Association between patient activation and delayed discharge in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A prospective cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Improving patient activation may be an effective way to reduce healthcare costs and improve patient outcomes after surgery. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether preoperative patient activation is associated with delayed discharge (i.e., length of stay >24 h) after elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Postoperative symptoms, unscheduled access to healthcare facilities within seven days of surgery, unplanned hospital readmissions, and postoperative complications were analyzed as secondary outcomes. DESIGN: This cohort study was a secondary analysis of the DeDiLaCo study (Delayed Discharge after day-surgery Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy) collecting data of patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy during 2021 in Italy. Data was analyzed from June 2022 to April 2023. SETTING: 90 Italian surgical centers participating in the study. PARTICIPANTS: 4708 adult patients with an instrumental diagnosis of gallbladder disease and undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patient activation was assessed using the Italian translation of Patient Activation Measure in the preoperative setting. RESULTS: Of 4532 cases analyzed the median (IQR) Patient Activation Measure score was 80.3 (71.2-92.3). Participants were on average 55.5 years of age and 58.1 % were female. Two groups based on the activation level were created: 270 (6 %) had low activation, and 4262 had high activation. The low activation level was associated with the likelihood of delayed discharge (odds ratio [OR] 1.47, 95 % CI, 1.11-1.95; P = .008), higher symptom burden (OR 1.99, 95 % CI 1.49-2.66, P < .0001), and unplanned healthcare utilization within seven days after hospital discharge (OR 1.85, 95 % CI, 1.29-2.63; P = .001). There was no difference between the high and low activation groups in the incidence of postoperative complications (OR 1.28, 95 % CI, 0.95-1.73; P = .10) and hospital readmission after discharge (OR 0.95, 95 % CI, 0.30-3.05; P = .93). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that patients with low activation have 1.47 times the risk of delayed discharge compared with patients with higher activation, almost twice the risk of the onset of postoperative symptoms, and 1.85 times the risk of unscheduled use of hospital services. Screening for patient activation in the preoperative setting could not only identify patients not suitable for early discharge, but more importantly, help physicians and nurses develop tailored interventions.

Laparoscopic Treatment of Perforated Peptic Ulcer: A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of Interrupted Stitches Repair versus Knotless Barbed Suture.

Background: Peptic ulcers result from imbalanced acid production, and in recent decades, proton pump inhibitors have proven effective in treating them. However, perforated peptic ulcers (PPU) continue to occur with a persistent high mortality rate when not managed properly. The advantages of the laparoscopic approach have been widely acknowledged. Nevertheless, concerning certain technical aspects of this method, such as the best gastrorrhaphy technique, the consensus remains elusive. Consequently, the choice tends to rely on individual surgical experiences. Our study aimed to compare interrupted stitches versus running barbed suture for laparoscopic PPU repair. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study utilizing propensity score matching analysis on patients who underwent laparoscopic PPU repair. Patients were categorised into two groups: Interrupted Stitches Suture (IStiS) and Knotless Suture (KnotS). We then compared the clinical and pathological characteristics of patients in both groups. Results: A total of 265 patients underwent laparoscopic PPU repair: 198 patients with interrupted stitches technique and 67 with barbed knotless suture. Following propensity score matching, each group (IStiS and KnotS) comprised 56 patients. The analysis revealed that operative time did not differ between groups: 87.9 ± 39.7 vs. 92.8 ± 42.6 min (p = 0.537). Postoperative morbidity (24.0% vs. 32.7%, p = 0.331) and Clavien-Dindo III (10.7% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.489) were more frequently observed in the KnotS group, without any significant difference. In contrast, we found a slightly higher mortality rate in the IStiS group (10.7% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.742). Concerning leaks, no differences emerged between groups (3.6% vs. 5.4%, p = 1.000). Conclusions: Laparoscopic PPU repair with knotless barbed sutures is a non-inferior alternative to interrupted stitches repair. Nevertheless, further research such as randomised trials, with a standardised treatment protocol according to ulcer size, are required to identify the best gastrorraphy technique.

Towards a tailored approach for patients with acute diverticulitis and abscess formation. The DivAbsc2023 multicentre case-control study.

BACKGROUND: This multicentre case-control study aimed to identify risk factors associated with non-operative treatment failure for patients with CT scan Hinchey Ib-IIb and WSES Ib-IIa diverticular abscesses. METHODS: This study included a cohort of adult patients experiencing their first episode of CT-diagnosed diverticular abscess, all of whom underwent initial non-operative treatment comprising either antibiotics alone or in combination with percutaneous drainage. The cohort was stratified based on the outcome of non-operative treatment, specifically identifying those who required emergency surgical intervention as cases of treatment failure. Multivariable logistic regression analysis to identify independent risk factors associated with the failure of non-operative treatment was employed. RESULTS: Failure of conservative treatment occurred for 116 patients (27.04%). CT scan Hinchey classification IIb (aOR 2.54, 95%CI 1.61;4.01, P < 0.01), tobacco smoking (aOR 2.01, 95%CI 1.24;3.25, P < 0.01), and presence of air bubbles inside the abscess (aOR 1.59, 95%CI 1.00;2.52, P = 0.04) were independent predictors of failure. In the subgroup of patients with abscesses > 5 cm, percutaneous drainage was not associated with the risk of failure or success of the non-operative treatment (aOR 2.78, 95%CI - 0.66;3.70, P = 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: Non-operative treatment is generally effective for diverticular abscesses. Tobacco smoking's role as an independent risk factor for treatment failure underscores the need for targeted behavioural interventions in diverticular disease management. IIb Hinchey diverticulitis patients, particularly young smokers, require vigilant monitoring due to increased risks of treatment failure and septic progression. Further research into the efficacy of image-guided percutaneous drainage should involve randomized, multicentre studies focussing on homogeneous patient groups.

Are Surgeons Going to Be Left Holding the Bag? Incisional Hernia Repair and Intra-Peritoneal Non-Absorbable Mesh Implant Complications.

Ventral incisional hernias are common indications for elective repair and frequently complicated by recurrence. Surgical meshes, which may be synthetic, bio-synthetic, or biological, decrease recurrence and, resultingly, their use has become standard. While most patients are greatly benefited, mesh represents a permanently implanted foreign body. Mesh may be implanted within the intra-peritoneal, preperitoneal, retrorectus, inlay, or onlay anatomic positions. Meshes may be associated with complications that may be early or late and range from minor to severe. Long-term complications with intra-peritoneal synthetic mesh (IPSM) in apposition to the viscera are particularly at risk for adhesions and potential enteric fistula formation. The overall rate of such complications is difficult to appreciate due to poor long-term follow-up data, although it behooves surgeons to understand these risks as they are the ones who implant these devices. All surgeons need to be aware that meshes are commercial devices that are delivered into their operating room without scientific evidence of efficacy or even safety due to the unique regulatory practices that distinguish medical devices from medications. Thus, surgeons must continue to advocate for more stringent oversight and improved scientific evaluation to serve our patients properly and protect the patient-surgeon relationship as the only rationale long-term strategy to avoid ongoing complications.

The Operating Room management for emergency Surgical Activity (ORSA) study: a WSES international survey.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances and improvements in the management of surgical patients, emergency and trauma surgery is associated with high morbidity and mortality. This may be due in part to delays in definitive surgical management in the operating room (OR). There is a lack of studies focused on OR prioritization and resource allocation in emergency surgery. The Operating Room management for emergency Surgical Activity (ORSA) study was conceived to assess the management of operating theatres and resources from a global perspective among expert international acute care surgeons. METHOD: The ORSA study was conceived as an international web survey. The questionnaire was composed of 23 multiple-choice and open questions. Data were collected over 3 months. Participation in the survey was voluntary and anonymous. RESULTS: One hundred forty-seven emergency and acute care surgeons answered the questionnaire; the response rate was 58.8%. The majority of the participants come from Europe. One hundred nineteen surgeons (81%; 119/147) declared to have at least one emergency OR in their hospital; for the other 20/147 surgeons (13.6%), there is not a dedicated emergency operating room. Forty-six (68/147)% of the surgeons use the elective OR to perform emergency procedures during the day. The planning of an emergency surgical procedure is done by phone by 70% (104/147) of the surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: There is no dedicated emergency OR in the majority of hospitals internationally. Elective surgical procedures are usually postponed or even cancelled to perform emergency surgery. It is a priority to validate an effective universal triaging and scheduling system to allocate emergency surgical procedures. The new Timing in Acute Care Surgery (TACS) was recently proposed and validated by a Delphi consensus as a clear and reproducible triage tool to timely perform an emergency surgical procedure according to the clinical severity of the surgical disease. The new TACS needs to be prospectively validated in clinical practice. Logistics have to be assessed using a multi-disciplinary approach to improve patients' safety, optimise the use of resources, and decrease costs.

Current status of liver surgery for non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastases: the NON.LI.MET. Italian Society for Endoscopic Surgery and New Technologies (SICE) and Association of Italian Surgeons in Europe (ACIE) collaborative international survey.

Despite the increasing trend in liver resections for non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastases (NCNNLM), the role of surgery for these liver malignancies is still debated. Registries are an essential, reliable tool for assessing epidemiology, diagnosis, and therapeutic approach in a single hub, especially when data are dispersive and inconclusive, as in our case. The dissemination of this preliminary survey would allow us to understand if the creation of an International Registry is a viable option, while still offering a snapshot on this issue, investigating clinical practices worldwide. The steering committee designed an online questionnaire with Google Forms, which consisted of 37 questions, and was open from October 5th, 2022, to November 30th, 2022. It was disseminated using social media and mailing lists of the Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery and New Technologies (SICE), the Association of Italian Surgeons in Europe (ACIE), and the Spanish Chapter of the American College of Surgeons (ACS). Overall, 141 surgeons (approximately 18% of the total invitations sent) from 27 countries on four continents participated in the survey. Most respondents worked in general surgery units (62%), performing less than 50 liver resections/year (57%). A multidisciplinary discussion was currently performed to validate surgical indications for NCNNLM in 96% of respondents. The most commonly adopted selection criteria were liver resectability, RECIST criteria, and absence of extrahepatic disease. Primary tumors were generally of gastrointestinal (42%), breast (31%), and pancreaticobiliary origin (13%). The most common interventions were parenchymal-sparing resections (51% of respondents) of metachronous metastases with an open approach. Major post-operative complications (Clavien-Dindo > 2) occurred in up to 20% of the procedures, according to 44% of respondents. A subset analysis of data from high-volume centers (> 100 cases/year) showed lower post-operative complications and better survival. The present survey shows that NCNNLM patients are frequently treated by surgeons in low-volume hospitals for liver surgery. Selection criteria are usually based on common sense. Liver resections are performed mainly with an open approach, possibly carrying a high burden of major post-operative complications. International guidelines and a specific consensus on this field are desirable, as well as strategies for collaboration between high-volume and low-volume centers. The present study can guide the elaboration of a multi-institutional document on the optimal pathway in the management of patients with NCNNLM.

The 2023 MANCTRA Acute Biliary Pancreatitis Care Bundle: A Joint Effort Between Human Knowledge and Artificial Intelligence (ChatGPT) to Optimize the Care of Patients With Acute Biliary Pancreatitis in Western Countries.

OBJECTIVE: To generate an up-to-date bundle to manage acute biliary pancreatitis using an evidence-based, artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted GRADE method. BACKGROUND: A care bundle is a set of core elements of care that are distilled from the most solid evidence-based practice guidelines and recommendations. METHODS: The research questions were addressed in this bundle following the PICO criteria. The working group summarized the effects of interventions with the strength of recommendation and quality of evidence applying the GRADE methodology. ChatGPT AI system was used to independently assess the quality of evidence of each element in the bundle, together with the strength of the recommendations. RESULTS: The 7 elements of the bundle discourage antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with acute biliary pancreatitis, support the use of a full-solid diet in patients with mild to moderately severe acute biliary pancreatitis, and recommend early enteral nutrition in patients unable to feed by mouth. The bundle states that endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography should be performed within the first 48 to 72 hours of hospital admission in patients with cholangitis. Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy should be performed in patients with mild acute biliary pancreatitis. When operative intervention is needed for necrotizing pancreatitis, this should start with the endoscopic step-up approach. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a new care bundle with 7 key elements for managing patients with acute biliary pancreatitis. This new bundle, whose scientific strength has been increased thanks to the alliance between human knowledge and AI from the new ChatGPT software, should be introduced to emergency departments, wards, and intensive care units.

Colonic Resection, Stoma, or Self-expanding Metal Stents for Obstructive Left Colon Cancer: the CROSCO-1 study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide. There are several causes of a mechanical left bowel obstructive but CRC accounts for approximately 50% of cases and in 10-30% of whom it is the presenting syndrome. In most cases, the left colon is involved. At present, the range of therapeutic alternatives in the management of obstructive left CRC in emergency conditions (primary resection vs. staged resection with applied self-expanding metallic stents) is broad, whereas internationally validated clinical recommendations in each condition are still lacking. This enormous variability affects the scientific evidence on both the immediate and long-term surgical and oncological outcomes. METHODS: CROSCO-1 (Colonic Resection, Stoma or Self-expanding Metal Stents for Obstructive Left Colon Cancer) study is a national, multi-center, prospective observational study intending to compare the clinical results of all these therapeutic regimens in a cohort of patients treated for obstructive left-sided CRC. RESULTS: The primary aim of the CROSCO-1 study is the 1-year stoma rate of patients undergoing primary emergency surgical resection (Hartmann procedure or primary resection and anastomosis) compared with patients undergoing staged resection. Secondary outcomes are 30-day and 90-day major morbidity and mortality, 1-year quality of life and the timing of chemotherapy initiation in the two groups. Future CROSCO studies will follow in which, instead, we will evaluate the long-term oncological outcomes of the two treatment strategies. CONCLUSIONS: The results of a large prospective cohort study which will analyze what really happens in the common clinical practice of managing patients with obstructive left CRC will have the aim of understanding which is the best strategy in terms of surgical and oncological outcomes. Indeed, the CROSCO-1 study will analyze the early surgical outcomes for patients with obstructed left CRC. Future CROSCO studies will follow in which, instead, we will evaluate the long-term oncological outcomes of the two treatment strategies.

A core outcome set for appendicitis: A consensus approach utilizing modified Delphi methodology.

BACKGROUND: Appendicitis is one of the most common pathologies encountered by general and acute care surgeons. The current literature is inconsistent, as it is fraught with outcome heterogeneity, especially in the area of nonoperative management. We sought to develop a core outcome set (COS) for future appendicitis studies to facilitate outcome standardization and future data pooling. METHODS: A modified Delphi study was conducted after identification of content experts in the field of appendicitis using both the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) landmark appendicitis articles and consensus from the EAST ad hoc COS taskforce on appendicitis. The study incorporated three rounds. Round 1 utilized free text outcome suggestions, then in rounds 2 and 3 the suggests were scored using a Likert scale of 1 to 9 with 1 to 3 denoting a less important outcome, 4 to 6 denoting an important but noncritical outcome, and 7 to 9 denoting a critically important outcome. Core outcome status consensus was defined a priori as >70% of scores 7 to 9 and <15% of scores 1 to 3. RESULTS: Seventeen panelists initially agreed to participate in the study with 16 completing the process (94%). Thirty-two unique potential outcomes were initially suggested in round 1 and 10 (31%) met consensus with one outcome meeting exclusion at the end of round 2. At completion of round 3, a total of 17 (53%) outcomes achieved COS consensus. CONCLUSION: An international panel of 16 appendicitis experts achieved consensus on 17 core outcomes that should be incorporated into future appendicitis studies as a minimum set of standardized outcomes to help frame future cohort-based studies on appendicitis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test or Criteria; Level V.

Levels of Robotic Mesopancreas Dissection According to Malignancy and Vascular Anatomy: What Surgeons Need to Know.

INTRODUCTION: The robotic approach is attracting increasing interest among the surgical community, and more and more series describing robotic pancreatoduodenectomy have been reported. Thus, surgeons performing robotic pancreatoduodenectomy should be confident with this critical step's potential scenarios. MATERIALS AND METHODS: According to Yosuke et al., there are three different levels of mesopancreas dissection. We describe the main steps for a safe mesopancreas dissection by robotic approach. RESULTS: This multimedia article provides, for the first time in literature, a comprehensive step-by-step overview of the mesopancreas dissection during robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and its three different levels according to tumor type. CONCLUSIONS: Through the tips and indications presented in this multimedia article, we aim to familiarize surgeons with the mesopancreas dissections levels according to type of malignancy and vascular anatomy.

Safety of laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed by trainee surgeons with different cholangiographic techniques (SCOTCH): a prospective non-randomized trial on the impact of fluorescent cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed by trainees.

AIMS: The identification of the anatomical components of the Calot's Triangle during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) might be challenging and its difficulty may increase when a surgical trainee (ST) is in charge, ultimately allegedly affecting also the incidence of common bile duct injuries (CBDIs). There are various methods to help reach the critical view of safety (CVS): intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC), critical view of safety in white light (CVS-WL) and near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography (NIRF-C). The primary objective was to compare the use of these techniques to obtain the CVS during elective LC performed by ST. METHODS: This was a multicentre prospective observational study (Clinicalstrials.gov Registration number: NCT04863482). The impact of three different visualization techniques (IOC, CVS-WL, NIRF-C) on LC was analyzed. Operative time and time to achieve the CVS were considered. All the participating surgeons were also required to fill in three questionnaires at the end of the operation focusing on anatomical identification of the general task and their satisfaction. RESULTS: Twenty-nine centers participated for a total of 338 patients: 260 CVS-WL, 10 IOC and 68 NIRF-C groups. The groups did not differ in the baseline characteristics. CVS was considered achieved in all the included case. Rates were statistically higher in the NIR-C group for common hepatic and common bile duct visualization (p = 0.046; p < 0.005, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences in operative time (p = 0.089) nor in the time to achieve the CVS (p = 0.626). Three biliary duct injuries were reported: 2 in the CVS-WL and 1 in the NIR-C. Surgical workload scores were statistically lower in every domain in the NIR-C group. Subjective satisfaction was higher in the NIR-C group. There were no other statistically significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: These data showed that using NIRF-C did not prolong operative time but positively influenced the surgeon's satisfaction of the performance of LC.

Cesena guidelines: WSES consensus statement on laparoscopic-first approach to general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopy is widely adopted across nearly all surgical subspecialties in the elective setting. Initially finding indication in minor abdominal emergencies, it has gradually become the standard approach in the majority of elective general surgery procedures. Despite many technological advances and increasing acceptance, the laparoscopic approach remains underutilized in emergency general surgery and in abdominal trauma. Emergency laparotomy continues to carry a high morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there has been a growing interest from emergency and trauma surgeons in adopting minimally invasive surgery approaches in the acute surgical setting. The present position paper, supported by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), aims to provide a review of the literature to reach a consensus on the indications and benefits of a laparoscopic-first approach in patients requiring emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies or abdominal trauma. METHODS: This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of 54 experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on a position statement. RESULTS: A total of 323 studies (systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized clinical trial, retrospective comparative cohort studies, case series) have been selected from an initial pool of 7409 studies. Evidence demonstrates several benefits of the laparoscopic approach in stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgical emergencies or abdominal trauma. The selection of a stable patient seems to be of paramount importance for a safe adoption of a laparoscopic approach. In hemodynamically stable patients, the laparoscopic approach was found to be safe, feasible and effective as a therapeutic tool or helpful to identify further management steps and needs, resulting in improved outcomes, regardless of conversion. Appropriate patient selection, surgeon experience and rigorous minimally invasive surgical training, remain crucial factors to increase the adoption of laparoscopy in emergency general surgery and abdominal trauma. CONCLUSIONS: The WSES expert panel suggests laparoscopy as the first approach for stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the follow-up of abdominal solid organ trauma: an international survey prior to the PseAn study.

BACKGROUND: The blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma follow-up relies on contrast CT scan to detect solid organ injuries. CEUS is not widely used worldwide, despite its accuracy and feasibility in identifying parenchymal and vascular lesions. This survey aims to define the current use of CEUS in Trauma Centers and the expectations of Emergency Surgeons regarding its role. METHODS: We sent an online questionnaire composed of 10 questions to trauma physicians worldwide during the period of September 2022 to March 2023. RESULTS: 59 participants from 53 different centers answered the questionnaire. 76.2% of the enrolled participants have CEUS available at their Institution, and 49.2% think that it can replace CT scan. Contrast-CT scan remains the preferred option in the follow-up of blunt liver (69.5%), spleen (72.9%) and kidney (76.3%) injuries, followed by CEUS which is used in 18.6% for liver, 20.3% for spleen and 15.3% for kidney injuries. The results are similar for penetrating abdominal trauma, with contrast CT scan being the first-line imaging technique (91.5% for liver, 91.5% for spleen and 88.1% for kidney injuries), followed by CEUS (5.1% for liver, 5.1% for spleen and 6.8% for kidney injuries). CONCLUSIONS: Our survey shows that CEUS is still underutilized in the follow-up of abdominal trauma, even though many emergency surgeons consider it as a valid alternative to contrast CT scan.

The burden of the knowledge-to-action gap in acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: The burden of emergency general surgery (EGS) is higher compared to elective surgery. Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most frequent diseases and its management is dictated by published international clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Adherence to CPG has been reported as heterogeneous. Barriers to clinical implementation were not studied. This study explored barriers to adherence to CPG and the clinico-economic impact of poor compliance. METHODS: Data were extracted from the three-year data lock of the REsiDENT-1 registry, a prospective resident-led multicenter trial. We identified 7 items from CPG published from the European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) and the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES). We applied our classification proposal and used a five-point Likert scale (Ls) to assess laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) difficulty. Descriptive analyses were performed to explore compliance and group comparisons to assess the impact on outcomes and related costs. We ran logistic regressions to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation of CPG. RESULTS: From 2019 to 2022, 653 LA were included from 24 centers. 69 residents performed and coordinated data collection. We identified low compliance with recommendations on peritoneal irrigation (PI) (25.73%), abdominal drains (AD) (34.68%), and antibiotic stewardship (34.17%). Poor compliance on PI and AD was associated to higher infectious complications in uncomplicated AA. Hospitalizations were significantly longer in non-compliance except for PI in uncomplicated AA, and costs significantly higher, exception made for antibiotic stewardship in complicated AA. The strongest barriers to CPG implementation were complicated AA and technically challenging LA for PI and AD. Longer operative times and the use of PI negatively affected antibiotic stewardship in uncomplicated AA. Compliance was higher in teaching hospitals and in emergency surgery units. CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed low compliance with standardized items influenced by environmental factors and non-evidence-based practices in complex LA. Antibiotic stewardship is sub-optimal. Not following CPG may not influence clinical complications but has an impact in terms of logistics, costs and on the non-measurable magnitude of antibiotic resistance. Structured educational interventions and institutional bundles are required.