Search

Primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) represent the two most common malignant neoplasms of the liver. The objective of this study was to assess outcomes of surgical approaches to liver ablation comparing laparoscopic versus percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA), and MWA versus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in patients with HCC or CRLM lesions smaller than 5 cm.A systematic review was conducted across seven databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane, to identify all comparative studies between 1937 and 2021. Two independent reviewers screened for eligibility, extracted data for selected studies, and assessed study bias using the modified Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Random effects meta-analyses were subsequently performed on all available comparative data.From 1066 records screened, 11 studies were deemed relevant to the study and warranted inclusion. Eight of the 11 studies were at high or uncertain risk for bias. Our meta-analyses of two studies revealed that laparoscopic MW ablation had significantly higher complication rates compared to a percutaneous approach (risk ratio = 4.66; 95% confidence interval = [1.23, 17.22]), but otherwise similar incomplete ablation rates, local recurrence, and oncologic outcomes. The remaining nine studies demonstrated similar efficacy of MWA and RFA, as measured by incomplete ablation, complication rates, local/regional recurrence, and oncologic outcomes, for both HCC and CRLM lesions less than 5 cm (p 0.05 for all outcomes). There was no statistical subgroup interaction in the analysis of tumors 3 cm.The available comparative evidence regarding both laparoscopic versus percutaneous MWA and MWA versus RFA is limited, evident by the few studies that suffer from high/uncertain risk of bias. Additional high-quality randomized trials or statistically matched cohort studies with sufficient granularity of patient variables, institutional experience, and physician specialty/training will be useful in informing clinical decision making for the ablative treatment of HCC or CRLM.

Many surgical adverse events, such as bile duct injuries during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), occur due to errors in visual perception and judgment. Artificial intelligence (AI) can potentially improve the quality and safety of surgery, such as through real-time intraoperative decision support. GoNoGoNet is a novel AI model capable of identifying safe ("Go") and dangerous ("No-Go") zones of dissection on surgical videos of LC. Yet, it is unknown how GoNoGoNet performs in comparison to expert surgeons. This study aims to evaluate the GoNoGoNet's ability to identify Go and No-Go zones compared to an external panel of expert surgeons.A panel of high-volume surgeons from the SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Task Force was recruited to draw free-hand annotations on frames of prospectively collected videos of LC to identify the Go and No-Go zones. Expert consensus on the location of Go and No-Go zones was established using Visual Concordance Test pixel agreement. Identification of Go and No-Go zones by GoNoGoNet was compared to expert-derived consensus using mean F1 Dice Score, and pixel accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV).A total of 47 frames from 25 LC videos, procured from 3 countries and 9 surgeons, were annotated simultaneously by an expert panel of 6 surgeons and GoNoGoNet. Mean (± standard deviation) F1 Dice score were 0.58 (0.22) and 0.80 (0.12) for Go and No-Go zones, respectively. Mean (± standard deviation) accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for the Go zones were 0.92 (0.05), 0.52 (0.24), 0.97 (0.03), 0.70 (0.21), and 0.94 (0.04) respectively. For No-Go zones, these metrics were 0.92 (0.05), 0.80 (0.17), 0.95 (0.04), 0.84 (0.13) and 0.95 (0.05), respectively.AI can be used to identify safe and dangerous zones of dissection within the surgical field, with high specificity/PPV for Go zones and high sensitivity/NPV for No-Go zones. Overall, model prediction was better for No-Go zones compared to Go zones. This technology may eventually be used to provide real-time guidance and minimize the risk of adverse events.

Surgical treatment of foregut disease is a complex field that demands advanced expertise to ensure favorable outcomes for patients. To address the growing need for foregut surgeons, leaders within several national societies have become interested in developing a foregut fellowship. The aim of this study was to develop data-driven benchmarks that will aid in defining appropriate accreditation criteria for these fellowships.We obtained case log data for Fellowship Council fellows trained from 2009-2019. We identified 78 complex foregut (non-bariatric) case codes and divided them into 5 index case categories including (1) hiatal/paraoesophageal hernia repair, (2) fundoplication, (3) esophageal myotomy, (4) major organ resection, and (5) minor organ resection. Median volumes in each index category were compared over time using Kruskall-Wallis tests. The share of cases done using open, laparoscopic, or robotic approaches were analyzed using linear regression analysis.For the 10 years analyzed, 1362 fellows logged 82,889 operations and 111,799 endoscopies. Median foregut cases per fellow grew significantly from 42 (IQR = 24-74) cases in 2010 to 69 (IQR = 33-106) cases in 2019. Median endoscopy volumes also grew significantly from 42 (IQR = 7-88) in 2010 to 69 (IQR 32-123) in 2019.The volume of hiatal/paraoesophageal hernia repairs increased significantly over time while volumes in the remaining 4 index categories remained stable. The share of robotic cases exhibited near perfect linear growth from 2.2% of all foregut cases in 2010 to 14.4% in 2019 (R = 0.99, p 0.0001). Open cases exhibited linear decay from 7.2% of cases in 2010 to 4.7% of cases in 2019 (R = 0.92, p = 0.0001). Laparoscopic/thoracoscopic cases also exhibited linear decay from 90.6% of cases in 2010 to 80.9% of cases in 2019 (R = 0.98, p 0.00001).FC fellows are exposed to robust volumes of foregut cases. This rich data set provides an evidence-based guide for establishing criteria for potential foregut fellowships.

Worldwide, trauma-related deaths are one of the main causes of mortality. Appropriate surgical treatment is crucial to prevent mortality, however, in the past decade, general surgery residents' exposure to trauma cases has decreased, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic. In this context, accessible simulation-based training scenarios are essential.A low-cost, previously tested OSCE scenario for the evaluation of surgical skills in trauma was implemented as part of a short training boot camp for residents and recently graduated surgeons. The following stations were included bowel anastomosis, vascular anastomosis, penetrating lung injury, penetrating cardiac injury, and gastric perforation (laparoscopic suturing). A total of 75 participants from 15 different programs were recruited. Each station was videotaped in high definition and assessed in a remote and asynchronous manner. The level of competency was assessed through global and specific rating scales alongside procedural times. Self-confidence to perform the procedure as the leading surgeon was evaluated before and after training.Statistically significant differences were found in pre-training scores between groups for all stations. The lowest scores were obtained in the cardiac and lung injury stations. After training, participants significantly increased their level of competence in both grading systems. Procedural times for the pulmonary tractotomy, bowel anastomosis, and vascular anastomosis stations increased after training. A significant improvement in self-confidence was shown in all stations.An OSCE scenario for training surgical skills in trauma was effective in improving proficiency level and self-confidence. Low pre-training scores and level of confidence in the cardiac and lung injury stations represent a deficit in residency programs that should be addressed. The incorporation of simulation-based teaching tools at early stages in residency would be beneficial when future surgeons face extremely severe trauma scenarios.

Despite the advantages of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, major bile duct injury (BDI) rates during this operation remain unacceptably high. In October 2018, SAGES released the Safe Cholecystectomy modules, which define specific strategies to minimize the risk of BDI. This study aims to investigate whether this curriculum can change the knowledge and behaviors of surgeons in practice.Practicing surgeons were recruited from the membership of SAGES and the American College of Surgeons Advisory Council for Rural Surgery. All participants completed a baseline assessment (pre-test) that involved interpreting cholangiograms, troubleshooting difficult cases, and managing BDI. Participants' dissection strategies during cholecystectomy were also compared to the strategies of a panel of 15 experts based on accuracy scores using the Think Like a Surgeon validated web-based platform. Participants were then randomized to complete the Safe Cholecystectomy modules (Safe Chole module group) or participate in usually scheduled CME activities (control group). Both groups completed repeat assessments (post-tests) one month after randomization.Overall, 41 participants were eligible for analysis, including 18 Safe Chole module participants and 23 controls. The two groups had no significant differences in pre-test scores. However, at post-test, Safe Chole module participants made significantly fewer errors managing BDI and interpreting cholangiograms. Safe Chole module participants were less likely to convert to an open operation on the post-test than controls when facing challenging dissections. However, Safe Chole module participants displayed a similar incidence of errors when evaluating adequate critical views of safety.In this randomized-controlled trial, the SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy modules improved surgeons' abilities to interpret cholangiograms and safely manage BDI. Additionally, surgeons who studied the modules were less likely to convert to open during difficult dissections. These data show the power of the Safe Cholecystectomy modules to affect practicing surgeons' behaviors in a measurable and meaningful way.

While surgical resection has a demonstrated utility for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), it is unclear whether minimally invasive surgery (MIS) or an open approach should be used. This review sought to assess the efficacy and safety of MIS versus open hepatectomy for isolated, resectable CRLM when performed separately from (Key Question (KQ) 1) or simultaneously with (KQ2) the resection of the primary tumor.PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane CENTRAL, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched to identify both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized comparative studies published during January 2000-September 2020. Two independent reviewers screened literature for eligibility, extracted data from included studies, and assessed internal validity using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 Tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed using risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD).From 2304 publications, 35 studies were included for meta-analysis. For staged resections, three RCTs and 20 observational studies were included. Data from RCTs indicated MIS having similar disease-free survival (DFS) at 1-year (RR 1.03, 95%CI 0.70-1.50), overall survival (OS) at 5-years (RR 1.04, 95%CI 0.84-1.28), fewer complications of Clavien-Dindo Grade III (RR 0.62, 95%CI 0.38-1.00), and shorter hospital length of stay (LOS) (MD -6.6 days, 95%CI -10.2, -3.0). For simultaneous resections, 12 observational studies were included. There was no evidence of a difference between MIS and the open group for DFS-1-year, OS-5-year, complications, R0 resections, blood transfusions, along with lower blood loss (MD -177.35 mL, 95%CI -273.17, -81.53) and shorter LOS (MD -3.0 days, 95%CI -3.82, -2.17).Current evidence regarding the optimal approach for CRLM resection demonstrates similar oncologic outcomes between MIS and open techniques, however MIS hepatectomy had a shorter LOS, lower blood loss and complication rate, for both staged and simultaneous resections.

Minimally invasive approach represents the gold standard for the resection of the left lateral section of the liver. Recently, the American Minimally Invasive Liver Resection (AMILES) registry has become available to track outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic liver resection in the Americas. The aim of the present study is to determine the benchmark performance of MILLS throughout the AMILES database.The AMILES registry was interrogated for cases of minimally invasive left lateral sectionectomies (MILLS). Centers with best practices according to the achievement of textbook outcomes (TOs) were identified and were used to define benchmark performances.Seven institutions from US and Canada entered 1665 minimally invasive liver resections, encompassing 203 MILLS. Overall, 49% of cases of MILLS satisfied contemporarily all textbook outcomes. While all centers obtained TOs with different rates of success, the outcomes of the top-ranking centers were used for benchmarking. Benchmark performance metrics of MILLS across North America are: conversion rate ≤ 3.7%, blood loss ≤ 200 ml, OR time ≤ 199 min, transfusion rate ≤ 4.5%, complication rate ≤ 7.9%, LOS ≤ 4 days.Benchmark performances of MILLS have been defined on a large multi-institutional database in North America. As more institutions join the collaboration and more prospective cases accrue, benchmark for additional procedures and approaches will be defined.

Limitations in surgical simulation training include lack of access to validated training programs with continuous year-round training and lack of experts' ongoing availability for feedback. A model of simulation training was developed to address these limitations. It incorporated basic and advanced laparoscopic skills curricula from a previously validated program and provided instruction through a digital platform. The platform allowed for remote and asynchronous feedback from a few trained instructors. The instructors were continuously available and provided personalized feedback using a variety of different media. We describe the upscaling of this model to teach trainees at fourteen centers in eight countries.Institutions with surgical programs lacking robust simulation curricula and needing instructors for ongoing education were identified. The simulation centers ("skills labs") at these sites were equipped with necessary simulation training hardware. A remote training-the-administrators (TTA) program was developed where personnel were trained in how to manage the skills lab, schedule trainees, set up training stations, and use the platform. A train-the-trainers (TTT) program was created to establish a network of trained instructors, who provided objective feedback through the platform remotely and asynchronously.Between 2019 and 2022, seven institutions in Chile and one in each of the USA, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, El Salvador, México, and Perú implemented a digital platform-based remote simulation curriculum. Most administrators were not physicians (19/33). Eight Instructors were trained with the TTT program and became active proctors. The platform has been used by 369 learners, of whom 57% were general surgeons and general surgery residents. A total of 6729 videos, 28,711 feedback inputs, and 233.7 and 510.2 training hours in the basic and advanced programs, respectively, were registered.A remote and asynchronous method of giving instruction and feedback through a digital platform has been effectively employed in the creation of a robust network of continuous year-round simulation-based training in laparoscopy. Training centers were successfully run only with trained administrators to assist in logistics and setup, and no on-site instructors were necessary.

A limitation to expanding laparoscopic simulation training programs is the scarcity of expert evaluators. In 2019, a new digital platform for remote and asynchronous laparoscopic simulation training was validated. Through this platform, 369 trainees have been trained in 14 institutions across Latin America, collecting 6729 videos of laparoscopic training exercises. The use of artificial intelligence (AI) has recently emerged in surgical simulation, showing usefulness in training assessment, virtual reality scenarios, and laparoscopic virtual reality simulation. An AI algorithm to assess basic laparoscopic simulation training exercises was developed. This study aimed to analyze the agreement between this AI algorithm and expert evaluators in assessing basic laparoscopic-simulated training exercises.The AI algorithm was trained using 400-bean drop (BD) and 480-peg transfer (PT) videos and tested using 64-BD and 43-PT randomly selected videos, not previously used to train the algorithm. The agreement between AI and expert evaluators from the digital platform (EE) was then analyzed. The exercises being assessed involve using laparoscopic graspers to move objects across an acrylic board without dropping any objects in a determined time (BD 24 s, PT 55 s). The AI algorithm can detect object movement, identify if objects have fallen, track grasper clamps location, and measure exercise time. Cohen's Kappa test was used to evaluate the agreement between AI assessments and those performed by EE, using a pass/fail nomenclature based on the time to complete the exercise.After the algorithm was trained, 79.69% and 93.02% agreement were observed in BD and PT, respectively. The Kappa coefficients test observed for BD and PT were 0.59 (moderate agreement) and 0.86 (almost perfect agreement), respectively.This first approach of AI use in basic laparoscopic skills simulated training assessment shows promising results, providing a preliminary framework to expand the use of AI to other basic laparoscopic skills exercises.

Surgeons often assume patients may be dissatisfied if their operations were stopped due to suspicious intraoperative findings requiring transfer of care. We sought to assess patient opinions regarding transfer of care for unexpected intraoperative findings during laparoscopic cholecystectomy with and without bile duct injury (BDI). The investigators developed two clinical scenarios comparing transfer of care for unexpected intraoperative findings during elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy: without BDI and with BDI requiring open repair. A multi-institutional structured telephone interview process was conducted with patients ≥ 18 years of age who had an outpatient, uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy within the last year. The first scenario presented a case of suspicious findings prompting the surgeon to stop and transfer for specialized care; whereas the second case was a BDI requiring transfer of care. Textual and thematic analysis as well as descriptive statistics was used for analysis, with significance set at p

The Fellowship Council (FC) oversees 172 non-ACGME surgical fellowships offering 211 fellowship positions per year. These training programs cover multiple specialties including Advanced gastrointestinal (GI), Advanced GI/MIS, Bariatric, Hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB), Flexible Endoscopy, Colorectal, and Thoracic Surgery. Although some data have been published detailing the practice environments (i.e., urban vs. rural) and yearly total case volumes of FC alumni, there is a lack of granular data regarding the practice patterns of FC graduates. The aim of this study was to gather detailed data on the specific case types performed and surgical approaches employed by recent FC alumni. A 21-item survey covering 64 data points was emailed to 835 FC alumni who completed their fellowship between 2013 and 2017. Email addresses were obtained from FC program directors and FC archives. We received 327 responses (39% response rate). HPB, Advanced Colorectal, and Advanced Thoracic alumni appear to establish practices focused on their respective fields. Graduates from Advanced GI, Adv GI/MIS, and Bariatric programs appear to build practices with a mix of several complex GI case types including bariatrics, colorectal, foregut, HPB, and hernia cases. This is the first large data set to provide granular information on the practice patterns of FC alumni. FC trained surgeons perform impressive volumes of complex procedures, and minimally invasive approaches are extremely prevalent in these practices. Further, many graduates carve out practices with large footprints in robotics and endoscopy.

Background Burnout among physicians is an increasing concern, and surgeons are not immune to this threat. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has caused dramatic changes to surgeon workflow, often leading to redeployment to other clinical areas, slowdown and shutdown of elective surgery practices, and an uncertain future of surgical practice in the post-pandemic setting. Paradoxically, for many surgeons who had to prepare for but not immediately care for a major surge, the crisis did allow for reflective opportunities and a resetting of priorities that could serve to mitigate chronic patterns contributory to Burnout. Methods SAGES Reimagining the Practice of Surgery task force convened a webinar to discuss lessons learned from the COVID pandemic that may address burnout. Results Burnout is multifactorial and may vary in cause among different generation/experience groups. Those that report burnout symptoms often complain of lacking purpose or meaning in their work. Although many mechanisms to address Burnout are from a defensive standpoint—including coping mechanisms, problem solving, and identification of a physician having wellness difficulties—offensive mechanisms such as pursuing purpose and meaning and finding joy in one's work can serve as reset points that promote thriving and fulfillment. Understanding what motivates physicians will help physician leaders to develop and sustain effective teams. Reinvigorating the surgical workforce around themes of meaning and joy in the service rendered via our surgical skills may diminish Burnout through generative and aspirational strategies, as opposed to merely reactive ones. Fostering an educational environment free of discriminatory or demeaning behavior may produce a new workforce conducive to enhanced and resilient wellbeing at the start of careers. Conclusion Surgeon wellness and self-care must be considered an important factor in the future of all healthcare delivery systems, a need reaffirmed by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Faculty experts (FE) and crowd workers (CW) can assess technical skill, but assessment of operative technique has not been explored. We sought to evaluate if CW could be taught to assess completion of the critical view of safety (CVS) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We prepared 160 blinded, surgical videos of laparoscopic cholecystectomy from public domain websites. Videos were edited to ≤60 s, ending when a structure was cut/clipped. CW analyzed videos using Global Objective Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) and CVS criteria assessment tools after watching an instructional tutorial. Ten videos were randomly selected from each performance quartile based on GOALS. Five FE rated the 40 videos using GOALS and CVS. Linear mixed effects models derived average CW and FE ratings for GOALS and CVS for each video. Spearman correlation coefficients (SCC) were used to assess the degree of correlation between performance measures. Satisfactory completion of the CVS was defined as scoring an average CVS ≥ 5. Videos with an average GOALS ≥ 15 were considered top technical performers. A high degree of correlation was seen between all performance measures: CVS ratings between CW and FE, SCC 0.89 (p

Closed social media groups (CSMG), including closed Facebook® groups, are online communities providing physicians with platforms to collaborate privately via text, images, videos, and live streaming in real time and optimize patient care. CSMG platforms represent a novel paradigm in online learning and education, so it is imperative to ensure that the public and patients trust the physicians using these platforms. Informed consent is an essential aspect of establishing this trust. With the launch of several of its own CSMG, Society of Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) sought to define its position on CSMG platforms and provide an informed consent template for educating and protecting patients, surgeons, and institutions. A review of the literature (2012–2018) discussing the informed consent process for posting clinical scenarios, photography, and/or videography on social media was performed. Pertinent articles and exemplary legal counsel-approved CSMG policies and informed consent forms were reviewed by members of the SAGES Facebook® Task Force. Eleven articles and two institutional CSMG policies discussing key components of the informed consent process, including patient transparency and confidentiality, provider-patient partnerships, ethics, and education were included. Using this information and expert opinion, a SAGES-approved statement and informed consent template were formulated. SAGES endorses the professional use of medical and surgical CSMG platforms for education, patient care optimization, and dissemination of clinical information. Despite the growing use of social media as an integral tool for surgical practice and education, issues of informed consent still exist and remain the responsibility of the physician contributor. Responsible, ethical, and compliant use of CSMG platforms is essential. Surgeons and patients embracing CSMG for quality improvement and optimized outcomes should be legally protected. SAGES foresees the use of this type of platform continuing to grow.