The road to tailored adjuvant chemotherapy for all four non-pancreatic periampullary cancers: An international multimethod cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Despite differences in tumour behaviour and characteristics between duodenal adenocarcinoma (DAC), the intestinal (AmpIT) and pancreatobiliary (AmpPB) subtype of ampullary adenocarcinoma and distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA), the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) on these cancers, as well as the optimal ACT regimen, has not been comprehensively assessed. This study aims to assess the influence of tailored ACT on DAC, dCCA, AmpIT, and AmpPB. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for non-pancreatic periampullary adenocarcinoma were identified and collected from 36 tertiary centres between 2010 - 2021. Per non-pancreatic periampullary tumour type, the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy and the main relevant regimens of adjuvant chemotherapy were compared. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The study included a total of 2866 patients with DAC (n = 330), AmpIT (n = 765), AmpPB (n = 819), and dCCA (n = 952). Among them, 1329 received ACT, and 1537 did not. ACT was associated with significant improvement in OS for AmpPB (P = 0.004) and dCCA (P < 0.001). Moreover, for patients with dCCA, capecitabine mono ACT provided the greatest OS benefit compared to gemcitabine (P = 0.004) and gemcitabine - cisplatin (P = 0.001). For patients with AmpPB, no superior ACT regime was found (P > 0.226). ACT was not associated with improved OS for DAC and AmpIT (P = 0.113 and P = 0.445, respectively). DISCUSSION: Patients with resected AmpPB and dCCA appear to benefit from ACT. While the optimal ACT for AmpPB remains undetermined, it appears that dCCA shows the most favourable response to capecitabine monotherapy. Tailored adjuvant treatments are essential for enhancing prognosis across all four non-pancreatic periampullary adenocarcinomas.

Entrustable Professional Activities in Postgraduate General Surgery Training: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of the current use of Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) in postgraduate general surgery training internationally. BACKGROUND: Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) were introduced to connect clinical competencies and the professional activities to be entrusted to trainees on graduation. The popularity of EPAs as a framework for assessment is growing globally, including in general surgery. Anecdotally, there appears to be substantial variation in how they are implemented, yet a formal comparison of their use in postgraduate general surgery training is lacking. METHODS: A scoping review was performed, based on the original five-stage approach described by Arksey and O'Malley with the addition of protocol-specific items from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). RESULTS: Twenty-nine published and grey literature sources were included in the review. Entrustable Professional Activity use in postgraduate general surgery training was identified in 11 unique contexts, including from North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australia. There were substantial differences in the scope and number of EPAs, tools used for EPA assessment, and how EPAs were sequenced through training. Despite wide variation, eight distinct EPAs were common to the majority (>80%) of countries. Several articles described findings of EPA use in postgraduate general surgery training, allowing identification of multiple barriers and facilitators to integration. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides guidance for certification and regulatory bodies, program directors, and institutions with ambitions to implement EPAs for assessment and curricular design. In settings where EPAs are already used, the data may facilitate refinement of programs and strategies.

Surgery and Surgical Training Prior to Graduate Medical Education: A Blue Ribbon Committee II, Medical Student Education Subcommittee Report.

OBJECTIVE: To update and add to the first report commissioned by the Blue Ribbon Committee about 20 years prior. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Following a summit in late 2022 commissioned by the American Board of Surgery regarding competency-based reforms in surgical education and via a partnership with the American College of Surgeons (ACS) and other stakeholders, a Blue Ribbon Committee (BRC-II) on surgical education was formed. The BRC-II would have seven subcommittees. This paper details the work of the Medical Student Subcommittee within the BRC- II. METHODS: The subcommittee's work, supported by staff from the ACS, entailed a thorough literature review, which involved collating and aggregating the findings, identifying key challenges and opportunities, and committing to draft recommendations. These recommendations were then presented and refined via discussions with the Blue Ribbon Committee at large in multiple virtual and in-person settings. RESULTS: The subcommittee's work is detailed below and further summarized in table format. The section below elucidates the medical student education continuum and discusses the pertinent topics of recruitment, surgical engagement in medical student training and the surgical image, training for the current surgical practice model, trainee selection for graduate medical education (GME), and optimizing the transition from undergraduate medical education (UME) to GME. CONCLUSIONS: The last two decades have shown significant changes and shifts in medical education and surgical practice. The findings of BRC-II in this manuscript help to structure the current and future necessary improvements, focusing on different aspects of medical student education.

A Computer Vision Algorithm to Predict Superior Mesenteric Artery Margin Status for Patients with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of developing a computer vision algorithm that uses preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans to predict superior mesenteric artery (SMA) margin status in patients undergoing Whipple for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), and to compare algorithm performance to that of expert abdominal radiologists and surgical oncologists. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Complete surgical resection is the only chance to achieve a cure for PDAC; however, current modalities to predict vascular invasion have limited accuracy. METHODS: Adult patients with PDAC who underwent Whipple and had preoperative contrast-enhanced CT scans were included (2010-2022). The SMA was manually annotated on the CT scans, and we trained a U-Net algorithm for SMA segmentation and a ResNet50 algorithm for predicting SMA margin status. Radiologists and surgeons reviewed the scans in a blinded fashion. SMA margin status per pathology reports was the reference. RESULTS: Two hundred patients were included. Forty patients (20%) had a positive SMA margin. For the segmentation task, the U-Net model achieved a Dice Similarity Coefficient of 0.90. For the classification task, all readers demonstrated limited sensitivity, although the algorithm had the highest sensitivity at 0.43 (versus 0.23 and 0.36 for the radiologists and surgeons, respectively). Specificity was universally excellent, with the radiologist and algorithm demonstrating the highest specificity at 0.94. Finally, the accuracy of the algorithm was 0.85 versus 0.80 and 0.76 for the radiologists and surgeons, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the feasibility of developing a computer vision algorithm to predict SMA margin status using preoperative CT scans, highlighting its potential to augment the prediction of vascular involvement.

Outcome of Minimally Invasive and Open Pancreatoduodenectomy in Patients with Intestinal- and Pancreatobiliary Subtype Ampullary Cancer: An International Multicenter Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare minimally invasive and open pancreatoduodenectomy in different subtypes of ampullary adenocarcinoma. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Ampullary adenocarcinoma (AAC) is widely seen as the best indication for minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) due to the lack of vascular involvement and dilated bile and pancreatic duct. However, it is unknown whether outcomes of MIPD for AAC differ between the pancreatobiliary (AAC-PB) and intestinal (AAC-IT) subtypes as large studies are lacking. METHODS: This is an international cohort study, encompassing 27 centers from 12 countries. Outcome of MIPD and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) were compared in patients with AAC-IT and AAC-PB. Primary end points were R1 rate, lymph node yield, and 5-year overall survival (5yOS). RESULTS: Overall, 1187 patients after MIPD for AAC were included, of whom 572 with AAC-IT (62 MIPD, 510 OPD) and 615 with AAC-PB (41 MIPD and 574 OPD). The rate of R1 resection was not significantly different between MIPD and OPD for both AAC-IT (3.4% vs 6.9%, P=0,425) and AAC-PB (9.8% vs 14.9%, P=0,625). AAC-IT, more lymph nodes were resected with MIPD group (19 vs 16, P=0.007), compared to OPD. The 5y-OS did not differ after MIPD and OPD for both AAC-IT (56.8% vs 59.5%, P=0.827 and AAC-PB (52.5% vs 44.4%, P=0.357). The rates of surgical complication between MIPD and OPD did not differ between AmpIT and AmpPB. DISCUSSION: This international multicenter study found no differences in outcomes between MIPD and OPD for AAC-IT and AAC-PB. MIPD and OPD demonstrated comparable outcomes in oncological resection, survival and surgical outcomes for both subtypes of AAC.

The Brescia Internationally Validated European Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (EGUMIPS).

OBJECTIVE: To develop and update evidence-based and consensus-based guidelines on laparoscopic and robotic pancreatic surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS), including laparoscopic and robotic surgery, is complex and technically demanding. Minimizing the risk for patients requires stringent, evidence-based guidelines. Since the International Miami Guidelines on MIPS in 2019, new developments and key publications have been reported, necessitating an update. METHODS: Evidence-based guidelines on 22 topics in 8 domains were proposed: terminology, indications, patients, procedures, surgical techniques and instrumentation, assessment tools, implementation and training, and artificial intelligence. The Brescia Internationally Validated European Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (EGUMIPS, September 2022) used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology to assess the evidence and develop guideline recommendations, the Delphi method to establish consensus on the recommendations among the Expert Committee, and the AGREE II-GRS tool for guideline quality assessment and external validation by a Validation Committee. RESULTS: Overall, 27 European experts, 6 international experts, 22 international Validation Committee members, 11 Jury Committee members, 18 Research Committee members, and 121 registered attendees of the 2-day meeting were involved in the development and validation of the guidelines. In total, 98 recommendations were developed, including 33 on laparoscopic, 34 on robotic, and 31 on general MIPS, covering 22 topics in 8 domains. Out of 98 recommendations, 97 reached at least 80% consensus among the experts and congress attendees, and all recommendations were externally validated by the Validation Committee. CONCLUSIONS: The EGUMIPS evidence-based guidelines on laparoscopic and robotic MIPS can be applied in current clinical practice to provide guidance to patients, surgeons, policy-makers, and medical societies.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Various Settings: An International Multicenter Propensity Score Matched Study of 10.075 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the perioperative outcomes of robotic liver surgery (RLS) and laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) in various settings. BACKGROUND: Clear advantages of RLS over LLS have rarely been demonstrated, and the associated costs of robotic surgery are generally higher than those of laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, the exact role of the robotic approach in minimally invasive liver surgery remains to be defined. METHODS: In this international retrospective cohort study, the outcomes of patients who underwent RLS and LLS for all indications between 2009 and 2021 in 34 hepatobiliary referral centers were compared. Subgroup analyses were performed to compare both approaches across several types of procedures: (1) minor resections in the anterolateral (2, 3, 4b, 5, and 6) or (2) posterosuperior segments (1, 4a, 7, 8), and (3) major resections (≥3 contiguous segments). Propensity score matching was used to mitigate the influence of selection bias. The primary outcome was textbook outcome in liver surgery (TOLS), previously defined as the absence of intraoperative incidents ≥grade 2, postoperative bile leak ≥grade B, severe morbidity, readmission, and 90-day or in-hospital mortality with the presence of an R0 resection margin in case of malignancy. The absence of a prolonged length of stay was added to define TOLS+. RESULTS: Among the 10.075 included patients, 1.507 underwent RLS and 8.568 LLS. After propensity score matching, both groups constituted 1.505 patients. RLS was associated with higher rates of TOLS (78.3% vs 71.8%, P < 0.001) and TOLS+ (55% vs 50.4%, P = 0.026), less Pringle usage (39.1% vs 47.1%, P < 0.001), blood loss (100 vs 200 milliliters, P < 0.001), transfusions (4.9% vs 7.9%, P = 0.003), conversions (2.7% vs 8.8%, P < 0.001), overall morbidity (19.3% vs 25.7%, P < 0.001), and microscopically irradical resection margins (10.1% vs. 13.8%, P = 0.015), and shorter operative times (190 vs 210 minutes, P = 0.015). In the subgroups, RLS tended to have higher TOLS rates, compared with LLS, for minor resections in the posterosuperior segments (n = 431 per group, 75.9% vs 71.2%, P = 0.184) and major resections (n = 321 per group, 72.9% vs 67.5%, P = 0.086), although these differences did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: While both produce excellent outcomes, RLS might facilitate slightly higher TOLS rates than LLS.

Model to predict major complications following liver resection for HCC in patients with metabolic syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome (MS) is rapidly growing as risk factor for HCC. Liver resection for HCC in patients with MS is associated with increased postoperative risks. There are no data on factors associated with postoperative complications. AIMS: The aim was to identify risk factors and develop and validate a model for postoperative major morbidity after liver resection for HCC in patients with MS, using a large multicentric Western cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The univariable logistic regression analysis was applied to select predictive factors for 90 days major morbidity. The model was built on the multivariable regression and presented as a nomogram. Performance was evaluated by internal validation through the bootstrap method. The predictive discrimination was assessed through the concordance index. RESULTS: A total of 1087 patients were gathered from 24 centers between 2001 and 2021. Four hundred and eighty-four patients (45.2%) were obese. Most liver resections were performed using an open approach (59.1%), and 743 (68.3%) underwent minor hepatectomies. Three hundred and seventy-six patients (34.6%) developed postoperative complications, with 13.8% major morbidity and 2.9% mortality rates. Seven hundred and thirteen patients had complete data and were included in the prediction model. The model identified obesity, diabetes, ischemic heart disease, portal hypertension, open approach, major hepatectomy, and changes in the nontumoral parenchyma as risk factors for major morbidity. The model demonstrated an AUC of 72.8% (95% CI: 67.2%-78.2%) ( https://childb.shinyapps.io/NomogramMajorMorbidity90days/ ). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing liver resection for HCC and MS are at high risk of postoperative major complications and death. Careful patient selection, considering baseline characteristics, liver function, and type of surgery, is key to achieving optimal outcomes.

Distinct Indications for Adjuvant Therapy in Resected Invasive Mucinous Cystic Neoplasms of the Pancreas Compared with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Surgical and adjuvant management of mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCNs) lacks formal guidelines and data is limited to institutional studies. Factors associated with receipt of adjuvant therapy and any associated impact on survival remain to be clarified. In the absence of other data, guidelines that recommend adjuvant chemotherapy for invasive pancreatic adenocarcinoma have been extrapolated to MCN. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The National Cancer Database (2004-2019) was utilized to identify all patients that underwent pancreatic resection for invasive MCNs. Patients that received neoadjuvant therapy or did not undergo lymphadenectomy were excluded. Patient, tumor, and treatment factors associated with survival were assessed. RESULTS: For 161 patients with invasive MCN, median overall survival (OS) was 133 months and 45% of patients received adjuvant therapy. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that poorly differentiated tumors [odds ratio (OR) 4.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.47-11.98; p = 0.008] and positive lymph node status (OR 2.67, 95% CI 1.02-6.98; p = 0.042) were independent predictors of receiving adjuvant therapy. Lymph node positivity [hazard ratio (HR) 2.90, 95% CI 1.47-5.73; p = 0.002], positive margins (HR 5.28, 95% CI 2.28-12.27; p < 0.001), and stage III disease (HR 12.46, 95% CI 1.40-111.05; p = 0.024) were associated with worse OS. Receipt of adjuvant systemic therapy was independently associated with decreased risk of mortality in node positive patients (HR 0.23, 95% CI 0.10-0.69; p = 0.002). Survival was not associated with adjuvant therapy in patients with negative lymph nodes or margin negative status. CONCLUSION: In contrast to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), where adjuvant therapy improves OS for every tumor stage, surgery alone for invasive MCN is not associated with improved OS compared with surgery plus adjuvant therapy in node-negative patients. Surgery alone is likely sufficient for a subset of invasive MCN.

Long-Duration Neoadjuvant Therapy with FOLFIRINOX Yields Favorable Outcomes for Patients Who Undergo Surgery for Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In 2023 alone, it's estimated that over 64,000 patients will be diagnosed with PDAC and more than 50,000 patients will die of the disease. Current guidelines recommend neoadjuvant therapy for patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced PDAC, and data is emerging on its role in resectable disease. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may increase the number of patients able to receive complete chemotherapy regimens, increase the rate of microscopically tumor-free resection (R0) margin, and aide in identifying unfavorable tumor biology. To date, this is the largest study to examine surgical outcomes after long-duration neoadjuvant chemotherapy for PDAC. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of single-institution data. RESULTS: The routine use of long-duration therapy in our study (median cycles: FOLFIRINOX = 10; gemcitabine-based = 7) is unique. The majority (85%) of patients received FOLFIRINOX without radiation therapy; the R0 resection rate was 76%. Median OS was 41 months and did not differ significantly among patients with resectable, borderline-resectable, or locally advanced disease. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that in patients who undergo surgical resection after receipt of long-duration neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX therapy alone, survival outcomes are similar regardless of pretreatment resectability status and that favorable surgical outcomes can be attained.

The Five Periampullary Cancers, not Just Different Siblings but Different Families: An International Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer arising in the periampullary region can be anatomically classified in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA), duodenal adenocarcinoma (DAC), and ampullary carcinoma. Based on histopathology, ampullary carcinoma is currently subdivided in intestinal (AmpIT), pancreatobiliary (AmpPB), and mixed subtypes. Despite close anatomical resemblance, it is unclear how ampullary subtypes relate to the remaining periampullary cancers in tumor characteristics and behavior. METHODS: This international cohort study included patients after curative intent resection for periampullary cancer retrieved from 44 centers (from Europe, United States, Asia, Australia, and Canada) between 2010 and 2021. Preoperative CA19-9, pathology outcomes and 8-year overall survival were compared between DAC, AmpIT, AmpPB, dCCA, and PDAC. RESULTS: Overall, 3809 patients were analyzed, including 348 DAC, 774 AmpIT, 848 AmpPB, 1,036 dCCA, and 803 PDAC. The highest 8-year overall survival was found in patients with AmpIT and DAC (49.8% and 47.9%), followed by AmpPB (34.9%, P < 0.001), dCCA (26.4%, P = 0.020), and finally PDAC (12.9%, P < 0.001). A better survival was correlated with lower CA19-9 levels but not with tumor size, as DAC lesions showed the largest size. CONCLUSIONS: Despite close anatomic relations of the five periampullary cancers, this study revealed differences in preoperative blood markers, pathology, and long-term survival. More tumor characteristics are shared between DAC and AmpIT and between AmpPB and dCCA than between the two ampullary subtypes. Instead of using collective definitions for "periampullary cancers" or anatomical classification, this study emphasizes the importance of individual evaluation of each histopathological subtype with the ampullary subtypes as individual entities in future studies.

A Novel Machine Learning Approach to Predict Textbook Outcome in Colectomy.

BACKGROUND: Several calculators exist to predict risk of postoperative complications. However, in low-risk procedures such as colectomy, a tool to determine the probability of achieving the ideal outcome could better aid clinical decision-making, especially for high-risk patients. A textbook outcome is a composite measure that serves as a surrogate for the ideal surgical outcome. OBJECTIVE: To identify the most important factors for predicting textbook outcomes in patients with nonmetastatic colon cancer undergoing colectomy and to create a textbook outcome decision support tool using machine learning algorithms. DESIGN: This was a retrospective analysis study. SETTINGS: Data were collected from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. PATIENTS: Adult patients undergoing elective colectomy for nonmetastatic colon cancer (2014-2020) were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Textbook outcome was the main outcome, defined as no mortality, no 30-day readmission, no postoperative complications, no 30-day reinterventions, and a hospital length of stay of ≤5 days. Four models (logistic regression, decision tree, random forest, and eXtreme Gradient Boosting) were trained and validated. Ultimately, a web-based calculator was developed as proof of concept for clinical application. RESULTS: A total of 20,498 patients who underwent colectomy for nonmetastatic colon cancer were included. Overall, textbook outcome was achieved in 66% of patients. Textbook outcome was more frequently achieved after robotic colectomy (77%), followed by laparoscopic colectomy (68%) and open colectomy (39%, p < 0.001). eXtreme Gradient Boosting was the best performing model (area under the curve = 0.72). The top 5 preoperative variables to predict textbook outcome were surgical approach, patient age, preoperative hematocrit, preoperative oral antibiotic bowel preparation, and patient sex. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective nature of the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Using textbook outcome as the preferred outcome may be a useful tool in relatively low-risk procedures such as colectomy, and the proposed web-based calculator may aid surgeons in preoperative evaluation and counseling, especially for high-risk patients. See Video Abstract . UN NUEVO ENFOQUE DE APRENDIZAJE AUTOMTICO PARA PREDECIR EL RESULTADO DE LOS LIBROS DE TEXTO EN COLECTOMA: ANTECEDENTES:Existen varias calculadoras para predecir el riesgo de complicaciones posoperatorias. Sin embargo, en procedimientos de bajo riesgo como la colectomía, una herramienta para determinar la probabilidad de lograr el resultado ideal podría ayudar mejor a la toma de decisiones clínicas, especialmente para pacientes de alto riesgo. Un resultado de libro de texto es una medida compuesta que sirve como sustituto del resultado quirúrgico ideal.OBJETIVO:Identificar los factores más importantes para predecir el resultado de los libros de texto en pacientes con cáncer de colon no metastásico sometidos a colectomía y crear una herramienta de apoyo a la toma de decisiones sobre los resultados de los libros de texto utilizando algoritmos de aprendizaje automático.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio de análisis retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Los datos se obtuvieron de la base de datos del Programa Nacional de Mejora de la Calidad del Colegio Americano de Cirujanos.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes adultos sometidos a colectomía electiva por cáncer de colon no metastásico (2014-2020).MEDIDAS PRINCIPALES DE RESULTADO:El resultado de los libros de texto fue el resultado principal, definido como ausencia de mortalidad, reingreso a los 30 días, complicaciones posoperatorias, reintervenciones a los 30 días y una estancia hospitalaria ≤5 días. Se entrenaron y validaron cuatro modelos (regresión logística, árbol de decisión, bosque aleatorio y XGBoost). Finalmente, se desarrolló una calculadora basada en la web como prueba de concepto para su aplicación clínica.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron un total de 20.498 pacientes sometidos a colectomía por cáncer de colon no metastásico. En general, el resultado de los libros de texto se logró en el 66% de los pacientes. Los resultados de los libros de texto se lograron con mayor frecuencia después de la colectomía robótica (77%), seguida de la colectomía laparoscópica (68%) y la colectomía abierta (39%) (p<0,001). XGBoost fue el modelo con mejor rendimiento (AUC=0,72). Los cinco principales variables preoperatorias para predecir el resultado en los libros de texto fueron el abordaje quirúrgico, la edad del paciente, el hematocrito preoperatorio, la preparación intestinal con antibióticos orales preoperatorios y el sexo femenino.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por la naturaleza retrospectiva del análisis.CONCLUSIONES:El uso de los resultados de los libros de texto como resultado preferido puede ser una herramienta útil en procedimientos de riesgo relativamente bajo, como la colectomía, y la calculadora basada en la web propuesta puede ayudar a los cirujanos en la evaluación y el asesoramiento preoperatorios, especialmente para pacientes de alto riesgo. (Traducción-Yesenia Rojas-Khalil ).

Instrument and Supply Variability: An Opportunity to Reduce the Carbon Footprint of the Operating Room.

INTRODUCTION: Reducing costs and carbon footprints are important, parallel priorities for the US health-care system. Within surgery, reducing the number of instruments that are sterilized and disposable supplies that are used for each operation may help achieve both goals. We wanted to measure the existing variability in surgical instrument and supply choices and assess whether standardization could have a meaningful cost and environmental impact. METHODS: We analyzed surgeon preference cards for common general surgery operations at our hospital to measure the number of sterilizable instrument trays and supplies used by each surgeon for each operation. From this data, we calculated supply costs, carbon footprint, and median operative time and studied the variability in each of these metrics. RESULTS: Among the ten operations studied, variability in sterilizable instrument trays requested on surgeon preference cards ranged from one to eight. Variability in disposable supplies requested ranged from 17 to 45. Variability in open supply costs ranged from $104 to $4184. Variability in carbon footprint ranged from 17 to 708 kg CO2e. If the highest-cost surgeon for each operation switched their preference card to that of the median-cost surgeon, $245,343 in open supply costs and 41,708 kg CO2e could be saved. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant variability in the instrument and supply choices of surgeons performing common general surgery operations. Standardizing this variability may lead to meaningful cost savings and carbon footprint reduction, especially if scaled across the entire health system.

Impact of safety-net hospital burden on achievement of textbook oncologic outcomes following resection in for stage I-IV colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Textbook oncologic outcome (TOO) is a benchmark for high-quality surgical cancer care but has not been studied at safety-net hospitals (SNH). The study sought to understand how SNH burden affects TOO achievement in colorectal cancer. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for colorectal cancer patients who underwent resection for stage I-III plus stage IV with liver-only metastases (2010-2019). TOO was defined as R0 resection, AJCC-compliant lymphadenectomy (>12 nodes), no prolonged LOS, no 30-day mortality/readmission, and receipt of stage-appropriate adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: Of 487,195 patients, 66.7% achieved TOO. Lower achievement was explained by adequate lymphadenectomy (87.3%), non-prolonged LOS (76.3%), and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage III (60.3%) and IV (54.1%). Treatment at high burden hospitals (HBH, >10% Medicaid/uninsured) was a predictor of non-TOO (Stage I/II: OR 0.83, III: OR 0.86, IV: OR 0.83; all p < 0.001). Achieving TOO was associated with decreased mortality (Stage I/II: HR 0.49, III: HR 0.48, IV: HR 0.57; all p < 0.001), and HBH treatment was a predictor of mortality (Stage I/II: HR 1.09, III: HR 1.05, IV: HR 1.07; all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment at higher SNH burden hospitals was associated with less frequent TOO achievement and increased mortality. Quality improvement targets include receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy and avoidance of prolonged LOS.

Robotic technology in surgery; a classification system of soft tissue surgical robotic devices.

BACKGROUND: The field of robotic-assisted surgery is rapidly growing as many robotic surgical devices are in development and about to enter the market. Currently, there is no universally accepted language for labeling the different robotic systems. To facilitate this communication, we created what is, to our knowledge, the first classification of surgical robotic technologies that organizes and classifies surgical robots used for endoscopy, laparoscopy and thoracoscopy. METHODS: We compiled a list of surgical robots intended to be used for endoscopy, laparoscopy, and/or thoracoscopy by searching United States, European, Hong Kong, Japan, and Korean databases for approved devices. Devices showcased at the 2023 Annual Meeting for the Society of Robotic Surgery were added. We also systematically reviewed the literature for any existing surgical robotic classifications or categorizations. We then created a multidisciplinary committee of 8 surgeons and 2 engineers to construct a proposed classification of the devices included in our search. RESULTS: We identified 40 robotic surgery systems intended to be used for endoscopy, laparoscopy and/or thoracoscopy. The proposed classification organizes robotic devices with regard to architecture, port design, and configuration (modular carts, multi-arm integrated cart, table-attachable or arm-table integration). CONCLUSION: This 3-level classification of robotic surgical devices used for endoscopy, laparoscopy and/or thoracoscopy describes important characteristics of robotic devices systematically.

LapBot-Safe Chole: validation of an artificial intelligence-powered mobile game app to teach safe cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Gaming can serve as an educational tool to allow trainees to practice surgical decision-making in a low-stakes environment. LapBot is a novel free interactive mobile game application that uses artificial intelligence (AI) to provide players with feedback on safe dissection during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). This study aims to provide validity evidence for this mobile game. METHODS: Trainees and surgeons participated by downloading and playing LapBot on their smartphone. Players were presented with intraoperative LC scenes and required to locate their preferred location of dissection of the hepatocystic triangle. They received immediate accuracy scores and personalized feedback using an AI algorithm ("GoNoGoNet") that identifies safe/dangerous zones of dissection. Player scores were assessed globally and across training experience using non-parametric ANOVA. Three-month questionnaires were administered to assess the educational value of LapBot. RESULTS: A total of 903 participants from 64 countries played LapBot. As game difficulty increased, average scores (p < 0.0001) and confidence levels (p < 0.0001) decreased significantly. Scores were significantly positively correlated with players' case volume (p = 0.0002) and training level (p = 0.0003). Most agreed that LapBot should be incorporated as an adjunct into training programs (64.1%), as it improved their ability to reflect critically on feedback they receive during LC (47.5%) or while watching others perform LC (57.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Serious games, such as LapBot, can be effective educational tools for deliberate practice and surgical coaching by promoting learner engagement and experiential learning. Our study demonstrates that players' scores were correlated to their level of expertise, and that after playing the game, most players perceived a significant educational value.

Online videos of robotic-assisted cholecystectomies: more harm than good?

BACKGROUND: Many surgeons use online videos to learn. However, these videos vary in content, quality, and educational value. In the setting of recent work questioning the safety of robotic-assisted cholecystectomies, we aimed (1) to identify highly watched online videos of robotic-assisted cholecystectomies, (2) to determine whether these videos demonstrate suboptimal techniques, and (3) to compare videos based on platform. METHODS: Two authors searched YouTube and a members-only Facebook group to identify highly watched videos of robotic-assisted cholecystectomies. Three members of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons Safe Cholecystectomy Task Force then reviewed videos in random order. These three members rated each video using Sanford and Strasberg's six-point criteria for critical view of safety (CVS) scoring and the Parkland grading scale for cholecystitis. We performed regression to determine any association between Parkland grade and CVS score. We also compared scores between the YouTube and Facebook videos using a t test. RESULTS: We identified 50 videos of robotic-assisted cholecystectomies, including 25 from YouTube and 25 from Facebook. Of the 50 videos, six demonstrated a top-down approach. The remaining 44 videos received a mean of 2.4 of 6 points for the CVS score (SD = 1.8). Overall, 4 of the 50 videos (8%) received a passing CVS score of 5 or 6. Videos received a mean of 2.4 of 5 points for the Parkland grade (SD = 0.9). Videos on YouTube had lower CVS scores than videos on Facebook (1.9 vs. 2.8, respectively), though this difference was not significant (p = 0.09). By regression, there was no association between Parkland grade and CVS score (p = 0.13). CONCLUSION: Publicly available and closed-group online videos of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy demonstrated inadequate dissection and may be of limited educational value. Future work should center on introducing measures to identify and feature videos with high-quality techniques most useful to surgeons.

Advancing minimally invasive hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery: ensuring safety with implementation.

BACKGROUND: Although minimally invasive hepato-pancreato-biliary (MIS HPB) surgery can be performed with good outcomes, there are currently no standardized requirements for centers or surgeons who wish to implement MIS HPB surgery. The aim of this study was to create a consensus statement regarding safe dissemination and implementation of MIS HPB surgical programs. METHODS: Sixteen key questions regarding safety in MIS HPB surgery were generated after a focused literature search and iterative review by three field experts. Participants for the working group were then selected using sequential purposive sampling and snowball techniques. Review of the 16 questions took place over a single 2-h meeting. The senior author facilitated the session, and a modified nominal group technique was used. RESULTS: Twenty three surgeons were in attendance. All participants agreed or strongly agreed that formal guidelines should exist for both institutions and individual surgeons interested in implementing MIS HPB surgery and that routine monitoring and reporting of institutional and surgeon technical outcomes should be performed. Regarding volume cutoffs, most participants (91%) agreed or strongly agreed that a minimum annual institutional volume cutoff for complex MIS HPB surgery, such as major hepatectomy or pancreaticoduodenectomy, should exist. A smaller proportion (74%) agreed or strongly agreed that a minimum annual surgeon volume requirement should exist. The majority of participants agreed or strongly agreed that surgeons were responsible for defining (100%) and enforcing (78%) guidelines to ensure the overall safety of MIS HPB programs. Finally, formal MIS HPB training, minimum case volume requirements, institutional support and infrastructure, and mandatory collection of outcomes data were all recognized as important aspects of safe implementation of MIS HPB surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Safe implementation of MIS HPB surgery requires a thoughtful process that incorporates structured training, sufficient volume and expertise, a proper institutional ecosystem, and monitoring of outcomes.

The joy of surgery: how surgeons experience joy, time, and support.

BACKGROUND: Burnout is a crisis in medicine, and especially in surgery it has serious implications not only for physician well-being but also for patient outcomes. This study builds on previous SAGES Reimagining the Practice of Surgery Task Force work to better understand how organizations might intervene to increase the "joy in surgery." METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, descriptive study utilizing a REDCap survey with closed-ended questions for data collection across 5 domains: facilitators of joy, support for best work, time for work tasks, barriers to joy, and what they would do with more time. We calculated average scores and "percentage of respondents giving a high score" for each item. RESULTS: There were 307 individuals who started the survey; 223 completed it and were surgeons who met the inclusion criteria. The majority (85.7%) were trained in general surgery, regardless of sub-specialty. Surgeons found joy in operating and its technical skills, curing disease, patient relationships, and working with a good team. They reported usually having what they needed to deliver care. A majority felt valued and respected. Most were dissatisfied with reimbursement, perceiving it as unfair. The most commonly worked range of hours was 51-70 per week. They reported having little time for paperwork and documentation, and if they had more time, they would spend it with friends and family. CONCLUSION: Organizations should consider interventions to address the operative environment, provide appropriate staff support, and foster good teamwork. They can also consider interventions that alleviate time pressures and administrative burden while at the same time promoting sustainable workloads.

Advancing minimally invasive hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery: barriers to adoption and equitable access.

BACKGROUND: Despite a growing body of literature supporting the safety of robotic hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) procedures, the adoption of minimally invasive techniques in HPB surgery has been slow compared to other specialties. We aimed to identify barriers to implementing robotic assisted surgery (RAS) in HPB and present a framework that highlights opportunities to improve adoption. METHODS: A modified nominal group technique guided by a 13-question framework was utilized. The meeting session was guided by senior authors, and field notes were also collected. Results were reviewed and free text responses were analyzed for major themes. A follow-up priority setting survey was distributed to all participants based on meeting results. RESULTS: Twenty three surgeons with varying robotic HPB experience from different practice settings participated in the discussion. The majority of surgeons identified operating room efficiency, having a dedicated operating room team, and the overall hospital culture and openness to innovation as important facilitators of implementing a RAS program. In contrast, cost, capacity building, disparities/risk of regionalization, lack of evidence, and time/effort were identified as the most significant barriers. When asked to prioritize the most important issues to be addressed, participants noted access and availability of the robot as the most important issue, followed by institutional support, cost, quality of supporting evidence, and need for robotic training. CONCLUSIONS: This study reports surgeons' perceptions of major barriers to equitable access and increased implementation of robotic HPB surgery. To overcome such barriers, defining key resources, adopting innovative solutions, and developing better methods of collecting long term data should be the top priorities.