Safe laparoscopic colorectal surgery performed by trainees

Evaluation of the advantage of surgeons certified by the endoscopic surgical skill qualification system participating in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection

Background

A technical qualification system was developed in 2004 by the Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery. An analysis of the EnSSURE study on 3188 stage II-III rectal cancer patients, which was performed by including the participation of qualified surgeons as assistants and advisers without restricting their participation as operators, revealed that the participation of technically qualified surgeons in surgery improved the technical and oncological safety of laparoscopic rectal resection.

Aim

This secondary retrospective analysis of the EnSSURE study examined the advantage of qualified surgeons participating in laparoscopic low anterior resection (LAR).

Methods

The outcomes of low anterior resection were compared between groups with and without the participation of surgeons qualified by the Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System (Q and non-Q groups, respectively). We used propensity score matching to generate paired cohorts at a one-to-one ratio. The postoperative complication rate, short-term results (hemorrhage volume, operative time, number of dissected lymph nodes, open conversion rate, intraoperative complication rate, and R0 resection rate), and long-term results (disease-free survival rate, local recurrence rate, and overall survival rate) were evaluated.

Results

The frequencies of postoperative complications, anastomotic bleeding, and intraperitoneal abscess were significantly lower, the operative time was significantly shorter, the postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter, and the number of dissected lymph nodes was higher in the Q group. No significant differences were observed in disease-free survival, local recurrence, or overall survival rate rates between the groups.

Conclusion

The participation of qualified surgeons in LAR is technically advantageous.

Scoping review: The terminology used to describe major abdominal surgical procedures

BACKGROUND

Major abdominal surgery (MAS) can have a profound impact on the patient but there is currently no consensus as to which surgical procedures constitute MAS. The main objective of this work is to ascertain the terminology used to describe MAS procedures and to apply these findings in order to propose a definition of MAS.

METHODS

The following databases were searched: Ovid MEDLINE (R) ALL, Embase Classic and Embase (via OvidSP), Global Health (via OvidSP), Health Management Information Consortium (via OvidSP), APA PsycInfo (via OvidSP), PubMed and Web of Science. Original research articles, published between 1980 and April 26, 2022 that contained a description of MAS procedure were included in this study. Article screening and data extraction was undertaken independently by 3 authors. Content analysis was performed to identify key terminology used to describe MAS.

RESULTS

Five thousand six hundred and sixty three articles were identified, of which 767 underwent full-text review and 312 were included in the scoping review. Content analysis resulted in 4 main categories: (1) pre-operative factors, (2) intraoperative factors, (3) operation-related factors, (4) post-operative factors. Operation-related factors was the predominant category (1137 references coded). The gastrointestinal resection made the vast majority of the references coded (591).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on these results, the term "major abdominal surgery" should be defined as an intra-peritoneal operation with no primary involvement of the thorax, involving either luminal resection and/or resection of a solid organ associated with the gastrointestinal tract. However, further work is required to verify this definition using real world data.

Impact of surgeon and hospital factors on length of stay after colorectal surgery systematic review

Background

Although length of stay (LOS) after colorectal surgery (CRS) is associated with worse patient and system level outcomes, the impact of surgeon and hospital-level factors on LOS after CRS has not been well investigated. The aim of this study was to synthesize the evidence for the impact of surgeon and hospital-level factors on LOS after CRS.

Methods

A comprehensive database search was conducted using terms related to LOS and CRS. Studies were included if they reported the effect of surgeon or hospital factors on LOS after elective CRS. The evidence for the effect of each surgeon and hospital factor on LOS was synthesized using vote counting by direction of effect, taking risk of bias into consideration.

Results

A total of 13 946 unique titles and abstracts were screened, and 69 studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies were retrospective and assessed a total of eight factors. Surgeon factors such as increasing surgeon volume, colorectal surgical specialty, and progression along a learning curve were significantly associated with decreased LOS (effect seen in 87.5 per cent, 100 per cent, and 93.3 per cent of studies respectively). In contrast, hospital factors such as hospital volume and teaching hospital status were not significantly associated with LOS.

Conclusion

Provider-related factors were found to be significantly associated with LOS after elective CRS. In particular, surgeon-related factors related to experience specifically impacted LOS, whereas hospital-related factors did not. Understanding the mechanisms underlying these relationships may allow for tailoring of interventions to reduce LOS.

Distance of Peritoneum to Inferior Mesenteric Artery Predicts the Operation Time During Laparoscopic Colectomy for Sigmoid or Rectosigmoid Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

Obesity is a major technical limiting factor for laparoscopic surgery because abundant visceral fat is known to extend the operation time. However, special hardware is needed to assess it. We hypothesized that the depth from the peritoneum to the bifurcation of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) defined as 'peritoneum to IMA distance (PID)' might be a simple predictive factor for extended operation time during laparoscopic colectomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred twenty-four patients who were diagnosed with sigmoid or rectosigmoid colon cancer and underwent laparoscopic colectomy were included. The patients were divided into two groups based on the operation time (210 min). The vertical distance from the peritoneum to the bifurcation of the inferior mesenteric artery was defined as PID. The factors eliciting an operation time longer than 210 min were investigated.

RESULTS

There was significant difference in sex, BMI, cT, cN, and PID between the Early group (<210 min) and Late group (≥210 min). Less blood loss was observed in the Early group than in the Late group. Multivariate analysis showed that PID was the only independent factor that affected operation time (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

PID predicts the operation time during laparoscopic colectomy for sigmoid or rectosigmoid colon cancer.

Does the Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System improve patients' outcome following laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer? A multicentre, retrospective analysis with propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the short-term and oncological impact of the Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System (ESSQS) by the Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery on the operator performing laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was based on medical records from a multicentre database. A total of 417 patients diagnosed with stage II/III colon and rectosigmoid cancer treated with curative resection were divided into two groups according to whether they were operated on by qualified surgeons (Q group, n=352) or not (NQ group, n=65). Through strict propensity score matching, 98 cases (49 in each group) were assessed.

RESULTS

Operative time was significantly longer in the NQ group than in the Q group (199 vs. 168 min, p=0.029). The amount of blood loss, post-operative complications, and duration of hospitalisation were similar between both groups. No mortality was observed. One conversion case was seen in the NQ group. The 3-year recurrence-free survival rate was 86.6% in the NQ group and 88.2% in the Q group, which was not statistically significant (log-rank p=0.966).

CONCLUSION

Direct operation by ESSQS-qualified surgeons contributed to a shortened operation time. Under an organised educational environment, almost equivalent safety and oncological outcomes are expected regardless of the surgeon's qualifications.

Short-term clinical outcomes of a European training programme for robotic colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Despite there being a considerable amount of published studies on robotic colorectal surgery (RCS) over the last few years, there is a lack of evidence regarding RCS training pathways. This study examines the short-term clinical outcomes of an international RCS training programme (the European Academy of Robotic Colorectal Surgery-EARCS).

METHODS

Consecutive cases from 26 European colorectal units who conducted RCS between 2014 and 2018 were included in this study. The baseline characteristics and short-term outcomes of cases performed by EARCS delegates during training were analysed and compared with cases performed by EARCS graduates and proctors.

RESULTS

Data from 1130 RCS procedures were collected and classified into three cohort groups (323 training, 626 graduates and 181 proctors). The training cases conversion rate was 2.2% and R1 resection rate was 1.5%. The three groups were similar in terms of baseline characteristics with the exception of malignant cases and rectal resections performed. With the exception of operative time, blood loss and hospital stay (training vs. graduate vs. proctor: operative time 302, 265, 255 min, p < 0.001; blood loss 50, 50, 30 ml, p < 0.001; hospital stay 7, 6, 6 days, p = 0.003), all remaining short-term outcomes (conversion, 30-day reoperation, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, clinical anastomotic leak, complications, R1 resection and lymph node yield) were comparable between the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Colorectal surgeons learning how to perform RCS under the EARCS-structured training pathway can safely achieve short-term clinical outcomes comparable to their trainers and overcome the learning process in a way that minimises patient harm.

Impact of Teaching on Surgical Site Infection after Colonic Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The present study aimed to evaluate whether teaching had an influence on surgical site infections (SSI) after colonic surgery.

DESIGN

Colonic surgeries between January 2014 and December 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, surgical details, and SSI rates were compared between teaching procedures vs. experts. Risk factors for SSI were identified by multinominal logistic regression.

SETTING

SSI were prospectively assessed by an independent National Surveillance Program (www.swissnoso.ch) at Lausanne University Hospital CHUV, a tertiary academic institution.

PARTICIPANTS

Included in the present analysis were patients documented in a prospective institutional enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) database and who were prospectively monitored by the independent National Infection Surveillance Committee between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2016.

RESULTS

In all, 315 patients constituted the study cohort. Demographic and surgical items were comparable between teaching (n = 161) vs. expert operations (n = 135) except for higher occurrence of wound contamination class III-IV (13 vs. 19%, p = 0.046) in patients operated by experts. Overall, 61 patients (19%) developed SSI, namely 25 patients (16%) in the teaching group and 32 patients (24%) in the expert group (p = 0.077). Contamination class III-IV (OR = 3.2; 95% CI: 1.4-7.5, p = 0.005) and open surgery (OR = 3.4; 95% CI: 1.8-6.7, p < 0.001) were independent risk factors for SSI, while teaching had no significant impact (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.3-1.2, p = 0.153).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical teaching was feasible and safe after colonic surgery in the present cohort and had no impact on SSI rate.

Mentored Trainees have Similar Short-Term Outcomes to a Consultant Trainer Following Laparoscopic Colorectal Resection

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery has a long learning curve. Using a modular-based training programme may shorten this. Concerns with laparoscopic surgery have been oncological compromise and poor surgical outcomes when training more junior surgeons. This study aimed to compare operative and oncological outcomes between trainees undergoing a mentored training programme and a consultant trainer.

METHODS

A prospective study of all elective laparoscopic colorectal resections was undertaken in a single institution. Operative and oncological outcomes were recorded. All trainees were mentored by a National Laparoscopic Trainer (Lapco), and results between trainer and trainees compared.

RESULTS

Three hundred cases were included, with 198 (66%) performed for cancer. The trainer undertook 199 (66%) of operations, whilst trainees performed 101 (34%). Anterior resection was the commonest operation (n = 124, 41%). There were no differences between trainer and trainees for the majority of surgical outcomes, including blood loss (p = 0.598), conversion to open (p = 0.113), anastomotic leak (p = 0.263), readmission (p = 1.000) and death rates (p = 0.549). Only length of stay (p = 0.034), stoma formation (p < 0.01) and operative duration (p = 0.007) were higher in the trainer cohort, reflecting the more complex cases undertaken. Overall, there were no significant differences in both short- and longer-term oncology outcomes according to the grade of operating surgeon, including lymph nodes in specimen, circumferential resection margin and 1- and 2-year radiological recurrence.

CONCLUSION

When a modular-based training system was combined with case selection, both clinical and histopathological outcomes following resectional laparoscopic colorectal surgery were similar between trainees and trainer. This should encourage the use of more training opportunities in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Supervision by a technically qualified surgeon affects the proficiency and safety of laparoscopic colectomy performed by novice surgeons

BACKGROUND

The use of laparoscopic colectomy is becoming widespread and acquisition of its technique is challenging. In this study, we investigated whether supervision by a technically qualified surgeon affects the proficiency and safety of laparoscopic colectomy performed by novice surgeons.

METHODS

The outcomes of 23 right colectomies and 19 high anterior resections for colon cancers performed by five novice surgeons (experience level of <10 cases) between 2014 and 2016 were assessed. A laparoscopic surgeon qualified by the Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System (Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery) participated in surgeries as the teaching assistant.

RESULTS

In the right colectomy group, one patient (4.3%) required conversion to open surgery and postoperative morbidities occurred in two cases (8.6%). The operative time moving average gradually decreased from 216 to 150 min, and the blood loss decreased from 128 to 28 mL. In the CUSUM charts, the values for operative time decreased continuously after the 18th case, as compared to the Japanese standard. The values for blood loss also plateaued after the 18th case. In the high anterior resection group, one patient (5.2%) required conversion to open surgery and no postoperative complication occurred in any patient. The operative time moving average gradually decreased from 258 to 228 min, and the blood loss decreased from 33 to 18 mL. The CUSUM charts showed that the values of operative time plateaued after the 18th case, as compared to the Japanese standard. In the CUSUM chart for blood loss, no distinguishing peak or trend was noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Supervision by a technically qualified surgeon affects the proficiency and safety of laparoscopic colectomy performed by novice surgeons. The trainee's learning curve in this study represents successful mentoring by the laparoscopic surgeon qualified by the Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of trainee- versus expert surgeon-performed colorectal resection

BACKGROUND

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare short-term and oncological outcomes following colorectal resection performed by surgical trainees and expert surgeons.

METHODS

Systematic literature searches were made to identify articles on colorectal resection for benign or malignant disease published until April 2013. The primary outcome was the rate of anastomotic leak. Secondary outcomes were intraoperative variables, postoperative adverse event rates, and early and late oncological outcomes. Odds ratios (ORs), weighted mean differences (WMDs) and hazard ratios (HRs) for outcomes were calculated using meta-analytical techniques.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 19 non-randomized, observational studies of 14,344 colorectal resections, of which 8845 (61.7 per cent) were performed by experts and 5499 (38.3 per cent) by trainees. The overall rate of anastomotic leak was 2.6 per cent. Compared with experts, trainees had a lower leak rate (3.0 versus 2.0 per cent; OR 0.72, P = 0.010), but there was no difference between experts and expert-supervised trainees (3.2 versus 2.5 per cent; OR 0.77, P = 0.080). A subgroup of expert-supervised trainees had a significantly longer operating time for laparoscopic procedures (WMD 10.00 min, P < 0.001), lower 30-day mortality (OR 0.70, P = 0.001) and lower wound infection rate (OR 0.67, P = 0.040) than experts. No difference was observed in laparoscopic conversion, R0 resection or local recurrence rates. For oncological resection, there was no significant difference in cancer-specific survival between trainees and consultants (3 studies, 533 patients; hazard ratio 0.76, P = 0.130).

CONCLUSION

In selected patients, it is appropriate for supervised trainees to perform colorectal resection.