, specifically focusing on evaluating assessment tools and their utilisation in training and surgical education in robotic surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature search of PubMed, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and EMBASE was conducted to identify primary articles on NTS in RAS. Messick's validity framework and the Modified Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument were utilised to evaluate the quality of the validity evidence of the abstracted articles. RESULTS: Seventeen studies were eligible for the final analysis. Communication, environmental factors, anticipation and teamwork were key NTS for RAS. Team-related factors such as ambient noise and chatter, inconveniences due to repeated requests during the procedure and constraints due to poor design of the operating room may harm patient safety during RAS. Three novel rater-based scoring systems and one sensor-based method for assessing NTS in RAS were identified. Anticipation by the team to predict and execute the next move before an explicit verbal command improved the surgeon's situational awareness. CONCLUSION: This systematic review highlighted the paucity of reporting on non-technical skills in robotic surgery with only three bespoke objective assessment tools being identified. Communication, environmental factors, anticipation, and teamwork are the key non-technical skills reported in robotic surgery, and further research is required to investigate their benefits to improve patient safety during robotic surgery.