Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundSurgical care in the operating room (OR) contributes one-third of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in healthcare. The European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) initiated a joint Task Force to promote sustainability within minimally invasive gastrointestinal surgery.MethodsA scoping review was conducted by searching MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase via Elsevier, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus on August 25th, 2023 to identify articles reporting on the impact of gastrointestinal surgical care on the environment. The objectives were to establish the terminology, outcome measures, and scope associated with sustainable surgical practice. Quantitative data were summarized using descriptive statistics.ResultsWe screened 22,439 articles to identify 85 articles relevant to anesthesia, general surgical practice, and gastrointestinal surgery. There were 58/85 (68.2%) cohort studies and 12/85 (14.1%) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies. The most commonly measured outcomes were kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents (kg CO2eq), cost of resource consumption in US dollars or euros, surgical waste in kg, water consumption in liters, and energy consumption in kilowatt-hours. Surgical waste production and the use of anesthetic gases were among the largest contributors to the climate impact of surgical practice. Educational initiatives to educate surgical staff on the climate impact of surgery, recycling programs, and strategies to restrict the use of noxious anesthetic gases had the highest impact in reducing the carbon footprint of surgical care. Establishing green teams with multidisciplinary champions is an effective strategy to initiate a sustainability program in gastrointestinal surgery.ConclusionThis review establishes standard terminology and outcome measures used to define the environmental footprint of surgical practices. Impactful initiatives to achieve sustainability in surgical practice will require education and multidisciplinary collaborations among key stakeholders including surgeons, researchers, operating room staff, hospital managers, industry partners, and policymakers.

A recent survey of fellowship directors suggested significant deficits in the technical laparoscopic skills of graduated general surgery residents. Our aim was to define the need for and possible content of a simulation-based curriculum in advanced laparoscopic skills (ALS). An anonymous online survey was distributed to all Fellowship Council program directors (PDs), current fellows, and recent fellowship graduates. The survey was designed to assess the perceived need for, possible content of, and implementation challenges to an ALS curriculum. Recently developed simulation-based advanced laparoscopic tasks included off-angle camera work and restricted space suturing. Images and descriptions of these tasks were evaluated by respondents, and suggestions for modifications or improvements solicited via free text response. Of 186 respondents (response rate: 64%), 40% were current fellows, 22% were fellowship graduates, and 37% were PDs. Respondents primarily self-identified as minimally invasive and/or bariatric surgeons (78%) and hepatobiliary surgeons (12%). Most respondents (73%) identified a need for an ALS curriculum. All 3 respondent groups cited laparoscopic needle positioning and suturing (78%) and bimanual coordination during dissection and retraction (72%) as the skills in most need of improvement. In addition, most of the responding PDs identified “lack of familiarity with anatomy and procedure” (74% of PDs) and “lack of proficiency at laparoscopic bowel anastomosis” (59% of PDs) as problem areas. Respondents felt that successful implementation of an ALS curriculum depended on both overall feasibility and the ability for repeated practice and should not be dependent on cost. Thematic analysis of free responses revealed the following priorities for possible ALS skills and tasks: (1) difficult dissections and exposures, (2) forehand and/or backhand and suturing under tension, (3) nondominant hand drills, (4) working with an off-set camera, and (5) suturing and handling fragile tissue with properties similar to peritoneum or bowel. We present survey results identifying several specific ALS set deficits among graduating general surgery residents, including advanced suturing, bimanual coordination, and managing difficult anatomy. Next, the results of this needs assessment will be used to develop an advanced laparoscopic curriculum for residents entering minimally invasive surgery fellowships and careers.

BackgroundMany 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.MethodsA 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).ResultsA 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.ConclusionsAI 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.

Hundreds of millions of operations are performed worldwide each year, and the rising uptake in minimally invasive surgery has enabled fiber optic cameras and robots to become both important tools to conduct surgery and sensors from which to capture information about surgery. Computer vision (CV), the application of algorithms to analyze and interpret visual data, has become a critical technology through which to study the intraoperative phase of care with the goals of augmenting surgeons’ decision-making processes, supporting safer surgery, and expanding access to surgical care. While much work has been performed on potential use cases, there are currently no CV tools widely used for diagnostic or therapeutic applications in surgery. Using laparoscopic cholecystectomy as an example, we reviewed current CV techniques that have been applied to minimally invasive surgery and their clinical applications. Finally, we discuss the challenges and obstacles that remain to be overcome for broader implementation and adoption of CV in surgery.

Background Feedback is a pivotal cornerstone and a challenge in psychomotor training. There are different teaching methodologies; however, some may be less effective. Methods A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted in 130 medical students to compare the effectiveness of the video-guided learning (VLG), peer-feedback (PFG) and the expert feedback (EFG) for teaching suturing skills. The program lasted 4 weeks. Students were recorded making 3-simple stitches (pre-assessment and post-assessment). The primary outcome was a global scale (OSATS). The secondary outcomes were performance time, specific rating scale (SRS) and the impact of the intervention (IOI), defined as the variation between the final and initial OSATS and SRS scores. Results No significant differences were found between PFG and EFG in post-assessment results of OSATS, SRS scores or in the IOI for OSATS and SRS scores. Post-assessment results of PFG and EFG were significantly superior to VLG in OSATS and SRS scores [(19.8 (18.5–21); 16.6 (15.5–17.5)) and (20.3 (19.88–21); 16.8 (16–17.5)) vs (15.7 (15–16); 13.3 (12.5–14)) ( p  < 0.05)], respectively. The results of PFG and EFG were significantly superior to VLG in the IOI for OSATS [7 (4.5–9) and 7.4 (4.88–10) vs 3.5 (1.5–6) ( p  < 0.05)] and SRS scores [5.4 (3.5–7) and 6.3 (4–8.5) vs 3.1 (1.13–4.88) ( p  < 0.05)], respectively. Conclusion The video-guided learning methodology without any kind of feedback is not enough for teaching suturing skills compared to expert or peer feedback. The peer feedback methodology appears to be a viable alternative to handling the emerging demands in medical education.

Hepato-pancreatico-biliary (HPB) surgery, and the training of HPB surgeons, has evolved significantly over the last several decades. The current state of training in HPB surgery in North America is defined through three main pathways: the Complex General Surgical Oncology (CGSO) ACGME fellowship, the American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) fellowship, and the Americas Hepatopancreaticobiliary Association (AHPBA) fellowship. These fellowships offer variable experiences in pancreas, liver, and biliary cases, and each pathway offers a unique perspective on HPB surgery. The CGSO ACGME, ASTS, and AHPBA fellowships represent decades of work by the three major surgical leadership stakeholders to improve and ensure quality training of future HPB surgeons. The best care is provided by the HPB surgeon who has been trained to understand the importance of all available treatment options within the context of a multidisciplinary setting. The three fellowship pathways are outlined in this paper with the nuances and variations characteristic of the different training programs highlighted.

BackgroundBurnout 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.MethodsSAGES Reimagining the Practice of Surgery task force convened a webinar to discuss lessons learned from the COVID pandemic that may address burnout.ResultsBurnout 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.ConclusionSurgeon 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.

BackgroundGuidelines recommend limiting minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) to high-volume centers. However, the definition of high-volume care remains unclear. We aimed to objectively define a minimum number of MIPD performed annually per hospital associated with improved outcomes in a contemporary patient cohort.Patients and MethodsResectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients undergoing MIPD were included from the National Cancer Database (2010–2017). Multivariable modeling with restricted cubic splines was employed to identify an MIPD annual hospital volume threshold associated with lower 90-day mortality. Outcomes were compared between patients treated at low-volume (≤ model-identified cutoff) and high-volume (> cutoff) centers.ResultsAmong 3079 patients, 141 (5%) died within 90 days. Median hospital volume was 6 (range 1–73) cases/year. After adjustment, increasing hospital volume was associated with decreasing 90-day mortality for up to 19 (95% CI 16–25) cases/year, indicating a threshold of 20 cases/year. Most cases (82%) were done at low-volume (< 20 cases/year) centers. With adjustment, MIPD at low-volume centers was associated with increased 90-day mortality (OR 2.7; p = 0.002). Length of stay, positive surgical margins, 30-day readmission, and overall survival were similar. On analysis of the most recent two years (n = 1031), patients at low-volume centers (78.2%) were younger and had less advanced tumors but had longer length of stay (8 versus 7 days; p < 0.001) and increased 90-day mortality (7% versus 2%; p = 0.009).ConclusionsThe cutpoint analysis identified a threshold of at least 20 MIPD cases/year associated with lower postoperative mortality. This threshold should inform national guidelines and institution-level protocols aimed at facilitating the safe implementation of this complex procedure.

BackgroundPrevious studies of video-based operative assessments using crowd sourcing have established the efficacy of non-expert evaluations. Our group sought to establish the equivalence of abbreviating video content for operative assessment.MethodsA single institution video repository of six core general surgery operations was submitted for evaluation. Each core surgery included three unique surgical performances, totaling 18 unique operative videos. Each video was edited using four different protocols based on the critical portion of the operation: (1) custom edited critical portion (2) condensed critical portion (3) first 20 s of every minute of the critical portion, and (4) first 10 s of every minute of the critical portion. In total, 72 individually edited operative videos were submitted to the C-SATS (Crowd-Sourced Assessment of Technical Skills) platform (C-SATS) for evaluation. Aggregate score for study protocol was compared using the Kruskal–Wallis test. A multivariable, multilevel mixed-effects model was constructed to predict total skill assessment scores.ResultsMedian video lengths for each protocol were: custom, 6:20 (IQR 5:27–7:28); condensed, 10:35 (8:50–12:06); 10 s, 4:35 (2:11–6:09); and 20 s, 9:09 (4:20–12:14). There was no difference in aggregate median score among the four study protocols: custom, 15.7 (14.4–16.2); condensed, 15.8 (15.2–16.4); 10 s, 15.8 (15.3–16.1); 20 s, 16.0 (15.1–16.3); χ2 = 1.661, p = 0.65. Regression modeling demonstrated a significant, but minimal effect of the 10 s and 20 s editing protocols compared to the custom method on individual video score: condensed, + 0.33 (− 0.05–0.70), p = 0.09; 10 s, + 0.29 (0.04–0.55), p = 0.03; 20 s, + 0.40 (0.15–0.66), p = 0.002.ConclusionA standardized protocol for video editing abbreviated surgical performances yields reproducible assessment of surgical aptitude when assessed by non-experts.