Clinical artificial intelligence: teaching a large language model to generate recommendations that align with guidelines for the surgical management of GERD.

BACKGROUND: Large Language Models (LLMs) provide clinical guidance with inconsistent accuracy due to limitations with their training dataset. LLMs are "teachable" through customization. We compared the ability of the generic ChatGPT-4 model and a customized version of ChatGPT-4 to provide recommendations for the surgical management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) to both surgeons and patients. METHODS: Sixty patient cases were developed using eligibility criteria from the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) & United European Gastroenterology (UEG)-European Association of Endoscopic. Surgery (EAES) guidelines for the surgical management of GERD. Standardized prompts were engineered for physicians as the end-user, with separate layperson prompts for patients. A customized GPT was developed to generate recommendations based on guidelines, called the GERD Tool for Surgery (GTS). Both the GTS and generic ChatGPT-4 were queried July 21st, 2024. Model performance was evaluated by comparing responses to SAGES & UEG-EAES guideline recommendations. Outcome data was presented using descriptive statistics including counts and percentages. RESULTS: The GTS provided accurate recommendations for the surgical management of GERD for 60/60 (100.0%) surgeon inquiries and 40/40 (100.0%) patient inquiries based on guideline recommendations. The Generic ChatGPT-4 model generated accurate guidance for 40/60 (66.7%) surgeon inquiries and 19/40 (47.5%) patient inquiries. The GTS produced recommendations based on the 2021 SAGES & UEG-EAES guidelines on the surgical management of GERD, while the generic ChatGPT-4 model generated guidance without citing evidence to support its recommendations. CONCLUSION: ChatGPT-4 can be customized to overcome limitations with its training dataset to provide recommendations for the surgical management of GERD with reliable accuracy and consistency. The training of LLM models can be used to help integrate this efficient technology into the creation of robust and accurate information for both surgeons and patients. Prospective data is needed to assess its effectiveness in a pragmatic clinical environment.

The performance of artificial intelligence large language model-linked chatbots in surgical decision-making for gastroesophageal reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: Large language model (LLM)-linked chatbots may be an efficient source of clinical recommendations for healthcare providers and patients. This study evaluated the performance of LLM-linked chatbots in providing recommendations for the surgical management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS: Nine patient cases were created based on key questions addressed by the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) guidelines for the surgical treatment of GERD. ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, Copilot, Google Bard, and Perplexity AI were queried on November 16th, 2023, for recommendations regarding the surgical management of GERD. Accurate chatbot performance was defined as the number of responses aligning with SAGES guideline recommendations. Outcomes were reported with counts and percentages. RESULTS: Surgeons were given accurate recommendations for the surgical management of GERD in an adult patient for 5/7 (71.4%) KQs by ChatGPT-4, 3/7 (42.9%) KQs by Copilot, 6/7 (85.7%) KQs by Google Bard, and 3/7 (42.9%) KQs by Perplexity according to the SAGES guidelines. Patients were given accurate recommendations for 3/5 (60.0%) KQs by ChatGPT-4, 2/5 (40.0%) KQs by Copilot, 4/5 (80.0%) KQs by Google Bard, and 1/5 (20.0%) KQs by Perplexity, respectively. In a pediatric patient, surgeons were given accurate recommendations for 2/3 (66.7%) KQs by ChatGPT-4, 3/3 (100.0%) KQs by Copilot, 3/3 (100.0%) KQs by Google Bard, and 2/3 (66.7%) KQs by Perplexity. Patients were given appropriate guidance for 2/2 (100.0%) KQs by ChatGPT-4, 2/2 (100.0%) KQs by Copilot, 1/2 (50.0%) KQs by Google Bard, and 1/2 (50.0%) KQs by Perplexity. CONCLUSIONS: Gastrointestinal surgeons, gastroenterologists, and patients should recognize both the promise and pitfalls of LLM's when utilized for advice on surgical management of GERD. Additional training of LLM's using evidence-based health information is needed.

Perspectives on sustainability among surgeons: findings from the SAGES-EAES sustainability in surgical practice task force survey.

BACKGROUND: Surgical care significantly contributes to healthcare-associated greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). Surgeon attitudes about mitigation of the impact of surgical practice on environmental sustainability remains poorly understood. To better understand surgeon perspectives globally, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery established a joint Sustainability in Surgical Practice (SSP) Task Force and distributed a survey on sustainability. METHODS: Our survey asked about (1) surgeon attitudes toward sustainability, (2) ability to estimate the carbon footprint of surgical procedures and supplies, (3) concerns about the negative impacts of sustainable interventions, (4) willingness to change specific practices, and (5) preferred educational topics and modalities. Questions were primarily written in Likert-scale format. A clustering analysis was performed to determine whether survey respondents could be grouped into distinct subsets to inform future outreach and education efforts. RESULTS: We received 1024 responses, predominantly from North America and Europe. The study revealed that while 63% of respondents were motivated to enhance the sustainability of their practice, less than 10% could accurately estimate the carbon footprint of surgical activities. Most were not concerned that sustainability efforts would negatively impact their practice and showed readiness to adopt proposed sustainable practices. Online webinars and modules were the preferred educational methods. A clustering analysis identified a group particularly concerned yet willing to adopt sustainable changes. CONCLUSION: Surgeons believe that operating room waste is a critical issue and are willing to change practice to improve it. However, there exists a gap in understanding the environmental impact of surgical procedures and supplies, and a sizable minority have some degree of concern about potential adverse consequences of implementing sustainable policies. This study uniquely provides an international, multidisciplinary snapshot of surgeons' attitudes, knowledge, concerns, willingness, and preferred educational modalities related to mitigating the environmental impact of surgical practice.

Scoping review for the SAGES EAES joint collaborative on sustainability in surgical practice.

BACKGROUND: Surgical care in the operating room (OR) contributes one-third of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in healthcare. The European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) initiated a joint Task Force to promote sustainability within minimally invasive gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted by searching MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase via Elsevier, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus on August 25th, 2023 to identify articles reporting on the impact of gastrointestinal surgical care on the environment. The objectives were to establish the terminology, outcome measures, and scope associated with sustainable surgical practice. Quantitative data were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We screened 22,439 articles to identify 85 articles relevant to anesthesia, general surgical practice, and gastrointestinal surgery. There were 58/85 (68.2%) cohort studies and 12/85 (14.1%) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies. The most commonly measured outcomes were kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents (kg CO2eq), cost of resource consumption in US dollars or euros, surgical waste in kg, water consumption in liters, and energy consumption in kilowatt-hours. Surgical waste production and the use of anesthetic gases were among the largest contributors to the climate impact of surgical practice. Educational initiatives to educate surgical staff on the climate impact of surgery, recycling programs, and strategies to restrict the use of noxious anesthetic gases had the highest impact in reducing the carbon footprint of surgical care. Establishing green teams with multidisciplinary champions is an effective strategy to initiate a sustainability program in gastrointestinal surgery. CONCLUSION: This review establishes standard terminology and outcome measures used to define the environmental footprint of surgical practices. Impactful initiatives to achieve sustainability in surgical practice will require education and multidisciplinary collaborations among key stakeholders including surgeons, researchers, operating room staff, hospital managers, industry partners, and policymakers.

Sustainability in surgical practice: a collaborative call toward environmental sustainability in operating rooms.

BACKGROUND: The healthcare system plays a pivotal role in environmental sustainability, and the operating room (OR) significantly contributes to its overall carbon footprint. In response to this critical challenge, leading medical societies, government bodies, regulatory agencies, and industry stakeholders are taking measures to address healthcare sustainability and its impact on climate change. Healthcare now represents almost 20% of the US national economy and 8.5% of US carbon emissions. Internationally, healthcare represents 5% of global carbon emissions. US Healthcare is an outlier in both per capita cost, and per capita greenhouse gas emission, with almost twice per capita emissions compared to every other country in the world. METHODS: The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) established the Sustainability in Surgical Practice joint task force in 2023. This collaborative effort aims to actively promote education, mitigation, and innovation, steering surgical practices toward a more sustainable future. RESULTS: Several key initiatives have included a survey of members' knowledge and awareness, a scoping review of terminology, metrics, and initiatives, and deep engagement of key stakeholders. DISCUSSION: This position paper serves as a Call to Action, proposing a series of actions to catalyze and accelerate the surgical sustainability leadership needed to respond effectively to climate change, and to lead the societal transformation towards health that our times demand.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the use of high-energy devices for thyroid surgery.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the role of High Energy Devices (HEDs) versus conventional clamp and tie technique in thyroidectomy. This work is endorsed by the Italian Society of Surgical Endoscopy (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery and new technologies-SICE) in the broader project on the evaluation of the role of HEDs in different surgical settings with the full health technology assessment report. MEHODS: Inclusion criteria were adult patients (≥ 18 years old) undergoing Thyroidectomy/Parathyroidectomy conducted with High Energy Devices (as ultrasonic (US), radiofrequency (RF), and hybrid energy (H-US/RF)) in the setting of thyroid surgery (both partial and total) for benign and malign diseases. However, some variability was found in included studies and described in the text. This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews, and the recommendations of the 2020 updated Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were pursuit. Selection of abstracts was performed in Ryyan system by 2 independent reviewers, and doubts were solved by another independent reviewer. At the end of literature research, Randomized controlled trials and observational studies were included. Risk of Bias was assessed with ROB2 for RCTs, and New Castle Ottawa Scale for Observational studies. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 47 studies, including 29 RCTs and 18 observational studies. Meta-analysis was performed for 29 randomized clinical trials. Outcomes included in the comparison between High Energy Devise and conventional technique groups were operative time, operative blood loss, overall post-operative drainage volume, length of stay, complications, and costs. HED significantly reduced operative time (28 studies, 3097patients; MD -128.8; 95% CI -34.4 to -23.20; I2 = 96%, p < 0.00001, Random-effect), intra-operative blood loss (13 studies, 642 vs 519 patients; SMD -0.82; 95% CI -1.33 to -0.32; I2 = 93%, p < 0.00001, Random-effect), LOS (22 studies, 2808 vs 2789 patients; MD -0.38, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.17; I2 = 98%, p < 0.00001 Random-effect), and healthcare costs (8 studies, 1138 vs 1129 patients, SMD 1.05; 95% CI -0.06 to 2.16; I2 = 99%, p < 0.00001 Random-effect). The rate of overall intraoperative complications was significantly different between both groups (25 studies, 2804 vs 2775 patients; RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.97; I2 = 38%, p = 0.03 Random-effect), but the sensitivity analysis did not find a statistically significant difference (6 studies, 605 vs 594 patients, RR; 95% CI to; I2 = 0%, p = 0.50, Random-effect). There was no difference in the subgroup analysis for the occurrence of transient and permanent RLN palsy, nor hematoma formation and hypocalcaemia. DISCUSSION: Though findings of our systematic review and metanalysis are limited by heterogeneous data, surgeons, hospital managers, and policymakers should note that the use of High Energy Devices compared to conventional clamp and tie technique have reduced operative times, intra-operative blood loss, length of stay, and hospital costs in patients underwent to tyroid surgery. Future work must explore issues of equity to mitigate barriers to patient access to safe thyroid surgical care and define better this initial results.

Methods of quality assurance in multicenter trials in laparoscopic fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: Operative performance may affect the internal and external validity of randomized trials. The aim of this study was to review the use of surgical quality assurance mechanisms of published trials on laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery, with the objective to appraise their internal (research quality) and external validity (applicability to the clinical setting). METHODS: Building upon a previous systematic review and network meta-analysis published by the authors, Medline, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and OpenGrey databases were searched for randomized control trials comparing different methods of laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery for the management of gastroesophageal disease. Quality assurance in individual studies was appraised using a specified framework addressing surgeon accreditation, procedure standardization, and performance monitoring. RESULTS: In total, 2276 articles were screened to obtain 43 publications reporting 29 randomized controlled trials. Twenty-five out of 43 (58.1%) articles reported the number of participating centers and surgeons involved. Additionally, only 21/43 (48.8%) of articles reported consistent use of a bougie, while 23/43 (53.5%) of articles reported consistent division of the short gastric arteries during fundoplication. Surgical experience and credentials were stated in half of the studies. Standardization of the technique was reported in almost 70% of cases, whereas operative notes or video was submitted in one fourth of the studies. Monitoring of the operative performance during the trial was not documented in most of the trials (62%). CONCLUSION: Surgical quality assurance in randomized trials on laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery is insufficient, which does not allow appraisal of the internal and external validity of this research. With improved reporting, trials assessing the use of laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery will enable surgeons to make informed treatment decisions to enhance patient care in the surgical management of GERD.

EAES, SAGES, and ESCP rapid guideline: bowel preparation for minimally invasive colorectal resection.

BACKGROUND: Variation exists in practice pertaining to bowel preparation before minimally invasive colorectal surgery. A survey of EAES members prioritized this topic to be addressed by a clinical practice guideline. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to develop evidence-informed clinical practice recommendations on the use of bowel preparation before minimally invasive colorectal surgery, through evidence synthesis and a structured evidence-to-decision framework by an interdisciplinary panel of stakeholders. METHODS: This is a collaborative project of EAES, SAGES, and ESCP. We updated a previous systematic review and performed a network meta-analysis of interventions. We appraised the certainty of the evidence for each comparison, using the GRADE and CINeMA methods. A panel of general and colorectal surgeons, infectious diseases specialists, an anesthetist, and a patient representative discussed the evidence in the context of benefits and harms, the certainty of the evidence, acceptability, feasibility, equity, cost, and use of resources, moderated by a GIN-certified master guideline developer and chair. We developed the recommendations in a consensus meeting, followed by a modified Delphi survey. RESULTS: The panel suggests either oral antibiotics alone prior to minimally invasive right colon resection or mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) plus oral antibiotics; MBP plus oral antibiotics prior to minimally invasive left colon and sigmoid resection, and prior to minimally invasive right colon resection when there is an intention to perform intracorporeal anastomosis; and MBP plus oral antibiotics plus enema prior to minimally invasive rectal surgery (conditional recommendations); and recommends MBP plus oral antibiotics prior to minimally invasive colorectal surgery, when there is an intention to localize the lesion intraoperatively (strong recommendation). The full guideline with user-friendly decision aids is available in https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/LwvKej . CONCLUSION: This guideline provides recommendations on bowel preparation prior to minimally invasive colorectal surgery for different procedures, using highest methodological standards, through a structured framework informed by key stakeholders. Guideline registration number PREPARE-2023CN045.

EAES rapid guideline: updated systematic review, network meta-analysis, CINeMA and GRADE assessment, and evidence-informed European recommendations on the management of common bile duct stones.

BACKGROUND: Choledocholithiasis presents in a considerable proportion of patients with gallbladder disease. There are several management options, including preoperative or intraoperative endoscopic cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-informed, interdisciplinary, European recommendations on the management of common bile duct stones in the context of intact gallbladder with a clinical decision to intervene to both the gallbladder and the common bile duct stones. METHODS: We updated a systematic review and network meta-analysis of LCBDE, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative ERCP. We formed evidence summaries using the GRADE and the CINeMA methodology, and a panel of general surgeons, gastroenterologists, and a patient representative contributed to the development of a GRADE evidence-to-decision framework to select among multiple interventions. RESULTS: The panel reached unanimous consensus on the first Delphi round. We suggest LCBDE over preoperative, intraoperative, or postoperative ERCP, when surgical experience and expertise are available; intraoperative ERCP over LCBDE, preoperative or postoperative ERCP, when this is logistically feasible in a given healthcare setting; and preoperative ERCP over LCBDE or postoperative ERCP, when intraoperative ERCP is not feasible and there is insufficient experience or expertise with LCBDE (weak recommendation). The evidence summaries and decision aids are available on the platform MAGICapp ( https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/nJ5zyL ). CONCLUSION: We developed a rapid guideline on the management of common bile duct stones in line with latest methodological standards. It can be used by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to inform clinical and policy decisions. GUIDELINE REGISTRATION NUMBER: IPGRP-2022CN170.

Grit and Thoracic Surgery Interest Among Medical Students.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the relationship between medical student Grit and thoracic surgery career interest. DESIGN: An online questionnaire was designed to measure self-reported ratings of Grit among medical student using the Short-Grit scale, as well as thoracic surgery career interest. SETTING: Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: From 2019 to 2021, 192/367 (52.3%) participants in their first or second year of medical school. The cohort was comprised of 109 (56.8%) females while 115 (59.9%) were <24 years of age. RESULTS: Mean Grit was high (M = 4.159 +/- 0.450) among medical students. There were 80 (41.2%) students interested in thoracic surgery. There was a significant difference in Grit between students with a career interest in thoracic surgery (4.256 +/- 0.442) and those uninterested in thoracic surgery (4.089 +/- 0.444); t(190) = 2.572, p = 0.011; Cohen's D = 0.442. Career interest in thoracic surgery was not influenced by career factor interest. CONCLUSIONS: Grittier students have a career interest in thoracic surgery. Recruitment teams in thoracic surgery residency programs with high rates of burnout and poor psychological wellbeing among trainees may take interest in these findings.

Double-row staple technology versus triple-row staple technology for colorectal surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Some observational data have suggested that anastomotic leak may be reduced with triple-row staple technology compared to double-row staple technology. We aimed to investigate this further by performing a systematic review comparing double- and triple-row staple technology for colorectal anastomoses. METHODS: This systematic review was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched up to November 2023. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they were comparing double-row staple and triple-row staple technology for left-sided colo-colic, colorectal, or coloanal anastomosis. The main outcomes included anastomotic leak, anastomotic hemorrhage, 30-day mortality, and reoperation. Meta-analyses with inverse variance random effects were performed. Certainty of evidence was assessed with Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations. RESULTS: After reviewing 340 relevant citations, 6 retrospective cohort studies met inclusion. Overall, 19,372 patients (mean age: 60.2 years, 52.7% female sex) had anastomoses with double-row staple technology, and 2,298 patients (mean age: 61.3 years, 50.3% female sex) with triple-row staple technology. Most operations were anterior resections (double-row: 55.3%; triple-row: 43.6%). Across all included studies, the risk of anastomotic leak was reduced with triple-row staple technology (6.3% vs 7.5%, risk ratio 0.54, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.94, P = .03, I2=75%). There were no significant differences in anastomotic hemorrhage (risk ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.15-1.49, P = .20, I2 = 57%), 30-day mortality (risk ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.17-2.55, P = .55, I2 = 0%), or reoperation (risk ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 0.42-2.64, P = .91, I2 = 56%). CONCLUSION: Triple-row staple technology may reduce the risk of anastomotic leak in left-sided colorectal anastomoses.

Canadian medical student perceptions of the Choosing Wisely Canada campaign.

Background: Medical student investment in resource stewardship (RS) is essential as resource overuse continues among physicians, but it is unclear whether this is influenced by hidden curriculum. This study investigated medical student perceptions of Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC). Methods: Canadian Medical students completed a bilingual questionnaire. Chi-square and student's T-tests were used to analyze Likert responses capturing student attitudes toward questions grouped by theme, including the importance of the CWC campaign, the amount of CWC represented in undergraduate medical curriculum, the application of CWC recommendations in medicine, and the barriers which exist to student advocacy for CWC in practice. Results: There were 3,239/11,754 (26.9%) respondents. While most students (n = 2,720/3,171; 85.8%) endorsed the importance of CWC, few students felt that their institution had sufficiently integrated CWC into pre-clerkship (47.0%) and clerkship (63.5%) curricula. Overall, 61.4% of students felt that it is reasonable to expect physicians to apply CWC recommendations given the workplace culture in medicine. Only 35.1% students were comfortable addressing resource misuse with their preceptor. The most common barriers included the assumption that their preceptor was more knowledgeable (86.4%), concern over evaluations (66.0%), and concern for their reputation (31.2%). Conclusions: Canadian medical students recognize the importance of CWC. However, many trainees feel that the workplace culture in medicine does not support the application of CWC recommendations. A power imbalance exists that prevents students from advocating for RS in practice.

Contexte: Il est essentiel que les étudiants en médecine se préoccupent de la gestion des ressources, qui sont encore surutilisées par les médecins, sans qu'il soit clair qu'il s'agisse d'un effet du curriculum caché. La présente étude examine sure des étudiants en médecine concernant la campagne Choisir avec soin (CWC). Méthodes: Des étudiants en médecine canadiens ont été invités à répondre à un questionnaire bilingue. Le test du chi carré et le test de Student ont été utilisés pour analyser leurs réponses, exprimées sur une échelle de Likert, reflétant leur position sur des questions regroupées par thème, notamment l'importance de la campagne CWC, le degré d'intégration des principes de la CWC dans le programme d'études médicales de premier cycle, l'application des recommandations de la CWC en médecine et les facteurs qui peuvent freiner la promotion de la CWC par les étudiants. Résultats: Parmi les 3 239 répondants (soit 26,9% des 11 754 étudiants sondés) la plupart (n=2 720/3 171 ; 85,8 %) reconnaissaient l'importance de la CWC, mais peu d'étudiants estimaient que leur établissement avait suffisamment intégré la CWC au pré-externat (47,0 %) et à l'externat (63,5 %). Dans l'ensemble, 61,4 % des étudiants estimaient qu'il était raisonnable d'attendre des médecins qu'ils appliquent les recommandations de la CWC, compte tenu de la culture du milieu médical. Seuls 35,1 % des étudiants étaient à l'aise d'aborder la question de la mauvaise utilisation des ressources avec leur précepteur. Les obstacles les plus courants étaient l'idée que leur superviseur était sans doute mieux informé qu'eux (86,4 %), et des craintes quant à leur évaluation (66,0%) ou à leur réputation (31,2%). Conclusions: Les étudiants en médecine canadiens reconnaissent l'importance de la CWC. Cependant, ils sont nombreux à croire que la culture du lieu de travail en médecine ne favorise pas la mise en pratique des recommandations de la CWC. Le rapport de pouvoir qui y existe empêche les étudiants de défendre l'IR dans la pratique.

Screening Criteria Evaluation for Expansion in Pulmonary Neoplasias (SCREEN).

The SCREEN study investigated screening eligibility and survival outcomes between heavy smokers and light-or-never-smokers with lung cancer to determine whether expanded risk factor analysis is needed to refine screening criteria. SCREEN is a retrospective study of 917 lung cancer patients diagnosed between 2005 and 2018 in Nova Scotia, Canada. Screening eligibility was determined using the National Lung Screening Trial (NSLT) criteria. Mortality risk between heavy smokers and light-or-never-smokers was compared using proportional-hazards models. The median follow-up was 2.9 years. The cohort was comprised of 179 (46.1%) female heavy smokers and 306 (57.8%) female light-or-never-smokers. Light-or-never-smokers were more likely to have a diagnosis of adenocarcinoma [n=378 (71.6%)] compared to heavy smokers [n=234 (60.5%); P< 0.001]. Heavy smokers were more frequently diagnosed with squamous cell carcinoma [n=111 (28.7%)] compared to light-or-never-smokers, [n=100 (18.9%); P< 0.001]. Overall, 36.9% (338) of patients met NLST screening criteria. There was no difference in 5-year survival between light-or-never-smokers and heavy smokers [55.2% (338) vs 58.5% (529); P = 0.408; HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.80-1.40; P = 0.704]. Multivariate analysis showed that males had an increased mortality risk [HR 2.00 (95% CI 1.57-2.54); P< 0.001]. Half of lung cancer patients were missed with the conventional screening criteria. There were more curable, stage 1 tumors among light-or-never-smokers. Smoking status and age alone may be insufficient predictors of lung cancer risk and prognosis. Expanded risk factor analysis is needed to refine lung cancer screening criteria.

Innovation in gastrointestinal surgery: the evolution of minimally invasive surgery-a narrative review.

Background: Minimally invasive (MI) surgery has revolutionised surgery, becoming the standard of care in many countries around the globe. Observed benefits over traditional open surgery include reduced pain, shorter hospital stay, and decreased recovery time. Gastrointestinal surgery in particular was an early adaptor to both laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Within this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the evolution of minimally invasive gastrointestinal surgery and a critical outlook on the evidence surrounding its effectiveness and safety. Methods: A literature review was conducted to identify relevant articles for the topic of this review. The literature search was performed using Medical Subject Heading terms on PubMed. The methodology for evidence synthesis was in line with the four steps for narrative reviews outlined in current literature. The key words used were minimally invasive, robotic, laparoscopic colorectal, colon, rectal surgery. Conclusion: The introduction of minimally surgery has revolutionised patient care. Despite the evidence supporting this technique in gastrointestinal surgery, several controversies remain. Here we discuss some of them; the lack of high level evidence regarding the oncological outcomes of TaTME and lack of supporting evidence for robotic colorectalrectal surgery and upper GI surgery. These controversies open pathways for future research opportunities with RCTs focusing on comparing robotic to laparoscopic with different primary outcomes including ergonomics and surgeon comfort.

The impact of the European Association of Endoscopic Surgery research grant scheme-a mixed qualitative quantitative methodology study protocol.

Background: The European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) is a surgical society who promotes the development and expansion of minimally invasive surgery to surgeons and surgical trainees. It does so through its activities in education, training, and research. The EAES research committee aims to promote the highest quality clinical research in endoscopic and minimally invasive surgery. They have provided grant funding since 2009 in education, surgery, and basic science. Despite the success and longevity of the scheme, the academic and non-academic impact of the research funding scheme has not been evaluated. Aims: The primary aim of this project is to assess the short, long term academic and real world impact of the EAES funding scheme. The secondary aims are to identify barriers and facilitators for achieving good impact. Methods: This will be a mixed qualitative and quantitative study. Semi-structured interviews will be performed with previous grant recipients. The questions for the interviews will be selected after a consensus is achieved amongst the members of the steering committee of this project. The responses will be transcribed and thematic analysis will be applied. The results of the thematic analysis will be used to populate a questionnaire which will be disseminated to grant recipients. This study is kindly funded by the EAES. Discussion: The first question this project is expected to answer is whether the EAES research funding scheme had a significant positive impact on research output, career progression but also non-academic output such as change in clinical guidelines, healthcare quality and cost-effectiveness improvement. This project however is also expected to identify facilitators and barriers to successful completion of projects and to achieving high impact. This will inform EAES and the rest of the surgical and academic communities as to how clinicians would like to be supported when conducting research. There should also be a positive and decisive change towards removing factors that hinder the timely and successful completion of projects.

The Relation of Grit and Surgical Specialty Interest Among Medical Students.

OBJECTIVE: The assessment of Grit among medical students applying to surgical residency programs may be useful, but the relationship between student Grit and surgical specialty interest is not clear. This study investigated whether medical student Grit differs based on interest in direct-entry surgical specialties. DESIGN: A literature search informed the development of a cross-sectional study assessing medical student ratings of the validated 6-item Short-Grit scale. Medical students also indicated their career preferences. SETTING: Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada; a tertiary medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Surgical specialty interest and Grittiness were assessed among 297 (50.4%) pre-clerkship medical students in their first or second year of training. Data was collected from program applicants over 4 years. RESULTS: Medical students had high levels of Grit (M = 4.029, SD = 0.517). There was a significant difference in Grit level between medical students interested in cardiac surgery ([M = 4.197, SD = 0.471 vs M = 3.919, 0.518]; t(295) = 4.674, p < 0.001; Cohen's D = 0.556), general surgery ([M = 4.178, SD = 0.466 vs M = 3.916, 0.527]; t(295) = 4.434, p < 0.001; Cohen's D = 0.520), neurosurgery ([M = 4.238, SD = 0.457 vs M = 3.950, 0.518]; t(295) = 4.412, p < 0.001; Cohen's D = 0.575), plastic surgery ([M = 4.138, SD = 0.497 vs M = 3.967, 0.520]; t(295) = 2.747, p = 0.006; Cohen's D = 0.333), and vascular surgery (M = 4.248, SD = 0.368 vs M = 3.948, 0.541); t(295) = 4.570, p < 0.001; Cohen's D = 0.501). CONCLUSIONS: Medical students with a career interest in "poor lifestyle" surgical specialties have higher Grit than their peers. These findings may be noteworthy for surgical residency programs with high rates of attrition and burnout.

Impact of Clopidogrel Stop Interval on Major Adverse Bleeding Events in Cardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Major societal guidelines recommend a 5-day stop interval before cardiac surgery for patients with acute coronary syndrome receiving clopidogrel. Yet, many such patients present with high acuity, generating surgeon inclination toward use of shorter stop intervals. Thus, this study aimed to determine the impact of the duration and timing of the interval of clopidogrel cessation on adverse bleeding events. METHODS: Patients who underwent cardiac surgery between 2009 and 2016 at a tertiary-care centre were included in this retrospective cohort study. Multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for clopidogrel stop interval, age, urgency of procedure, and procedure type were used to quantify the effect of clinically relevant baseline demographic characteristics on incidence of massive transfusion as well as hemorrhagic complication outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 5748 patients underwent cardiac surgery. In this cohort, 1743 patients (30.3%) received clopidogrel preoperatively, and 884 (50.7%) of these patients discontinued clopidogrel 5 days before presenting to the operating room. The administration of clopidogrel 1-2 days before surgery (odds ratio 1.97; 95% confidence interval: 1.18 to 3.29) was an independent predictor for massive transfusions and hemorrhagic complications (odds ratio 1.85; 95% confidence interval: 1.01 to 3.37). The 3-4 day group did not have an increased risk of major bleeding complications. The risk for both massive transfusions and hemorrhagic complications also increased with the urgency and complexity of surgery. CONCLUSION: A clopidogrel stop interval of 3-4 days preoperatively was not associated with an increased risk for major bleeding complications.

INTRODUCTION: Les grandes lignes directrices sociétales recommandent une interruption de cinq jours avant l'intervention chirurgicale du cœur des patients atteints d'un syndrome coronarien aigu qui prennent du clopidogrel. Toutefois, comme il s'agit pour plusieurs d'entre eux de patients de haute acuité, le chirurgien penche vers l'utilisation d'une interruption plus courte. Par conséquent, la présente étude avait pour objectif de déterminer les conséquences de la durée et du moment de la cessation du clopidogrel sur les événements hémorragiques indésirables. MÉTHODES: La présente étude de cohorte rétrospective portait sur les patients qui avaient subi une intervention chirurgicale au cœur entre 2009 et 2016 dans un centre de soins tertiaires. Nous avons utilisé les modèles multivariés de régression logistique ajustés à l'interruption du clopidogrel, à l'âge, à l'urgence de l'intervention chirurgicale et au type d'intervention chirurgicale pour quantifier les effets des caractéristiques démographiques initiales cliniquement pertinentes sur la fréquence des transfusions massives ainsi que sur les issues des complications hémorragiques. RÉSULTATS: Un total de 5 748 patients ont subi une intervention chirurgicale au cœur. Dans cette cohorte, parmi les 1 743 patients (30,3 %) qui avaient reçu du clopidogrel avant l'opération, 884 (50,7 %) avaient cessé le clopidogrel cinq jours avant leur admission à la salle d'opération. L'administration du clopidogrel un à deux jours avant l'intervention chirurgicale (ratio d'incidence approché 1,97; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % : de 1,18 à 3,29) était un prédicteur indépendant des transfusions massives et des complications hémorragiques (ratio d'incidence approché 1,85; [IC] à 95 % : de 1,01 à 3,37). Le groupe de l'interruption de trois à quatre jours n'a pas montré de risque accru de complications hémorragiques graves. Le risque de transfusions massives et de complications hémorragiques a aussi contribué à l'augmentation de l'urgence et de la complexité de l'intervention chirurgicale. CONCLUSION: Une interruption du clopidogrel de trois à quatre jours avant l'opération n'a pas été associée à un risque accru de complications hémorragiques graves.

UEG and EAES rapid guideline: Update systematic review, network meta-analysis, CINeMA and GRADE assessment, and evidence-informed European recommendations on surgical management of GERD.

BACKGROUND: There are several options for the surgical management of GERD in adults. Previous guidelines and systematic reviews have compared the effects of total fundoplication versus pooled effects of different techniques of partial fundoplication. OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-informed, trustworthy, pertinent recommendations on the use of total, posterior partial and anterior partial fundoplications for the management of GERD in adults. METHODS: We performed an update systematic review, network meta-analysis, and evidence appraisal using the GRADE and the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis methodologies. An international, multidisciplinary panel of surgeons, gastroenterologists, and a patient representative reached unanimous consensus through an evidence-to-decision framework to select among multiple interventions, and a Delphi process to formulate the recommendation. The project was developed in an online authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp), and was overseen by an external auditor. RESULTS: We suggest posterior partial fundoplication over total posterior or anterior 90° fundoplication in adult patients with GERD. We suggest anterior >90° fundoplication as an alternative, although relevant comparative evidence is limited (weak recommendation). The guideline, with recommendations, evidence summaries and decision aids in user friendly formats can also be accessed in MAGICapp: https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/j20X4n. CONCLUSION: This rapid guideline was developed in line with highest methodological standards and provides evidence-informed recommendations on the surgical management of GERD. It provides user-friendly decision aids to inform healthcare professionals' and patients' decision making.

The Effectiveness of an Interprofessional Education Course in Teaching the Importance of Choosing Wisely and Resource Stewardship: A Pilot Study.

Objectives Rising health care costs and an increase in unnecessary testing have sparked interest in resource stewardship (RS) and subsequently the Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC) campaign. Currently, all Canadian medical schools have student representatives for CWC; however, the same is not true in other health professions. Interprofessional care learned through interprofessional education (IPE) can lead to better patient outcomes. This study assessed whether an IPE course for health profession students was effective in teaching undergraduate students both interprofessional competencies and CWC principles. Methods An approximately seven-hour-long, four-session course was administered to Dalhousie University health profession students (N= 30). A validated survey for IPE competencies and a general survey about CWC principles were administered to assess the course. Descriptive statistics were used to assess the general CWC views, and paired samples t-tests were employed to compare pre- and post-IPE competencies. Results The full survey was completed by 25 (83%) students. Of these, 52% were female, within five health disciplines, and 13 (52%) had heard of CWC prior. Overall, the students agreed that CWC was important and relevant to their profession. They also reported significant improvements in multiple IPE competencies, including communication, collaboration, roles and responsibilities, patient-/family-centered care, conflict management/resolution, and team function. Conclusion Participants in our pilot Choosing Wisely IPE course valued the importance of the CWC campaign and reported improvement in multiple IPE competencies. This adaptable, simple, and low-cost course may be an effective way to integrate RS teaching across multiple health professions.