Correlation of Colorectal Surgical Skill With Patient Outcomes: A Cautionary Tale.

BACKGROUND: Previous work has demonstrated a correlation between video ratings of surgical skill and clinical outcomes. Some have proposed the use of video review for technical skill assessment, credentialing, and quality improvement. OBJECTIVE: Before its adoption as a quality measure for colorectal surgeons, we must first determine whether video-based skill assessments can predict patient outcomes among specialty surgeons. DESIGN: Twenty-one surgeons submitted one representative video of a minimally invasive colectomy. Each video was edited to highlight key steps and then rated by 10 peer surgeons using a validated American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons assessment tool. Linking surgeons' ratings to a validated surgical outcomes registry, we assessed the relationship between skill and risk-adjusted complication rates. SETTINGS: The study was conducted with the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, a statewide collaborative including 70 community, academic, and tertiary hospitals. PATIENTS: Patients included those who underwent minimally invasive colorectal resection performed by the participating surgeons. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Main outcome measures included 30-day risk-adjusted postoperative complications. RESULTS: The average technical skill rating for each surgeon ranged from 2.6 to 4.6. Risk-adjusted complication rate per surgeon ranged from 9.9% to 33.1%. Patients of surgeons in the bottom quartile of overall skill ratings were older and more likely to have hypertension or to smoke; patients of surgeons in the top quartile were more likely to be immunosuppressed or have an ASA score of 3 or higher. After patient- and surgery-specific risk adjustment, there was no statistically significant difference in complication rates between the bottom and top quartile surgeons (17.5% vs 16.8%, respectively, p = 0.41). LIMITATIONS: Limitations included retrospective cohort design with short-term follow-up of sampled cases. Videos were edited to highlight key steps, and reviewers did not undergo training to establish norms. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that video-based peer rating of minimally invasive colectomy was not correlated with postoperative complications among specialty surgeons. As such, the adoption of video review for use in credentialing should be approached with caution. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B802.CORRELACIÓN ENTRE LA HABILIDAD QUIRÚRGICA COLORRECTAL Y LOS RESULTADOS OBTENIDOS EN EL PACIENTE: RELATO PRECAUTORIOANTECEDENTES:Trabajos anteriores han demostrado una correlación entre la video-calificación de la habilidad quirúrgica y los resultados clínicos. Algunos autores han propuesto el uso de la revisión de videos para la evaluación de la habilidad técnica, la acreditación y la mejoría en la calidad quirúrgica.OBJETIVO:Antes de su adopción como medida de calidad entre los cirujanos colorrectales, primero debemos determinar si las evaluaciones de habilidades basadas en video pueden predecir los resultados clínicos de los pacientes entre cirujanos especializados.DISEÑO:Veintiún cirujanos enviaron un video representativo de una colectomía mínimamente invasiva. Cada video fue editado para resaltar los pasos clave y luego fué calificado por 10 cirujanos revisores utilizando una herramienta de evaluación validada por la ASCRS. Al vincular las calificaciones de los cirujanos al registro de resultados quirúrgicos aprobado, evaluamos la relación entre la habilidad y las tasas de complicaciones ajustadas al riesgo.AJUSTE:Colaboración en todo el estado incluyendo 70 hospitales comunitarios, académicos y terciarios, el Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative.PACIENTES:Todos aquellos sometidos a resección colorrectal mínimamente invasiva realizada por los cirujanos participantes.MEDIDA DE RESULTADO PRINCIPAL:Complicaciones posoperatorias ajustadas al riesgo a los 30 días.RESULTADOS:La calificación de la habilidad técnica promedio de cada cirujano osciló entre 2.6 y 4.6. La tasa de complicaciones ajustada al riesgo por cirujano osciló entre el 9,9% y el 33,1%. Los pacientes operados por los cirujanos del cuartil inferior de las calificaciones generales de habilidades eran fumadores y añosos, y tambiés más propensos a la hipertensión arterial. Los pacientes operados por los cirujanos del cuartil superior tenían más probabilidades de ser inmunosuprimidos o tener una puntuación ASA> = 3. Después del ajuste de riesgo específico de la cirugía y el paciente, no hubo diferencias estadísticamente significativas en las tasas de complicaciones entre los cirujanos del cuartil inferior y superior (17,5% frente a 16,8%, respectivamente, p = 0,41).LIMITACIONES:Diseño de cohortes retrospectivo con seguimiento a corto plazo de los casos muestreados. Los videos se editaron para resaltar los pasos clave y los revisores no recibieron capacitación para establecer normas.CONCLUSIONES:Nuestro estudio demuestra que la evaluación realizada por los revisores basada en el video de la colectomía mínimamente invasiva no se correlacionó con las complicaciones post-operatorias entre los cirujanos especialistas. Por tanto, la adopción de la revisión del video quirúrgico para su uso en la acreditación profesional, debe abordarse con mucha precaución. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B802. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo).

Development and Validation of a 3-Dimensional Convolutional Neural Network for Automatic Surgical Skill Assessment Based on Spatiotemporal Video Analysis.

Importance: A high level of surgical skill is essential to prevent intraoperative problems. One important aspect of surgical education is surgical skill assessment, with pertinent feedback facilitating efficient skill acquisition by novices. Objectives: To develop a 3-dimensional (3-D) convolutional neural network (CNN) model for automatic surgical skill assessment and to evaluate the performance of the model in classification tasks by using laparoscopic colorectal surgical videos. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prognostic study used surgical videos acquired prior to 2017. In total, 650 laparoscopic colorectal surgical videos were provided for study purposes by the Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery, and 74 were randomly extracted. Every video had highly reliable scores based on the Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System (ESSQS, range 1-100, with higher scores indicating greater surgical skill) established by the society. Data were analyzed June to December 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: From the groups with scores less than the difference between the mean and 2 SDs, within the range spanning the mean and 1 SD, and greater than the sum of the mean and 2 SDs, 17, 26, and 31 videos, respectively, were randomly extracted. In total, 1480 video clips with a length of 40 seconds each were extracted for each surgical step (medial mobilization, lateral mobilization, inferior mesenteric artery transection, and mesorectal transection) and separated into 1184 training sets and 296 test sets. Automatic surgical skill classification was performed based on spatiotemporal video analysis using the fully automated 3-D CNN model, and classification accuracies and screening accuracies for the groups with scores less than the mean minus 2 SDs and greater than the mean plus 2 SDs were calculated. Results: The mean (SD) ESSQS score of all 650 intraoperative videos was 66.2 (8.6) points and for the 74 videos used in the study, 67.6 (16.1) points. The proposed 3-D CNN model automatically classified video clips into groups with scores less than the mean minus 2 SDs, within 1 SD of the mean, and greater than the mean plus 2 SDs with a mean (SD) accuracy of 75.0% (6.3%). The highest accuracy was 83.8% for the inferior mesenteric artery transection. The model also screened for the group with scores less than the mean minus 2 SDs with 94.1% sensitivity and 96.5% specificity and for group with greater than the mean plus 2 SDs with 87.1% sensitivity and 86.0% specificity. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this prognostic study showed that the proposed 3-D CNN model classified laparoscopic colorectal surgical videos with sufficient accuracy to be used for screening groups with scores greater than the mean plus 2 SDs and less than the mean minus 2 SDs. The proposed approach was fully automatic and easy to use for various types of surgery, and no special annotations or kinetics data extraction were required, indicating that this approach warrants further development for application to automatic surgical skill assessment.

A Prospective Randomized Trial of Surgeon-Administered Intraoperative Transversus Abdominis Plane Block With Bupivacaine Against Liposomal Bupivacaine: The TINGLE Trial.

BACKGROUND: Transversus abdominis plane blocks are increasingly used to achieve opioid-sparing analgesia after colorectal surgery. Traditionally, bupivacaine was the long-acting analgesic of choice, but the addition of dexamethasone and/or epinephrine to bupivacaine may extend block duration. Liposomal bupivacaine has also been suggested to achieve an extended analgesia duration of 72 hours but is significantly more expensive. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare pain control between laparoscopic transversus abdominis plane blocks using liposomal bupivacaine versus bupivacaine with epinephrine and dexamethasone. DESIGN: This was a parallel-group, single-institution, randomized clinical trial. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a single tertiary medical center. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients between October 2018 to October 2019, ages 18 to 90 years, undergoing minimally invasive colorectal surgery with multimodal analgesia were included. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive a laparoscopic transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine or bupivacaine with epinephrine and dexamethasone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was total oral morphine equivalents administered in the first 48 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included pain scores, time to ambulation and solid diet, hospital length of stay, and complications. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients (50 men) with a median age of 42 years (interquartile range, 29-60 y) consented and were randomly assigned. The primary end point, total oral morphine equivalents administered in the first 48 hours, was not significantly different between the liposomal bupivacaine group (median = 69 mg) and the bupivacaine with epinephrine and dexamethasone group (median = 47 mg; difference in medians = 22 mg, (95% CI, -17 to 49 mg); p = 0.60). There were no significant differences in pain scores, time to ambulation, time to diet tolerance, time to bowel movement, length of stay, overall complications, or readmission rate between groups. There were no treatment-related adverse outcomes. LIMITATIONS: This study was not placebo controlled or blinded. CONCLUSIONS: This first randomized trial comparing laparoscopic transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine or bupivacaine with epinephrine and dexamethasone showed that a liposomal bupivacaine block does not provide superior or extended analgesia in the era of standardized multimodal analgesia protocols.See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B533. ESTUDIO PROSPECTIVO Y RANDOMIZADO DE BLOQUEO DEL PLANO MUSCULAR TRANSVERSO DEL ABDOMEN REALIZADO POR EL CIRUJANO CON BUPIVACANA VERSUS BUPIVACANA LIPOSOMAL ESTUDIO TINGLE: ANTECEDENTES:El bloqueo anestésico del plano muscular transverso del abdomen se utiliza cada vez más para lograr una analgesia con menos consumo de opioides después de cirugía colorrectal. Tradicionalmente, la Bupivacaína era el analgésico de acción prolongada de elección, pero al agregarse Dexametasona y/o Adrenalina a la Bupivacaína se puede prolongar la duración del bloqueo. También se ha propuesto que la Bupivacaína liposomal logra una duración prolongada de la analgesia de 72 horas, pero es significativamente más cara.OBJETIVO:Comparar el control del dolor entre bloqueo laparoscópico del plano de los transversos del abdomen usando Bupivacaína liposomal versus Bupivacaína con Adrenalina y Dexametasona.DISEÑO:Estudio clínico prospectivo y randomizado de una sola institución en grupos paralelos.AJUSTE:Centro médico terciario único.PACIENTES:Todos aquellos pacientes entre 18 y 90 años sometidos a cirugía colorrectal mínimamente invasiva con analgesia multimodal, entre octubre de 2018 a octubre de 2019 incluidos de manera consecutiva.INTERVENCIONES:Los pacientes fueron seleccionados aleatoriamente 1:1 para recibir un bloqueo laparoscópico del plano de los transversos del abdomen con Bupivacaína liposomal o Bupivacaína con Adrenalina y Dexametasona.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario fue el total de equivalentes de morfina oral administradas en las primeras 48 horas después de la operación. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron puntuaciones de dolor, inicio de dieta sólida, tiempo de inicio a la deambulación, la estadía hospitalaria y las complicaciones.RESULTADOS:Un total de 102 pacientes (50 hombres) con una mediana de edad de 42 años (IQR 29-60) fueron incluidos aleatoriamente. El criterio de valoración principal, equivalentes de morfina oral total administrada en las primeras 48 horas, no fue significativamente diferente entre el grupo de Bupivacaína liposomal (mediana = 69 mg) y el grupo de Bupivacaína con Adrenalina y Dexametasona (mediana = 47 mg; diferencia en medianas = 22 mg, IC del 95% [-17] - 49 mg, p = 0,60). No hubo diferencias significativas en las puntuaciones de dolor, tiempo de inicio a la deambulación, el tiempo de tolerancia a la dieta sólida, el tiempo hasta el primer evacuado intestinal, la duración de la estadía hospitalaria, las complicaciones generales o la tasa de readmisión entre los grupos. No hubo resultados adversos relacionados con el tratamiento.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio no fue controlado con placebo ni de manera cegada.CONCLUSIONES:Este primer estudio prospectivo y randomizado que comparó el bloqueo del plano de los músculos transversos del abdomen por vía laparoscópica, utilizando Bupivacaína liposomal o Bupivacaína con Adrenalina y Dexametasona, demostró que el bloqueo de Bupivacaína liposomal no proporciona ni mejor analgesia ni un efecto mas prolongado.Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B533.

Colorectal Surgery Surveillance: A Novel Method for Composing an Automated Real-time Prospective Registry.

BACKGROUND: Medical registries have been shown to be an effective way to improve patient care and reduce costs. Constructing such registries entails extraneous effort of either reviewing medical charts or creating tailored case report forms (CRF). While documentation has shifted from handwritten notes into electronic medical records (EMRs), the majority of information is logged as free text, which is difficult to extract. OBJECTIVES: To construct a tool within the EMR to document patient-related data as codified variables to automatically create a prospective database for all patients undergoing colorectal surgery. METHODS: The hospital's EMR was re-designed to include codified variables within the operative report and patient notes that documented pre-operative history, operative details, postoperative complications, and pathology reports. The EMR was programmed to capture all existing data of interest with manual completion of un-coded variables. RESULTS: During a 6-month pilot study, 130 patients underwent colorectal surgery. Of these, 104 (80%) were logged into the registry on the same day of surgery. The median time to log the rest of the 26 cases was 1 day. Forty-two patients had a postoperative complication. The most common cause for severe complications was an anastomotic leak with a cumulative rate of 12.3. CONCLUSIONS: Re-designing the EMR to enable prospective documentation of surgical related data is a valid method to create an on-going, real-time database that is recorded instantaneously with minimal additional effort and minimal cost.

Colorectal surgery patient perspectives on healthcare during the CoVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: To focus on critical care needs of coronavirus patients, elective operations were postponed and selectively rescheduled. The effect of these measures on patients was unknown. We sought to understand patients' perspectives regarding surgical care during the CoVID-19 pandemic to improve future responses. METHODS: We performed qualitative interviews with patients whose operations were postponed. Interviews explored patient responses to: 1) surgery postponement; 2) experience of surgery; 3) impacts of rescheduling/postponement on emotional/physical health; 4) identifying areas of improvement. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed through an integrated approach. RESULTS: Patient perspectives fell within the following domains: 1) reactions to surgery postponement/rescheduling; 2) experience of surgery during CoVID-19 pandemic; 3) reflections on communication; 4) patient trust in surgeons and healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: We found no patient-reported barriers to rescheduling surgery. Several areas of care which could be improved (communication). There was an unexpected sense of trust in surgeons and the hospital.

E-consensus on telemedicine in proctology: A RAND/UCLA-modified study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 is revolutionizing healthcare delivery. The aim of this study was to reach a consensus among experts as to the possible applications of telemedicine in the proctologic field. METHODS: A group of 55 clinical practice recommendations was developed by a clinical guidance group based on coalescence of evidence and expert opinion. The Telemedicine in Proctology Italian Working Group included 47 Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery nominated experts evaluating the appropriateness of each clinical practice recommendations based on published RAND/UCLA methodology in 2 rounds. RESULTS: Stakeholder median age was 53 years (interquartile range limits 40-60), and 38 (81%) were men. Nine (19%) panelists reported no experience with telemedicine before the pandemic. Agreement was obtained on a minimum of 3 to 5 years of practice in the proctologic field before starting teleconsultations, which should be regularly paid, with advice and prescriptions incorporated into a formal report sent to the patient by e-mail along with a receipt. Of the panelists, 35 of 47 (74%) agreed that teleconsultation carries the risk of misdiagnosis of cancer, thus recommending an in-person assessment before scheduling any surgery. Fifteen additional clinical practice recommendations were re-elaborated in the second round and assessed by 44 of 47 (93.6%) panelists. The application of telemedicine for the diagnosis of common proctologic conditions (eg, hemorrhoidal disease, anal abscess and fistula, anal condylomas, and anal fissure) and functional pelvic floor disorders was generally considered inappropriate. Teleconsultation was instead deemed appropriate for the diagnosis and management of pilonidal disease. CONCLUSION: This e-consensus revealed the boundaries of telemedicine in Italy. Standardization of infrastructures, logistics, and legality remain to be better elucidated.

Colorectal Surgery in Romania during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

As the COVID-19 pandemic extends, its negative consequences on the effectiveness of therapeutic programs - previously assumed by the medical community and imperatively suspended for a difficult-to-predict period of time - are becoming increasingly worrying. In this context, as the evidence-based recommendations are not possible, most of the national and international scientific societies tried to develop balanced recommendations (1-4). The Romanian Society of Coloproctology (SRCP) and the Romanian Association for Endoscopic Surgery (ARCE) have created a working group that, taking into account recent publications, the statements of international academic societies, the national legislative context and the unique experience of countries severely affected by this pandemic (China, Italy, Spain, USA, etc.) proposes for Romania, the following recommendations for medical practice in colorectal surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. These recommendations are subjected to continuous review, depending on the global and national situation of the pandemic, the particular needs of each hospital, the recommendations of the competent authorities and the evolution of the literature that publishes the conclusions of ongoing clinical trials.

Impact of surgical indication on patient outcomes and compliance with enhanced recovery program for colorectal surgery: A Francophone multicenter retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The impact of surgical indication on compliance with enhanced recovery program (ERP) and on outcomes has never been assessed. This study aims to assess the impact of surgical indication (malignant vs benign) on postoperative outcomes and ERP compliance. METHODS: A multicenter nationwide database was analyzed. Patients who underwent colorectal surgery for benign disease and those who underwent colorectal surgery for cancer were compared. Inclusion criteria were elective colorectal resection with anastomosis. ERP components, postoperative morbidity, and hospital length of hospital stay data were collected. RESULTS: Among the 6472 patients registered in the database between October 2012 and June 2018, 4528 patients were included; 2647 in the malignant group and 1881 in the benign group. The ERP compliance over 70% was not different between groups. Postoperative morbidity rate was higher in the malignant group (22.5% vs 19.3%; P = .009) but not confirmed in multivariate analysis. Patients in the malignant group were more often readmitted after discharge, 6.6% vs 4.6% (P = .004). The mean LOS was 6.3 ± 5.0 days in the malignant group and 5.4 ± 4.7 days in the benign group (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Indication for colorectal surgery did not significantly influence peri-operative management and postoperative major complications, in patients managed within an enhanced recovery program.

Cirugía colorrectal en tiempos de COVID-19: guías de recomendación del Hospital Británico de Buenos Aires / Colorectal surgery in times of COVID-19: recommendation guides of the British Hospital of Buenos Aires

Se trató de redactar una guía para la práctica segura de la especialidad en tiempos de COVID-19. Se realizó una búsqueda de las publicaciones recientes disponibles en Pub-Med y en otros buscadores, se utilizó la experiencia de expertos a través de diferentes conferencias o comunicados de sociedades científicas. Esta pandemia nos ha obligado a aprender de una manera vertiginosa el manejo de una nueva enfermedad, donde especialistas en cirugía comenzamos a hablar de terminología clínica, virológica, entre otras completamente nueva y desconocida para la mayoría de nosotros. Tuvimos que adaptar nuestra práctica habitual a nuevos estándares, cometiendo diferentes errores en el manejo inicial, provocados por la falta de información previa. La guía trata de abarcar los tópicos considerados más relevantes en este momento, como son el manejo del consultorio, recomendaciones de que patologías se recomienda operar y cuáles no. Recomendaciones de tratamientos alternativos al quirúrgico mientras dura la pandemia. Métodos de diagnósticos utilizados para evaluar infección en pacientes que se someterán a una cirugía, etc. Se agregaron links y apéndices para aquellos que deseen ampliar algún tema en particular, esto evita que la guía sea más extensa y pierda su practicidad con la que fue pensada. Esperamos esta guía sirva para facilitar la compresión de esta nueva enfermedad y su manejo para cualquier cirujano que necesite asistir a pacientes con patología colorrectal. Seguramente al finalizar estas líneas habrá nueva evidencia que deberá ser adaptada e incorporada a la presentada actualmente.

An attempt was made to write a guide for the safe practice of the specialty in times of COVID-19. A search of recent publication available in Pub-Med and other platforms was performed. Experts' opinions and experiences were taken into account from various conferences or communications of scientific societies. This pandemic has forced us to learn the management of a new disease in a sudden way. Surgical specialists began to learn clinical and virologic terminology, among other new concepts previously ignored by most of us. We were forced to adapt our usual practice to new standards, making different mistakes in the initial handling, caused by the lack of prior information.The present guide tries to cover the topics considered most relevant at this time, such as outpatients ́ management, recommendations of which patients we should operate on and which procedures should be postponed. Recommendations for alternative treatments to surgery while the pandemic lasts. Diagnostic methods used to assess infection in patients who will undergo surgery, etc. Links and appendices have been added for those who wish to expand on a particular topic, this prevents the guide from being too extensive and losing the practicality with which it was intended. We hope this guide will facilitate the understanding of this new disease and its management for any surgeon who needs to assist patients with colorectal pathology. By the time we would have finished these lines there will be new evidence that must be adapted and incorporated into those currently presented.