Complexity and Experience Grading to Guide Patient Selection for Minimally-invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: An ISGPS Consensus.

OBJECTIVE: The ISGPS aims to develop a universally accepted complexity and experience grading system to guide the safe implementation of robotic and laparoscopic minimally-invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD). BACKGROUND: Despite the perceived advantages of MIPD, its global adoption has been slow due to the inherent complexity of the procedure and challenges to acquiring surgical experience. Its wider adoption must be undertaken with an emphasis towards appropriate patient selection according to adequate surgeon and center experience. METHODS: The ISGPS developed a complexity and experience grading system to guide patient selection for MIPD based on an evidence-based review and a series of discussions. RESULTS: The ISGPS complexity and experience grading system for MIPD is subclassified into patient-related risk factors and provider experience-related variables. The patient-related risk factors include anatomical (main pancreatic and common bile duct diameters), tumor-specific (vascular contact), and conditional (obesity and previous complicated upper abdominal surgery/disease) factors, all incorporated in an A-B-C classification, graded as no, a single, and multiple risk factors. The surgeon and center experience-related variables include surgeon total MIPD experience (cut-offs 40 and 80) and center annual MIPD volume (cut-offs 10 and 30), all also incorporated in an A-B-C classification. CONCLUSION: This ISGPS complexity and experience grading system for robotic and laparoscopic MIPD may enable surgeons to optimally select patients after duly considering specific risk factors known to influence the complexity of the procedure. This grading system will likely allow for a thoughtful and stepwise implementation of MIPD and facilitate a fair comparison of outcome between centers and countries.

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.

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 gender influences surgeons' experiences.

INTRODUCTION: Burnout in medicine is an epidemic, and surgeons are not immune. Studies often focus on negative factors leading to burnout, with less emphasis on optimizing joy. The purpose of this study, conducted by the SAGES Reimagining the Practice of Surgery Task Force, was to explore how gender may influence surgeon well-being to better inform organizational change. METHODS: The study team developed a survey with the domains: facilitators of joy, support for best work, time for work tasks, barriers to joy, and what they would do with more time. The survey was emailed to 5777 addresses on the SAGES distribution list. Results were analyzed by calculating summary statistics. RESULTS: 223 surgeons completed the survey; 62.3% identified as men, 32.3% as women, and 5.4% did not indicate gender. Female compared to male respondents were younger (41.6 vs 52.5 years) and had practiced for fewer years (8.4 vs 19.4 years). The three greatest differences in facilitators of joy were being a leader in the field, leading clinical teams, and teaching, with a > 10 percentage point difference between men/women rating these highly (score of ≥ 8). Women generally perceived less support from their institutions than men. The greatest gender difference was in support for teaching, with 52.8% of men rating this highly compared to 30.2% of women. Only 52% of women felt respected by coworkers most of the time compared to 68.3% of men. Most (96.0%) respondents (men 95.7% and women 98.6%) reported wanting more time with family and friends. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the complexity of the personal and professional factors that influence joy in surgery, highlight gender differences that impact joy and suggests opportunities for improved gender-based support. These results can inform potential organization-level changes and further research to better understand emerging differences in joy across gender identities.

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.

A cross sectional survey on burnout and career satisfaction in surgeons: a joint work from the SAGES quality, outcomes, and safety and reimaging the practice of surgery burnout task forces.

INTRODUCTION: The growth of surgeon burnout is of significant concern. As we work to reimagine the practice of surgery, an accurate understanding of the extent of surgeon burnout is essential. Our goal was to define the current prevalence of burnout and quality of life (QOL) among SAGES surgeons. METHODOLOGY: An electronic survey was administered to SAGES members to establish a current baseline for QOL, burnout, depression, and career satisfaction. To assess outcomes, we utilized the validated Maslach Burnout Inventory for Medical Personnel, the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form, and the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders. All scoring followed validated norm-based methods. RESULTS: Of 4194 active members, 604 responded (14.40%). 69% met burnout threshold, with high levels of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, and low personal accomplishment. 81% reported "being at the end of their rope", 74% felt emotionally drained, and 65% felt used up daily. Nearly all maintained caring about what happened to their patients (96%), easily understanding how their patients feel (84.3%) and being capable of dealing effectively with their patient's problems (87.6%). However, respondents never, rarely, or occasionally felt energetic (77.5%) or experienced a sense of professional accomplishment (57.8%). The overall QOL score was 69/100, with lower Mental than Physical scores (62.69 (SD 10.20) vs.77.27 (SD 22.24)). More than half of respondents met depression criteria. While 77% supported they would become a physician again, less than half would choose surgery again or recommend surgery to their children. Furthermore, less than a third felt work allowed sufficient time for their personal lives. CONCLUSIONS: Participating SAGES surgeons reported alarmingly high rates of burnout and depression. Despite experiencing emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, they maintained a strong commitment to patient care. These findings likely reflect the broader state of surgeons, underscoring the urgent need for action to address this critical issue.

Intraductal papillary neoplasms of the bile ducts: a comparative study of a rare disease in Europe and Nagoya, Japan.

BACKGROUND: Intraductal papillary neoplasm of the bile ducts (IPNB) is a rare disease in Western countries. The aim of this study was to compare tumor characteristics, management strategies, and outcomes between Western and Eastern patients who underwent surgical resection for IPNB. METHODS: A multi-institutional retrospective series of patients with IPNB undergoing surgery between January 2010 and December 2020 was gathered under the auspices of the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (E-AHPBA), and at Nagoya University Hospital, Japan. RESULTS: A total of 85 patients (51% male; median age 66 years) from 28 E-AHPBA centers were compared to 91 patients (64% male; median age 71 years) from Nagoya. Patients in Europe had more multiple lesions (23% vs 2%, P < .001), less invasive carcinoma (42% vs 85%, P < .001), and more intrahepatic tumors (52% vs 24%, P < .001) than in Nagoya. Patients in Europe experienced less 90-day grade >3 Clavien-Dindo complications (33% vs 68%, P < .001), but higher 90-day mortality rate (7.0% vs 0%, P = .03). R0 resections (81% vs 82%) were similar. Overall survival, excluding 90-day postoperative deaths, was similar in both regions. DISCUSSION: Despite performing more extensive resections, the low perioperative mortality rate observed in Nagoya was probably influenced by a combination of patient-, tumor-, and surgery-related factors.

Incidence and outcomes of postoperative fluid collections after minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy without placement of surgical drain. A prospective observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: There is uncertainty about the role of prophylactic intra-abdominal drains after distal pancreatectomy. In the present study, we aimed to describe the long-term outcomes of postoperative pancreatic collections in patients who underwent a minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) without surgical drain placement. METHODS: From 2018 to 2022, consecutive patients who underwent a MIDP were recorded. Patients were followed at 90 days, 6 months, and in the long term. The use of interventional procedures and antibiotic therapy were documented, and the overall evolution of the collections was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients underwent MIDP; 11 were excluded; 80 were analyzed. Median age was 63 (51-73) years; 61.3% were women. Most lesions (71.3%) were malignant; 15 patients received neoadjuvant therapy. Procedures were laparoscopic (87.5%) or robotic (12.5%). Incidence of postoperative pancreatic collections was 33%; 10 patients were symptomatic. Interventional endoscopic (n = 3) or percutaneous (n = 3) procedures were required. At a follow-up of 24 (17.5-33.1) months, 18 collections resolved completely, eight partially, and one increased. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo MIDP without surgical drain placement develop well-tolerated pancreatic collections. Although a minority may require endoscopic or percutaneous drainage, the majority can be managed conservatively and resolve spontaneously in the long term.

Autogenic splenic implantation versus splenectomy in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy for benign or low-grade malignant lesions of the distal pancreas: study protocol for a multicentre, open-label, randomized controlled trial (RESTORE).

BACKGROUND: The spleen plays a significant role in the clearance of circulating microorganisms. Sequelae of splenectomy, especially immunodeficiency, can have a deleterious effect on a patient's health and even lead to death. Hence, splenectomy should be avoided and spleen preservation during elective surgery has become a treatment goal. However, this cannot be achieved in every patient due to intraoperative technical difficulties or oncological reasons. Autogenic splenic implantation (ASI) is currently the only possible way to preserve splenic function when a splenectomy is necessary. Experience largely stems from trauma patients with a splenic rupture. Splenic immune function can be measured by the body's clearing capacity of encapsulated bacteria. The aim of this study is to assess the splenic immune function after ASI was performed during minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robotic) distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy. METHODS: This is the protocol for a multicentre, randomized, open-labelled trial. Thirty participants with benign or low-grade malignant lesions of the distal pancreas requiring minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy will be allocated to either additional intraoperative ASI (intervention) or no further intervention (control). An additional 15 patients who will undergo spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy serve as the control group with normal splenic function. Six months postoperatively, after assumed restoration of splenic function, patients will be given a Salmonella typhi (Typhim Vi™) vaccine. The Salmonella typhi vaccine is a polysaccharide vaccine. The specific antibody titres immediately before and 4 to 6 weeks after vaccination will be measured. The ratio between pre- and post-vaccination antibody count is the primary outcome measure and secondary outcome measures include intraoperative details, length of hospital stay, 30-day mortality and morbidity. DISCUSSION: This study will investigate the splenic immune function of patients who undergo ASI during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy. The splenic immune function will be measured using the surrogate outcome of specific antibody titre after vaccination with a Salmonella typhi vaccine. The results will reveal details about splenic function after ASI and guide further treatment options for patients when a splenectomy cannot be avoided. It might eventually lead to a new standard of care making sometimes more demanding and time-consuming spleen-preserving procedures redundant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trials Number (ISRCTN) ISRCTN10171587. Prospectively registered on 18 February 2019.

REDISCOVER guidelines for borderline-resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer: management algorithm, unanswered questions, and future perspectives.

The REDISCOVER guidelines present 34 recommendations for the selection and perioperative care of borderline-resectable (BR-PDAC) and locally advanced ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (LA-PDAC). These guidelines represent a significant shift from previous approaches, prioritizing tumor biology over anatomical features as the primary indication for resection. Condensed herein, they provide a practical management algorithm for clinical practice. However, the guidelines also highlight the need to redefine LA-PDAC to align with modern treatment strategies and to solve some contradictions within the current definition, such as grouping "difficult" and "impossible" to resect tumors together. Furthermore, the REDISCOVER guidelines highlight several areas requiring urgent research. These include the resection of the superior mesenteric artery, the management strategies for patients with LA-PDAC who are fit for surgery but unable to receive multi-agent neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the approach to patients with LA-PDAC who are fit for surgery but demonstrate high serum Ca 19.9 levels even after neoadjuvant treatment, and the optimal timing and number of chemotherapy cycles prior to surgery. Additionally, the role of primary chemoradiotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in LA-PDAC, the timing of surgical resection post-neoadjuvant/primary chemoradiotherapy, the efficacy of ablation therapies, and the management of oligometastasis in patients with LA-PDAC warrant investigation. Given the limited evidence for many issues, refining existing management strategies is imperative. The establishment of the REDISCOVER registry ( https://rediscover.unipi.it/ ) offers promise of a unified research platform to advance understanding and improve the management of BR-PDAC and LA-PDAC.

Prophylactic abdominal drainage after distal pancreatectomy (PANDORINA): an international, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic passive abdominal drainage is standard practice after distal pancreatectomy. This approach aims to mitigate the consequences of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) but its added value, especially in patients at low risk of POPF, is currently being debated. We aimed to assess the non-inferiority of a no-drain policy in patients after distal pancreatectomy. METHODS: In this international, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older undergoing open or minimally invasive elective distal pancreatectomy for all indications in 12 centres in the Netherlands and Italy. We excluded patients with an American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical status of 4-5 or WHO performance status of 3-4, added by amendment following the death of a patient with ASA 4 due to a pre-existing cardiac condition. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) intraoperatively by permuted blocks (size four to eight) to either no drain or prophylactic passive drain placement, stratified by annual centre volume (<40 or ≥40 distal pancreatectomies) and low risk or high risk of grade B or C POPF. High-risk was defined as a pancreatic duct of more than 3 mm in diameter, a pancreatic thickness at the neck of more than 19 mm, or both, based on the Distal Pancreatectomy Fistula Risk Score. Other patients were considered low-risk. The primary outcome was the rate of major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score ≥III), and the most relevant secondary outcome was grade B or C POPF, grading per the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery. Outcomes were assessed up to 90 days postoperatively and analysed in the intention-to-treat population and per-protocol population, which only included patients who received the allocated treatment. A prespecified non-inferiority margin of 8% was compared with the upper limit of the two-sided 95% CI (Wald) of unadjusted risk difference to assess non-inferiority. This trial is closed and registered in the Netherlands Trial Registry, NL9116. FINDINGS: Between Oct 3, 2020, and April 28, 2023, 376 patients were screened for eligibility and 282 patients were randomly assigned to the no-drain group (n=138; 75 [54%] women and 63 [46%] men) or the drain group (n=144; 73 [51%] women and 71 [49%] men). Seven patients in the no-drain group received a drain intraoperatively; consequently, the per-protocol population included 131 patients in the no-drain group and 144 patients in the drain group. The rate of major morbidity was non-inferior in the no-drain group compared with the drain group in the intention-to-treat analysis (21 [15%] vs 29 [20%]; risk difference -4·9 percentage points [95% CI -13·8 to 4·0]; pnon-inferiority=0·0022) and the per-protocol analysis (21 [16%] vs 29 [20%]; risk difference -4·1 percentage points [-13·2 to 5·0]; pnon-inferiority=0·0045). Grade B or C POPF was observed in 16 (12%) patients in the no-drain group and in 39 (27%) patients in the drain group (risk difference -15·5 percentage points [95% CI -24·5 to -6·5]; pnon-inferiority<0·0001) in the intention-to-treat analysis. Three patients in the no-drain group died within 90 days; the cause of death in two was not considered related to the trial. The third death was a patient with an ASA score of 4 who died after sepsis and a watershed cerebral infarction at second admission, leading to multiple organ failure. No patients in the drain group died within 90 days. INTERPRETATION: A no-drain policy is safe in terms of major morbidity and reduced the detection of grade B or C POPF, and should be the new standard approach in eligible patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy. FUNDING: Ethicon UK (Johnson & Johnson Medical, Edinburgh, UK).

Cardiomiotomía por videotoracoscopía en acalasia esofágica grave / Cardiomiotomy by video thoracoscopy in severe esophageal achalasia

Se presenta el primer caso en nuestro país de acalasia operada por videotoracoscopía. Se siguió la técnica empleada por Pellegrini y Hasbún. El postoperatorio y la evolución de los primeros meses ha sido excelente a pesar de tratarse de un caso muy avanzado, grado III con dilataciones sacciformes. Para un equipo quirúrgico con experiencia en videotoracoscopía y en cirugía convencional de la acalasia, el procedimiento presentado es más simple y fácil de ejecutar. Hemos preferido la vía toracoscópica ya que no daña el ligamento freoeofágico; ello es necesario en la vía laparoscópica para poder efectuar la miotomía del esófago torácico distal. Es valioso, por lo menos en los primeros casos, la ayuda del endoscopio flexible, que permite identificar el esófago y señalar el límite de la mucosa esofágica y gástrica