Laparoscopy is associated with decreased all-cause mortality in patients undergoing emergency general surgery procedures in a regional health system

Robotic Surgery in Safety-Net Hospitals: Addressing Health Disparities and Improving Access to Care

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has demonstrated significant clinical and economic benefits that have been consistently validated and reproduced in practice and the literature for the past few decades. These benefits include improved patient outcomes, reduced complications, shorter hospital stays, decreased narcotic use, quicker recovery times, and lower rates of wound infections. However, safety-net hospitals, which historically serve a larger percentage of underserved and marginalized populations, often lack the resources to invest in high capital equipment. This limitation decreases access for these marginalized groups to the advantages of MIS, particularly robotic surgery and a wider range of surgical operations. This disparity in access to care highlights a critical shortfall in the delivery of health care for these patients and other vulnerable populations.

Rise of the robots: implementing robotic surgery into the acute care surgery practice

OBJECTIVES

Acute Care Surgery (ACS) admissions and procedures are substantially increasing. ACS disproportionally accounts for a majority of morbidity and mortality among surgical patients. Minimally invasive techniques are associated with improved outcomes and shorter hospital length of stay within the ACS population. While laparoscopy is widespread, ACS surgeons have been slower to adopt the use of robotics. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of incorporating robotic surgery within ACS practice.

METHODS

Robotic General Surgery operations performed by 8 Acute Care Surgeons from 5 local facilities within a large integrated healthcare system were queried over a 15 month period. Patients who underwent emergent, urgent, sub-acute, and elective robotic operations by ACS staff were identified. Demographics collected included age, gender, BMI, and ASA score. Outcomes recorded included procedure classification, total supply and implant charges (TSI), conversion to open, hospital length of stay (LOS), 30 day readmission, and 30 day mortality.

RESULTS

Of 200 operations, the most common were Cholecystectomy (43.5%), Inguinal hernia repair (26.0%), Ventral hernia repair (18.0%), Appendectomy (5.0%), and Sigmoid Colectomy (3.5%). The median (± std dev) age was 48 ± 16.66 years and BMI was 29.9 ± 8.79 kg/m2. 46% of cases were sub-acute (n = 92), 33.5% were elective (n = 67), 14% were emergent (n = 28), and 6.5% were urgent (n = 13). Most patients were ASA 2 (107, 46.1%) or ASA 3 (71, 45.9%). The median (IQR) TSI and LOS were $1,770 (889.50) USD and 0.1 (0.9) days. Forty-one inpatient procedures were performed. Median LOS was 3 days and expected LOS was 3.1 days (O:E = 0.96). Five patients were readmitted within 30 days, and there were no deaths within 30 days.

CONCLUSION

Robotic techniques may be safely implemented by ACS surgeons, potentially benefitting both patient and surgeon. LOS was similar between laparoscopic and robotic cases and only two cases required conversion to an open procedure. Next steps include a multi-center prospective trial comparing robotic to laparoscopic cases.

National trends and outcomes of robotic emergency general surgery in the United States

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted surgery has seen exponential adoption over the last decade. Although the safety and efficacy of robotic surgery in the elective setting have been demonstrated, data regarding robotic emergency general surgery remains sparse.

METHODS

All adults undergoing non-elective appendectomy, cholecystectomy, small or large bowel resection, perforated ulcer repair, or lysis of adhesions were identified in the 2008 to 2020 National Inpatient Sample. Temporal trends were analyzed using a rank-based, non-parametric test developed by Cuzick (nptrend). Using laparoscopy as a reference, multivariable regressions were used to evaluate the association between robotic techniques and in-hospital mortality, major complications, and resource use for each emergency general surgery operation.

RESULTS

Of an estimated 4,040,555 patients undergoing emergency general surgery, 65,853 (1.6%) were performed using robotic techniques. The robotic proportion of minimally invasive emergency general surgery increased significantly overall, with the largest growth seen in robot-assisted large bowel resections and perforated ulcer repairs. After adjustment for various patient and hospital-level factors, robot-assisted large bowel resection (adjusted odds ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.58-0.91) and cholecystectomy (adjusted odds ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.55-0.81) were associated with significantly reduced odds of perioperative blood transfusion compared to traditional laparoscopy. Although robotic techniques were associated with modest reductions in postoperative length of stay, costs were uniformly higher by increments of up to $4,900.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery appears to be a safe and effective adjunct to laparoscopy in minimally invasive emergency general surgery, although comparable cost-effectiveness has yet to be realized. Increasing use of robotic techniques in emergency general surgery may be attributable in part to reduced complications, including blood loss, in certain operative contexts.

Goodbye Hartmann trial: a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study on the current use of a surgical procedure developed a century ago

BACKGROUND

Literature suggests colonic resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) instead of Hartmann's procedure (HP) for the treatment of left-sided colonic emergencies. We aim to evaluate the surgical options globally used to treat patients with acute left-sided colonic emergencies and the factors that leading to the choice of treatment, comparing HP and RPA.

METHODS

This is a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total 1215 patients with left-sided colonic emergencies who required surgery were included from 204 centers during the period of March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020. with a 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

564 patients (43.1%) were females. The mean age was 65.9 ± 15.6 years. HP was performed in 697 (57.3%) patients and RPA in 384 (31.6%) cases. Complicated acute diverticulitis was the most common cause of left-sided colonic emergencies (40.2%), followed by colorectal malignancy (36.6%). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) were higher in the HP group (P < 0.001). 30-day mortality was higher in HP patients (13.7%), especially in case of bowel perforation and diffused peritonitis. 1-year follow-up showed no differences on ostomy reversal rate between HP and RPA. (P = 0.127). A backward likelihood logistic regression model showed that RPA was preferred in younger patients, having low ASA score (≤ 3), in case of large bowel obstruction, absence of colonic ischemia, longer time from admission to surgery, operating early at the day working hours, by a surgeon who performed more than 50 colorectal resections.

CONCLUSIONS

After 100 years since the first Hartmann's procedure, HP remains the most common treatment for left-sided colorectal emergencies. Treatment's choice depends on patient characteristics, the time of surgery and the experience of the surgeon. RPA should be considered as the gold standard for surgery, with HP being an exception.

[Emergency laparoscopic surgery in Russia: a current state]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the current status and main factors influencing the level of emergency laparoscopic surgery in the Russian Federation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective nationwide analysis included patients ≥18 years old undergoing surgery for acute cholecystitis (AC), acute appendicitis (AA), perforated ulcer (PU) and ileus. The database of the chief surgeon of the Russian Ministry of Health for 2018 - 2022 was used. To investigate possible reasons influencing the level of emergency laparoscopic surgeries, we performed online survey of medical organizations connected to the electronic reporting system.

RESULTS

Over five years, the incidence of laparoscopic surgeries for AC increased from 52.6% to 70.5% (p<0.001), for AA from 25.1% to 41.0% (p<0.001), for PU from 9.4% to 13.2% (p<0.001) and for ileus from 5.9% to 8.5% (p<0.001). The percentage of emergency laparoscopic surgeries in rural hospitals (level I) was 14.8%, level II hospitals - 40.2%, level III - 67.7% (p<0.001). We obtained responses from 1.982 (84.9%) out of 2.335 hospitals included in the database. Significant differences were revealed in equipment of hospitals of different levels with laparoscopic surgical systems and proportion of surgeons proficient in laparoscopic techniques (p<0.001). The same factors influence laparoscopy in different federal districts to a greater extent than their geographic and demographic characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic emergency procedures became more widespread, but vary widely between regions, urban and rural. Availability of laparoscopic surgery is influenced by availability of equipment and trained surgeons, geographic distance and population density, level of hospital and ability to maintain acquired skills and increase experience in appropriate surgeries.

[Laparoscopic surgery for advanced peritonitis]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the criteria for choosing surgical access in patients with advanced peritonitis considering its local and general manifestations.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We analyzed treatment outcomes in 588 patients with advanced peritonitis. The most common causes of peritonitis were destructive forms of acute appendicitis (273 cases), perforated gastroduodenal ulcers (165 cases), acute cholecystitis (59 cases). To determine the criteria for choosing surgical access in advanced peritonitis, we analyzed treatment outcomes considering MPI, SPP and WSES SSS score.

RESULTS

The choice of surgical access in advanced peritonitis can only symbolically be standardized according to modern scoring systems (MPI, SPP, WSES SSS). Laparotomy is necessary for MPI score ≥30 and SPP score > 10 (WSES SSS score > 8). Regardless of MPI, SPP, WSES SSS scores, the absolute contraindications for laparoscopic surgery are dense non-removable fibrin deposits, interintestinal abscesses, purulent recesses, intra-abdominal pressure > 20 mm Hg or small intestine dilation> 3 cm, sepsis or septic shock (qSOFA score 2-3), previous open abdominal surgery, unstable hemodynamics, technical difficulties. Conversion should be used at any doubt.

CONCLUSION

Careful patient selection, surgical experience and training in laparoscopic technique are decisive factors for wider use of laparoscopic approach in patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery.

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.

Relationship between the Tokyo Guidelines and Pathological Severity in Acute Cholecystitis

Background: It is not well understood whether the severity of acute cholecystitis (AC) correlates with the extent of gallbladder (GB) inflammation or laboratory findings. This study aimed to assess whether the severity of AC, in accordance with the Tokyo Guidelines (TGs), is consistent with the extent of GB inflammation on histopathological and laboratory findings, including microbiological isolation in blood and bile. Methods: The medical records of patients who underwent cholecystectomy for AC between January 2017 and May 2020 were reviewed. Demographic data, laboratory findings, the microbiologic culture of blood and bile, the extent of GB inflammation, and stone composition were compared in accordance with the TGs. Results: A total of 217 patients were divided into three groups of increasing severity-Grade I (n = 146), Grade II (n = 51), and Grade III (n = 20)-in accordance with the TGs. The Grade III group contained significantly older patients compared with the Grade I or Grade II groups (Grade I, 56.9 ± 13.9; Grade II, 64.3 ± 15.4; Grade III, 69.9 ± 9.9; p-value < 0.001). Patients in the Grade III group showed significantly higher levels of CRP, WBC, creatinine, and bilirubin and lower levels of platelets and albumin compared with the Grade I or Grade II group. As the grade of severity increased, the rate of microbiological isolation in blood (Grade I, 0% [0/146]; Grade II, 2.0% [1/51]; Grade III, 20% [4/20]; p-value < 0.001) and bile (Grade I, 19.9% [29/146]; Grade II, 33.3% [17/51]; Grade III, 70% [14/20]; p-value < 0.001) also increased significantly. However, there were no significant differences in the extent of GB inflammation between grades. Conclusions: AC severity, as stated by the TGs, does not correlate with the extent of GB inflammation on histopathological and laboratory findings. However, microbiological isolation in blood and bile was increased proportionally to the grade of the TGs.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Management and Outcomes of Acute Cholecystitis at US Academic Centers

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has had wide-ranging effects on management of medical conditions. Many hospitals encountered staffing shortages, limited operating room availability, and shortage of hospital beds. There was increased psychological stress and fear of contracting COVID-19 infection, leading to delay in medical care for various disease processes. The objective of this study was to examine changes in management and outcomes attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic in patients presenting with acute calculus cholecystitis at US academic centers.

STUDY DESIGN

Using the Vizient database, patients with the diagnosis of acute calculus cholecystitis who underwent intervention during the 15 months before the pandemic (prepandemic, October 2018 to December 2019) were compared with 15 months during the pandemic (pandemic, March 2020 to May 2021). Outcomes measures included demographics, characteristics, type of intervention, length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and direct cost.

RESULTS

There were 146,459 patients with acute calculus cholecystitis identified (prepandemic: 74,605 vs pandemic: 71,854). Patients in the pandemic group were more likely to undergo medical management (29.4% vs 31.8%; p < 0.001) or percutaneous cholecystostomy tube placement (21.5% vs 18%; p < 0.001) and less likely to undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy (69.8% vs 73.0%; p < 0.001). Patients in the pandemic group who underwent procedural intervention had longer length of stay (6.5 days vs 5.9 days; p < 0.001), higher in-hospital death (3.1% vs 2.3%; p < 0.001), and higher cost ($14,609 vs $12,570; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this analysis of patients with acute calculus cholecystitis, there were distinct changes in the management and outcomes of patients due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Changes in the type of intervention and outcomes are likely related to delayed presentation with increases in the severity and complexity of the disease.

Evolution of laparoscopic surgery in a sub-Saharan African country: a 30-year literature review in Senegal

INTRODUCTION

The advent of laparoscopy has significantly reduced the morbidity associated with the majority of abdominal surgeries. In Senegal, the first studies evaluating this technique were published in the 1980s. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the evolution of laparoscopy research in Senegal.

METHODS

A search of PubMed and Google Scholar was carried out without limit of publication date. The keywords used were "senegal" AND "laparoscop*". Duplicates were removed, and remaining articles were assessed for selection criteria. We included all articles about laparoscopy published in Senegal. The parameters studied in each included article were the place and year of study, average age, sex ratio, assessed indications and results.

RESULTS

41 Studies published between 1984 and 2021 met selection criteria. The average age of patients was 33 years (range 4.7-63). The sex ratio was 0.33. The main indications for laparoscopy according to the studies were: benign gastrointestinal disorders in 11 studies (26.8%), abdominal emergencies in 9 studies (22%), gallbladder surgery in 5 studies (12.2%), benign gynecological pathology in 6 studies (14.6%), malignant gynecological pathology in 2 studies (4.9%), diagnostic laparoscopy in 2 studies (4.9%), groin hernia repair in 2 studies (4.9%) and testicular pathology in 1 study (2.4%). Overall mortality was estimated at 0.9% (95% CI 0.6-1.3) and overall morbidity for all complications was estimated at 5% (95% CI 3.4-6.9).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review showed a predominance of the laparoscopy publications from the capital in Dakar with favorable outcomes. This technique should be popularized in the different regions of the country and its indications expanded.

Minimally invasive surgery in emergency surgery: a WSES survey

BACKGROUND

The diffusion of minimally invasive surgery in emergency surgery still represents a developing challenge. Evidence about the use of minimally invasive surgery shows its feasibility and safety; however, the diffusion of these techniques is still poor. The aims of the present survey were to explore the diffusion and variations in the use of minimally invasive surgery among surgeons in the emergency setting.

METHODS

This is a web-based survey administered to all the WSES members investigating the diffusion of minimally invasive surgery in emergency. The survey investigated personal characteristics of participants, hospital characteristics, personal confidence in the use of minimally invasive surgery in emergency, limitations in the use of it and limitations to prosecute minimally invasive surgery in emergency surgery. Characteristics related to the use of minimally invasive surgery were studied with a multivariate ordinal regression.

RESULTS

The survey collected a total of 415 answers; 42.2% of participants declared a working experience > 15 years and 69.4% of responders worked in tertiary level center or academic hospital. In primary emergencies, only 28,7% of participants declared the use of laparoscopy in more than 50% of times. Personal confidence with minimally invasive techniques was the highest for appendectomy and cholecystectomy. At multivariate ordinal regression, a longer professional experience, the use of laparoscopy in major elective surgery and bariatric surgery expertise were related to a higher use of laparoscopy in emergency surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The survey shows that minimally invasive techniques in emergency surgery are still underutilized. Greater focus should be placed on the development of dedicated training in laparoscopy among emergency surgeons.