The Middle Rectal Artery: Revisited Anatomy and Surgical Implications of a Neglected Blood Vessel.

BACKGROUND: Although the middle rectal artery is a relevant anatomical landmark for rectal resection and lateral lymph node dissection, descriptions of this entity are highly divergent. OBJECTIVE: Dissection, visualization, morphometry, and 3-dimensional reconstruction of the middle rectal artery to facilitate its management in surgery. DESIGN: Macroscopic dissection, histologic study, morphometric measurements, and virtual modeling. SETTING: University laboratory of applied surgical anatomy. PATIENTS: This study includes formalin-fixed hemipelvis specimens (n=37) obtained from body donors (age, 67-97 y). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures are photo documentation of origin, trajectory, diameter, and branching pattern; immunolabeling of lymphatics; and 3-dimensional reconstruction of the middle rectal artery. RESULTS: The middle rectal artery was present in 71.4% of body donors (21.4% bilateral, 50% unilateral), originated from the anterior division of the internal iliac artery, and branched either from the internal pudendal artery (45.5%), the inferior gluteal artery (22.7%), the gluteal-pudendal trunk (22.7%), or a trifurcation (9.1%). One to 3 branches of varying diameters (0.5-3.5 mm) entered the mesorectum from the ventrolateral (35.7%), lateral (42.9%), or dorsolateral (21.4%) aspect. The middle rectal artery was accompanied by podoplanin-immunoreactive lymphatic vessels and gave off additional branches (81.8%) to the urogenital pelvic organs. Three-dimensional reconstruction revealed the complex course of the middle rectal artery from the pelvic sidewall through the pelvic nerve plexus and parietal pelvic fascia into the mesorectum. LIMITATIONS: Findings retrieved from body donors may be prone to age- and fixation-related processes. CONCLUSIONS: The investigation disclosed the rather high prevalence of the middle rectal artery, its 3-dimensional topographic anatomy, and its proximity to the autonomic pelvic nerves. These features play a role in the surgical management of this blood vessel. The data provide the anatomical rationale for the lateral lymphatic spread of rectal cancer and an anatomical basis for nerve-preserving lateral lymph node dissection.

Standardization of the Definition and Surgical Management of Splenic Flexure Carcinoma by an International Expert Consensus Using the Delphi Technique: Room for Improvement?

BACKGROUND: Surgical management of splenic flexure carcinoma remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to establish an expert international consensus on splenic flexure carcinoma management. DESIGN: A 3-round online-based Delphi study was conducted between September 2020 and April 2021. SETTING: The first round included 18 experts from 12 different countries. For the second and third rounds, each expert in the first round was asked to invite 2 more colorectal surgeons (n = 47). Out of 47 invited experts, 89% (n = 42) participated in the second and third rounds of the consensus. INTERVENTIONS: A total of 35 questions were created and sent via the online questionnaire tool. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Levels of recommendation based on voting concordance were graded as follows: more than 75% agreement was defined as strong, between 50% and 75% as moderate, and below 50% as weak. RESULTS: There was moderate consensus on the definition of splenic flexure (55%) as 10 cm from either side where the distal transverse colon turns into the proximal descending colon. Also, experts recommended an abdominopelvic CT scan plus intraoperative exploration (moderate consensus, 72%) for tumor localization and cancer registry. Segmental colectomy was the preferred technique for the management of splenic flexure carcinoma in the elective setting (72%). Moderate consensus was achieved on the technique of complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation principles for splenic flexure carcinoma (74%). Only strong consensus was achieved on the surgical approach for minimally invasive surgery (88%). LIMITATIONS: Subjective decisions are based on individual expert clinical experience and not evidence based. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first internationally conducted Delphi consensus study regarding splenic flexure carcinoma. The definition of splenic flexure remains ambiguous. To more effectively compare oncologic outcomes among different cancer registries, guidelines need to be developed to standardize each domain and avoid arbitrary definitions. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C143 . ESTANDARIZACIN DE LA DEFINICIN Y MANEJO QUIRRGICO DEL CARCINOMA DE NGULO ESPLNICO ESTABLECIDO POR UN CONSENSO INTERNACIONAL DE EXPERTOS UTILIZANDO LA TCNICA DELPHI ESPACIO PARA MEJORAR: ANTECEDENTES:El tratamiento quirúrgico del cáncer de ángulo esplénico sigue siendo controvertido.OBJETIVO:Establecer un consenso internacional de expertos sobre el manejo del cáncer del ángulo esplénico.DISEÑO:Se condujo un estudio Delphi en línea de 3 rondas entre septiembre de 2020 y febrero de 2021.ESCENARIO:La primera ronda incluyó a 18 expertos de 12 países distintos. Para la segunda y tercera rondas, a cada experto de la primera ronda se le pidió que invitara a 2 cirujanos colorrectales más de su región (n = 47). De los 47 expertos invitados, el 89% (n = 42) participó en la segunda y tercera ronda del consenso.INTERVENCIONES:Se crearon y enviaron un total de 35 preguntas a través de la herramienta de cuestionario en línea.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los niveles de recomendación basados en la concordancia de votos fueron jerarquizados de la siguiente manera: más del 75% de acuerdo se definió como fuerte, entre 50 y 75% como moderado y por debajo del 50% como débil.RESULTADOS:Hubo un consenso moderado sobre la definición de ángulo esplénico (55%) como 10 cm desde cualquier lado donde el colon transverso distal se convierte en el colon descendente proximal. Así también, los expertos recomendaron la tomografía computarizada abdominopélvica más la exploración intraoperatoria (consenso moderado, 72%) para la localización del tumor y el registro del ángulo esplénico. La colectomía segmentaria fue la técnica preferida para el tratamiento del cáncer de ángulo esplénico en el caso de ser electivo (72%). Se logró un consenso moderado sobre la técnica de escisión completa del mesocolon y los principios de ligadura vascular a nivel central para el cáncer de ángulo esplénico (74%). Solo se logró un fuerte consenso sobre el abordaje quirúrgico para la cirugía mínimamente invasiva (88%).LIMITACIONES:Decisiones subjetivas basadas en la experiencia clínica de expertos individuales y no basadas en evidencia.CONCLUSIONES:Este es el primer estudio internacional de consenso Delphi realizado sobre el cáncer de ángulo esplénico. Si bien encontramos un consenso moderado sobre las modalidades de diagnóstico preoperatorio y el manejo quirúrgico, la definición de ángulo esplénico sigue siendo ambigua. Para comparar de manera más efectiva los resultados oncológicos entre diferentes registros de cáncer, se deben desarrollar pautas para estandarizar cada dominio y evitar definiciones arbitrarias. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C143 . (Traducción-Dr. Osvaldo Gauto ).

An early experience in robotic ileoanal pouch surgery with robotic intracorporeal single-stapled anastomosis (RiSSA) at a tertiary referral centre.

AIM: A robotic approach to ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) surgery offers advantages over other approaches in terms of precision, improved access to the pelvis and less muscular fatigue for the surgeon. The integrity of the anastomosis is also fundamental to successful IPAA surgery. The robotic platform can permit intracorporeal suturing deep within the pelvis to create a single-stapled, double purse-string anastomosis, which may reduce the risk of anastomotic complications. This study describes the safety and early outcomes of robotic intracorporeal single-stapled anastomosis (RiSSA) amongst patients operated consecutively at a tertiary centre immediately before and following the pandemic. METHOD: A retrospective study of prospectively collected data analysing the outcome of patients undergoing robotic IPAA between 2019 and 2022 was conducted. All procedures were performed with the da Vinci Xi Surgical System (with a hand-assisted suprapubic incision to fashion the pouch). All pouch-anal anastomoses were performed using a double purse-string, single-stapled (RiSSA) method. Demographic, clinical and outcome data were collected. RESULTS: Twenty consecutive patients (nine with ulcerative colitis and 11 with familial adenomatous polyposis) were included with a median age of 25 years (range 16-52); 18 had American Society of Anesthesiologists classification II, and mean body mass index was 24 kg/m2 (range 18.1-34.3). Nine patients (eight ulcerative colitis and one familial adenomatous polyposis) had undergone prior subtotal colectomy and therefore underwent restorative proctectomy with IPAA. Eleven patients underwent restorative proctocolectomy. All procedures were completed robotically. The median length of stay was 9 days (5-49). There were no unplanned admissions to intensive care and no deaths. Three patients were readmitted following hospital discharge for (i) an ileus managed conservatively, (ii) small bowel obstruction managed conservatively and (iii) small bowel obstruction due to constriction at the stoma site necessitating surgery. There were two additional reoperations both for drain complications, one for drain removal and one for drain erosion. On mobilization of the pouch in the latter case, an anastomotic defect was observed. In total, 19/20 patients underwent RiSSA without postoperative anastomotic problems. DISCUSSION: RiSSA offers a safe and feasible alternative technique to other minimally invasive approaches with low rates of anastomosis-related complications.

The retrocolic fascial system revisited for right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision based on anatomical terminology: do we need the eponyms Toldt, Gerota, Fredet and Treitz?

AIM: Right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision (CME) requires the removal of an intact mesocolic envelope. The study aimed to determine, on the basis of macroscopic and microscopic anatomical studies, the optimal surgical dissection planes for CME to preserve fascial integrity. Unequivocal anatomical nomenclature was applied to describe the retrocolic fascial system and compared to frequently used eponyms (Toldt, Gerota, Fredet, Treitz). METHOD: Stepwise macroscopic dissections, cross-section studies and histological analysis were performed on body donors to identify the components of the retrocolic fascial system. Based on these anatomical findings, the optimal surgical dissection planes for CME were validated in laparoscopic training courses on body donors and in robot-assisted surgical procedures in patients. RESULTS: The mesocolic tissue and lymphovascular pedicles were enveloped by the ventral and dorsal mesocolic leaf (mesocolic fascia). The mesocolic fascia was attached to the parietal peritoneal fascia ('fascia of Toldt') along the parieto-mesocolic interface, and further cranially to the pre-duodenopancreatic fascia along the mesocolic-duodenopancreatic interface ('space of Fredet'). Dorsally, the parietal peritoneal fascia was separated from the anterior renal fascia ('fascia of Gerota') by the parieto-renal interface. Dissection along this interface in front of the anterior renal fascia followed by incision of the parietal peritoneal fascia at the duodenal border and opening the mesocolic-duodenopancreatic interface yielded the best macroscopic appearance of specimens and was considered optimal for CME. CONCLUSION: The retrocolic fascial system as well as the surgical dissection planes for CME can be described by clearly defined anatomical terms rather than potentially confusing eponyms.

Technical assessment in minimally invasive complete mesocolic excision: Is the complete mesocolic excision competency assessment tool valid and reliable?

AIM: The complete mesocolic excision competency assessment tool (CMECAT) is a novel tool designed to assess technical skills in minimally invasive complete mesocolic excision (CME) surgery. The aim of this study was to assess construct validity and reliability of CMECAT in a clinical context. METHOD: Colorectal surgeons were asked to submit video recorded laparoscopic CME resections for independent assessment of their technical abilities. The videos were grouped by surgeons' training level, and four established CME experts were recruited as CMECAT assessors. Extended reliability analysis (G-theory) was applied to describe assessor agreement. RESULTS: A total of 19 videos and 72 assessments were included in the analysis. Overall, technical skills assessed by CMECAT improved with increased training level: the experts scored significantly better than the untrained surgeons (3.3 vs. 2.5 points; p < 0.01). On right-sided resections, significantly higher scores were reported with increased training level for all categories and sections, while for left-sided resections, the variance across groups was smaller and significantly higher scores were only reported for oncological safety describing items. Overall, assessor agreement was high (G-coefficient: 0.81). CONCLUSION: This study confirms that CMECAT can be applied to video recorded CME cases for technical skill assessment. Further, it can reliably assess technical performance in right sided CME surgery, where construct validity has now been established. More videos are required to evaluate its validity on left colonic CME. In the future, we hope CMECAT can improve feedback during CME training, serve as a tool in certification processes and contribute to distinguishing CME from conventional surgery in future research.

Development of a procedure-specific tool for skill assessment in left- and right-sided laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision.

AIM: To (1) develop an assessment tool for laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (LCME) and (2) report evidence of its content validity. METHOD: Assessment statements were revealed through (1) semi-structured expert interviews and (2) consensus by the Delphi method, both involving an expert panel of five LCME surgeons. All experts were interviewed and then asked to rate LCME describing statements from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Responses were returned anonymously to the panel until consensus was reached. Statements were directly included as content in the assessment tool if ≥60% of the experts responded "agree" or "strongly agree" (ratings 4 and 5), with the remaining responses being "neither agree nor disagree" (rating 3). Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated for expert agreement evaluation. All included statements were subsequently reformulated as tool items and approved by the experts. RESULTS: Four Delphi rounds were performed to reach consensus. Disagreement was reported for statements describing instrument handling around pancreas; visualisation of landmarks before inferior mesenteric artery ligation; lymphadenectomy around the inferior mesenteric artery, and division of the terminal ileum and transverse colon. ICC in the last Delphi-round was 0.84. The final tool content included 73 statements, converted to 48 right- and 40 left-sided items for LCME assessment. CONCLUSION: A procedure-specific, video-based tool, named complete mesocolic excision competency assessment tool (CMECAT), has been developed for LCME skill assessment. In the future, we hope it can facilitate assessment of LCME surgeons, resulting in improved patient outcome after colon cancer surgery.

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.

The impact of three-dimensional reconstruction and standardised CT interpretation (AMIGO) on the anatomical understanding of mesenteric vascular anatomy for planning complete mesocolic excision surgery: A randomised crossover study.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative planning is a crucial aspect of safe complete mesocolic excision (CME) surgery. 3D models derived from imaging may help improve anatomical understanding of the complex vascular anatomy. Here, we assessed the effect of 3D models on surgeons' anatomical understanding in comparison to a systematic approach for CT scan interpretation (AMIGO). METHOD: Fifteen cases were included in the study. Two GI radiology consultants reviewed each scan to ascertain the vascular anatomy. Virtual 3D models were produced and displayed on a web-based platform (https://skfb.ly/6OZUZ). A total of 13 surgical trainees were recruited. Candidates were assessed after baseline anatomical training and subsequently using the AMIGO method and 3D models. Five cases were randomly allocated in each round of testing for each participant. The primary outcome measure was an objective vascular anatomy knowledge score. The secondary outcome measure was subjective feedback from participants. RESULTS: Both 3D and AMIGO significantly improved anatomical understanding in comparison to baseline testing. However, 3D was superior to AMIGO (3D [n = 65; median score 8/14] vs. AMIGO [n = 65; median score 6/14; p < 0.0001]. For 13/15 patient cases examined, 3D was superior to the AMIGO method. Eleven participants demonstrated better anatomical understanding using 3D models versus AMIGO. Ten participants preferred 3D models in comparison to standard CT imaging. CONCLUSIONS: 3D models improve anatomical understanding of mesenteric vascular anatomy in a group of colorectal surgical trainees in comparison to a formal CT interpretation method. 3D models may be a useful planning adjunct to 2D imaging for CME surgery.

How can surgical skills in laparoscopic colon surgery be objectively assessed?-a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: In laparoscopic colorectal surgery, higher technical skills have been associated with improved patient outcome. With the growing interest in laparoscopic techniques, pressure on surgeons and certifying bodies is mounting to ensure that operative procedures are performed safely and efficiently. The aim of the present review was to comprehensively identify tools for skill assessment in laparoscopic colon surgery and to assess their validity as reported in the literature. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in EMBASE and PubMed/MEDLINE in May 2021 to identify studies examining technical skills assessment tools in laparoscopic colon surgery. Available information on validity evidence (content, response process, internal structure, relation to other variables, and consequences) was evaluated for all included tools. RESULTS: Fourteen assessment tools were identified, of which most were procedure-specific and video-based. Most tools reported moderate validity evidence. Commonly not reported were rater training, assessment correlation with variables other than training level, and validity reproducibility and reliability in external educational settings. CONCLUSION: The results of this review show that several tools are available for evaluation of laparoscopic colon cancer surgery, but few authors present substantial validity for tool development and use. As we move towards the implementation of new techniques in laparoscopic colon surgery, it is imperative to establish validity before surgical skill assessment tools can be applied to new procedures and settings. Therefore, future studies ought to examine different aspects of tool validity, especially correlation with other variables, such as patient morbidity and pathological reports, which impact patient survival.

Implementation and validation of a competency assessment tool for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Achieving proficiency in a surgical procedure is a milestone in the career of a trainee. We introduced a competency assessment tool for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in our residency program. Our aim was to assess the inter-rater reliability of this tool. METHODS: We included all laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed by residents under the supervision of board certified surgeons. All residents were assessed at the end of the procedure by the supervising surgeon (live reviewer) using our competency assessment tool. Video records of the same procedure were analyzed by two independent reviewers (reviewer A and B), who were blinded to the performing trainee's. The assessment had three parts: a laparoscopic cholecystectomy-specific assessment tool (LCAT), the objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) and a 5-item visual analogue scale (VAS) to address the surgeon's autonomy in each part of the cholecystectomy. We compared the assessment scores of the live supervising surgeon and the video reviewers. RESULTS: We included 15 junior residents who performed 42 laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Scoring results from live and video reviewer were comparable except for the OSATS and VAS part. The score for OSATS by the live reviewer and reviewer B were 3.68 vs. 4.26 respectively (p = 0.04) and for VAS (5.17 vs. 4.63 respectively (p = 0.03). The same difference was found between reviewers A and B with OSATS score (3.75 vs. 4.26 respectively (p = 0.001)) and VAS (5.56 vs. 4.63 respectively; p = 0.004)). CONCLUSION: Our competency assessment tool for the evaluation of surgical skills specific to laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been shown to be objective and comparable in-between raters during live procedure or on video material.

The Mesentery in Complete Mesocolic Excision.

The following article summarizes technical aspects of how to operate in the mesentery during complete mesocolic excision (CME). Increasingly, CME is being adopted and as such it is important to establish the anatomical basis of the techniques involved. This review thus serves to provide that foundation and explains the surgical techniques built on it.

Short-term clinical outcomes of a European training programme for robotic colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Despite there being a considerable amount of published studies on robotic colorectal surgery (RCS) over the last few years, there is a lack of evidence regarding RCS training pathways. This study examines the short-term clinical outcomes of an international RCS training programme (the European Academy of Robotic Colorectal Surgery-EARCS). METHODS: Consecutive cases from 26 European colorectal units who conducted RCS between 2014 and 2018 were included in this study. The baseline characteristics and short-term outcomes of cases performed by EARCS delegates during training were analysed and compared with cases performed by EARCS graduates and proctors. RESULTS: Data from 1130 RCS procedures were collected and classified into three cohort groups (323 training, 626 graduates and 181 proctors). The training cases conversion rate was 2.2% and R1 resection rate was 1.5%. The three groups were similar in terms of baseline characteristics with the exception of malignant cases and rectal resections performed. With the exception of operative time, blood loss and hospital stay (training vs. graduate vs. proctor: operative time 302, 265, 255 min, p < 0.001; blood loss 50, 50, 30 ml, p < 0.001; hospital stay 7, 6, 6 days, p = 0.003), all remaining short-term outcomes (conversion, 30-day reoperation, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, clinical anastomotic leak, complications, R1 resection and lymph node yield) were comparable between the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal surgeons learning how to perform RCS under the EARCS-structured training pathway can safely achieve short-term clinical outcomes comparable to their trainers and overcome the learning process in a way that minimises patient harm.

Proctorship in Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery.

Teaching an established surgeon in a novel technique by a colleague who has acquired a level of expertise is often referred to as "proctoring" or "precepting." Surgical preceptorships can be defined as supervised teaching programs, whereby individual or groups of surgeons (proctors) experienced in a certain technique support a colleague who wants to adopt this technique (sometimes referred to as "delegates" or "preceptees"). Preceptorship programs really focus on a specific technique, technology, or skill which is required to broaden, complement, or transform an established surgeon's practice. Within colorectal surgery, in the past 30 years, there is been an evolution of interventional options including open, laparoscopic, robotic, and endoscopic procedures. With each new emerging technology and technique, safe and effective uptake by established surgeons is best been attained by a period of proctorship by an experienced colleague. Formalizing this has been facilitated largely through industry support. There, however, remains a considerable chasm when it comes to standardization, quality control, and jurisprudence. This article aims to describe the requirements for a contemporary proctorship program, to examine instruments of quality control, and how to improve effectiveness.

Augmented Reality: Moving Robotics Forward.

Compared with other fields, adoption of robotics in colorectal surgery remains relatively slow. One of the reasons for this is that the expected benefits of robotics, such as greater accuracy, speed, and better patient outcomes, are not born out in evidence comparing use of robotics for colorectal procedures to conventional laparoscopy. But evidence also suggests that outcomes with colorectal robotic procedures depend on the experience of the surgeon, suggesting that a steep learning curve is acting as a barrier to the benefits of robotics being realized. In this paper, we analyze exactly why surgeon skill and proficiency is such a critical factor in colorectal surgery, especially around the most complex procedures associated with cancer. Shortening of the learning curve is crucial for both the adoption of the technique and the efficient use of expert trainers. Looking beyond the basics of training and embracing a new generation of digital learning technologies that facilitate peer-to-peer collaboration and development beyond the confines of individual institutions may be an important contributor to achieve these goals in the future.

Surgical Quality Assurance in COLOR III: Standardization and Competency Assessment in a Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop an objective and reliable surgical quality assurance system (SQA) for COLOR III, an international multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) with laparoscopic approach for rectal cancer. BACKGROUND OF SUMMARY DATA: SQA influences outcome measures in RCTs such as lymph nodes harvest, in-hospital mortality, and locoregional cancer recurrence. However, levels of SQA are variable. METHOD: Hierarchical task analysis of TaTME was performed. A 4-round Delphi methodology was applied for standardization of TaTME steps. Semistructured interviews were conducted in round 1 to identify key steps and tasks, which were rated as mandatory, optional, or prohibited in rounds 2 to 4 using questionnaires. Competency assessment tool (CAT) was developed and its content validity was examined by expert surgeons. Twenty unedited videos were assessed to test reliability using generalizability theory. RESULTS: Eighty-three of 101 surgical tasks identified reached 70% agreement (26 mandatory, 56 optional, and 1 prohibited). An operative guide of standardized TaTME was created. CAT is matrix of 9 steps and 4 performance qualities: exposure, execution, adverse event, and end-product. The overall G-coefficient was 0.883. Inter-rater and interitem reliability were 0.883 and 0.986. To enter COLOR III, 2 unedited TaTME and 1 laparoscopic TME videos were submitted and assessed by 2 independent assessors using CAT. CONCLUSION: We described an iterative approach to develop an objective SQA within multicenter RCT. This approach provided standardization, the development of reliable and valid CAT, and the criteria for trial entry and monitoring surgical performance during the trial.

Patient-specific mental rehearsal with interactive visual aids: a path worth exploring?

BACKGROUND: Surgeons of today are faced with unprecedented challenges; necessitating a novel approach to pre-operative preparation which takes into account the specific tests each case poses. In this study, we examine patient-specific mental rehearsal for pre-surgical practice and assess whether this method has an additional effect when compared to generic mental rehearsal. METHODS: Sixteen medical students were trained how to perform a simulated laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC). After baseline assessments, they were randomised to two equal groups and asked to complete three SLCs involving different anatomical variants. Prior to each procedure, Group A practiced mental rehearsal with the use of a pre-prepared checklist and Group B mental rehearsal with the checklist combined with virtual models matching the anatomical variations of the SLCs. The performance of the two groups was compared using simulator provided metrics and competency assessment tool (CAT) scoring by two blinded assessors. RESULTS: The participants performed equally well when presented with a "straight-forward" anatomy [Group A vs. Group B-time sec: 445.5 vs. 496 p = 0.64-NOM: 437 vs. 413 p = 0.88-PL cm: 1317 vs. 1059 p = 0.32-per: 0.5 vs. 0 p = 0.22-NCB: 0 vs. 0 p = 0.71-DVS: 0 vs. 0 p = 0.2]; however, Group B performed significantly better [Group A vs. B Total CAT score-Short Cystic Duct (SCD): 20.5 vs. 26.31 p = 0.02 η 2 = 0.32-Double cystic Artery (DA): 24.75 vs. 30.5 p = 0.03 η 2 = 0.28] and committed less errors (Damage to Vital Structures-DVS, SCD: 4 vs. 0 p = 0.03 η 2=0.34, DA: 0 vs. 1 p = 0.02 η 2 = 0.22). in the cases with more challenging anatomies. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that patient-specific preparation with the combination of anatomical models and mental rehearsal may increase operative quality of complex procedures.

Mental practice with interactive 3D visual aids enhances surgical performance.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that Mental Practice (MP) could be used to finesse surgical skills. However, MP is cognitively demanding and may be dependent on the ability of individuals to produce mental images. In this study, we hypothesised that the provision of interactive 3D visual aids during MP could facilitate surgical skill performance. METHODS: 20 surgical trainees were case-matched to one of three different preparation methods prior to performing a simulated Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (LC). Two intervention groups underwent a 25-minute MP session; one with interactive 3D visual aids depicting the relevant surgical anatomy (3D-MP group, n = 5) and one without (MP-Only, n = 5). A control group (n = 10) watched a didactic video of a real LC. Scores relating to technical performance and safety were recorded by a surgical simulator. RESULTS: The Control group took longer to complete the procedure relative to the 3D&MP condition (p = .002). The number of movements was also statistically different across groups (p = .001), with the 3D&MP group making fewer movements relative to controls (p = .001). Likewise, the control group moved further in comparison to the 3D&MP condition and the MP-Only condition (p = .004). No reliable differences were observed for safety metrics. CONCLUSION: These data provide evidence for the potential value of MP in improving performance. Furthermore, they suggest that 3D interactive visual aids during MP could potentially enhance performance, beyond the benefits of MP alone. These findings pave the way for future RCTs on surgical preparation and performance.