SAGES White Paper on the importance of diversity in surgical leadership: creating the fundamentals of leadership development (FLD) curriculum.

BACKGROUND: The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) has long recognized and championed increasing diversity within the surgical workplace. SAGES initiated the Fundamentals of Leadership Development (FLD) Curriculum to address these needs and to provide surgeon leaders with the necessary tools and skills to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in surgical practice. In 2019, the American College of Surgeons issued a request for anti-racism initiatives which lead to the partnering of the two societies. The primary goal of FLD was to create the first surgeon-focused leadership curriculum dedicated to DEI. The rationale/development of this curriculum and its evaluation/feedback methods are detailed in this White Paper. METHODS: The FLD curriculum was developed by a multidisciplinary task force that included surgeons, education experts, and diversity consultants. The curriculum development followed the Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation (ADDIE) instructional design model and utilized a problem-based learning approach. Competencies were identified, and specific learning objectives and assessments were developed. The implementation of the curriculum was designed to be completed in short intervals (virtual and in-person). Post-course surveys used the Kirkpatrick's model to evaluate the curriculum and provide valuable feedback. RESULTS: The curriculum consisted of interactive online modules, an online discussion forum, and small group interactive sessions focused in three key areas: (1) increasing pipeline of underrepresented individuals in surgical leadership, (2) healthcare equity, and (3) conflict negotiation. By focusing on positive action items and utilizing a problem-solving approach, the curriculum aimed to provide a framework for surgical leaders to make meaningful changes in their institutions and organizations. CONCLUSION: The FLD curriculum is a novel leadership curriculum that provided surgeon leaders with the knowledge and tools to improve diversity in three areas: pipeline improvement, healthcare equity, and conflict negotiation. Future directions include using pilot course feedback to enhance curricular effectiveness and delivery.

Understanding Post-Esophagectomy Complications and Their Management: The Early Complications.

Esophagectomy is a technically complex operation performed for both benign and malignant esophageal disease. Medical and surgical advancements have led to improved outcomes in esophagectomy patients over the past several decades; however, surgeons must remain vigilant as complications happen often and can be severe. Post-esophagectomy complications can be grouped into early and late categories. The aim of this review is to discuss the early complications of esophagectomy along with their risk factors, work-up, and management strategies with special attention given to anastomotic leaks.

Impact of Morbid Obesity on Post-esophagectomy Leak Rate: a NSQIP Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Morbid obesity is becoming more prevalent and is a known risk factor for esophageal cancer. Esophagectomy in this population is technically more challenging than the non-obese, thus increasing the risks of surgery. This study hypothesizes that higher body mass index (BMI) is associated with higher anastomotic leak rates after esophagectomy. METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of patients undergoing esophagectomy in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Targeted Esophagectomy database from 2016 to 2019. Patients were stratified by BMI < 35 versus BMI > 35, with the primary outcome being leak post-esophagectomy. Univariate analyses were performed for demographics and post-operative outcomes, and multivariate analyses were performed specifically for the primary outcome of anastomotic leak (all diagnoses and malignancy/dysplasia subgroup). This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board. RESULTS: Of 4165 patients, 439 (10.5%) had a BMI > 35. Patients with BMI > 35 were often younger (mean age 60 vs 64 years, p < 0.001), White (p < 0.001), female (p < 0.001), non-smoker (p < 0.001), diabetic (p < 0.001), with hypertension (p < 0.001), and ASA ≥ 3 (p < 0.001). There were no differences between BMI groups with regard to indication for esophagectomy (malignancy/dysphasia vs other), conversion to open, mortality, or length of stay. The BMI > 35 cohort reported higher operative times (p < 0.001), open operative approach (p = 0.04), superficial surgical site infection (p < 0.001), return to operating room (p = 0.01), and leak (13.5% vs 10.1%, p = 0.01). BMI > 35 was not an independent predictor of leak for all diagnoses; however, the subgroup analysis of esophagectomy for malignancy/dysplasia demonstrated that BMI > 35 was predictive of leak (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.05-1.91), as well as operative time and hypertension. CONCLUSION: Patients with a BMI > 35 and who undergo esophagectomy have a higher rate of anastomotic leak. BMI > 35 was also an independent predictor of leak when esophagectomy was performed for malignancy/dysplasia, but not for all diagnoses. The risk of anastomotic leak should be considered in morbidly obese patients undergoing esophagectomy, particularly for malignancy.

Multi-society consensus conference and guideline on the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common diseases in North America and globally. The aim of this guideline is to provide evidence-based recommendations regarding the most utilized and available endoscopic and surgical treatments for GERD. METHODS: Systematic literature reviews were conducted for 4 key questions regarding the surgical and endoscopic treatments for GERD in adults: preoperative evaluation, endoscopic vs surgical or medical treatment, complete vs partial fundoplication, and treatment for obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥ 35 kg/m2) and concomitant GERD. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the GRADE methodology by subject experts. Recommendations for future research were also proposed. RESULTS: The consensus provided 13 recommendations. Through the development of these evidence-based recommendations, an algorithm was proposed for aid in the treatment of GERD. Patients with typical symptoms should undergo upper endoscopy, manometry, and pH-testing; additional testing may be required for patients with atypical or extra-esophageal symptoms. Patients with normal or abnormal findings on manometry should consider undergoing partial fundoplication. Magnetic sphincter augmentation or fundoplication are appropriate surgical procedures for adults with GERD. For patients who wish to avoid surgery, the Stretta procedure and transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF 2.0) were found to have better outcomes than proton pump inhibitors alone. Patients with concomitant obesity were recommended to undergo either gastric bypass or fundoplication, although patients with severe comorbid disease or BMI > 50 should undergo Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for the additional benefits that follow weight loss. CONCLUSION: Using the recommendations an algorithm was developed by this panel, so that physicians may better counsel their patients with GERD. There are certain patient factors that have been excluded from included studies/trials, and so these recommendations should not replace surgeon-patient decision making. Engaging in the identified research areas may improve future care for GERD patients.

Diversity in Scientific Discovery.

Presented here is a brief discussion on the imperative need and thoughtful approaches to embracing diversity, equity and inclusion within scientific enquiry.

Biomarkers for Barrett's esophagus - a contemporary review.

INTRODUCTION: Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) has a poor 5-year survival rate (10%-18%), and incidence has increased dramatically in the past three decades. Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor lesion to EAC and is the replacement of the normally squamous lined esophagus with columnar cells that develop an intestinal phenotype characterized by the presence of goblet cells. Given the known precursor state, EAC is amenable to screening and surveillance strategies (analogous to colon cancer). However, unlike from colon cancer screening, BE poses challenges that make effective screening difficult. Robust and concerted effort is under way to find biomarkers of BE. Areas covered: This review summarizes current known biomarkers for BE. These include dysplasia, genomic markers, and gene expression alterations that occur early in the dysplasia/carcinoma sequence. Expert commentary: Despite the tremendous breadth of work in studying molecular advances, the ideal biomarker for BE has not yet been discerned. This review comments on innovations in the field of BE research that combine state-of-the-art molecular advances with simple technologies.

Feasibility, safety, and short-term efficacy of the laparoscopic Nissen-Hill hybrid repair.

BACKGROUND: A novel antireflux procedure combining laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication and Hill repair components was tested in 50 patients with paraesophageal hernia (PEH) and/or Barrett's esophagus (BE) because these two groups have been found to have a high rate of recurrence with conventional repairs. METHODS: Patients with symptomatic PEH and/or non-dysplastic BE underwent repair. Quality of life (QOL) metrics, manometry, EGD, and pH testing were administered pre- and postoperatively. RESULTS: Fifty patients underwent repair. There was no mortality and four major complications. At 13-month follow-up, there was one (2%) clinical recurrence, and two (4%) asymptomatic fundus herniations. Mean DeMeester scores improved from 57.2 to 7.7 (p < 0.0001). Control of preoperative symptoms was achieved in 90% with 6% resumption of antisecretory medication. All QOL metrics improved significantly. CONCLUSIONS: The hybrid Nissen-Hill repair for patients with PEH and BE appears safe and clinically effective at short-term follow-up. It is hoped that the combined structural components may reduce the rate of recurrence compared to existing repairs.

The laparoscopic Nissen-Hill hybrid: pilot study of a combined antireflux procedure.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic antireflux surgery is highly effective in patients with uncomplicated gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, long-term failure rates in paraesophageal hernia (PEH) and Barrett's metaplasia (BE) are higher and warrant a more durable repair. Outcomes for the laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) and Hill repair (LHR) are equivalent, but their anatomic components are different and may complement each other (Aye R Ann Thorac Surg, 2012). We designed and tested the feasibility and safety of an operation that combines the essential components of each repair. METHODS: A prospective, phase II pilot study was performed on patients with symptomatic giant PEH hernias and/or GERD with nondysplastic Barrett's metaplasia. Pre- and postoperative esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), upper gastrointestinal study (UGI), 48-hour pH testing, manometry, and three quality-of-life metrics were obtained. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were enrolled in the study. Three patients did not complete the planned procedure, leaving 21 patients, including 12 with PEH, 7 with BE, and 2 with both. There were no 30-day or in-hospital mortalities. At a median follow-up of 13 (range 6.4-30.2) months, there were no reoperations or clinical recurrences. Two patients required postoperative dilation for dysphagia, with complete resolution. Mean DeMeester scores improved from 54.3 to 7.5 (p < 0.0036). Mean lower esophageal sphincter pressures (LESP) increased from 8.9 to 21.3 mmHg (p < 0.013). Mean short-term and long-term QOLRAD scores improved from 4.09 at baseline to 6.04 and 6.48 (p < 0.0001). Mean short-term and long-term GERD-HQRL scores improved from 22.9 to 7.5 and 6.9 (p < 0.03). Mean long-term Dysphagia Severity Score Index improved from 33.3 to 40.6 (p < 0.064). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of a Nissen plus Hill hybrid reconstruction of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) is technically feasible, safe, and not associated with increased side effects. Short-term clinical results in PEH and BE suggest that this may be an effective repair, supporting the value of further study.

A descriptive analysis of gastric cancer specimen processing techniques.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to guidelines for adequate gastric cancer specimen assessment is poor in North America. Inadequate staging and poor prognosis were noted in some series when these guidelines are not met. Recent advances have been made in standardizing cancer pathology reports in Canada; however, the uptake of these reporting systems is unknown for gastric cancer. A survey of pathologists in Ontario was performed to outline the processing techniques and practices for assessing gastric cancer specimens. METHODS: A survey was designed through a collaboration of surgical oncologists, general surgeons, pathologists, and research staff. Pathologists were identified using the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario and MD Select databases. Participants were surveyed online or by mail-out. RESULTS: The response rate was 40.2% (147/366). Vascular invasion, perineural invasion, and signet ring cells were all reported as being examined for by the majority of pathologists. Fat clearing solution and keratin immunohistochemical techniques were not reported as being consistently utilized. Less than 70% of pathologists indicated using a form of synoptic report. CONCLUSION: Variations in practice and technique were observed. This may or may not reflect differences in quality of care or simply preferences for achieving equivalent results in the absence of standardized procedures. Education, evidence-based procedural guidelines and further research are required to provide infrastructure and support for pathologists and surgeons involved in the care of gastric cancer patients.

Improving the quality of processing gastric cancer specimens: the pathologist's perspective.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Research into surgeon and pathologist knowledge of guidelines for lymph node (LN) assessment in gastric cancer demonstrated a knowledge deficit. To understand factors affecting optimal assessment we surveyed pathologists to identify external barriers. METHODS: Pathologists were identified using two Ontario physician databases and surveyed online or by mail, with a 40% response rate. RESULTS: The majority (56%) of pathologists stated assessing an additional five LNs would not be a burden. Most (80%) pathologists disagreed with pay for performance for achieving quality standards. Qualitative analysis determined the majority of pathologists believed achieving quality standards was inherent to their profession and should not require incentives. Poor surgical specimen was identified as a barrier and underscores the importance of aiming quality improvement initiatives at the multidisciplinary team. CONCLUSION: In addition to education, tailoring an intervention to address all barriers, including laboratory constraints may be an effective means of improving gastric cancer care.

Quality indicators for gastric cancer surgery: a survey of practicing pathologists in Ontario.

BACKGROUND: Adequate lymph node (LN) assessment and R0 resection are critical to the staging and management of gastric cancer. The American Joint Committee on Cancer/International Union Against Cancer recommend at least 15 LN be assessed, and the literature suggests a gross disease-free margin of 5-6 cm be achieved. Results of an Ontario general surgeons' survey indicated these standards were not widely known. Because disease management is highly collaborative, we surveyed pathologists to assess their knowledge of LN assessment and margins for processing gastric cancer specimens. METHODS: Pathologists were identified by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario and MD Select databases. Participants were surveyed online or by mail. RESULTS: Pathologists indicated a goal of assessing <5 LN (2%), 5-10 LN (27%), 10-15 LN (40%), 15-20 LN (20%), or >20 LN (11%). Most self-reported an actual assessment of 5-10 LN (49%), with 88% reporting a number below current standards. Additionally, 54% of responding pathologists identified >1 cm as an adequate gross margin, and 89% of pathologists indicated a response below current standards. Ninety-four percent of pathologists agreed that more education on gastric cancer is valuable. CONCLUSIONS: To improve the quality of gastric cancer management, our findings suggest the need for clear, consistent guidelines for adequate gross margin resection length. Furthermore, there is a critical need for education aimed at closing the knowledge gap among practicing pathologists and surgeons regarding current recommended guidelines for LN assessment and adequate margin length.