Integrated flexible endoscopy training during surgical residency.

BACKGROUND: New advances in endoscopic surgery make it imperative that future gastrointestinal surgeons obtain adequate endoscopy skills. An evaluation of the 2001-02 general surgery residency endoscopy experience at the University of Missouri revealed that chief residents were graduating with an average of 43 endoscopic cases. This met American Board of Surgery (ABS) and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirements but is inadequate preparation for carrying out advanced endoscopic surgery. Our aim was to determine if endoscopy volume could be improved by dedicating specific staff surgeon time to a gastrointestinal diagnostic center at an affiliated Veterans Administration Hospital. METHODS: During the academic years 2002-05, two general surgeons who routinely perform endoscopy staffed the gastrointestinal endoscopy center at the Harry S. Truman Hospital two days per week. A minimum of one categorical surgical resident participated during these endoscopy training days while on the Veterans Hospital surgical service. A retrospective observational review of ACGME surgery resident case logs from 2001 to 2005 was conducted to document the changes in resident endoscopy experience. The cases were compiled by postgraduate year (PGY). RESULTS: Resident endoscopy case volume increased 850% from 2001 to 2005. Graduating residents completed an average of 161 endoscopies. Endoscopic experience was attained at all levels of training: 26, 21, 34, 23, and 26 mean endoscopies/year for PGY-1 to PGY-5, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Having specific endoscopy training days at a VA Hospital under the guidance of a dedicated staff surgeon is a successful method to improve surgical resident endoscopy case volume. An integrated endoscopy training curriculum results in early skills acquisition, continued proficiency throughout residency, and is an efficient way to obtain endoscopic skills. In addition, the foundation of flexible endoscopic skill and experience has allowed early integration of surgery residents into research efforts in natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery.

Management of postsurgical leaks in the bariatric patient.

Postsurgical leaks after bariatric procedures are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. They usually arise from anastomotic and staple line failures that are attributed to surgical technique, ischemia, and patient comorbid conditions. Timely diagnosis from subtle clinical clues is the key to appropriate management. Traditional treatment consists of adequate control of the intra-abdominal infection via surgical or percutaneous drainage maneuvers, antibiotics, and nutrition support via parenteral or feeding tube routes. Recently, endoscopically placed covered esophageal stents have been used to exclude the leak site, allowing oral nutrition and speeding healing.

Laparoscopic revisional surgery after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Failure of primary bariatric surgery is frequently due to weight recidivism, intractable gastric reflux, gastrojejunal strictures, fistulas, and malnutrition. Of these patients, 10-60% will undergo reoperative bariatric surgery, depending on the primary procedure performed. Open reoperative approaches for revision to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) have traditionally been advocated secondary to the perceived difficulty and safety with laparoscopic techniques. Few studies have addressed revisions after RYGB. The aim of the present study was to provide our experience regarding the safety, efficacy, and weight loss results of laparoscopic revisional surgery after previous RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy procedures. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent laparoscopic revisional bariatric surgery for complications after previous RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy from November 2005 to May 2007 was performed. Technical revisions included isolation and transection of gastrogastric fistulas with partial gastrectomy, sleeve gastrectomy conversion to RYGB, and revision of RYGB. The data collected included the pre- and postoperative body mass index, operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. RESULTS: A total of 26 patients underwent laparoscopic revisional surgery. The primary operations had consisted of RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy. The complications from primary operations included gastrogastric fistulas, refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease, weight recidivism, and gastric outlet obstruction. The mean prerevision body mass index was 42 ± 10 kg/m(2). The average follow-up was 240 days (range 11-476). The average body mass index during follow-up was 37 ± 8 kg/m(2). Laparoscopic revision was successful in all but 1 patient, who required conversion to laparotomy for staple line leak. The average operating room time and estimated blood loss was 131 ± 66 minutes and 70 mL, respectively. The average hospital stay was 6 days. Three patients required surgical exploration for hemorrhage, staple line leak, and an incarcerated hernia. The overall complication rate was 23%, with a major complication rate of 11.5%. No patients died. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic revisional bariatric surgery after previous RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy is technically challenging but compared well in safety and efficacy with the results from open revisional procedures. Intraoperative endoscopy is a key component in performing these procedures.

Transumbilical single-port laparoscopic adjustable gastric band placement with liver suture retractor.

BACKGROUND: The evolution of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has no doubt been impacted by the decrease or elimination of incisions seen with natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES). SILS upholds the principal advantages of minimal access surgery including shortened hospital stays, the potential for decreased postoperative pain, and cosmetically acceptable scars by reducing large or multiple incisions to a relatively small, single one. METHODS: As opposed to NOTES, SILS does not violate a natural orifice and so the potential for contamination is identical to that of laparoscopy. SILS also utilizes familiar technology regarding ports and instruments which make technical adaptation easier and costs remain essentially unchanged. Standard laparoscopic techniques for gastric band placement use up to six ports in various configurations to safely accomplish this procedure. We describe a 40-year-old female with a body mass index of 41 who underwent placement of a gastric band for weight reduction via a single incision. A novel liver retractor technique eliminated one of the typical incisions utilized in other described "single-incision" techniques. RESULTS: The total number of trocars used at the sole, transumbilical incision was three. The operative time was 58 min. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 1. CONCLUSIONS: Single-incision transumbilical placement of gastric band is safe and technically feasible. Evolution of this technique with improved instrumentation will facilitate its adoption.