ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To reduce perioperative risks among patients with a preoperative diabetes mellitus (DM) a total pancreatectomy (TP) might be a alternative to pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). This study aimed to compare the postoperative quality of life (QoL) of patients with preoperative DM undergoing PD or TP. METHODS: A single-centre retrospective study was conducted, all consecutive patients with preoperative DM undergoing PD or TP between 2011 and 2023 were identified in a prospective database. The primary endpoint was QoL, prospectively assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaires at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery and then annually until death. Secondary endpoints were morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients were included, 17 after TP and 54 after PD. Insulin-dependent DM occurred in 21 (39%) of the PD patients. QoL was worse after TP, especially in terms of physical functioning (-31.7 points; 95% CI: -50.0 to -13.3; P < 0.001), role functioning (-41.3 points; 95% CI: -61.3 to -21.3; P < 0.001), emotional functioning (-27.5 points; 95% CI: -50.4 to -4.6; P = 0.019), fatigue symptoms (20 points; 95% CI: 2.7 to 37.4; P = 0.024) and pain symptoms (30.2 points; 95% CI: 4.1 to 56.3; P = 0.024). The rates of postoperative major complications (29% vs. 35%; P = 0.853) and mortality (11% vs. 7%; P = 0.857) were similar between TP and PD. CONCLUSION: Postoperative morbidity and mortality were comparable between PD and TP, however QoL is significantly lower after TP. Importantly, patients with preoperative DM have a 60% chance of remaining noninsulin-dependent after PD.
Subject(s)
Pancreatectomy , Pancreatic Neoplasms , Pancreaticoduodenectomy , Quality of Life , Humans , Male , Female , Pancreaticoduodenectomy/adverse effects , Pancreaticoduodenectomy/methods , Pancreatectomy/methods , Pancreatectomy/adverse effects , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Aged , Pancreatic Neoplasms/surgery , Pancreatic Neoplasms/mortality , Treatment Outcome , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , AdultABSTRACT
Importance: Preoperative skin antisepsis is an established procedure to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs). The choice of antiseptic agent, povidone iodine or chlorhexidine gluconate, remains debated. Objective: To determine whether povidone iodine in alcohol is noninferior to chlorhexidine gluconate in alcohol to prevent SSIs after cardiac or abdominal surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, cluster-randomized, investigator-masked, crossover, noninferiority trial; 4403 patients undergoing cardiac or abdominal surgery in 3 tertiary care hospitals in Switzerland between September 2018 and March 2020 were assessed and 3360 patients were enrolled (cardiac, n = 2187 [65%]; abdominal, n = 1173 [35%]). The last follow-up was on July 1, 2020. Interventions: Over 18 consecutive months, study sites were randomly assigned each month to either use povidone iodine or chlorhexidine gluconate, each formulated in alcohol. Disinfectants and skin application processes were standardized and followed published protocols. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was SSI within 30 days after abdominal surgery and within 1 year after cardiac surgery, using definitions from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Healthcare Safety Network. A noninferiority margin of 2.5% was used. Secondary outcomes included SSIs stratified by depth of infection and type of surgery. Results: A total of 1598 patients (26 cluster periods) were randomly assigned to receive povidone iodine vs 1762 patients (26 cluster periods) to chlorhexidine gluconate. Mean (SD) age of patients was 65.0 years (39.0-79.0) in the povidone iodine group and 65.0 years (41.0-78.0) in the chlorhexidine gluconate group. Patients were 32.7% and 33.9% female in the povidone iodine and chlorhexidine gluconate groups, respectively. SSIs were identified in 80 patients (5.1%) in the povidone iodine group vs 97 (5.5%) in the chlorhexidine gluconate group, a difference of 0.4% (95% CI, -1.1% to 2.0%) with the lower limit of the CI not exceeding the predefined noninferiority margin of -2.5%; results were similar when corrected for clustering. The unadjusted relative risk for povidone iodine vs chlorhexidine gluconate was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.69-1.23). Nonsignificant differences were observed following stratification by type of surgical procedure. In cardiac surgery, SSIs were present in 4.2% of patients with povidone iodine vs 3.3% with chlorhexidine gluconate (relative risk, 1.26 [95% CI, 0.82-1.94]); in abdominal surgery, SSIs were present in 6.8% with povidone iodine vs 9.9% with chlorhexidine gluconate (relative risk, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.46-1.02]). Conclusions and Relevance: Povidone iodine in alcohol as preoperative skin antisepsis was noninferior to chlorhexidine gluconate in alcohol in preventing SSIs after cardiac or abdominal surgery. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03685604.
Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents, Local , Antisepsis , Chlorhexidine , Ethanol , Povidone-Iodine , Preoperative Care , Surgical Wound Infection , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Abdomen/surgery , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/administration & dosage , Antisepsis/methods , Cardiac Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Chlorhexidine/analogs & derivatives , Cross-Over Studies , Ethanol/administration & dosage , Povidone-Iodine/administration & dosage , Preoperative Care/methods , Skin/microbiology , Surgical Wound Infection/epidemiology , Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control , Adult , IncidenceABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate prognostic differences between minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and open esophagectomy (OE) in patients with surgery after a prolonged interval (>12 wk) following chemoradiotherapy (CRT). BACKGROUND: Previously, we established that a prolonged interval after CRT prior to esophagectomy was associated with poorer long-term survival. METHODS: This was an international multi-center cohort study involving seventeen tertiary centers, including patients who received CRT followed by surgery between 2010-2020. Patients undergoing MIE were defined as thoracoscopic and laparoscopic approach. RESULTS: 428 patients (145 MIE and 283 OE) had surgery between 12 weeks and two years after CRT. Significant differences were observed in ASA grade, radiation dose, clinical T stage, and histological subtype. There were no significant differences between the groups in age, sex, BMI, pathological T or N stage, resection margin status, tumor location, surgical technique, or 90-day mortality. Survival analysis showed MIE was associated with improved survival in univariate (P=0.014), multivariate analysis after adjustment for smoking, T and N stage, and histology (HR=1.69; 95% CI 1.14 to 2.5) and propensity matched analysis (P=0.02). Further subgroup analyses by radiation dose and interval after CRT showed survival advantage for MIE, in 40-50Gy dose groups (HR=1.9; 95% CI 1.2 to 3.0), and in patients having surgery within six months of CRT (HR=1.6; 95% CI 1.1 to 2.2). CONCLUSION: MIE was associated with an improved overall survival compared to OE in patients with a prolonged interval from CRT to surgery. The mechanism for this observed improvement in survival remains unknown, with potential hypotheses including a reduction in complications and improved functional recovery after MIE.
ABSTRACT
Robotic-assisted microsurgery has gained significant attention in recent years following the introduction of two dedicated microsurgical robotic systems specifically designed for this purpose. These feature higher degrees of movement and motion scaling which are useful tools, especially when performing surgery in areas of the body which are difficult to access. Robotic-assisted microsurgery has been implemented in lymphatic surgery as well as soft tissue reconstructive surgery at our institution over the past 2.5 years. Our study gives an insight into the details and outcomes of the first 100 consecutive (super-) microsurgical anastomoses in peripheral and central lymphatic reconstruction performed with the Symani® Surgical System between 2021 and 2024. In total, 67 patients were treated, receiving robotic-assisted lymphatic reconstruction with lymphatic tissue transfer (LTT) and/or lymphovenous anastomoses (LVA)/lympholymphatic anastomoses (LLA). No anastomosis-associated complications were recorded postoperatively. The majority of patients reported a postoperative improvement of their lymphedema or central lymphatic disorder. In conclusion, we show the successful implementation of the Symani® Surgical System into our clinical practice of lymphatic reconstruction. Although the necessary intraoperative setup and the use of intrinsic motion scaling lead to a slight increase in operating time, the presented study demonstrates the advantages of robotic assistance which becomes particularly evident in lymphatic surgery due to the involved deep surgical sites and the need for supermicrosurgical techniques.
Subject(s)
Lymphatic Vessels , Lymphedema , Plastic Surgery Procedures , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Robotics , Humans , Robotic Surgical Procedures/methods , Lymphatic Vessels/surgery , Anastomosis, Surgical/methodsABSTRACT
Reasons for structural and outcome differences in esophageal cancer surgery in Western Europe remain unclear. This questionnaire study aimed to identify differences in the organization of esophageal cancer surgical care in Western Europe. A cross-sectional international questionnaire study was conducted among upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgeons from Western Europe. One surgeon per country was selected based on scientific output and active membership in the European Society for Diseases of the Esophagus or (inter)national upper GI committee. The questionnaire consisted of 51 structured questions on the structural organization of esophageal cancer surgery, surgical training, and clinical audit processes. Between October 2021 and October 2022, 16 surgeons from 16 European countries participated in this study. In 5 countries (31%), a volume threshold was present ranging from 10 to 26 annual esophagectomies, in 7 (44%) care was centralized in designated centers, and in 4 (25%) no centralizing regulations were present. The number of centers performing esophageal cancer surgery per country differed from 4 to 400, representing 0.5-4.9 centers per million inhabitants. In 4 countries (25%), esophageal cancer surgery was part of general surgical training and 8 (50%) reported the availability of upper GI surgery fellowships. A national audit for upper GI surgery was present in 8 (50%) countries. If available, all countries use the audit to monitor the quality of care. Substantial differences exist in the organization and centralization of esophageal cancer surgical care in Western Europe. The exchange of experience in the organizational aspects of care could further improve the results of esophageal cancer surgical care in Europe.
Subject(s)
Esophageal Neoplasms , Esophagectomy , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Humans , Europe , Cross-Sectional Studies , Esophagectomy/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires , Surgeons/statistics & numerical data , MaleSubject(s)
Laparoscopy , Stomach Neoplasms , Humans , Benchmarking , Gastroenterostomy , Postoperative Complications , Gastrectomy , Stomach Neoplasms/surgeryABSTRACT
Importance: Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a complex procedure with substantial learning curves. In other complex minimally invasive procedures, suboptimal surgical performance has convincingly been associated with less favorable patient outcomes as assessed by peer review of the surgical procedure. Objective: To develop and validate a procedure-specific competency assessment tool (CAT) for MIE. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this international quality improvement study, a procedure-specific MIE-CAT was developed and validated. The MIE-CAT contains 8 procedural phases, and 4 quality components per phase are scored with a Likert scale ranging from 1 to 4. For evaluation of the MIE-CAT, intraoperative MIE videos performed by a single surgical team in the Esophageal Center East Netherlands were peer reviewed by 18 independent international MIE experts (with more than 120 MIEs performed). Each video was assessed by 2 or 3 blinded experts to evaluate feasibility, content validity, reliability, and construct validity. MIE-CAT version 2 was composed with refined content aimed at improving interrater reliability. A total of 32 full-length MIE videos from patients who underwent MIE between 2011 and 2020 were analyzed. Data were analyzed from January 2021 to January 2023. Exposure: Performance assessment of transthoracic MIE with an intrathoracic anastomosis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Feasibility, content validity, interrater and intrarater reliability, and construct validity, including correlations with both experience of the surgical team and clinical parameters, of the developed MIE-CAT. Results: Experts found the MIE-CAT easy to understand and easy to use to grade surgical performance. The MIE-CAT demonstrated good intrarater reliability (range of intraclass correlation coefficients [ICCs], 0.807 [95% CI, 0.656 to 0.892] for quality component score to 0.898 [95% CI, 0.846 to 0.932] for phase score). Interrater reliability was moderate (range of ICCs, 0.536 [95% CI, -0.220 to 0.994] for total MIE-CAT score to 0.705 [95% CI, 0.473 to 0.846] for quality component score), and most discrepancies originated in the lymphadenectomy phases. Hypothesis testing for construct validity showed more than 75% of hypotheses correct: MIE-CAT performance scores correlated with experience of the surgical team (r = 0.288 to 0.622), blood loss (r = -0.034 to -0.545), operative time (r = -0.309 to -0.611), intraoperative complications (r = -0.052 to -0.319), and severe postoperative complications (r = -0.207 to -0.395). MIE-CAT version 2 increased usability. Interrater reliability improved but remained moderate (range of ICCs, 0.666 to 0.743), and most discrepancies between raters remained in the lymphadenectomy phases. Conclusions and Relevance: The MIE-CAT was developed and its feasibility, content validity, reliability, and construct validity were demonstrated. By providing insight into surgical performance of MIE, the MIE-CAT might be used for clinical, training, and research purposes.
Subject(s)
Esophageal Neoplasms , Esophagectomy , Humans , Esophagectomy/adverse effects , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Reproducibility of Results , Lymph Node Excision/adverse effects , Postoperative Complications/etiologyABSTRACT
Transthoracic esophagectomy results in a radical change in foregut anatomy with multiple consequences for digestive physiology. The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with poor functional outcomes by assessing multiple dimensions of digestive performance and health-related quality of life (HRQL). Patients with cancer-free survival after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy were included. Four functional syndromes (dysphagia, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), delayed gastric conduit emptying (DGCE), and dumping syndrome (DS)) and HRQL were assessed using specifically designed questionnaires. Patient outcomes were compared with healthy controls. Independent factors associated with poor digestive performance were identified through multivariable analysis. Sixty-five postoperative patients and 50 healthy volunteers participated in this study. Compared with controls, patients had worse outcomes for dysphagia, GERD, DS, and HRQL, but not for DGCE. A multivariate analysis showed a significant correlation of reduced digestive performance with ASA score, squamous cell carcinoma, open or hybrid surgical approach, and (neo)adjuvant therapy. In contrast, no individual patient factor was found to be associated with dumping syndrome. Digestive function and HRQL are substantially impaired after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for cancer. Comorbid patients undergoing multimodal treatment and open access surgery for squamous cell carcinoma have the highest risk of poor functional outcome.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Symptomatic and large hiatal hernia (HH) is a common disorder requiring surgical management. However, there is a lack of systematic, evidence-based recommendations summarizing recent reviews on surgical treatment of symptomatic HH. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to create evidence mapping on the key technical issues of HH repair based on the highest available evidence. METHODS: A systematic review identified studies on eight key issues of large symptomatic HH repair. The literature was screened for the highest level of evidence (LE from level 1 to 5) according to the Oxford Center for evidence-based medicine's scale. For each topic, only studies of the highest available level of evidence were considered. RESULTS: Out of the 28.783 studies matching the keyword algorithm, 47 were considered. The following recommendations could be deduced: minimally invasive surgery is the recommended approach (LE 1a); a complete hernia sac dissection should be considered (LE 3b); extensive division of short gastric vessels cannot be recommended; however, limited dissection of the most upper vessels may be helpful for a floppy fundoplication (LE 1a); vagus nerve should be preserved (LE 3b); a dorso-ventral cruroplasty is recommended (LE 1b); routine fundoplication should be considered to prevent postoperative gastroesophageal reflux (LE 2b); posterior partial fundoplication should be favored over other forms of fundoplication (LE 1a); mesh augmentation is indicated in large HH with paraesophageal involvement (LE 1a). CONCLUSION: The current evidence mapping is a reasonable instrument based on the best evidence available to guide surgeons in determining optimal symptomatic and large HH repair.
Subject(s)
Gastroesophageal Reflux , Hernia, Hiatal , Laparoscopy , Humans , Hernia, Hiatal/surgery , Gastroesophageal Reflux/surgery , Fundoplication , ReoperationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Video-based assessment by experts may structurally measure surgical performance using procedure-specific competency assessment tools (CATs). A CAT for minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE-CAT) was developed and validated previously. However, surgeon's time is scarce and video assessment is time-consuming and labor intensive. This study investigated non-procedure-specific assessment of MIE video clips by MIE experts and crowdsourcing, collective surgical performance evaluation by anonymous and untrained laypeople, to assist procedure-specific expert review. METHODS: Two surgical performance scoring frameworks were used to assess eight MIE videos. First, global performance was assessed with the non-procedure-specific Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) of 64 procedural phase-based video clips < 10 min. Each clip was assessed by two MIE experts and > 30 crowd workers. Second, the same experts assessed procedure-specific performance with the MIE-CAT of the corresponding full-length video. Reliability and convergent validity of GOALS for MIE were investigated using hypothesis testing with correlations (experience, blood loss, operative time, and MIE-CAT). RESULTS: Less than 75% of hypothesized correlations between GOALS scores and experience of the surgical team (r < 0.3), blood loss (r = - 0.82 to 0.02), operative time (r = - 0.42 to 0.07), and the MIE-CAT scores (r = - 0.04 to 0.76) were met for both crowd workers and experts. Interestingly, experts' GOALS and MIE-CAT scores correlated strongly (r = 0.40 to 0.79), while crowd workers' GOALS and experts' MIE-CAT scores correlations were weak (r = - 0.04 to 0.49). Expert and crowd worker GOALS scores correlated poorly (ICC ≤ 0.42). CONCLUSION: GOALS assessments by crowd workers lacked convergent validity and showed poor reliability. It is likely that MIE is technically too difficult to assess for laypeople. Convergent validity of GOALS assessments by experts could also not be established. GOALS might not be comprehensive enough to assess detailed MIE performance. However, expert's GOALS and MIE-CAT scores strongly correlated indicating video clip (instead of full-length video) assessments could be useful to shorten assessment time.
Subject(s)
Crowdsourcing , Esophageal Neoplasms , Laparoscopy , Humans , Reproducibility of Results , Esophagectomy , Clinical CompetenceABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of delayed surgical intervention following chemoradiotherapy (CRT) on survival from esophageal cancer. BACKGROUND: CRT is a core component of multimodality treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. The timing of surgery following CRT may influence the probability of performing an oncological resection and the associated operative morbidity. METHODS: This was an international, multicenter, cohort study, including patients from 17 centers who received CRT followed by surgery between 2010 and 2020. In the main analysis, patients were divided into 4 groups based upon the interval between CRT and surgery (0-50, 51-100, 101-200, and >200 days) to assess the impact upon 90-day mortality and 5-year overall survival. Multivariable logistic and Cox regression provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs adjusted for relevant patient, oncological, and pathologic confounding factors. RESULTS: A total of 2867 patients who underwent esophagectomy after CRT were included. After adjustment for relevant confounders, prolonged interval following CRT was associated with an increased 90-day mortality compared with 0 to 50 days (reference): 51 to 100 days (HR=1.54, 95% CI: 1.04-2.29), 101 to 200 days (HR=2.14, 95% CI: 1.37-3.35), and >200 days (HR=3.06, 95% CI: 1.64-5.69). Similarly, a poorer 5-year overall survival was also observed with prolonged interval following CRT compared with 0 to 50 days (reference): 101 to 200 days (HR=1.41, 95% CI: 1.17-1.70), and >200 days (HR=1.64, 95% CI: 1.24-2.17). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged interval following CRT before esophagectomy is associated with increased 90-day mortality and poorer long-term survival. Further investigation is needed to understand the mechanism that underpins these adverse outcomes observed with a prolonged interval to surgery.
Subject(s)
Esophageal Neoplasms , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Humans , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , Chemoradiotherapy , EsophagectomyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Mesh augmentation is a highly controversial adjunct of hiatus hernia (HH) surgery. The current scientific evidence remains unclear and even experts disagree on indications and surgical techniques. With an aim to avoid the downsides of both non-resorbable synthetic and biological materials, biosynthetic long-term resorbable meshes (BSM) have recently been developed and are becoming increasingly popular. In this context, we aimed at assessing outcomes after HH repair with this new generation of mesh at our institution. METHODS: From a prospective database, we identified all consecutive patients that underwent HH repair with BSM augmentation. Data was extracted from electronic patient charts of our hospital information system. Endpoints of this analysis included perioperative morbidity, functional results and recurrence rates at follow-up. RESULTS: Between December 2017 and July 2022, 97 patients (elective primary cases n = 76, redo cases n = 13, emergency cases n = 8) underwent HH with BSM augmentation. Indications in elective and emergency cases were paraesophageal (Type II-IV) HH in 83%, and large Type I HH in 4%. There was no perioperative mortality, and overall (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 2) and severe (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) postoperative morbidity was 15% and 3%, respectively. An outcome without postoperative complications was achieved in 85% of cases (elective primary surgery 88%, redo cases 100%, emergencies cases 25%). After a median (IQR) postoperative follow-up of 12 months, 69 patients (74%) were asymptomatic, 15 (16%) reported improvement, and 9 (10%) had clinical failure, of which 2 patients (2%) required revisional surgery. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that HH repair with BSM augmentation is feasible and safe with low perioperative morbidity and acceptable postoperative failure rates at early to mid-term follow-up. BSM may be a useful alternative to non-resorbable materials in HH surgery.
Subject(s)
Hernia, Hiatal , Laparoscopy , Humans , Surgical Mesh , Herniorrhaphy/methods , Laparoscopy/methods , Recurrence , Hernia, Hiatal/surgery , Hernia, Hiatal/complications , Treatment Outcome , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND : Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) is a novel treatment for esophageal perforations. This study aimed to describe initial experience with EVT of esophageal perforations due to iatrogenic cause, Boerhaave syndrome, or other perforations not related to prior upper gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS : Data from patients treated with EVT for esophageal perforation at five hospitals in three European countries, between January 2018 and October 2021, were retrospectively collected. The primary end point was successful defect closure by EVT, with or without the use of other endoscopic treatment modalities. Secondary end points included mortality and adverse events. RESULTS : 27 patients were included (median age 71 years). The success rate was 89â% (24/27, 95â%CI 77-100). EVT failed in three patients: two deceased during EVT (septic embolic stroke, pulmonary embolism) and one underwent esophagectomy due to a persisting defect. Two adverse events occurred: one iatrogenic defect expansion during sponge exchange and one hemorrhage during sponge removal. Median treatment duration was 12 days (interquartile range [IQR] 6-16) with 1 sponge exchange (IQR 1-3). CONCLUSION : EVT is a promising organ-preserving treatment for esophageal perforations, with a success rate of 89â%. More experience with the technique and indications will likely improve success rates.
Subject(s)
Esophageal Perforation , Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy , Humans , Aged , Esophageal Perforation/etiology , Esophageal Perforation/surgery , Retrospective Studies , Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy/methods , Endoscopy/adverse effects , Iatrogenic Disease , Anastomotic Leak/therapy , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
AIMS: There is considerable controversy regarding optimal management of patients with paraesophageal hiatus hernia (pHH). This survey aims at identifying recommended strategies for work-up, surgical therapy, and postoperative follow-up using Delphi methodology. METHODS: We conducted a 2-round, 33-question, web-based Delphi survey on perioperative management (preoperative work-up, surgical procedure and follow-up) of non-revisional, elective pHH among European surgeons with expertise in upper-GI. Responses were graded on a 5-point Likert scale and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Items from the questionnaire were defined as "recommended" or "discouraged" if positive or negative concordance among participants was > 75%. Items with lower concordance levels were labelled "acceptable" (neither recommended nor discouraged). RESULTS: Seventy-two surgeons with a median (IQR) experience of 23 (14-30) years from 17 European countries participated (response rate 60%). The annual median (IQR) individual and institutional caseload was 25 (15-36) and 40 (28-60) pHH-surgeries, respectively. After Delphi round 2, "recommended" strategies were defined for preoperative work-up (endoscopy), indication for surgery (typical symptoms and/or chronic anemia), surgical dissection (hernia sac dissection and resection, preservation of the vagal nerves, crural fascia and pleura, resection of retrocardial lipoma) and reconstruction (posterior crurorrhaphy with single stitches, lower esophageal sphincter augmentation (Nissen or Toupet), and postoperative follow-up (contrast radiography). In addition, we identified "discouraged" strategies for preoperative work-up (endosonography), and surgical reconstruction (crurorrhaphy with running sutures, tension-free hiatus repair with mesh only). In contrast, many items from the questionnaire including most details of mesh augmentation (indication, material, shape, placement, and fixation technique) were "acceptable". CONCLUSIONS: This multinational European Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process to identify recommended strategies for the management of pHH. Our work may be useful in clinical practice to guide the diagnostic process, increase procedural consistency and standardization, and to foster collaborative research.
Subject(s)
Hernia, Hiatal , Laparoscopy , Humans , Hernia, Hiatal/surgery , Delphi Technique , Fundoplication/methods , Herniorrhaphy/methods , Surgical Mesh , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The only curative treatment for most gastric cancer is radical gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy (LAD). Minimally invasive total gastrectomy (MIG) aims to reduce postoperative morbidity, but its use has not yet been widely established in Western countries. Minimally invasivE versus open total GAstrectomy is the first Western multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to compare postoperative morbidity following MIG vs open total gastrectomy (OG). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This superiority multicentre RCT compares MIG (intervention) to OG (control) for oncological total gastrectomy with D2 or D2+LAD. Recruitment is expected to last for 2 years. Inclusion criteria comprise age between 18 and 84 years and planned total gastrectomy after initial diagnosis of gastric carcinoma. Exclusion criteria include Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status >2, tumours requiring extended gastrectomy or less than total gastrectomy, previous abdominal surgery or extensive adhesions seriously complicating MIG, other active oncological disease, advanced stages (T4 or M1), emergency setting and pregnancy.The sample size was calculated at 80 participants per group. The primary endpoint is 30-day postoperative morbidity as measured by the Comprehensive Complications Index. Secondary endpoints include postoperative morbidity and mortality, adherence to a fast-track protocol and patient-reported quality of life (QoL) scores (QoR-15, EUROQOL EuroQol-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D), EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-STO22, activities of daily living and Body Image Scale). Oncological endpoints include rate of R0 resection, lymph node yield, disease-free survival and overall survival at 60-month follow-up. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been received by the independent Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty, University of Heidelberg (S-816/2021) and will be received from each responsible ethics committee for each individual participating centre prior to recruitment. Results will be published open access. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00025765.
Subject(s)
Laparoscopy , Stomach Neoplasms , Humans , Adolescent , Young Adult , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Gastrectomy/methods , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Lymph Node Excision , Disease-Free Survival , Treatment Outcome , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Multicenter Studies as TopicABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To explore the prospects of academic e-learning by evaluating our long-standing internet-based surgical learning program and to assess the impact of training on the presentation skills of our residents. The eventual goal is to search whether such models could be further developed by the European Surgical Association (ESA). BACKGROUND: E-learning has become a major educational trend particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. For more than a decade, our academic tertiary center has released weekly video-lectures covering the entire abdominal-surgical curriculum for residents. All lessons were prepared under the supervision of specialized experts and recorded and edited by a professional film team before being released on a dedicated YouTube channel ( https://www.usz.ch/surgical-resident-lectures ). METHODS: To date, our channel includes 120 presentations with more than 619,000 views. We conducted a survey among online users with a medical background and tested the benefits and potential for improvements of local stakeholders to collect individual reviews. RESULTS: A total of 708 users from 106 countries participated in the survey. Continuing medical education (49%), specific questions (38%), and exam preparation (33%) were the main motivations for video viewing. The preferred topics were current guidelines (69%), latest research topics (59%), and complex surgical conditions (52%). Ninety-four percent of our local audience reported a positive learning experience. CONCLUSION: E-learning can improve local academic training and promote the global visibility of strong academic centers. Providing free and unrestricted expertise via social media is a novel and groundbreaking opportunity that fills a global education gap by dissemination of surgical education on an unprecedented scale. Expert associations such as the ESA may adopt similar formats and foster their perception as true beacons of knowledge.
Subject(s)
Computer-Assisted Instruction , Surgeons , COVID-19/epidemiology , Curriculum , Humans , Pandemics , Surgeons/educationABSTRACT
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: This multicenter study assessed the incidence and survival of patients with esophagogastric cancer and oligometastatic disease (OMD) in two tertiary referral cancer centers in The Netherlands and Switzerland. MATERIALS/METHODS: Between 2010 and 2021, patients with metastatic esophagogastric cancer were identified. Patients with de-novo OMD were included (first-time diagnosis of ≤5 distant metastases on 18F-FDG-PET/CT). Control of the primary tumor was considered in patients who underwent primary tumor resection or definitive chemoradiotherapy without locoregional recurrence. Treatment of OMD was categorized into (1) systemic therapy, (2) local treatment (stereotactic body radiotherapy or metastasectomy), (3) local plus systemic therapy, or (4) best supportive care. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and independent prognostic factors for OS. Independent prognostic factors for OS were analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: In total, 830 patients with metastatic esophagogastric cancer were identified of whom 200 patients with de-novo OMD were included (24%). The majority of included patients had esophageal cancer (73%) with adenocarcinoma histology (79%) and metachronous OMD (52%). The primary tumor was controlled in 68%. Treatment of OMD was systemic therapy (25%), local treatment (43%), local plus systemic therapy (13%), or best supportive care (18%). Median follow-up was 14 months (interquartile range: 7-27). Median OS was 16 months (95% CI: 13-21). Improved OS was independently associated with local plus systemic therapy compared with systemic therapy alone (hazard ratio [HR] 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25-0.87). Worse OS was independently associated with squamous cell carcinoma (HR 1.70, 95% CI: 1.07-2.74), bone oligometastases (HR 2.44, 95% CI: 1.28-4.68), brain oligometastases (HR 1.98, 95% CI: 1.05-4.69), and two metastatic locations (HR 2.07, 95% CI: 1.04-4.12). Median OS after local plus systemic therapy was 35 months (95% CI: 22-NA) as compared with 13 months (95% CI: 9-21, p < 0.001) after systemic therapy alone for OMD. CONCLUSION: Patients with metastatic esophagogastric cancer present in 25% with de-novo OMD. Local treatment of OMD plus systemic therapy was independently associated with long-term OS and independently improved OS when compared with systemic therapy alone. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm these results.
Subject(s)
Esophageal Neoplasms , Neoplasms, Second Primary , Radiosurgery , Stomach Neoplasms , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Esophageal Neoplasms/therapy , Humans , Incidence , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography , Radiosurgery/methods , Retrospective Studies , Stomach Neoplasms/therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has emerged as a novel treatment option for upper gastrointestinal wall defects. The basic principle of action of EVT entails evacuation of secretions, removal of wound debris, and containment of the defect. Furthermore, there is increasing evidence that EVT reduces interstitial edema, increases oxygen saturation, and promotes tissue granulation and microcirculation. Various devices, such as macroporous polyurethane sponge systems or open-pore film drains, have been developed for specific indications. Depending on the individual situation, EVT devices can be placed in- or outside the intestinal lumen, as a stand-alone procedure, or in combination with surgical, radiological, and other endoscopic interventions. PURPOSE: The aim of this narrative review is to describe the current spectrum of EVT in the upper gastrointestinal tract and to assess and summarize the related scientific literature. CONCLUSIONS: There is growing evidence that the efficacy of EVT for upper GI leakages exceeds that of other interventional treatment modalities such as self-expanding metal stents, clips, or simple drainages. Owing to the promising results and the excellent risk profile, EVT has become the therapy of choice for perforations and anastomotic leakages of the upper gastrointestinal tract in many centers of expertise. In addition, recent clinical research suggests that preemptive use of EVT after high-risk upper gastrointestinal resections may play an important role in reducing postoperative morbidity.
Subject(s)
Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy , Upper Gastrointestinal Tract , Anastomotic Leak/surgery , Endoscopy , Esophagectomy , Humans , Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy/methods , Upper Gastrointestinal Tract/surgeryABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To define a standardized methodology for establishing benchmarks for relevant outcomes in surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Benchmarking is an established tool to improve quality in industry and economics, and is emerging in assessing outcome values in surgery. Despite a recent 10-step approach to identify such benchmark values, a standardized and more widely agreed-on approach is still lacking. METHODS: A multinational web-based Delphi survey with a focus on methodological requirements for establishing benchmarks for surgical outcomes was performed. Participants were selected among internationally renowned specialists in abdominal, vascular, and thoracic surgery. Consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and results were used to develop a checklist to establish benchmarks in surgery. RESULTS: Forty-one surgical opinion leaders from 19 countries and 5 continents were involved. Experts' response rates were 98% and 80% in rounds 1 and 2, respectively. Upon completion of the final Delphi round, consensus was successfully achieved for 26 of 36 items covering the following areas: center eligibility, validation of databases, patient cohort selection, procedure selection, duration of follow-up, statistical analysis, and publication requirements regarding center-specific outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This multinational Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process for developing a standardized approach for establishing benchmarks for relevant outcome measures in surgery. The provided consensual checklist customizes the methodology of outcome reporting in surgery and thus improves reproducibility and comparability of data and should ultimately serve to improve quality of care.