Evaluation of objective tools and artificial intelligence in robotic surgery technical skills assessment: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: There is a need to standardize training in robotic surgery, including objective assessment for accreditation. This systematic review aimed to identify objective tools for technical skills assessment, providing evaluation statuses to guide research and inform implementation into training curricula. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Ovid Embase/Medline, PubMed and Web of Science were searched. Inclusion criterion: robotic surgery technical skills tools. Exclusion criteria: non-technical, laparoscopy or open skills only. Manual tools and automated performance metrics (APMs) were analysed using Messick's concept of validity and the Oxford Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) Levels of Evidence and Recommendation (LoR). A bespoke tool analysed artificial intelligence (AI) studies. The Modified Downs-Black checklist was used to assess risk of bias. RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-seven studies were analysed, identifying: 8 global rating scales, 26 procedure-/task-specific tools, 3 main error-based methods, 10 simulators, 28 studies analysing APMs and 53 AI studies. Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills and the da Vinci Skills Simulator were the most evaluated tools at LoR 1 (OCEBM). Three procedure-specific tools, 3 error-based methods and 1 non-simulator APMs reached LoR 2. AI models estimated outcomes (skill or clinical), demonstrating superior accuracy rates in the laboratory with 60 per cent of methods reporting accuracies over 90 per cent, compared to real surgery ranging from 67 to 100 per cent. CONCLUSIONS: Manual and automated assessment tools for robotic surgery are not well validated and require further evaluation before use in accreditation processes.PROSPERO: registration ID CRD42022304901.

BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery is increasingly used worldwide to treat many different diseases. The robot is controlled by a surgeon, which may give them greater precision and better outcomes for patients. However, surgeons' robotic skills should be assessed properly, to make sure patients are safe, to improve feedback and for exam assessments for certification to indicate competency. This should be done by experts, using assessment tools that have been agreed upon and proven to work. AIM: This review's aim was to find and explain which training and examination tools are best for assessing surgeons' robotic skills and to find out what gaps remain requiring future research. METHOD: This review searched for all available studies looking at assessment tools in robotic surgery and summarized their findings using several different methods. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION: Two hundred and forty-seven studies were looked at, finding many assessment tools. Further research is needed for operation-specific and automatic assessment tools before they should be used in the clinical setting.

Assessment and application of non-technical skills in robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Undeniably, robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has become very popular in recent decades, but it has introduced challenges to the workflow of the surgical team. Non-technical skills (NTS) have received less emphasis than technical skills in training and assessment. The systematic review aimed to update the evidence on the role of NTS in robotic surgery, specifically focusing on evaluating assessment tools and their utilisation in training and surgical education in robotic surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature search of PubMed, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and EMBASE was conducted to identify primary articles on NTS in RAS. Messick's validity framework and the Modified Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument were utilised to evaluate the quality of the validity evidence of the abstracted articles. RESULTS: Seventeen studies were eligible for the final analysis. Communication, environmental factors, anticipation and teamwork were key NTS for RAS. Team-related factors such as ambient noise and chatter, inconveniences due to repeated requests during the procedure and constraints due to poor design of the operating room may harm patient safety during RAS. Three novel rater-based scoring systems and one sensor-based method for assessing NTS in RAS were identified. Anticipation by the team to predict and execute the next move before an explicit verbal command improved the surgeon's situational awareness. CONCLUSION: This systematic review highlighted the paucity of reporting on non-technical skills in robotic surgery with only three bespoke objective assessment tools being identified. Communication, environmental factors, anticipation, and teamwork are the key non-technical skills reported in robotic surgery, and further research is required to investigate their benefits to improve patient safety during robotic surgery.

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.

Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery Outcomes Improved After National Training Program (LAPCO) for Specialists in England.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of The National Training Program for Lapco on the rate of laparoscopic surgery and clinical outcomes of cases performed by Lapco surgeons after completion of training. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lapco provided competency-based supervised clinical training for specialist colorectal surgeons in England. METHODS: We compared the rate of laparoscopic surgery, mortality, and morbidity for colorectal cancer resections by Lapco delegates and non-Lapco surgeons in 3-year periods preceding and following Lapco using difference in differences analysis. The changes in the rate of post-Lapco laparoscopic surgery with the Lapco sign-off competency assessment and in-training global assessment scores were examined using risk-adjusted cumulative sum to determine their predictive clinical validity with predefined competent scores of 3 and 5 respectively. RESULTS: One hundred eight Lapco delegates performed 4586 elective colo-rectal resections pre-Lapco and 5115 post-Lapco while non-Lapco surgeons performed 72,930 matched cases. Lapco delegates had a 37.8% increase in laparoscopic surgery which was greater than non-Lapco surgeons by 20.9% [95% confidence interval (CI), 18.5-23.3, P < 0.001) with a relative decrease in 30-day mortality by -1.6% (95% CI, -3.4 to -0.2, P = 0.039) and 90-day mortality by -2.3% (95% CI, -4.3 to -0.4, P = 0.018). The change point of risk-adjusted cumulative sum was 3.12 for competency assessment tool and 4.74 for global assessment score whereas laparoscopic rate increased from 44% to 66% and 40% to 56%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Lapco increased the rate of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery and reduced mortality and morbidity in England. In-training competency assessment tools predicted clinical performance after training.

Environmental sustainability in robotic and laparoscopic surgery: systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques are considered the gold standard of surgical interventions, but they have a high environmental cost. With global temperatures rising and unmet surgical needs persisting, this review investigates the carbon and material footprint of MIS and summarizes strategies to make MIS greener. METHODS: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases were interrogated between 1974 and July 2021. The search strategy encompassed surgical setting, waste, carbon footprint, environmental sustainability, and MIS. Two investigators independently performed abstract/full-text reviews. An analysis of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted per ton of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) or waste produced was generated. RESULTS: From the 2456 abstracts identified, 16 studies were selected reporting on 5203 MIS procedures. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions ranged from 6 kg to 814 kg CO2e per case. Carbon footprint hotspots included production of disposables and anaesthetics. The material footprint of MIS ranged from 0.25 kg to 14.3 kg per case. Waste-reduction strategies included repackaging disposables, limiting open and unused instruments, and educational interventions. Robotic procedures result in 43.5 per cent higher GHG emissions, 24 per cent higher waste production, fewer DALYs averted per ton of CO2, and less waste than laparoscopic alternatives. CONCLUSION: The increased environmental impact of robotic surgery may not sufficiently offset the clinical benefit. Utilizing alternative surgical approaches, reusable equipment, repackaging, surgeon preference cards, and increasing staff awareness on open and unused equipment and desflurane avoidance can reduce GHG emissions and waste.

Safety and effectiveness of live broadcast of surgical procedures: systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Live Broadcast of Surgical Procedures (LBSP) has gained popularity in conferences and educational meetings in the past few decades. This is due to rapid advancement in both Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) that enable transmission of the entire operative field and transmission ease and technology to help broadcast the operation to a live audience. The aim of this study was to update the evidence with specific emphasis on the patient safety issues related to LBSP in MIS. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed using Medline, Embase and Pubmed using defined search terms related to LBSP in educational events across all surgical specialities, in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. We also consolidated the prior guidelines and position statements on this topic. Outcomes included reports on the educational value of LBSP as well as patient safety outcomes and ethical issues that were captured by clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total 1230 abstracts were identified with 27 papers meeting the inclusion criteria (13 original articles and 14 position statements/guidelines). All studies highlighted the educational benefits of LBSP but without clear measure of these benefits. Clinical outcomes were not compromised in 9 studies but were inferior in the remaining 4, including lower completion rate of endoscopic surgery and higher rate of re-operation. Only nine studies complied with dedicated consent forms for LBSP with no consistent approach of reporting on maintaining patient confidentiality during LBSP. There was a lack of recommendation on standardised approach of reporting on LBSP including the outcomes across the 14 published guidelines and positions statements. CONCLUSIONS: Live Broadcast of Surgical Procedures can be of educational value but patient safety may be compromised. A standardised framework of reporting on LBSP and its outcomes is required from an ethical and patient safety perspective. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42021256901.

UEG and EAES rapid guideline: Systematic review, meta-analysis, GRADE assessment and evidence-informed European recommendations on TaTME for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Evidence and practice recommendations on the use of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer are conflicting. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to summarize best evidence and develop a rapid guideline using transparent, trustworthy, and standardized methodology. METHODS: We developed a rapid guideline in accordance with GRADE, G-I-N, and AGREE II standards. The steering group consisted of general surgeons, members of the EAES Research Committee/Guidelines Subcommittee with expertise and experience in guideline development, advanced medical statistics and evidence synthesis, biostatisticians, and a guideline methodologist. The guideline panel consisted of four general surgeons practicing colorectal surgery, a radiologist with expertise in rectal cancer, a radiation oncologist, a pathologist, and a patient representative. We conducted a systematic review and the results of evidence synthesis by means of meta-analyses were summarized in evidence tables. Recommendations were authored and published through an online authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp), with the guideline panel making use of an evidence-to-decision framework and a Delphi process to arrive at consensus. RESULTS: This rapid guideline provides a weak recommendation for the use of TaTME over laparoscopic or robotic TME for low rectal cancer when expertise is available. Furthermore, it details evidence gaps to be addressed by future research and discusses policy considerations. The guideline, with recommendations, evidence summaries, and decision aids in user-friendly formats can also be accessed in MAGICapp: https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/4494 . CONCLUSIONS: This rapid guideline provides evidence-informed trustworthy recommendations on the use of TaTME for rectal cancer.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Elective Abdominal and Pelvic Surgery at Primary and Secondary Hospitals in Low-Middle-Income Countries (LMIC's): Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendation.

BACKGROUND: This is the first Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society guideline for primary and secondary hospitals in low-middle-income countries (LMIC's) for elective abdominal and gynecologic care. METHODS: The ERAS LMIC Guidelines group was established by the ERAS® Society in collaboration with different representatives of perioperative care from LMIC's. The group consisted of seven members from the ERAS® Society and eight members from LMIC's. An updated systematic literature search and evaluation of evidence from previous ERAS® guidelines was performed by the leading authors of the Colorectal (2018) and Gynecologic (2019) surgery guidelines (Gustafsson et al in World J Surg 43:6592-695, Nelson et al in Int J Gynecol Cancer 29(4):651-668). Meta-analyses randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective cohort studies from both HIC's and LMIC's were considered for each perioperative item. The members in the LMIC group then applied the current evidence and adapted the recommendations for each intervention as well as identifying possible new items relevant to LMIC's. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system (GRADE) methodology was used to determine the quality of the published evidence. The strength of the recommendations was based on importance of the problem, quality of evidence, balance between desirable and undesirable effects, acceptability to key stakeholders, cost of implementation and specifically the feasibility of implementing in LMIC's and determined through discussions and consensus. RESULTS: In addition to previously described ERAS® Society interventions, the following items were included, revised or discussed: the Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC), preoperative routine human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing in countries with a high prevalence of HIV/AIDS (CD4 and viral load for those patients that are HIV positive), delirium screening and prevention, COVID 19 screening, VTE prophylaxis, immuno-nutrition, prehabilitation, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and a standardized postoperative monitoring guideline. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are seen as a starting point to address the urgent need to improve perioperative care and to effect data-driven, evidence-based care in LMIC's.

Clinical Evaluation of Intraoperative Near Misses in Laparoscopic Rectal Cancer Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the frequency, nature, and severity of intraoperative adverse near miss events within advanced laparoscopic surgery and report any associated clinical impact. BACKGROUND: Despite implementation of surgical safety initiatives, the intraoperative period is poorly documented with evidence of underreporting. Near miss analyses are undertaken in high-risk industries but not in surgical practice. METHODS: Case video and data from 2 laparoscopic total mesorectal excision randomized controlled trials were analyzed (ALaCaRT ACTRN12609000663257, 2D3D ISRCTN59485808). Intraoperative adverse events were identified and categorized using the observational clinical human reliability analysis technique. The EAES classification was applied by 2 blinded assessors. EAES grade 1 events (nonconsequential error, no damage, or need for correction) were considered near misses. Associated clinical impact was assessed with early morbidity and histopathology outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-five cases contained 1113 error events. Six hundred ninety-eight (62.7%) were near misses (median 3, IQR 2-5, range 0-15) with excellent inter-rater and test-retest reliability (κ=0.86, 95% CI 0.83-0.89, P < 0.001 and κ=0.88, 95% CI 0.85-0.9, P < 0.001 respectively). Significantly more near misses were seen in patients who developed early complications (4 (3-6) vs. 3 (2-4), P < 0.001). Higher numbers of near misses were seen in patients with more numerous (P = 0.002) and more serious early complications (P = 0.003). Cases containing major intraoperative adverse events contained significantly more near misses (5 (3-7) vs. 3 (2-5), P < 0.001) with a major event observed for every 19.4 near misses. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative adverse events and near misses can be reliably and objectively captured in advanced laparoscopic surgery. Near misses are commonplace and closely associated with morbidity outcomes.

Impact and outcomes of postoperative anaemia in colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review.

AIM: Preoperative anaemia is common in colorectal cancer patients. Little attention has been given to the prevalence and consequences of postoperative anaemia. The aim of this study was to systematically review the published literature and determine the knowledge of the prevalence and impact of postoperative anaemia in colorectal cancer patients. METHODS: The databases Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Medline, via EBSCOhost, were systematically searched to identify suitable articles published between 2004 and 2020. After an initial search, articles were screened and all eligible articles reporting on the prevalence of postoperative anaemia and clinical and long-term outcome data in colorectal cancer patients undergoing surgery were included. The Risk of Bias 2.0 tool for the assessment of randomized controlled trials and the Risk of Bias 1.0 tool for non-randomized studies were used for the assessment of bias in the studies selected in our review. RESULTS: Six studies, one randomized control trial and five cohort studies, were included with a total population size of 1714. The prevalence of anaemia at discharge of 76.6% was reported as the primary end-point in only one study. The rate of red blood cell transfusion and length of hospital stay were found to be significantly increased in anaemic patients, while postoperative infection rate results were variable. Quality of life scores and overall survival at 5 years were significantly affected among anaemic patients as reported in two papers. CONCLUSION: The available limited evidence on postoperative anaemia indicates its high prevalence with negative impact on clinical and long-term outcomes. Further research is required to standardize the measurement and address the true impact of correcting postoperative anaemia on functional and oncological outcomes.

Insight into the methodology and uptake of EAES guidelines: a qualitative analysis and survey by the EAES Consensus & Guideline Subcommittee.

BACKGROUND: Over the past 25 years, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) has been issuing clinical guidance documents to aid surgical practice. We aimed to investigate the awareness and use of such documents among EAES members. Additionally, we conceptually appraised the methodology used in their development in order to propose a bundle of actions for quality improvement and increased penetration of clinical practice guidelines among EAES members. METHODS: We invited members of EAES to participate in a web-based survey on awareness and use of these documents. Post hoc analyses were performed to identify factors associated with poor awareness/use and the reported reasons for limited use. We further summarized and conceptually analyzed key methodological features of clinical guidance documents published by EAES. RESULTS: Three distinct consecutive phases of methodological evolvement of clinical guidance documents were evident: a "consensus phase," a "guideline phase," and a "transitional phase". Out of a total of 254 surgeons who completed the survey, 72% percent were aware of EAES guidelines and 47% reported occasional use. Young age and trainee status were associated with poor awareness and use. Restriction by colleagues was the primary reason for limited use in these subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The methodology of EAES clinical guidance documents is evolving. Awareness among EAES members is fair, but use is limited. Dissemination actions should be directed to junior surgeons and trainees.

Guideline Assessment Project II: statistical calibration informed the development of an AGREE II extension for surgical guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To inform the development of an AGREE II extension specifically tailored for surgical guidelines. AGREE II was designed to inform the development, reporting, and appraisal of clinical practice guidelines. Previous research has suggested substantial room for improvement of the quality of surgical guidelines. METHODS: A previously published search in MEDLINE for clinical practice guidelines published by surgical scientific organizations with an international scope between 2008 and 2017, resulted in a total of 67 guidelines. The quality of these guidelines was assessed using AGREE II. We performed a series of statistical analyses (reliability, correlation and Factor Analysis, Item Response Theory) with the objective to calibrate AGREE II for use specifically in surgical guidelines. RESULTS: Reliability/correlation/factor analysis and Item Response Theory produced similar results and suggested that a structure of 5 domains, instead of 6 domains of the original instrument, might be more appropriate. Furthermore, exclusion and re-arrangement of items to other domains was found to increase the reliability of AGREE II when applied in surgical guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest that statistical calibration of AGREE II might improve the development, reporting, and appraisal of surgical guidelines.

Impact of anaemia at discharge following colorectal cancer surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Preoperative anaemia is common in patients with colorectal cancer and increasingly optimised prior to surgery. Comparably little attention is given to the prevalence and consequences of postoperative anaemia. We aimed to investigate the frequency and short- or long-term impact of anaemia at discharge following colorectal cancer resection. METHODS: A dedicated, prospectively populated database of elective laparoscopic colorectal cancer procedures undertaken with curative intent within a fully implemented ERAS protocol was utilised. The primary endpoint was anaemia at time of discharge (haemoglobin (Hb) < 120 g/L for women and < 135 g/L for men). Patient demographics, tumour characteristics, operative details and postoperative outcomes were captured. Median follow-up was 61 months with overall survival calculated with the Kaplan-Meier log rank method and Cox proportional hazard regression based on anaemia at time of hospital discharge. RESULTS: A total of 532 patients with median 61-month follow-up were included. 46.4% were anaemic preoperatively (cohort mean Hb 129.4 g/L ± 18.7). Median surgical blood loss was 100 mL (IQR 0-200 mL). Upon discharge, most patients were anaemic (76.6%, Hb 116.3 g/L ± 14, mean 19 g/L ± 11 below lower limit of normal, p < 0.001). 16.7% experienced postoperative complications which were associated with lower discharge Hb (112 g/L ± 12 vs. 117 g/L ± 14, p = 0.001). Patients discharged anaemic had longer hospital stays (7 [5-11] vs. 6 [5-8], p = 0.037). Anaemia at discharge was independently associated with reduced overall survival (82% vs. 70%, p = 0.018; HR 1.6 (95% CI 1.04-2.5), p = 0.034). CONCLUSION: Anaemia at time of discharge following elective laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery and ERAS care is common with associated negative impacts upon short-term clinical outcomes and long-term overall survival.

Assessing the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic antireflux procedures for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review with network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the extensive literature on laparoscopic antireflux surgery, comparative evidence across different procedures is scarce. The aim of this study was to assess and rank the most efficacious and safe laparoscopic procedures for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. METHODS: Medline, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and OpenGrey databases were queried for randomized trials comparing two or more laparoscopic antireflux procedures with each other or with medical treatment for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Pairwise meta-analyses were conducted for each pair of interventions using a random-effects model. Network meta-analysis was employed to assess the relative efficacy and safety of laparoscopic antireflux procedures for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. RESULTS: Forty-four publications reporting 29 randomized trials which included 1892 patients were identified. The network of treatments was sparse with only a closed loop between different types of wraps; 270°, 360°, anterior 180° and anterior 90°; and star network between 360° and other treatments; and between anterior 180° and other treatments. Laparoscopic 270° (odds ratio, OR 1.19, 95% confidence interval, CI 0.64-2.22), anterior 180°, and anterior 90° were equally effective as 360° for control of heartburn, although this finding was supported by low quality of evidence according to GRADE modification for NMA. The odds for dysphagia were lower after 270° (OR 0.38, 95%, CI 0.24-0.60), anterior 90° (moderate quality evidence), and anterior 180° (low-quality evidence) compared to 360°. The odds for gas-bloat were lower after 270° (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27, 0.95) and after anterior 90° compared to 360° (low-quality evidence). Regurgitation, morbidity, and reoperation were similar across treatments, albeit these were associated with very low-quality evidence. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic 270° fundoplication achieves a better outcome than 360° total fundoplication, especially in terms of postoperative dysphagia, although other types of partial fundoplication might be equally effective. REGISTRATION NO: CRD42017074783.

Competency assessment tool for laparoscopic suturing: development and reliability evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic suturing can be technically challenging and requires extensive training to achieve competency. To date no specific and objective assessment method for laparoscopic suturing and knot tying is available that can guide training and monitor performance in these complex surgical skills. In this study we aimed to develop a laparoscopic suturing competency assessment tool (LS-CAT) and assess its inter-observer reliability. METHODS: We developed a bespoke CAT tool for laparoscopic suturing through a structured, mixed methodology approach, overseen by a steering committee with experience in developing surgical assessment tools. A wide Delphi consultation with over twelve experts in laparoscopic surgery guided the development stages of the tool. Following, subjects with different levels of laparoscopic expertise were included to evaluate this tool, using a simulated laparoscopic suturing task which involved placing of two surgical knots. A research assistant video recorded and anonymised each performance. Two blinded expert surgeons assessed the anonymised videos using the developed LS-CAT. The LS-CAT scores of the two experts were compared to assess the inter-observer reliability. Lastly, we compared the subjects' LS-CAT performance scores at the beginning and end of their learning curve. RESULTS: This study evaluated a novel LS-CAT performance tool, comprising of four tasks. Thirty-six complete videos were analysed and evaluated with the LS-CAT, of which the scores demonstrated excellent inter-observer reliability. Cohen's Kappa analysis revealed good to excellent levels of agreement for almost all tasks of both instrument handling and tissue handling (0.87; 0.77; 0.75; 0.86; 0.85, all with p < 0.001). Subjects performed significantly better at the end of their learning curve compared to their first attempt for all LS-CAT items (all with p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We developed the LS-CAT, which is a laparoscopic suturing grading matrix, with excellent inter-rater reliability and to discriminate between experience levels. This LS-CAT has a potential for wider use to objectively assess laparoscopic suturing skills.

Surgical challenges and research priorities in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic: EAES membership survey.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems and general surgeons are being challenged by the current pandemic. The European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) aimed to evaluate surgeons' experiences and perspectives, to identify gaps in knowledge, to record shortcomings in resources and to register research priorities. METHODS: An ad hoc web-based survey of EAES members and affiliates was developed by the EAES Research Committee. The questionnaire consisted of 69 items divided into the following sections: (Ι) demographics, (II) institutional burdens and management strategies, and (III) analysis of resource, knowledge, and evidence gaps. Descriptive statistics were summarized as frequencies, medians, ranges,, and interquartile ranges, as appropriate. RESULTS: The survey took place between March 25th and April 16th with a total of 550 surgeons from 79 countries. Eighty-one percent had to postpone elective cases or suspend their practice and 35% assumed roles not related to their primary expertise. One-fourth of respondents reported having encountered abdominal pathologies in COVID-19-positive patients, most frequently acute appendicitis (47% of respondents). The effect of protective measures in surgical or endoscopic procedures on infected patients, the effect of endoscopic surgery on infected patients, and the infectivity of positive patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery were prioritized as knowledge gaps and research priorities. CONCLUSIONS: Perspectives and priorities of EAES members in the era of the pandemic are hereto summarized. Research evidence is urgently needed to effectively respond to challenges arisen from the pandemic.

Clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) on bariatric surgery: update 2020 endorsed by IFSO-EC, EASO and ESPCOP.

BACKGROUND: Surgery for obesity and metabolic diseases has been evolved in the light of new scientific evidence, long-term outcomes and accumulated experience. EAES has sponsored an update of previous guidelines on bariatric surgery. METHODS: A multidisciplinary group of bariatric surgeons, obesity physicians, nutritional experts, psychologists, anesthetists and a patient representative comprised the guideline development panel. Development and reporting conformed to GRADE guidelines and AGREE II standards. RESULTS: Systematic review of databases, record selection, data extraction and synthesis, evidence appraisal and evidence-to-decision frameworks were developed for 42 key questions in the domains Indication; Preoperative work-up; Perioperative management; Non-bypass, bypass and one-anastomosis procedures; Revisional surgery; Postoperative care; and Investigational procedures. A total of 36 recommendations and position statements were formed through a modified Delphi procedure. CONCLUSION: This document summarizes the latest evidence on bariatric surgery through state-of-the art guideline development, aiming to facilitate evidence-based clinical decisions.

Guideline Assessment Project: Filling the GAP in Surgical Guidelines: Quality Improvement Initiative by an International Working Group.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to identify clinical practice guidelines published by surgical scientific organizations, assess their quality, and investigate the association between defined factors and quality. The ultimate objective was to develop a framework to improve the quality of surgical guidelines. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Evidence on the quality of surgical guidelines is lacking. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE for clinical practice guidelines published by surgical scientific organizations with an international scope between 2008 and 2017. We investigated the association between the following factors and guideline quality, as assessed using the AGREE II instrument: number of guidelines published within the study period by a scientific organization, the presence of a guidelines committee, applying the GRADE methodology, consensus project design, and the presence of intersociety collaboration. RESULTS: Ten surgical scientific organizations developed 67 guidelines over the study period. The median overall score using AGREE II tool was 4 out of a maximum of 7, whereas 27 (40%) guidelines were not considered suitable for use. Guidelines produced by a scientific organization with an output of ≥9 guidelines over the study period [odds ratio (OR) 3.79, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01-12.66, P = 0.048], the presence of a guidelines committee (OR 4.15, 95% CI, 1.47-11.77, P = 0.007), and applying the GRADE methodology (OR 8.17, 95% CI, 2.54-26.29, P < 0.0001) were associated with higher odds of being recommended for use. CONCLUSIONS: Development by a guidelines committee, routine guideline output, and adhering to the GRADE methodology were found to be associated with higher guideline quality in the field of surgery.

Factors Predicting Operative Difficulty of Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision is a challenging procedure requiring high-quality surgery for optimal outcomes. Patient, tumor, and pelvic factors are believed to determine difficulty, but previous studies were limited to postoperative data. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to report factors predicting laparoscopic total mesorectal excision performance by using objective intraoperative assessment. DESIGN: Data from a multicenter laparoscopic total mesorectal excision randomized trial (ISRCTN59485808) were reviewed. SETTING: This study was conducted at 4 centers in the United Kingdom. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTION: Seventy-one patients underwent elective laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal adenocarcinoma with curative intent: 53% were men, mean age was 69 years, body mass index was 27.7, tumor height was 8.5 cm, 24% underwent neoadjuvant therapy, and 25% had previous surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Surgical performance was assessed through the identification of intraoperative adverse events by using observational clinical human reliability analysis. Univariate analysis and multivariate binomial regression were performed to establish factors predicting the number of intraoperative errors, surgeon-reported case difficulty, and short-term clinical and histopathological outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1331 intraoperative errors were identified from 365 hours of surgery (median, 18 per case; interquartile range, 16-22; and range, 9-49). No patient, tumor, or bony pelvimetry measurement correlated with total or pelvic error count, surgeon-reported case difficulty, cognitive load, operative data, specimen quality, number or severity of 30-day morbidity events and length of stay (all r not exceeding ±0.26, p > 0.05). Mesorectal area was associated with major intraoperative adverse events (OR, 1.09; 95%CI, 1.01-1.16; p = 0.015) and postoperative morbidity (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.01-1.2; p = 0.033). Obese men were subjectively reported as harder cases (24 vs 36 mm, p = 0.042), but no detrimental effects on performance or outcomes were seen. LIMITATIONS: Our sample size is modest, risking type II errors and overfitting of the statistical models. CONCLUSION: Patient, tumor, and bony pelvic anatomical characteristics are not seen to influence laparoscopic total mesorectal excision operative difficulty. Mesorectal area is identified as a risk factor for intraoperative and postoperative morbidity. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B35. FACTORES QUE PREDICEN LA DIFICULTAD OPERATIVA DE LA ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL LAPAROSCÓPICA: La escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica es un procedimiento desafiante. Para obtener resultados óptimos, se requiere cirugía de alta calidad. Se cree que, factores como el paciente, el tumor y la pelvis, determinan la dificultad, pero estudios previos solamente se han limitado a datos postoperatorios.Informar de los factores que predicen el resultado de la escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica, mediante una evaluación intraoperatoria objetiva.Datos de un ensayo multicéntrico y randomizado de escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica (ISRCTN59485808).Cuatro centros del Reino Unido.Un total de 71 pacientes fueron sometidos a escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica electiva, para adenocarcinoma rectal con intención curativa. 53% hombres, edad media, índice de masa corporal y altura del tumor 69, 27.7 y 8.5 cm respectivamente, 24% terapia neoadyuvante y 25% cirugía previa.Rendimiento quirúrgico evaluado mediante la identificación de eventos intraoperatorios adversos, mediante el análisis clínico observacional de confiabilidad humana. Se realizaron análisis univariado y la regresión binomial multivariada para establecer factores que predicen el número de errores intraoperatorios, reportes del cirujano sobre la dificultad del caso y los resultados clínicos e histopatológicos a corto plazo.Se identificaron un total de 1,331 errores intraoperatorios en 365 horas de cirugía (media de 18 por caso, IQR 16-22, rango 9-49). Ningún paciente, tumor o medición de pelvimetría pélvica, se correlacionó con la cuenta de errores pélvicos o totales, reporte del cirujano sobre dificultad del caso, carga cognitiva, datos operativos, calidad de la muestra, número o gravedad de eventos de morbilidad de 30 días y duración de la estadía (todos r <± 0.26, p > 0.05). El área mesorrectal se asoció con eventos adversos intraoperatorios importantes (OR, 1.09; IC 95%, 1.01-1.16; p = 0.015) y morbilidad postoperatoria (OR, 1.1; IC 95%, 1.01-1.2; p = 0.033). Como información subjetiva, hombres obesos fueron casos más difíciles (24 mm frente a 36 mm, p = 0.042) pero no se observaron efectos perjudiciales sobre el rendimiento o los resultados.Nuestro tamaño de muestra es un modesto riesgo de errores de tipo II y el sobreajuste de los modelos estadísticos.No se observa que las características anatómicas del paciente, tumor y pelvis ósea influyan en la dificultad operatoria de la escisión mesorrectal laparoscópica total. El área mesorrectal se identifica como un factor de riesgo para la morbilidad intraoperatoria y postoperatoria. Vea el resumen del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B35.

The use of 3D laparoscopic imaging systems in surgery: EAES consensus development conference 2018.

BACKGROUND: The use of 3D laparoscopic systems is expanding. The European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) initiated a consensus development conference with the aim of creating evidence-based statements and recommendations for the surgical community. METHODS: Systematic reviews of the PubMed and Embase libraries were performed to identify evidence on potential benefits of 3D on clinical practice and patient outcomes. Statements and recommendations were prepared and unanimously agreed by an international surgical and engineering expert panel which were presented and voted at the EAES annual congress, London, May 2018. RESULTS: 9967 abstracts were screened with 138 articles included. 18 statements and two recommendations were generated and approved. 3D significantly shortened operative time (mean difference 11 min (8% [95% CI 20.29-1.72], I2 96%)). A significant reduction in complications was observed when 3D systems were used (RR 0.75, [95 CI% 0.60-0.94], I2 0%) particularly for cases involving laparoscopic suturing (RR 0.57 [95% CI 0.35-0.90], I2 0%). In 69 box trainer or simulator studies, 64% concluded trainees were significant faster and 62% performed fewer errors when using 3D. CONCLUSION: We recommend the use of 3D vision in laparoscopy to reduce the operative time (grade of recommendation: low). Future robust clinical research is required to specifically investigate the potential benefit of 3D laparoscopy system on complication rates (grade of recommendation: high).