Search

IntroductionSurgical-related injuries are frequent, in fact the reported percentage of musculoskeletal disorders in surgeons is between 47% and 87%. These conditions are caused by long periods of standing, incorrect postures, repeated movements, little rest between operations, the lack of integrated operator rooms, the correct number and arrangement of monitors and the use of non-ergonomic instruments. This survey aims to assess the Italian overview both highlighting how prevalent surgical-related injury is in our surgeons and whether there is an operating room ergonomics education program in Italian surgical specialty schools.MethodsAn anonymous questionnaire was designed through SurveyMonkey© web application. This survey was composed of 3 different sections concerning the general characteristics of the participants, their surgical background and any training performed, and any injuries or ailments related to the surgical activity. The survey was carried out in the period 1th of December 2022 and the 6th of February 2023.ResultsAt the close of our survey, 300 responses were collected. Among the participants, the two most represented specialties were Gynecology and Obstetrics (42.3%) and General Surgery (39.7%) and surgeons were mainly employed in the Northern regions of Italy (54.8%). Analyzing the participants’ background, 61.7% of the respondents had laparoscopic training during their training and only 53.1% had a pelvic trainer during their residency. In accordance with 98.7% of the respondents, during surgery we have the feeling of being in an uncomfortable position that causes discomfort or muscle pain, and regarding the frequency of these discomforts, the majority of our study population experiences these problems monthly (46.2%), while in 29.6% it is experienced weekly, 12.1% annually and finally 12.1% daily. The surgical approach that is most correlated with these disorders is laparoscopy (62.7%) while the one that causes the least discomfort is robotic surgery (1.4%). These discomforts cause 43.9% of our population to take a break or do short exercises to reduce pain during surgery, and the body areas most affected are the back (61.6%), neck (40.6%) and shoulders (37.8%).ConclusionDespite this, our survey allows us to highlight some now-known gaps present in the surgical training program of our schools and the lack of protection toward our surgeons during their long career.

Open in new tab Download slide OBJECTIVES The purpose of the study is to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of the frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique based on 2 different hybrid grafts implanted from January 2007 to July 2022. METHODS The study includes patients who underwent an elective or emergency FET procedure. Short-term, long-term mortality and freedom from thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) were the primary end points. Analyses were carried out separately for the periods 2007–2012 and 2013–2022 RESULTS Of the 367 enrolled, 49.3% received E-Vita Open implantation and 50.7% received Thoraflex Hybrid implants. Overall mean age was 61 years [standard deviation (SD) = 11] and 80.7% were male. The average annual volume of FET procedures was 22.7 cases/year. Compared to E-Vita Open, patients implanted with Thoraflex Hybrid grafts were more likely to receive distal anastomosis in zone 2 (68.3% vs 11.6%, P  < 0.001) with a shorter stent portion, mean = 103mm (SD = 11.3) vs mean = 149 mm (SD = 12.7; P  < 0.001) and they underwent a reduced visceral ischaemia time, mean = 42.5 (SD = 14.2) vs mean= 61.0 (SD = 20.2) min, P  < 0.001. In the period 2013–2022, overall survival at 1, 2 and 5 years was 74.8%, 72.5% and 63.2% for Thoraflex and 73.2%, 70.7% and 64.1% for E-Vita, without significant differences between groups (log-rank test = 0.01, P  = 0.907). Overall freedom from TEVAR at 1, 2 and 5 years was 66.7%, 57.6% and 39.3% for Thoraflex and 79%, 69.7% and 66% for E-Vita, with significant differences between groups (log-rank test = 5.28, P  = 0.029). In a competing risk analysis adjusted for chronic/residual aortic syndromes and stent diameter, the Thoraflex group was more likely to receive TEVAR during follow-up (subdistribution hazard ratio SHR = 2.12, 95% confidence interval 1.06–4.22). CONCLUSIONS The FET technique addresses acute and chronic arch disease with acceptable morbidity and mortality. Downstream endovascular reinterventions are very common during follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objective: Reoperative aortic root surgery has become more and more common over the years and is considered high-risk, with significantly worse outcomes compared to first-procedure root surgery. At our institution, this kind of surgery is frequently performed. The aim of the present review is to describe currently available literature on reoperative surgery on the aortic root in terms of patients' population, indications for surgery and outcomes and to present our center's experience on the matter., Methods: A literature review was performed in order to identify pertinent studies. They were then compared and described. We also described preoperative characteristics, operative strategies and outcomes of all the patients who underwent redo aortic root surgery from January 1986 to December 2022 at our center., Key Content and Findings: Our literature review identified 12 pertinent studies, with a total of 16,627 considered patients. The most frequent indications for redo surgery were endocarditis (35.5%), aneurysm, dissection and pseudoaneurysm. Mean cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and cross-clamp times were 218 and 152 minutes, respectively. In-hospital mortality was 12%. When analyzing our center's data, 344 procedures were identified. Aortic root dilation was the most frequent indication (36.9%). Mean CPB and cross-clamp times were 218.0±78.8 and 158.2±49.7 minutes, respectively. In-hospital mortality was 9.6%. Survival at 5 and 15 years was 76.1% and 51.4% respectively. Freedom from further aortic reintervention was 88.1% after 5 years and 64.9% after 15 years., Conclusions: Reoperative aortic root surgery is a difficult cardiac procedure which is linked to significantly higher mortality than first-time root replacement. If it is performed by experienced surgeons with a careful preoperative planning its result can still be satisfactory. Our results showed acceptable rates of mortality and reinterventions at follow-up. Endocarditis, however, was linked to worse outcomes., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://jtd.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/jtd-23-1629/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2024 Journal of Thoracic Disease. All rights reserved.)