Influence of a surgeon's exposure to operating room turnover delays on patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: A surgeon's daily performance may be affected by operating room organizational factors, potentially impacting patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the link between a surgeon's exposure to delays in starting scheduled operations and patient outcomes. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted from 1 November 2020 to 31 December 2021, across 14 surgical departments in four university hospitals, covering various surgical disciplines. All elective surgeries by 45 attending surgeons were analysed, assessing delays in starting operations and inter-procedural wait times exceeding 1 or 2 h. The primary outcome was major adverse events within 30 days post-surgery. Mixed-effect logistic regression accounted for operation clustering within surgeons, estimating adjusted relative risks and outcome rate differences using marginal standardization. RESULTS: Among 8844 elective operations, 4.0% started more than 1 h late, associated with an increased rate of adverse events (21.6% versus 14.4%, P = 0.039). Waiting time surpassing 1 h between procedures occurred in 71.4% of operations and was also associated with a higher frequency of adverse events (13.9% versus 5.3%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delayed operations were associated with an elevated risk of major adverse events (adjusted relative risk 1.37 (95% c.i. 1.06 to 1.85)). The standardized rate of major adverse events was 12.1%, compared with 8.9% (absolute difference of 3.3% (95% c.i. 0.6% to 5.6%)), when a surgeon experienced a delay in operating room scheduling or waiting time between two procedures exceeding 1 h, as opposed to not experiencing such delays. CONCLUSION: A surgeon's exposure to delay before starting elective procedures was associated with an increased occurrence of major adverse events. Optimizing operating room turnover to prevent delayed operations and waiting time is critical for patient safety.

Conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Is Intrathoracic Migration of the Sleeve of High Incidence?

BACKGROUND: Conversion of SG to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is increasing. Intrathoracic migration of the sleeve (ITM) often seems associated and is increasingly reported. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients who underwent a conversion of SG to RYGB from August 2013 to December 2022 were included. Two groups were compared: patients operated on for weight loss failure (WLF gp) and those operated on for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD gp). Demographic data, the incidence of ITM, weight loss outcomes, resolution of symptoms, and morbidity were analyzed. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were included with an average follow-up of 32 months: 46 patients in the GERD gp (78%) were compared to 13 patients (22%) in the WLF gp. Groups were comparable regarding age and gender, but BMI and commodities were significantly higher in the WLF gp. In the GERD gp, on preoperative gastroscopy, 30% had a esophagitis, 48% had an ITM which required a posterior crural closure versus no esophagitis (p=0.02) and 23% of ITM in the WLF gp (p=0.11). Conversion led to 93% of GERD symptom improvement. In the WLF gp, mean TWL% was 15.3%, significantly greater than in the GERD gp (TWL% = 4.6%, p = 0.01). The complication rate was 10% at 30 days and 3.4% after 30 days, not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: The main indication of conversion of SG to RYGB was because of GERD: in these indications, the incidence of ITM was high requiring a surgical treatment with a very good efficacy on symptoms. Weight loss results were disappointing.

Impact of primary endoscopic resection on oncological outcomes after esophagectomy for cancer: a retrospective propensity score-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal cancer posed significant global health challenges, particularly due to poor survival rates, especially in advanced stages. Primary endoscopic resection had emerged as an alternative treatment for early esophageal cancer, aiming to preserve organ function and reduce surgical morbidity. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter cohort study included 334 patients with early esophageal cancer (T1a-b, N0) from 30 French-speaking European centers between 2000 and 2010. Patients underwent either primary endoscopic resection followed by esophagectomy (E group, n = 36) or esophagectomy alone (S group, n = 298). Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for TNM stage and propensity score weighting were used to assess the impact of primary endoscopic resection on recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and postoperative complications. RESULTS: Primary endoscopic resection did not significantly influence RFS (adjusted HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.68, p = 0.88) or OS (adjusted HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.13, p = 0.92) compared to esophagectomy alone. Initial higher thromboembolic complications in the endoscopic resection group were not significant after adjustment (adjusted OR 4.73, 95% CI 0.34 to 64.27, p = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: Primary endoscopic resection followed by esophagectomy for early esophageal cancer did not alter oncological outcomes or overall survival in this retrospective cohort. These findings supported the role of primary endoscopic resection as a safe initial treatment strategy, warranting validation in larger prospective studies. REGISTRATION: Our study was registered retrospectively on the Clinicaltrials.com website under the identifier NCT01927016. We acknowledge the importance of prospective registration and regret that this was not done before the commencement of the study.

Mesenteric sparing approach for advanced nodal extent in small intestinal neuroendocrine tumors. Is there a limit to the vascular resection in order to avoid creating a short small bowel syndrome? An anatomic research study.

PURPOSE: By selectively perfusing the first three jejunal arteries (JA), we aim to assess the individual perfusion length of small bowel (SB) and its impact on nodal resection in stage III-up small-intestinal neuroendocrine tumors (SI-NET). METHODS: Our anatomical research protocol implies a midline laparotomy and three measures of the SB length. We then perform a classical anterior approach of the superior mesenteric vessels. We carry on with the complete dissection and checking of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) in order to identify the first three JA. Then we selectively perfuse each artery with colored latex solutions and measure the length of small bowel perfused respectively. RESULTS: We conducted our protocol on six cadaveric subjects. Mean(SD) SB length was 413(5.7), 535(13.2), 485(15), 353(25.1), 730(17.3) and 525(16° cm respectively from subject one to six. Most JA originated from the left side of the SMA. The first JA originated from its posterior wall in two subjects. Mean(SD) distance of origin of the first three JA was 4.6(1.3)cm, 6(1.1)cm and 7.1(0.9)cm respectively. Mean(SD) diameter of SMA was 10.8(3.3)mm. Mean diameter of the three first JA was 4(1.4)mm, 4(1.5)mm and 5(1.2)mm respectively. Mean(SD) SB length perfused by first and second JA was 224(14.9)cm, 175(8.6)cm, 238.3(7.6)cm, 84.3(5.1)cm, 233.3(5.8)cm and 218.3(10.4)cm respectively from subject one to six. CONCLUSION: We observed a trend suggesting that the first and second JA may sustain a SB length beyond the viable 1.5 m limit, implying the feasibility of stage III-up SI-NET resection with just two JA.

Operating room organization and surgical performance: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Organizational factors may influence surgical outcomes, regardless of extensively studied factors such as patient preoperative risk and surgical complexity. This study was designed to explore how operating room organization determines surgical performance and to identify gaps in the literature that necessitate further investigation. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines to identify original studies in Pubmed and Scopus from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2019. Studies evaluating the association between five determinants (team composition, stability, teamwork, work scheduling, disturbing elements) and three outcomes (operative time, patient safety, costs) were included. Methodology was assessed based on criteria such as multicentric investigation, accurate population description, and study design. RESULTS: Out of 2625 studies, 76 met inclusion criteria. Of these, 34 (44.7%) investigated surgical team composition, 15 (19.7%) team stability, 11 (14.5%) teamwork, 9 (11.8%) scheduling, and 7 (9.2%) examined the occurrence of disturbing elements in the operating room. The participation of surgical residents appeared to impact patient outcomes. Employing specialized and stable teams in dedicated operating rooms showed improvements in outcomes. Optimization of teamwork reduced operative time, while poor teamwork increased morbidity and costs. Disturbances and communication failures in the operating room negatively affected operative time and surgical safety. CONCLUSION: While limited, existing scientific evidence suggests that operating room staffing and environment significantly influences patient outcomes. Prioritizing further research on these organizational drivers is key to enhancing surgical performance.

The Need for Centralization for Small Intestinal Neuroendocrine Tumor Surgery: A Cohort Study from the GTE-Endocan-RENATEN Network, the CentralChirSINET Study.

BACKGROUND: The concept of surgical centralization is becoming more and more accepted for specific surgical procedures. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between procedure volume and the outcomes of surgical small intestine (SI) neuroendocrine tumor (NET) resections. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective national study that included patients who underwent SI-NET resection between 2019 and 2021. A high-volume center (hvC) was defined as a center that performed more than five SI-NET resections per year. The quality of the surgical resections was evaluated between hvCs and low-volume centers (lvCs) by comparing the number of resected lymph nodes (LNs) as the primary endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 157 patients underwent surgery in 33 centers: 90 patients in four hvCs and 67 patients in 29 lvCs. Laparotomy was more often performed in hvCs (85.6% vs. 59.7%; p < 0.001), as was right hemicolectomy (64.4% vs. 38.8%; p < 0.001), whereas limited ileocolic resection was performed in 18% of patients in lvCs versus none in hvCs. A bi-digital palpation of the entire SI length (95.6% vs. 34.3%, p < 0.001), a cholecystectomy (93.3% vs. 14.9%; p < 0.001), and a mesenteric mass resection (70% vs. 35.8%; p < 0.001) were more often performed in hvCs. The proportion of patients with ≥8 LNs resected was significantly higher (96.3% vs. 65.1%; p < 0.001) in hvCs compared with lvCs, as was the proportion of patients with ≥12 LNs resected (87.8% vs. 52.4%). Furthermore, the number of patients with multiple SI-NETs was higher in the hvC group compared with the lvC group (43.3% vs. 25.4%), as were the number of tumors in those patients (median of 7 vs. 2; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Optimal SI-NET resection was significantly more often performed in hvCs. Centralization of surgical care of SI-NETs is recommended.

Management strategies of anastomotic ulcer after gastric bypass and risk factors of recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Marginal ulcers (MU) after gastric bypass are a challenging problem. The first-line treatment is a medical therapy with eviction of risk factors but is sometimes insufficient. The management strategies of intractable ulcers are still not clearly defined. The aim of our study was to analyse the risk factors for recurrence, the management strategies used and their efficiencies. METHODS: Based on a retrospective analysis of all MU managed in our tertiary care centre of bariatric surgery during the last 14 years, a descriptive analysis of the cohort, the management strategies and their efficiency were analysed. A logistic regression was done to identify the independent associated risk factors of intractable ulcer. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients matched inclusion criteria: 30 were referred to us (13 Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass-RYGB and 17 One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass-OAGB), 26 were operated on in our institution (24 RYGB and 2 OAGB). 11 patients had a complicated inaugural MU requiring an interventional procedure in emergency: 7 perforations, 4 haemorrhages. The majority of MU were treated medically as a first-line therapy (n = 45; 80.4%). 32 MU recurred: 20 patients required surgery as a 2nd line therapy, 6 were operated on as a 3rd line therapy and 1 had a surgery as a 5th line therapy. The OAGB was the only risk factor of recurrence (p = 0.018). We found that the Surgical management was significantly more frequent for patients with a OAGB (84% versus 35% for RYGB, p = 0.001); the most performed surgical procedure was a conversion of OAGB to RYGB (n = 11, 37.9%). CONCLUSION: Surgery was required for a large number of MU especially in case of recurrence, but recurrence can still occur after the surgery. The OAGB was the only risk factor of recurrence identified and conversion to RYGB seemed to be effective for the healing.

Cytoreductive surgery with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for small bowel neuroendocrine tumors with peritoneal metastasis.

BACKGROUND: Up to 20% of patients with small-bowel neuroendocrine tumors (SB-NETs) may present with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PM). Surgical cytoreduction (CRS) has been proposed as an adequate management as it confers a survival benefit in selected patients. The addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to CRS in this context may be an option but data on its added benefits is lacking. METHODS: A search was performed in the prospective multicenter international collaborative database of the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI) and BIG-RENAPE working groups, and patients who underwent a surgical treatment (CRS or CRS with HIPEC) for a SB-NET with PM were identified and compared. RESULTS: Between 2002 and 2016, a total of 67 patients were identified as having a CRS for SB-NET, with 36 receiving HIPEC during surgery. Median postoperative follow-up was 34 months. The peritoneal cancer index (PCI) and the completeness of cytoreduction score (CCR-score) were higher in the CRS-HIPEC group. More grade III-IV complications occurred in this group as assessed by the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0. Despite a tendency toward a better progression/recurrence-free survival in patients receiving HIPEC, no significant differences were noted between the CRS and CRS-HIPEC groups in terms of postoperative recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: HIPEC does not seem to provide additional benefits in terms of postoperative evolution and survival in patients with SB-NET undergoing CRS. It is associated with higher morbidity. It may possibly lead to an improved recurrence-free survival, but further reports are required to confirm this assumption.

Association of Hospital Bed Turnover With Patient Outcomes in Digestive Surgery.

To determine the influence of hospital bed turnover rate (BTR) on the occurrence of complications following minor or major digestive surgery. Background: Performance improvement in surgery aims at increasing productivity while preventing complications. It is unknown whether this relationship can be influenced by the complexity of surgery. Methods: A nationwide retrospective cohort study was conducted, based on generalized estimating equation modeling to determine the effect of hospital BTR on surgical outcomes, adjusting for patient mix and clustering within 631 public and private French hospitals. All patients who underwent minor or major digestive surgery between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2018 were included. Hospital BTR was defined as the annual number of stays per bed for digestive surgery and categorized into tertiles. The primary endpoint was a composite measurement of events occurring within 30 days after surgery: inpatient death, extended intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and reoperation. Results: Rate of adverse events was 2.51% in low BTR hospitals versus 2.25% in high BTR hospitals for minor surgery, and 16.79% versus 16.83% for major surgery. Patients who underwent minor surgery in high BTR hospitals experienced lower complications (odds ratio [OR], 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-0.97; P = 0.009), mortality (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78-0.98, P = 0.02), ICU admission (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-0.99; P = 0.03), and reoperation (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85-0.97; P = 0.002) compared to those in low BTR hospitals. Such differences were not consistently observed among patients admitted for major surgery. Conclusions: High turnover of patients in beds is beneficial for minor procedures, but questionable for major surgeries.

Principles of Surgical Management of Small Intestinal NET.

INTRODUCTION: Small-intestinal neuroendocrine tumors (siNETs) account for 25% of gastroenteropancreatic NETs. Multiple siNETs appear to develop in a limited segment of the small bowel (SB), 89% of them being located in the ileum, most often within 100 cm of the ileocecal valve (ICV). According to the European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) and the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC), all localized siNETs should be considered for radical surgical resection with adequate lymphadenectomy irrespective of the absence of lymphadenopathy or mesenteric involvement. Surgical management of siNETs: The preoperative workout should include a precise evaluation of past medical and surgical history, focusing on the symptoms of carcinoid syndrome (flush, diarrhea, and cardiac failure). Morphological evaluation should include a CT scan including a thin-slice arterial CT, a PET/CT with 68 Ga, and a hepatic MRI in cases of suspected metastasis. Levels of 24 h urinary 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid are needed. Regarding surgery, the limiting component is the number of free jejunal branches allowing a resection without risk of short small bowel syndrome. The laparoscopic approach has been poorly studied, and open laparotomy remains the gold standard to explore the abdominal cavity and entirely palpate the small bowel through bidigital palpation and compression. An extensive lymphadenectomy is required. A prophylactic cholecystectomy should be performed. In case of emergency surgery, current recommendations are not definitive. However, there is expert agreement that it is not reasonable to initiate resection of the mesenteric mass without comprehensive workup and mapping. CONCLUSION: The surgery of siNETs is in constant evolution. The challenge lies in the ability to propose a resection without imposing short small bowel syndrome on the patients. The oncological benefits supported in the literature led to recent changes in the recommendations of academic societies. The next steps remain the dissemination of reproducible quality criteria to perform these procedures.

Prophylactic colectomy and rectal preservation in FAP: systematic endoscopic follow-up and adenoma destruction changes natural history of polyposis.

Background and study aims Prophylactic surgery of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) includes total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) to proctocolectomy with ileoanal anastomosis (IAA). Surgical guidelines rely on studies without systematic endoscopic follow-up and treatment. Our aim was to report our experience based on a different approach: therapeutic follow-up, comparing in this setting IRA and IAA in terms of oncological safety and quality of life. Patients and methods Between January 1965 and November 2015, all patients who underwent prophylactic surgery for FAP with therapeutic endoscopic follow-up in Lyon University hospital: systematic endoscopic treatment of adenomas, were retrospectively and prospectively (since 2011) included. Results A total of 296 patients were analyzed: 92 had proctocolectomy with IAA (31.1 %), 197 total colectomy with IRA (66.5 %), and seven abdominoperineal resections (2.4 %). Median follow-up was 17.1 years (range, 0-38.1). Incidence of secondary cancer (IR vs. IAA) was 6.1 % vs. 1.1 % ( P  = 0.06; 95 %CI 0.001-0.36). The 15-year cancer-free and overall survival (IR vs. IAA) were 99.5 % vs 100 % ( P  = 0.09) and 98.9 % vs. 98.8 % ( P  = 0.82), respectively. Postoperative morbidity occurred in 44 patients: 29 (14.7 %) in the IRA and 15 (16.3 %) in the IAA group ( P  = 0.72). The mean number of stools per day in the respective groups were 4.4 (2.5) vs. 5.5 (2.6) ( P  = 0.001). Fecal incontinence occurred in 14 patients (7.1 %) in the IRA vs. 16 (17.4 %) in the IAA group ( P  = 0.03). Conclusions A combination of therapeutic endoscopic treatment and extended rectal preservation appears to be a safe alternative to ileoanal J-pouch anastomosis.

Endoscopic ultrasound efficacy in staging gastric linitis plastica lesion: a retrospective multicentric French study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a key imaging technique in gastric cancer (GC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of EUS in the staging of parietal and lymph node involvement in linitis plastica (LP) compared to "classical" GC. METHODS: A retrospective multicentric French study was conducted on patients with no metastatic LP and operated by gastrectomy. A 2/1 matching based on pTNM stage and center was performed with GC. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were included, sixteen patients in the LP group and 27 in the control group. Sensitivity and specificity of EUS for diagnosis of T3-T4 parietal invasion were 77% and 100% respectively in the LP group and 89% and 56% respectively in the control group. Sensitivity and specificity of EUS for diagnosis of lymph node involvement were 73% and 80%, respectively in the LP group and 88% and 50%, respectively in the control group. Patients from LP group had significantly more advanced histological lesion, and frequent undiagnosed peritoneal carcinomatosis. CONCLUSIONS: This study evaluated for the first time in a European population, the preoperative EUS performance in LP. Our study identified a similar sensitivity and specificity of the EUS in LP compared to "classical" GC paving for a broader use of EUS in preoperative settings.

Third bariatric procedure for insufficient weight loss or weight regain: how far should we go?

BACKGROUND: Revisional procedures in bariatric surgery are increasing with several debated failure risk factors, such as super obesity and old age. No study has yet evaluated the outcomes and risks of a third bariatric procedure indicated for weight loss failure or weight regain. OBJECTIVES: To assess failure risks of a third bariatric procedure according to Reinhold's criteria (percentage excess weight loss [%EWL] ≤50% and/or body mass index [BMI] ≥35 kg/m2). SETTING: A university-affiliated tertiary care center, France. METHODS: From 2009 to 2019, clinical data and weight loss results of patients who benefited from 3 bariatric procedures for weight loss failure or weight regain were collected prospectively and analyzed using a binary logistic regression. Weight loss failure was defined according to Reinhold's criteria. RESULTS: Among 1401 bariatric procedures performed, 336 patients benefited from 2 or more procedures, and 45 had a third surgery. Eleven patients that were reoperated on because of malnutrition or gastroesophageal reflux disease were excluded from the final analysis. Among 34 patients with 3 procedures because of weight loss failure or regain, mean BMI was 48.3 ± 8.3 kg/m2, and mean age was 30 ± 10.7 years. Three out of 34 patients (9%) presented a severe complication (Dindo-Clavien IIIb) and 2 (6%) had a minor one. Achieving Reinhold's weight loss criteria after the second bariatric procedure was a significant predictor of success of the third procedure (ß = 2.9 ± 1.3 S.E.). CONCLUSION: Not reaching Reinhold's criteria after a second bariatric procedure was identified as a significant risk factor of failure of a third procedure. A third surgery should be carefully discussed especially in case of primary failure of previous procedures.

Unifocal versus Multiple Ileal Neuroendocrine Tumors Location: An Embryological Origin.

INTRODUCTION: Small-intestinal neuroendocrine tumors (SI-NET) are situated preferentially within the ileum. The aim was to describe a potential difference in location between unifocal and multiple ileal-NET. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between December 2010 and December 2019, all consecutive patients who underwent resection in our European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society Center of Excellence, of at least 1 non-duodenal SI-NET, were retrospectively included. The main objective was to prove that multiple ileal-NET were mostly located on the left side of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) axis (defined as 40 cm from the ileocecal valve), and unifocal ones on the right side. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were included, 6 with unifocal jejunal-NET located 35 cm (range, 10-60) from the duodenojejunal angle (DJA), 44 (47%) with unifocal ileal-NET and 44 (47%) with multiple ileal-NET. The median number of tumors in multiple ileal-NET was 7 (range, 2-95), within a median small bowel segment of 105 cm (10-240). The median length between the proximal tumor and the DJA was 428 cm (300-635) and 540 cm (350-725) for the distal one; 40 (91%) of them were located on the left side of the SMA axis. In contrast, unifocal ileal-NET were located at a median distance of 577 cm (305-820) from the DJA (p < 0.001, compared to multiple ileal-NET); 30 (68%) of them were on the right side of the SMA axis (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Multiple ileal-NET are mostly located on the left side of the SMA axis. Further studies are warranted to explore the embryological origin of unifocal versus multiple ileal-NET.