Severity Grading Systems for Intraoperative Adverse Events. A Systematic Review of the Literature and Citation Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The accurate assessment and grading of adverse events (AE) is essential to ensure comparisons between surgical procedures and outcomes. The current lack of a standardized severity grading system may limit our understanding of the true morbidity attributed to AEs in surgery. The aim of this study is to review the prevalence in which intraoperative adverse event (iAE) severity grading systems are used in the literature, evaluate the strengths and limitations of these systems, and appraise their applicability in clinical studies. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were queried to yield all clinical studies reporting the proposal and/or the validation of iAE severity grading systems. Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched separately to identify the articles citing the systems to grade iAEs identified in the first search. RESULTS: Our search yielded 2957 studies, with 7 studies considered for the qualitative synthesis. Five studies considered only surgical/interventional iAEs, while 2 considered both surgical/interventional and anesthesiologic iAEs. Two included studies validated the iAE severity grading system prospectively. A total of 357 citations were retrieved, with an overall self/nonself-citation ratio of 0.17 (53/304). The majority of citing articles were clinical studies (44.1%). The average number of citations per year was 6.7 citations for each classification/severity system, with only 2.05 citations/year for clinical studies. Of the 158 clinical studies citing the severity grading systems, only 90 (56.9%) used them to grade the iAEs. The appraisal of applicability (mean%/median%) was below the 70% threshold in 3 domains: stakeholder involvement (46/47), clarity of presentation (65/67), and applicability (57/56). CONCLUSION: Seven severity grading systems for iAEs have been published in the last decade. Despite the importance of collecting and grading the iAEs, these systems are poorly adopted, with only a few studies per year using them. A uniform globally implemented severity grading system is needed to produce comparable data across studies and develop strategies to decrease iAEs, further improving patient safety.

Intraoperative leak test is associated with lower postoperative bleed rate in primary sleeve gastrectomy: a propensity matched analysis of primary and revision bariatric surgery using the MBSAQIP database.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal leaks after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) occur infrequently but lead to clinical and socioeconomic burden on patients. Surgeons perform intraoperative leak test (IOLT) via gastric tube or endoscopy to help prevent postoperative leaks. However, there is knowledge gap in the literature on effectiveness of IOLT during bariatric surgery. METHODS: In this observational cohort study using the 2015-2017 MBSAQIP database, we compared the outcomes in patients who received IOLT with those who did not during primary or revision RYGB and SG. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative leak. Secondary outcomes were procedure duration and the rates of 30-day postoperative bleed, readmission, reoperation and intervention. Propensity score matching was used to assemble cohorts of patients with similar baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Among 363,042 patients, 82% underwent IOLT. Four subgroups of patients who underwent operations with or without IOLT during primary RYGB (n = 13,756), primary SG (n = 110,810), revision RYGB (n = 1140), and revision SG (n = 5576) had similar propensity scores and were matched 1:1. Patients who underwent IOLT had similar postoperative leak rates compared to those who did not (Primary RYGB with IOLT 0.7% v. without IOLT 0.6%; Primary SG 0.4% v. 0.3%; Revision RYGB 2.3% v. 1.0%; Revision SG 1.1% v. 0.7%). In primary SG subgroup, patients who underwent IOLT had lower postoperative bleed rates (0.6% v. 0.8%, p = 0.002). In primary RYGB and SG subgroups, operations with IOLT were slightly longer. CONCLUSION: Postoperative leak rates after primary and revision bariatric surgery were low and similar irrespective of IOLT. Patients who had IOLT during primary SG had lower postoperative bleed rates. Current judgment as to whether to perform an IOLT leads to excellent outcomes, and thus, current practices should continue. However, one should consider an IOLT during primary SG, not necessarily to reduce leak rates but to help reduce postoperative bleeding occurrences.

System Factors Affecting Patient Safety in the OR: An Analysis of Safety Threats and Resiliency.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to determine the characteristics and frequency of intraoperative safety threats and resilience supports using a human factors measurement tool. BACKGROUND: Human factors analysis can provide insight into how system elements contribute to intraoperative adverse events. Empiric evidence on safety threats and resilience in surgical practice is lacking. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 24 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic general surgery at a single center in the Netherlands from May to November, 2017 was conducted. Video, audio, and patient physiologic data from all included procedures were obtained through a multichannel synchronized recording device. Trained analysts reviewed the recordings and coded safety threats and resilience supports. The codes were categorized into 1 of 6 categories (person, task, tools and technology, physical environment, organization, and external environment). RESULTS: A median of 14 safety threats [interquartile range (IQR) 11-16] and 12 resilience supports (IQR 11-16) were identified per case. Most safety threat codes (median 9, IQR 7-12) and resilience support codes (median 10, IQR 7-12) were classified in the person category. The organization category contained a median of 2 (IQR 1-2) safety threat codes and 2 (IQR 2-3) resilience support codes per case. The tools and technology category contributed a small number of safety threats (median 1 per case, IQR 0-1), but rarely provided resilience support. CONCLUSIONS: Through a detailed human factors analysis of elective laparoscopic general surgery cases, this study provided a quantitative analysis of the existing safety threats and resilience supports in a modern endoscopic operating room.

Non-technical skills and device-related interruptions in minimally invasive surgery.

BACKGROUND: Device-related interruptions in the operating room (OR) may create stress among health care providers and delays. Although non-technical skills (NTS) of the OR teams, such as situational awareness and communication, are expected to influence device-related interruptions, empirical data on this relationship are limited. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of 144 consecutive elective laparoscopic operations during 13 months. A data capture system called the OR Black Box® was used to characterize device-related interruptions, NTS, and distractions. Device-related interruptions were classified according to a priori established categories. Positive and negative NTS instances were identified according to validated measurement tools specific for nurses and surgeons. We assessed the relationship between NTS and device-related interruptions after adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 86 device-related interruptions occurred in 48 of 144 operations (33%). They were most frequently classified as device failure (54%) followed by improper assembly (19%) and disconnection (14%). Medians of 1 [interquartile range (IQR) 0-3] and 1 (IQR 0-2) negative NTS instance per operation were demonstrated by nurses and surgeons, respectively. Medians of 28 (IQR 15-38) and 40 (IQR 28-118) positive NTS instances per operation were demonstrated by nurses and surgeons. In a multivariable analysis, a higher frequency of negative NTS instances demonstrated by nurses was associated with device-related interruptions after risk adjustment (Odds Ratio 1.33, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In elective laparoscopic operations, an increased likelihood of device-related interruptions in the OR was associated with more frequent negative NTS demonstrations by nursing teams.

First-year Analysis of the Operating Room Black Box Study.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize intraoperative errors, events, and distractions, and measure technical skills of surgeons in minimally invasive surgery practice. BACKGROUND: Adverse events in the operating room (OR) are common contributors of morbidity and mortality in surgical patients. Adverse events often occur due to deviations in performance and environmental factors. Although comprehensive intraoperative data analysis and transparent disclosure have been advocated to better understand how to improve surgical safety, they have rarely been done. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study in 132 consecutive patients undergoing elective laparoscopic general surgery at an academic hospital during the first year after the definite implementation of a multiport data capture system called the OR Black Box to identify intraoperative errors, events, and distractions. Expert analysts characterized intraoperative distractions, errors, and events, and measured trainee involvement as main operator. Technical skills were compared, crude and risk-adjusted, among the attending surgeon and trainees. RESULTS: Auditory distractions occurred a median of 138 times per case [interquartile range (IQR) 96-190]. At least 1 cognitive distraction appeared in 84 cases (64%). Medians of 20 errors (IQR 14-36) and 8 events (IQR 4-12) were identified per case. Both errors and events occurred often in dissection and reconstruction phases of operation. Technical skills of residents were lower than those of the attending surgeon (P = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: During elective laparoscopic operations, frequent intraoperative errors and events, variation in surgeons' technical skills, and a high amount of environmental distractions were identified using the OR Black Box.

Nontechnical Skill Assessment of the Collective Surgical Team Using the Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons (NOTSS) System.

OBJECTIVE: To validate the Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons (NOTSS) system for assessment of the collective surgical teams' nontechnical skills after observing recordings of actual OR environment. BACKGROUND: The NOTSS system is a widely accepted tool to measure nontechnical skills of individual surgeons, and has mostly been used in the simulated setting. Surgical procedures are rarely performed by a single surgeon, but by a surgical team of attending surgeons, surgical assistants, and surgical trainees. Therefore, assessment of nontechnical skills may benefit from holistic assessment of the collective surgical teams. METHODS: Five trained participants assessed surgical team and attending surgeon using the NOTSS system after watching ten 20-minute long videos obtained from live OR. A set of reference ratings was provided by a multidisciplinary expert committee. We performed analyses to assess system sensitivity; examine inter-rater reliability of ratings; investigate concurrent construct validity; and assess feasibility and acceptability of using the NOTSS system to measure surgical team performance. RESULTS: There was adequate system sensitivity when comparing participants' and reference ratings. Inter-rater reliability among the participants' ratings was good except for decision-making category. The level of inter-rater reliability was similar when rating teams and attending surgeons. There was strong positive correlation between teams' and attending surgeons' NOTSS ratings at category [Pearson coefficient 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82-0.89] and element levels (0.83, 95% CI 0.80-0.85), demonstrating evidence of concurrent construct validity. The participants felt that the use of NOTSS system to measure teams' nontechnical skills was acceptable and feasible to a fair extent. CONCLUSION: The NOTSS system, although developed for assessment of individual surgeons, is a useful tool for observing and rating surgical teams.

Development and Evaluation of a Novel Instrument to Measure Severity of Intraoperative Events Using Video Data.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate a novel instrument to measure SEVERE processes using video data. BACKGROUND: Surgical video data can serve an important role in understanding the relationship between intraoperative events and postoperative outcomes. However, a standard tool to measure severity of intraoperative events is not yet available. METHODS: Items to be included in the instrument were identified through literature and video reviews. A committee of experts guided item reduction, including pilot tests and revisions, and determined weighted scores. Content validity was evaluated using a validated sensibility questionnaire. Inter-rater reliability was assessed by calculating intraclass correlation coefficient. Construct validity was evaluated on a sample of 120 patients who underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass procedure, in which comprehensive video data was obtained. RESULTS: SEVERE index measures severity of 5 event types using ordinal scales. Each intraoperative event is given a weighted score out of 10. Inter-rater reliability was excellent [0.87 (95%-confidence interval, 0.77-0.92)]. In a sample of consecutive 120 patients undergoing gastric bypass procedures, a median of 12 events [interquartile range (IQR) 9-18] occurred per patient and bleeding was the most frequent type (median 10, IQR 7-14). The median SEVERE score per case was 11.3 (IQR 8.3-16.9). In risk-adjusted multivariable regression models, history of previous abdominal surgery (P = 0.02) and body mass index (P = 0.005) were associated with SEVERE scores, demonstrating construct validity evidence. CONCLUSION: The SEVERE index may prove to be a useful instrument in identifying patients with high risk of developing postoperative complications.

Factors associated with surgeon's perception of distraction in the operating room.

BACKGROUND: Distractions in the operating room (OR) can create stress among surgeons and lead to higher chances of errors and adverse events. The objective is to determine intraoperative factors that are associated with surgeons' perception of distraction. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study in 265 consecutive patients undergoing elective laparoscopic general surgery during the 2 years after the implementation of a data capture system called the OR Black Box to identify intraoperative sources of distraction. At the end of each operation, human-factor surveys were administered to assess whether surgeons felt distracted. Using a multivariable logistic model, we determined which intraoperative sources of distraction were associated with the surgeons feeling distracted in the OR. RESULTS: The attending surgeon reported feeling distracted in 120 of 265 operations (45%). Auditory sources of distraction, such as the OR door opening occurred at a median of 41 times per case (interquartile range (IQR), 32-54). Cognitive distractions such as teaching (142 cases (54%)), device malfunction (91 (34%)), irrelevant conversations (72 (27%)), management of the next case (41 (15%)), and time pressure (22 (8%)) occurred in a significant number of operations. In a multivariable analysis, presence of irrelevant conversations (odds ratio 2.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16-3.94, p = 0.015) and patient history of previous abdominal surgery (odds ratio 2.2, 95% CI 1.18-4.1, p = 0.013) were independently associated with increased likelihood of the surgeons feeling distracted. CONCLUSIONS: Irrelevant conversation in the OR is a modifiable factor that was independently associated with surgeon's perception of distraction.

Underreporting of Veress Needle Injuries: Comparing Direct Observation and Chart Review Methods.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events in surgery occur frequently, increase likelihood of postoperative morbidity, and mostly take place in the operating rooms. Several surgeons have advocated for learning from adverse events and near misses to help improve patient safety. To do so, one must first understand how to accurately identify and report intraoperative events. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive laparoscopic cases performed in a referral center were included in the cohort. Veress needle (VN) injuries were characterized according to a priori established criteria. Two methods were used to identify VN injuries: direct observation and patient chart review. For direct observation, trained surgeon assessors identified the outcomes using a comprehensive data capture platform called the operating room black box. On the other hand, operative reports and patient charts were reviewed by trained assessors to identify reported VN injuries. RESULTS: Hundred thirty-one cases were analyzed. There were 12 (9%) VN injuries identified by direct observation compared to 3 (2%) identified in patient chart review method. Injuries to the liver and stomach were identified by both methods, whereas injuries to the omentum were not reported in patient charts even if they required rectification. There were seven VN injuries that required rectification, lasting up to 12% of the operating time. There were 47 (35%) near misses identified through direct observation, whereas none was reported in patient charts. CONCLUSIONS: Direct observation enables characterization of VN injury and near misses with far greater detail and accuracy than patient chart review.

Characterization of device-related interruptions in minimally invasive surgery: need for intraoperative data and effective mitigation strategies.

BACKGROUND: The burden of device-related interruptions is expected to increase as modern surgical practices adopt complex minimally invasive surgery devices. Currently, there is a paucity of empiric data that examined the nature of device-related interruptions using comprehensive intraoperative data. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of consecutive elective laparoscopic general surgery cases performed in one operating room (OR) at a referral center between April 2014 and April 2016. The included cases were directly observed using a comprehensive multiport data recorder called the OR Black Box. The data were synchronized, encrypted, and reviewed by expert surgeon assessors. The assessors characterized device-related interruptions that occurred during operations. The prevalence of the cases with device-related interruptions was calculated. Device-related interruptions were classified into a priori categories of (1) absent/wrong device; (2) improper assembly; (3) loss of sterility; (4) disconnection; and (5) device failure. RESULTS: In a cohort of 210 cases, 64 (30%) had at least one device-related interruption. Sleeve gastrectomy (52%) and oncologic gastrectomy (43%) procedures experienced the highest prevalence of device-related interruptions. Device failure was the most frequently chosen category with laparoscopic staplers implicated in more than half of these failures. Three failure modes were described for laparoscopic stapler, of which stapler malfunction (46%) was the most common. CONCLUSIONS: Device-related interruptions occurred frequently in the OR and could be characterized into one of the five categories. Understanding the nature of the device-related interruptions can help guide implementation of safety interventions and user training in the future.

Adverse Events in the Operating Room: Definitions, Prevalence, and Characteristics. A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events occur commonly in the operating room (OR) and often contribute to morbidity, mortality, and increased healthcare spending. Validated frameworks to measure and report postoperative outcomes have long existed to facilitate exchanges of structured information pertaining to postoperative complication rates in order to improve patient safety. However, systematic evidence regarding measurement and reporting of intraoperative adverse events (iAE) is still lacking. METHODS: We searched Ovid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases for articles published up to June 2016 that measured and reported iAE. We presented the terms and definitions used to describe iAE. We identified the types of reported iAE and summarized them into discrete categories. We reported frequencies of iAE by detection methods. RESULTS: Of the 47 included studies, 30 were cross-sectional, 14 were case-series, and 3 were cohort studies. The studies used 16 different terms and 22 unique definitions to describe 74 types of iAE. Frequencies of iAE appeared to vary depending on the detection methods, with higher numbers reported when direct observation in the OR was used to detect iAE. Twenty studies assessed severity of iAE, which were mostly based on whether they resulted in postoperative outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study systematically reviewed the current evidence on prevalence and characteristics of iAE that were detected by direct observation, reviews of patient charts, administrative data and incident reports, and surveys and interviews of healthcare providers. Our findings suggest that direct observation method has the most potential to identify and characterize iAE in detail.

Approach to asymptomatic paraesophageal hernia: watchful waiting or elective laparoscopic hernia repair?

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on whether asymptomatic paraesophageal hernia (PEH) should be operated. Some argue that surgery is necessary prophylaxis against potentially catastrophic consequences of acute complications in untreated PEH. Others reason that the acute complications are rare and emergent operations have relatively low mortality. In the laparoscopic era, elective operations have become safer and less morbid. However, recent studies report high incidence of recurrent hernia, some of which affect quality of life and require further interventions. In light of these new findings, we investigated whether asymptomatic PEH should receive elective laparoscopic hernia repair (ELHR) or watchful waiting (WW). METHODS: A Markov Monte Carlo microsimulation decision analysis model followed a hypothetical cohort of asymptomatic PEH patients who have predominantly female gender and normally distributed mean age of 62.5 years for the lifetime. Accrued health benefits expressed in quality-adjusted life months (QALM) were compared between two strategies: WW and ELHR. Two-dimensional simulations were performed to account for uncertainties in the model. Deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed to test key assumptions. RESULTS: After considering both individual- and parameter-level uncertainties in the two-dimensional simulations, WW was the superior strategy in 82% of the simulations, accumulating mean 5 QALM more than ELHR (168 vs. 163). Our model was robust to deterministic sensitivity analyses and was internally validated, which supported the validity of our results. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with asymptomatic PEH are more likely to achieve greater health outcomes if they undergo WW as initial treatment than ELHR.

Early Discharge after Uncomplicated Elective Colectomy and Risk of Postdischarge Complication.

BACKGROUND: This was a retrospective cohort study of adult patients undergoing uncomplicated elective colectomy using the NSQIP database from January 2012 to December 2019. A colectomy is deemed uncomplicated if there are no complications reported during the hospitalization. The objective of this study was to examine the association between discharge timing and postdischarge complications in patients who undergo uncomplicated elective colectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Patients were stratified into an early discharge group if their length of postoperative hospitalization was ≤3 days for laparoscopic or robotic approaches, or ≤5 days for the open approach, and otherwise into delayed discharge groups. The association between early discharge and any postdischarge complication was examined using unadjusted logistic regression after propensity score matching between early and delayed discharge groups. RESULTS: Of the 113,940 patients included, 77,979, 15,877, and 20,084 patients underwent uncomplicated laparoscopic, robotic, and open colectomy, respectively. After propensity score matching, the odds of a postdischarge complication were lower for the early discharge group in laparoscopic (odds ratio 0.73, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.79) and robotic (odds ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.76) approaches, and not different in the open approach (odds ratio 1.02, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.15). There were no clinically meaningful differences in the risk of return to the operating room for all surgical approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Early discharge after uncomplicated colectomy appears to be safe and is associated with lower odds of postdischarge complications in minimally invasive approaches. Our findings suggest that surgical teams practice sound clinical judgments on selecting patients who benefit from early discharge.

Does routine upper gastrointestinal swallow study after metabolic and bariatric surgery lead to earlier diagnosis of leak?

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether routine upper gastrointestinal swallow study (SS) in the immediate postoperative period is associated with earlier diagnosis of gastrointestinal leak after bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between routine SS and time to diagnosis of postoperative gastrointestinal leak. SETTING: MBSAQIP-accredited hospitals in the United States and Canada. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of adults who underwent laparoscopic primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (n = 82,510) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) (n = 283,520) using the MBSAQIP 2015-2019 database. Propensity scores were used to match patient cohorts who underwent routine versus no routine SS. Primary outcome was time to diagnosis of leak. Median days to diagnosis of leak were compared. The Nelson-Aalen estimator was used to determine the cumulative hazards of leak. RESULTS: In our study, 36,280 (23%) RYGB and 135,335 (33%) SG patients received routine SS. Routine SS was not associated with earlier diagnosis of leak (RYGB routine SS median 7 [IQR 3-12] days v. no routine SS 6 [2-11] days, P = .9; SG routine SS 15 [9-22] days v. no routine SS 14 [8-21] days, P = .06) or lower risk of developing leak (RYGB HR 1.0, 95%-CI .8-1.2; SG HR 1.1, 95%-CI 1.0-1.4). More routine SS patients had a length of stay 2 days or greater (RYGB 78.3% v. 61.1%; SG 48.6% v. 40.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Routine SS was not associated with earlier diagnosis of leaks compared to the absence of routine SS. Surgeons should consider abandoning the practice of routine SS for the purpose of obtaining earlier diagnosis of postoperative leaks.

Performance of artificial intelligence in bariatric surgery: comparative analysis of ChatGPT-4, Bing, and Bard in the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery textbook of bariatric surgery questions.

BACKGROUND: The American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) textbook serves as a comprehensive resource for bariatric surgery, covering recent advancements and clinical questions. Testing artificial intelligence (AI) engines using this authoritative source ensures accurate and up-to-date information and provides insight in its potential implications for surgical education and training. OBJECTIVES: To determine the quality and to compare different large language models' (LLMs) ability to respond to textbook questions relating to bariatric surgery. SETTING: Remote. METHODS: Prompts to be entered into the LLMs were multiple-choice questions found in "The ASMBS Textbook of Bariatric Surgery, second Edition. The prompts were queried into 3 LLMs: OpenAI's ChatGPT-4, Microsoft's Bing, and Google's Bard. The generated responses were assessed based on overall accuracy, the number of correct answers according to subject matter, and the number of correct answers based on question type. Statistical analysis was performed to determine the number of responses per LLMs per category that were correct. RESULTS: Two hundred questions were used to query the AI models. There was an overall significant difference in the accuracy of answers, with an accuracy of 83.0% for ChatGPT-4, followed by Bard (76.0%) and Bing (65.0%). Subgroup analysis revealed a significant difference between the models' performance in question categories, with ChatGPT-4's demonstrating the highest proportion of correct answers in questions related to treatment and surgical procedures (83.1%) and complications (91.7%). There was also a significant difference between the performance in different question types, with ChatGPT-4 showing superior performance in inclusionary questions. Bard and Bing were unable to answer certain questions whereas ChatGPT-4 left no questions unanswered. CONCLUSIONS: LLMs, particularly ChatGPT-4, demonstrated promising accuracy when answering clinical questions related to bariatric surgery. Continued AI advancements and research is required to elucidate the potential applications of LLMs in training and education.

Preoperative depression and outcomes after metabolic and bariatric surgery: A systematic narrative review.

Preoperative depression is prevalent among patients undergoing metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) and is a potentially modifiable risk factor. However, the impact of preoperative depression on MBS outcomes has not been systematically reviewed. A search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and PsychINFO (inception to June 2023) was conducted for studies reporting associations between preoperative depression and any clinical or patient-reported outcomes after MBS. Eighteen studies (5 prospective and 13 retrospective) reporting on 5933 participants were included. Most participants underwent gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy. Meta-analyses were not conducted due to heterogeneity in reported outcomes; findings were instead synthesized using a narrative and tabular approach. Across 13 studies (n = 3390) the associations between preoperative depression and weight loss outcomes at 6-72 months were mixed overall. This may be related to differences in cohort characteristics, outcome definitions, and instruments used to measure depression. A small number of studies reported that preoperative depression was associated with lower quality of life, worse acute pain, and more perioperative complications after surgery. Most of the included studies were deemed to be at high risk of bias, resulting in low or very low certainty of evidence according to the Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Exposure (ROBINS-E) tool. While the impact of preoperative depression on weight loss after MBS remains unclear, there is early evidence that depression has negative consequences on other patient-important outcomes. Adequately powered studies using more sophisticated statistical methods are needed to accurately estimate these associations.

Black-versus-White racial disparities in 30-day outcomes at Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program-accredited centers: a needed quality indicator.

BACKGROUND: Creating a metric in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) to assess Black-versus-White disparities is critical if we are to ensure equitable care for all. OBJECTIVE: To investigate Black-versus-White disparities while replicating MBSAQIP methodology with regard to covariates and modeling so that the results can serve as the foundation to create a benchmarked site-level Disparities Metric for MBSAQIP. SETTING: United States and Canada. METHODS: Across the 2015-2019 MBSAQIP cohorts, 543,976 adults underwent primary or revision sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and were reported as either White or Black. Using a set of covariates derived from published MBSAQIP performance models, we performed multivariable logistic modeling with 10-fold cross-validation for the 11 outcomes evaluated in MBSAQIP Semiannual Reports, plus venous thromboembolism (VTE) and death. We analyzed primary and revision cases separately. RESULTS: After risk adjustment, Black patients experienced higher odds of all-occurrence morbidity (odds ratio [OR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-1.25; P < .001), serious events (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04-1.13; P < .001), all-cause intervention (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.24-1.37; P < .001), related intervention (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.22-1.37; P < .001), all-cause readmission (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.33-1.41; P < .001), related readmission (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.36-1.46; P < .001), venous thromboembolism (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.34-1.65; P < .001), and death (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.34-1.89; P < .001) after primary procedures. Black patients experienced lower odds of morbidity (OR, .94; 95% CI, .91-.98; P = .004) and surgical-site infection (OR, .72; 95% CI, .66-.78; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Black patients experienced a higher risk for serious complications and required more readmissions, reoperations, and postoperative interventions. This study supports the creation of a site-level Disparities Metric for the MBSAQIP and provides the framework to do so.

The United States Experience with One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass at MBSAQIP-Accredited Centers.

PURPOSE: One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) has emerged as a potentially safe and effective weight-loss procedure. Worldwide, OAGB is the third most commonly performed primary bariatric procedure, comprising 4% of the annual volume. In the USA, OAGB has yet to be endorsed as a primary bariatric procedure and can only be performed under research protocols or as a revision procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed an observational cohort study to describe the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative characteristics of adult patients who underwent primary or revision OAGB from 2015 to 2019 at MBSAQIP centers. Exclusion criteria included emergent surgery, incomplete 30-day follow-up, and non-laparoscopic- or robotic approach. RESULTS: During the study period, 803,906 bariatric procedures were performed and 645 (0.08%) were OAGB. Among these, 436 (67.6%) were primary and 209 (32.4%) were revision OAGB. The mean operation time was 89 min (SD, 59) and 8% were performed using a robotic approach. The overall complication rate was 7.4% and there was one death (0.2%). The post-operative complication rates were generally higher than the early complication rate (3.4%) reported in the YOMEGA trial, an RCT from France. Revision OAGB had a longer mean operation time of 141 min (SD, 85, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Primary OAGB was a rarely performed bariatric procedure at MBSAQIP-accredited centers comprising only 0.05% compared to 4% worldwide. Future studies should compare safety of OAGB to that of established bariatric procedures like Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy.

The development and measurement properties of the trauma NOn-TECHnical skills (T-NOTECHS) scale: A scoping review.

PURPOSE: Conduct a scoping review to critically appraise the development and summarize the evidence on the measurement properties of T-NOTECHS including sensibility, reliability, and validity. METHODS: A literature search was performed using Pubmed and Ovid databases. Studies that described the development process of T-NOTECHS and primary studies that presented evidence of reliability and validity were identified and included. Measurement properties of T-NOTECHS was assessed and summarized under the following: scale development, sensibility, reliability, and validity. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 245 articles with 24 studies meeting inclusion criteria. The T-NOTECHS was developed with an acceptable robust methodology. It has good sensibility with adequate content, face validity, and feasibility. It is a reliable measure of non-technical skills in the setting of trauma video review, which improves with expert raters or extensive training. The T-NOTECHS is a valid discriminative and evaluative instrument that measures non-technical skills of multidisciplinary trauma teams. CONCLUSIONS: T-NOTECHS provides reliable and valid measurements of non-technical skills of trauma teams, particularly when assessing trauma video review and non-technical skills training interventions by expert raters.

Comparison of Short-term Safety of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy in the United States: 341 cases from MBSAQIP-accredited Centers.

BACKGROUND: One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is the third most common (4%) primary bariatric procedure worldwide but is seldom performed in the United States and is currently under consideration for endorsement by the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. Evidence from the United States on safety of OAGB compared to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare the short-term safety outcomes of the three primary bariatric procedures. SETTING: Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP)-accredited hospitals in the United States and Canada. METHODS: Using the 2015-2019 MBSAQIP database, we compared the safety outcomes of adult patients who underwent primary laparoscopic OAGB, RYGB, and SG. Exclusion criteria included age over 80 years, emergency operation, conversion, and incomplete follow-up. The primary outcome was 30-day overall complication. Secondary outcomes were 30-day surgical and medical complications and hospitalization length. RESULTS: A total of 341 patients underwent primary OAGB. Using propensity scores, we matched the OAGB cohort 1:1 with two cohorts of similar baseline characteristics who underwent RYGB and SG, respectively. The OAGB cohort had a lower overall complication rate than the RYGB cohort (6.7% versus12.3%, P = .02) and a similar rate to the SG cohort (5.0%, P = .43). The OAGB cohort had a similar rate of surgical complication to the RYGB cohort (5.0% versus 8.5%, P = .1) and a higher rate than the SG group (1.2%, P = .009). The OAGB cohort had a shorter median hospitalization than the RYGB cohort (1 d [interquartile range (IQR) 1-2 d] versus 2 d [IQR 1-2 d], P < .001) and a similar hospitalization length to the SG cohort ([1-2 d], P = .46). CONCLUSION: Using the largest and the most current U.S. data, this study demonstrated that the short-term safety profile of primary OAGB is acceptable, but future studies should determine the long-term safety.