The unspoken reality of gender bias in surgery: A qualitative systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to better understand the pervasive gender barriers obstructing the progression of women in surgery by synthesising the perspectives of both female surgical trainees and surgeons. METHODS: Five electronic databases, including Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science Core Collection, were searched for relevant articles. Following a full-text review by three authors, qualitative data was synthesized thematically according to the Thomas and Harden methodology and quality assessment was conducted by two authors reaching a consensus. RESULTS: Fourteen articles were included, with unfavorable work environments, male-dominated culture and societal pressures being major themes. Females in surgery lacked support, faced harassment, and had unequal opportunities, which were often exacerbated by sex-blindness by their male counterparts. Mothers were especially affected, struggling to achieve a work-life balance while facing strong criticism. However, with increasing recognition of the unique professional traits of female surgeons, there is progress towards gender quality which requires continued and sustained efforts. CONCLUSION: This systematic review sheds light on the numerous gender barriers that continue to stand in the way of female surgeons despite progress towards gender equality over the years. As the global agenda towards equality progresses, this review serves as a call-to-action to increase collective effort towards gender inclusivity which will significantly improve future health outcomes.

An international multicenter study of protocols for liver transplantation during a pandemic: A case for quadripartite equipoise.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The outbreak of COVID-19 has vastly increased the operational burden on healthcare systems worldwide. For patients with end-stage liver failure, liver transplantation is the only option. However, the strain on intensive care facilities caused by the pandemic is a major concern. There is an urgent need for ethical frameworks to balance the need for liver transplantation against the availability of national resources. METHODS: We performed an international multicenter study of transplant centers to understand the evolution of policies for transplant prioritization in response to the pandemic in March 2020. To describe the ethical tension arising in this setting, we propose a novel ethical framework, the quadripartite equipoise (QE) score, that is applicable to liver transplantation in the context of limited national resources. RESULTS: Seventeen large- and medium-sized liver transplant centers from 12 countries across 4 continents participated. Ten centers opted to limit transplant activity in response to the pandemic, favoring a "sickest-first" approach. Conversely, some larger centers opted to continue routine transplant activity in order to balance waiting list mortality. To model these and other ethical tensions, we computed a QE score using 4 factors - recipient outcome, donor/graft safety, waiting list mortality and healthcare resources - for 7 countries. The fluctuation of the QE score over time accurately reflects the dynamic changes in the ethical tensions surrounding transplant activity in a pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: This four-dimensional model of quadripartite equipoise addresses the ethical tensions in the current pandemic. It serves as a universally applicable framework to guide regulation of transplant activity in response to the increasing burden on healthcare systems. LAY SUMMARY: There is an urgent need for ethical frameworks to balance the need for liver transplantation against the availability of national resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. We describe a four-dimensional model of quadripartite equipoise that models these ethical tensions and can guide the regulation of transplant activity in response to the increasing burden on healthcare systems.

Greater hypertrophy can be achieved with associating liver partition with portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy compared to conventional staged hepatectomy, but with a higher price to pay?

BACKGROUND: Associating liver partition with portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) and conventional staged hepatectomy (CSH) are options for patients with unresectable liver tumors due to insufficient future liver remnant (FLR). METHODS: A retrospective comparison of clinical data, liver volumetry and surgical outcomes between 10 ALPPS and 29 CSH patients was performed. RESULTS: Patient demographics and disease characteristics were similar between both groups. ALPPS induced superior FLR growth (ALPPS vs. CSH, 48.1% (IQR 39.4-96.9%) vs. 11.8% (IQR 4.3-41.9%), p = 0.013). However, post-operative day 5 international normalized ratio (INR) (ALPPS vs. CSH, 1.6 (IQR 1.5-1.8) vs. 1.4 (IQR 1.3-1.6), p = 0.015) and rate of post-hepatectomy liver failure (ALPPS vs. CSH, 25 vs. 0%, p = 0.032) was higher in the ALPPS group. 90-day mortality (ALPPS vs. CSH, 12.5% vs. 0%, p = 0.320) was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: ALPPS was superior in inducing FLR growth but associated with increased post-hepatectomy liver failure compared to CSH.