Comparison of outcomes after unplanned conversion for patients undergoing robotic when compared with laparoscopic colectomy.

The robotic approach improves the feasibility of minimally invasive colectomy even where there may be an anatomic challenge with laparoscopy. Whether a failure in completing colectomy with this newer technology is associated with worse consequences needs to be considered when evaluating the relative benefit of robotic colectomy. The aim of this study is to evaluate rates of conversion to open surgery after robotic and laparoscopic colectomy and whether outcomes after conversion vary after the two techniques since this has not been well studied. From the American College of Surgeons (ACS) - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) (2015-2016), patients who underwent elective minimally invasive colectomy were identified. Converted robotic were compared to laparoscopic procedures for patient demographics, co-morbidities; primary procedure and diagnosis, prolonged operation and postoperative complications. Of 36,046 colectomy procedures, 30,808 (85.5%) were laparoscopic, while 5238 (14.5%) were robotic-assisted. There were 3271 (9.1%) conversions to open surgery (laparoscopic: 2959 [9.6%]; robotic: 312 [6%]). Thirty-day postoperative surgical site infection, anastomotic leak, ileus, sepsis, bleeding requiring transfusion, urinary tract infection, reoperation; pulmonary, renal, cardiac/cerebrovascular complications; readmission, hospital stay, and mortality, were similar between the two groups. However, deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism was higher after robotic conversion (4.5% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.01). Conversion was lower after robotic when compared to laparoscopic colectomy. Converted patients had similar outcomes except for vein thromboembolism which was higher after robotic surgery. Robotic technology seems to improve the feasibility of minimally invasive surgery without negatively affecting safety and efficacy even when conversion is required.

Ambulatory sleeve gastrectomy: a prospective feasibility and comparative study of early postoperative morbidity.

BACKGROUND: Given its short procedure time and low morbidity, there is enthusiasm to perform sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in an outpatient setting. However, most relevant studies include an overnight stay at a medical facility (≤ 24-h). Hence, we investigated the feasibility and safety of a same-day discharge (SDD) protocol for laparoscopic SG. METHODS: In a prospective pilot study (02/01/2021-02/28/2022), all patients planned for SG were screened for eligibility. Patients met the inclusion criteria if they were ≤ 65 years old, without major comorbidity, and lived close to the hospital. Postoperatively, patients who met discharge criteria were sent home directly from the recovery room. Patients were called the same night and the next morning. Feasibility was defined as discharge on the day of surgery without emergency department (ED) visit or readmission within 24-h. Secondary outcomes, including 90-day morbidity, were compared to patients who met inclusion criteria but chose a same-day admission (SDA) approach during the same study period. Descriptive statistics are displayed as count (percentage) and median (interquartile range). RESULTS: A total of 320 patients were planned for SG during the study period, 229 of whom met eligibility criteria and underwent SG with 56 agreeing to SDD-SG while 173 opted for SDA-SG. Baseline characteristics were all similar between both groups except for obstructive sleep apnea being more prevalent in SDA-SG group (38.2% vs. 16.1%; P < 0.001). Operative characteristics including procedure time were similar between both groups. Successful SDD-SG was achieved in 54(96%) of patients with a median of 6.0(1.0) hours of stay in the recovery room. Ninety-day morbidity was similar between SDD-SG and SDA-SG groups (1.8% vs. 6.9%, respectively; P = 0.196). CONCLUSION: A SDD protocol for laparoscopic SG was feasible and safe in selected patients. Larger studies that evaluate patient reported outcomes and include bypass-type procedures may be needed to guide safe use of ambulatory bariatric surgery.

Pilot Evaluation of a Novel, Low-Cost, Simulation Model for Training and Assessment of Laparoscopic Intracorporeal Continuous Suturing.

Background: Laparoscopic intracorporeal continuous suturing is being employed in a growing number of minimally invasive procedures. However, there is a lack of adequate bench models for gaining proficiency in this complex task. The purpose of this study was to assess a novel simulation model for running suture. Methods: Participants were grouped as novice (LSN) or expert (LSE) at laparoscopic suturing based on prior experience and training level. A novel low-cost bench model was developed to simulate laparoscopic intracorporeal continuous closure of a defect. The primary outcome measured was time taken to complete the task. Videos were scored by independent raters for Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS). Results: Sixteen subjects (7 LSE and 9 LSN) participated in this study. LSE completed the task significantly faster than LSN (430 ± 107 vs 637 ± 164 seconds, P ≤ .05). LSN scored higher on accuracy penalties than LSE (Median 30 vs 0, P ≤ .05). Mean GOALS score was significantly different between the 2 groups (LSE 20.64 ± 2.64 vs LSN 14.28 ± 1.94, P < .001) with good inter-rater reliability (ICC ≥ .823). An aggregate score using the formula: Performance Score = 1200-time(sec)-(accuracy penalties x 10) was significantly different between groups with a mean score of 741 ± 141 for LSE vs 285 ± 167 for LSN (P < .001). Conclusion A novel bench model for laparoscopic continuous suturing was able to significantly discriminate between laparoscopic experts and novices. This low-cost model may be useful for both training and assessment of laparoscopic continuous suturing proficiency.

Cost analysis of indocyanine green fluorescence angiography for prevention of anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Indocyanine green, near infrared, fluorescence angiography (ICG-FA) is increasingly adopted in colorectal surgery for intraoperative tissue perfusion assessment to reduce anastomotic leakage rates. However, the economic impact of this intervention has not been investigated. This study is a cost analysis of the routine use of ICG-FA in colorectal surgery from the hospital payer perspective. METHODS: A decision analysis model was developed for colorectal resections considering two scenarios: resection without using ICG-FA and resection with intraoperative ICG-FA for anastomotic perfusion assessment. Incorporated into the model were the costs of ICG agent, fluorescence angiography equipment, surgery, anastomotic leak, and the leak rates with and without ICG-FA. All input data were derived from recent publications. RESULTS: The routine use of ICG-FA for colorectal anastomosis is cost saving when cost analysis is performed using the following base case assumptions: 8.6% leak rate without ICG-FA, odds ratio of 0.46 for reduction of leakage with ICG-FA (4.8% leak rate relative to 8.6% base case), cost of ICG-FA of $250, and incremental cost of leak, not requiring reoperation, of $9,934.50. In one-way sensitivity analyses, routine use of ICG-FA was cost saving if the cost of an anastomotic leak is more than $5616.29, the cost of ICG-FA is less than $634.44, the leak rate (without ICG-FA) is higher than 4.9%, or the odds ratio for reduction of leak with ICG-FA is less than 0.69. There is a per-case saving of $192.22 with the use of ICG-FA. CONCLUSION: Using the best available evidence and most conservative base case values, routine use of ICG-FA in colorectal surgery was found to be cost saving. Since the evidence suggests there is a reduction in leak rate, the routine use of ICG-FA is a dominating strategy. However, the overall quality of evidence is low and there is a clear need for prospective, randomized controlled trials.

Feasibility of intraoperative angioembolization for trauma patients using C-arm digital subtraction angiography.

PURPOSE: Hemodynamically unstable trauma patients who would benefit from angioembolization (AE) typically also require emergent surgery for their injuries. The critical decision of transferring a patient to the operating room versus the interventional radiology (IR) suite can be bypassed with the advent of intra-operative AE (IOAE). Previously limited by the availability of costly rooms termed RAPTOR (resuscitation with angiography, percutaneous techniques and open repair) suites, it has been suggested that using C-arm digital subtraction angiography (DSA) is a comparable alternative. This case series aims to establish the feasibility and safety of IOAE. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of all trauma patients at our level 1 trauma center who underwent IOAE with a concomitant surgical intervention from January 2011 to May 2019. Descriptive analyses were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 49 patients (80% male, 44 ± 17 years, 92% blunt) underwent IOAE using the C-arm DSA during the study period. All but one patient underwent exploratory laparotomy, 56% of which underwent an additional surgical procedure (ex. exploratory thoracotomy, orthopedic). Either Gelfoam® (Pfizer, New York, USA) (90%), coils (2.0%), or a combination (8.2%) were used for embolization. Internal iliac embolization was performed in 88% of cases (59% bilateral). IOAE was successful in all but four cases (8.2%) and thirty-day mortality was 31%. CONCLUSION: IOAE appears to be a feasible and safe management option in severe trauma patients with the advantage of concurrent operative intervention and ongoing active resuscitation with good success in hemorrhage control.

Management of Open Abdomen After Trauma Laparotomy: A Comparative Analysis of Dynamic Fascial Traction and Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Systems.

BACKGROUND: Management of the post-traumatic open abdomen (OA) using negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) alone is associated with low rates of primary fascial closure. The abdominal reapproximation anchor (ABRA) system exerts dynamic medial fascial traction and may work synergistically with NPWT to facilitate primary fascial closure. METHODS: Patients with an OA following trauma laparotomy between 2009 and 2018 were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database. Patients treated with ABRA in conjunction with NPWT (ABRA) versus NPWT alone (NPWT) were compared in terms of primary fascial closure rate, number of surgeries to closure, tracheostomy duration, length of stay and incidence of entero-atmospheric fistula. Multivariable linear regression was performed to identify predictors of tracheostomy duration. RESULTS: We identified 48 patients [ABRA, 12 and NPWT, 36]. The ABRA group was significantly younger (25 vs. 37 years, p = 0.027) and included a lower proportion of males (58% vs. 89%, p = 0.032). Groups were similar with respect to the incidence of hollow viscus injury, injury severity score and abdominal abbreviated injury score. Compared to the NPWT group, the ABRA group had a significantly higher rate of primary fascial closure (100% vs. 28%, p < 0.001), fewer surgeries to abdominal closure (2 vs. 2.5, p = 0.023) and shorter duration of tracheostomy (15.5 vs. 36 days, p = 0.008). There were no differences in length of stay or incidence of entero-atmospheric fistula. On multivariable linear regression, ABRA placement was an independent predictor of shorter tracheostomy duration, after adjusting for covariates (ß = - 0.294, p = 0.036). CONCLUSION: For the post-traumatic OA, ABRA coupled with NPWT achieves a higher rate of primary fascial closure compared to NPWT alone, while requiring fewer surgeries and a shorter duration of tracheostomy.