An international Delphi consensus for surgical quality assessment of lymphadenectomy and anastomosis in minimally invasive total gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive total gastrectomy (MITG) is a mainstay for curative treatment of patients with gastric cancer. To define and standardize optimal surgical techniques and further improve clinical outcomes through the enhanced MITG surgical quality, there must be consensus on the key technical steps of lymphadenectomy and anastomosis creation, which is currently lacking. This study aimed to determine an expert consensus from an international panel regarding the technical aspects of the performance of MITG for oncological indications using the Delphi method. METHODS: A 100-point scoping survey was created based on the deconstruction of MITG into its key technical steps through local and international expert opinion and literature evidence. An international expert panel comprising upper gastrointestinal and general surgeons participated in multiple rounds of a Delphi consensus. The panelists voted on the issues concerning importance, difficulty, or agreement using an online questionnaire. A priori consensus standard was set at > 80% for agreement to a statement. Internal consistency and reliability were evaluated using Cronbach's α. RESULTS: Thirty expert upper gastrointestinal and general surgeons participated in three online Delphi rounds, generating a final consensus of 41 statements regarding MITG for gastric cancer. The consensus was gained from 22, 12, and 7 questions from Delphi rounds 1, 2, and 3, which were rephrased into the 41 statetments respectively. For lymphadenectomy and aspects of anastomosis creation, Cronbach's α for round 1 was 0.896 and 0.886, and for round 2 was 0.848 and 0.779, regarding difficulty or importance. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi consensus defined 41 steps as crucial for performing a high-quality MITG for oncological indications based on the standards of an international panel. The results of this consensus provide a platform for creating and validating surgical quality assessment tools designed to improve clinical outcomes and standardize surgical quality in MITG.

Cost analysis of robot-assisted versus open transthoracic esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer. Results of the ROBOT randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The previously published ROBOT trial demonstrated that robot assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is associated with a lower percentage of postoperative complications compared to open esophagectomy (OTE) for patients with esophageal cancer. The implications of these results on healthcare costs are important given the increased attention for cost-reduction in healthcare. Therefore the aim of this study was to report the hospital costs of RAMIE compared to OTE as treatment for esophageal cancer. METHODS: The ROBOT trial randomized 112 patients with esophageal cancer between RAMIE and OTE through January 2012 and August 2016 in a single tertiary care academic centre in the Netherlands. The primary outcome of the current study was hospital costs from the day of esophagectomy until 90 days after discharge based on Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing methodology. Secondary outcomes included the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per complication prevented and risk factors for increased hospital costs. RESULTS: Of the 112 included patients, 109 patients underwent an esophagectomy, of whom 54 RAMIE and 55 OTE. The mean total hospital costs were comparable between RAMIE €40211 and OTE €39495 (mean difference €-715; bias-corrected and accelerated confidence interval € -14831 to 14783, p = 0.932). At a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20.000 to €25.000 (i.e. estimated additional costs to the hospital to treat patients with a complication) RAMIE had a probability 62%-70% of being cost effective to prevent postoperative complications. In multivariable regression analysis, major postoperative complications were the main driver of hospital costs after esophagectomy (€31839, p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: In this randomized trial RAMIE resulted in fewer postoperative complications compared to OTE without increasing total hospital costs.

ESDE-MIE fellowship: a descriptive analysis of the first experiences.

Esophageal resection is a high-risk and technically demanding procedure, with a long proficiency-gain curve. The European Society Diseases of the Esophagus (ESDE)-Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (MIE) training program was launched in 2018 for European surgeons willing to train and to begin a career undertaking MIE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the first experience of the ESDE-MIE fellowship and relate this to the initially predetermined core principles and objectives of the program. Between October 2021 and May 2022, the participating fellows, in collaboration with the ESDE Educational Committee, initiated a survey to assess the outcome and experience of these fellowships. Data from each individual fellowship were analysed and reported in a descriptive manner. Between 2018 and 2022, in total, five fellows have completed the ESDE-MIE fellowship program. Despite the COVID-19 outbreak just the year after its launch, predetermined clinical and research goals were achieved in all cases. Each of the fellows were able to assist in a median of 40 (IQR 27-69) MIE and/or Robot assisted (RA)MIE procedures, of a total median of 115 (IQR 83-123) attended Upper GI cases. After the fellowship, MIE has been fully adopted by the fellows who returned to their home institutions as Upper GI surgeons. The fellowship was concluded by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) Multidisciplinary Joint Committee (MJC) certification in Upper GI Surgery, which was successfully obtained by all who took part. Based on the experience of the first five fellows, the ESDE-MIE training fellowship meets with the expected needs even despite the COVID-19 outbreak in 2019. Furthermore, these fellows have returned home and integrated MIE into their independent surgical practice, affirming the ability of this program to train the next generation of MIE surgeons, even in the most challenging of circumstances.

Quality-based assessment of camera navigation skills for laparoscopic fundoplication.

Laparoscopic fundoplication is considered the gold standard surgical procedure for the treatment of symptomatic hiatus hernia. Studies on surgical performance in minimally invasive hiatus hernia repair have neglected the role of the camera assistant so far. The current study was designed to assess the applicability of the structured assessment of laparoscopic assistance skills (SALAS) score to laparoscopic fundoplication as an advanced and commonly performed laparoscopic upper GI procedure. Randomly selected laparoscopic fundoplications (n = 20) at a single institute were evaluated. Four trained reviewers independently assigned SALAS scoring based on synchronized video and voice recordings. The SALAS score (5-25 points) consists of five key aspects of laparoscopic camera navigation as previously described. Experience in camera assistance was defined as at least 100 assistances in complex laparoscopic procedures. Nine different surgical teams, consisting of five surgical residents, three fellows, and two attending physicians, were included. Experienced and inexperienced camera assistants were equally distributed (10/10). Construct validity was proven with a significant discrimination between experienced and inexperienced camera assistants for all reviewers (P < 0.05). The intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.897 demonstrates the score's low interrater variability. The total operation time decreases with increasing SALAS score, not reaching statistical significance. The applied SALAS score proves effective by discriminating between experienced and inexperienced camera assistants in an upper GI surgical procedure. This study demonstrates the applicability of the SALAS score to a more advanced laparoscopic procedure such as fundoplication enabling future investigations on the influence of camera navigation on surgical performance and operative outcome.

Diagnosis, assessment, and management of surgical complications following esophagectomy.

Despite improvements in operative strategies for esophageal resection, anastomotic leaks, fistula, postoperative pulmonary complications, and chylothorax can occur. Our review seeks to identify potential risk factors, modalities for early diagnosis, and novel interventions that may ameliorate the potential adverse effects of these surgical complications following esophagectomy.

Minimally-invasive temporary gastric stimulation: A pilot study to predict the outcome of electronic gastric stimulation with the Enterra™ system.

INTRODUCTION: Gastroparesis (GP) is defined as delayed gastric emptying (GE) without any obstruction of the pylorus. It can be divided into idiopathic, diabetic, post surgical and rare causes. Electronic gastric stimulation (EGS) - Enterra Medtronic™ - is a part of GP therapy. Although its positive impact has been reported in open label trials, randomized controlled trials failed in demonstrating a positive outcome. The aim of this pilot study was to establish a reliable prediction for permanent gastric stimulation. PATIENTS AND PROCEDURE: 6 female patients underwent laparoscopic implantation of 2 temporary electrodes. The Enterra™ system was connected and taped to the skin. Baseline and postoperative gastroparesis cardinal symptom index (GCSI), a validated index for GP therapy, was assessed. Response to EGS was defined as a 50% decrease of baseline GCSI. RESULTS: 4 of 6 patients responded to temporary EGS. 3 of 4 responders underwent permanent implantation. 1 non-responder received a permanent Enterra™ at another institution. After a median follow up time of 9months the responder group GCSI remained low, whereas the non-responder GCSI had increased. Moreover, the health care system was saved € 30,678.03 by this test stimulation concept. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic implantation of a temporary EGS system predicts the outcome of permanent gastric stimulation and is cost-saving.