Scholarly Output by Army General Surgery Residents.

INTRODUCTION: To characterize and compare the scholarly activity of applicants to Army First Year Graduate Medical Education (FYGME) general surgery positions over the course of a residency. METHODS: All applicants for the 2011-2012 Army FYGME positions in general surgery were included. Applications were used to obtain demographics and peer-reviewed publications. Publications were verified using PubMed and Google Scholar. Applicants were tracked for acceptance to a FYGME position, graduation from a general surgery program, and future publications. Comparisons were made between selectees and non-selectees. RESULTS: There were 46 applicants for 22 positions. Seven of the selectees (32%) had prior publications versus three non-selectees (12%; p < 0.109). Eighteen of the selectees went on to complete a general surgery residency by 2017. Of those who completed a general surgery residency, 16 (89%) have at least one publication with the mean number of publications of 4.0 versus 10 (43%), and of those not selected had at least one publication and the mean number of publications was 0.7 (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of applications for general surgery residencies have no prior research publications. However, after 6 years, graduates of a general surgery residency have significantly published out those not selected for training.

Achieving Mastery of General Surgery Operative Skill in the Army Healthcare System.

INTRODUCTION: Operative case volumes for military surgeons are reported to be significantly lower than civilian counterparts. Among the concern that this raises is an inability of military surgeons to achieve mastery of their craft. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Annual surgical case reports were obtained from seven Army military treatment facilities (MTF) for 2012-2016. Operative case volume and cumulative operative time were calculated for active duty general surgeons and for individual MTFs. Subgroup analyses were also performed based upon rank. Results were extrapolated to calculate the amount of time it would take to reach a cumulative of 10,000 hours of operative time (the a priori definition for achieving mastery). RESULTS: One hundred and two active duty general surgeons operated at the seven MTFs during the study period and met the inclusion criteria. The average surgeon performed 108 ± 68 cases/year. The average surgeon operated 122 ± 82 hours/year. At this rate, it would take over 80 years to reach mastery of surgery. When stratified based upon rank, Majors averaged 113 ± 75 hours/year, Lieutenant Colonels averaged 170 ± 100 hours/year, and Colonels averaged 136 ± 101 hours/year (p < 0.05). When stratified based upon individual MTF, surgeons at the busiest facility averaged 187 ± 103 hours/year and those at the least busy facility averaged 85 ± 56 hours/year (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Obtaining mastery of general surgery is a nearly impossible proposition given the current care models at Army MTFs. Alternative staffing and patient care models should be developed if Army surgeons are to be masters at their craft.

Unexploded Ordnance Management.

The purpose of this Clinical Practice Guide is to provide details on the procedures to safely remove unexploded ordnance from combat patients, both loose and impaled, to minimize the risks to providers and the medical treatment facility while ensuring the best outcome for the patient. Military ordnance, to include bullets, grenades, flares, and explosive ordnance, retained by a patient can be a risk to all individuals and equipment along the continuum of care. This is especially true from the point of injury to the first treatment facility. Management of patients with unexploded ordnance either on or in their body is a rare event during combat surgery. Loose munitions are usually noted and easily removed prior to the patient receiving medical treatment. However, impaled munitions provide a significant challenge. These are usually caused by large caliber, high-velocity projectiles. Patients who survive to arrive at a treatment facility must be triaged safely and simultaneously treated appropriately to ensure both the survival of the patient and the treatment team. Between WWII and the Somalia conflict, there have been 36 reported cases of unexploded ordnance from U.S. soldiers. Since 2005, there have been six known cases during the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and one additional case in Pakistan. Optimal outcomes require a basic knowledge of explosives and triggering mechanisms, as well as adherence to basic principles of trauma resuscitation and surgery.

Expeditionary Resuscitation Surgical Team: The US Army's Initiative to Provide Damage Control Resuscitation and Surgery to Forces in Austere Settings.

Improvements in surgical care on the battlefield have contributed to reduced morbidity and mortality in wounded Servicemembers. 1 Point-of-injury care and early surgical intervention, along with improved personal protective equipment, have produced the lowest casualty statistics in modern warfare, resulting in improved force strength, morale, and social acceptance of conflict. It is undeniable that point-of-care injury, followed by early resuscitation and damage control surgery, saves lives on the battlefield. The US Army's Expeditionary Resuscitation Surgical Team (ERST) is a highly mobile, interprofessional medical team that can perform damage control resuscitation and surgery in austere locations. Its configuration and capabilities vary; however, in general, a typical surgical element can perform one major surgery and one minor surgery without resupply. The critical care element can provide prolonged holding in garrison, but this diminishes in the austere setting with complex and acutely injured patients.

Recent Advances in Forward Surgical Team Training at the U.S. Army Trauma Training Department.

U.S. Army Forward Surgical Teams (FSTs) are elite, multidisciplinary units that are highly mobile, and rapidly deployable. The mission of the FST is to provide resuscitative and damage control surgery for stabilization of life-threatening injuries in austere environments. The Army Trauma Training Center began in 2001 at the University of Miami Ryder Trauma Center under the direction of COL T. E. Knuth, MC USA (Ret.), as a multimodality combination of lectures, laboratory exercises, and clinical experiences that provided the only predeployment mass casualty and clinical trauma training center for all FSTs. Each of the subsequent five directors has restructured the training based on dynamic feedback from trainees, current military needs, and on the rapid advances in combat casualty care. We have highlighted these evolutionary changes at the Army Trauma Training Center in previous reviews. Under the current director, LTC J. M. Seery, MC USA, there are new team-building exercises, mobile learning modules and simulators, and other alternative methods in the mass casualty exercise. This report summarizes the latest updates to the state of the art training since the last review.

Surgeon preparedness for mass casualty events: Adapting essential military surgical lessons for the home front.

Military surgeons have gained familiarity and experience with mass casualty events (MCEs) as a matter of routine over the course of the last two conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. Over the same period of time, civilian surgeons have increasingly faced complex MCEs on the home front. Our objective is to summarize and adapt these combat surgery lessons to enhance civilian surgeon preparedness for complex MCEs on the home front. The authors describe the unique lessons learned from combat surgery over the course of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and adapt these lessons to enhance civilian surgical readiness for a MCE on the home front. Military Damage Control Surgery (mDCS) combines the established concept of clinical DCS (cDCS) with key combat situational awareness factors that enable surgeons to optimally care for multiple, complex patients, from multiple simultaneous events, with limited resources. These additional considerations involve the surgeon's role of care within the deployed trauma system and the battlefield effects. The proposed new concept of mass casualty DCS (mcDCS) similarly combines cDCS decisions with key factors of situational awareness for civilian surgeons faced with complex MCEs to optimize outcomes. The additional considerations for a civilian MCE include the surgeon's role of care within the regional trauma system and the incident effects. Adapting institutionalized lessons from combat surgery to civilian surgical colleagues will enhance national preparedness for complex MCEs on the home front.

Emergency canine surgery in a deployed forward surgical team: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Forward surgical teams (FSTs) perform a variety of non-doctrinal functions. During their deployment to Afghanistan, the 541st FST (Airborne) performed emergency surgery on a German shepherd military working dog (MWD). METHODS: Retrospective examination of a case of veterinary surgery in a deployed FST. RESULTS: A 5 1/2-year-old German shepherd MWD presented with extreme lethargy, tachycardia, excessive drooling, and a firm, distended abdomen. These conditions resulted from gastric dilatation with volvulus. Since evacuation to a veterinarian was untenable, emergency laparotomy was performed in the FST. The gastric dilatation with volvulus was treated by detorsion and gastropexy, and the canine patient fully recovered. CONCLUSION: Canine surgery can be safely performed in an FST. Based on the number of MWDs deployed throughout the theater, FSTs may be called upon to care for them in the absence of available veterinary care.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: outcomes at a military training center.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has gained support as a single-staged and stand-alone bariatric procedure. Reports of excess weight loss of 35 to 83 per cent, reduction in comorbidities, and decreased operative morbidity have garnered support for LSG. This study represents an initial outcome analysis of LSG performed solely at a military treatment center. This study is a retrospective analysis of all patients receiving LSG at Dwight D. Eisenhower Army Medical Center from September 2007 to December 2009. The patients were planned for a stand-alone procedure. One hundred and fifteen patients received LSG over this time period with a mean body mass index of 45.5 +/- 6.2 (range 35.1-58.3). The average age was 47.4 +/- 12.5 years. Diabetes mellitus was seen in 47 per cent and 68 per cent of patients had hypertension. The mean and median length of operation was 124 +/- 48 and 115.5 minutes. The mean percentage of excess weight loss was 16.6 +/- 6.40 per cent at 1 month, 31.5 +/- 7.6 per cent at 3 months, 41.2 +/- 13.9 per cent at 6 months, and 53.7 +/- 12.5 per cent at 1 year from surgery. One or more of patient's preoperative diabetic or hypertensive medications were improved postoperatively in 18.7 per cent and 16.3 per cent, respectively. Incidence of major complications occurred in 4.35 per cent of patients in this study to include four leaks (3.4%), one death (0.87%), and 10 readmissions. Midterm analysis of outcomes related to LSG as a single-stage bariatric procedure is promising as long-term outcome data is collected; the efficacy of this procedure as a sole bariatric procedure will continue to be borne out.