Effect of surgeon “experience” with laparoscopy on postoperative outcomes after colorectal surgery

Surgical Outcomes and Patient Expectations and Satisfaction in Spine Surgery Stratified by Surgeon Age

Importance

There is a paucity of data comparing patient-reported outcomes across surgeon age. Prior work has focused on adverse event rates for surgeon age across a variety of surgical procedures.

Objective

To compare patient-reported outcomes, expectation fulfillment, and satisfaction measures after spine surgery across surgeon age categories.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study was conducted at multicentered tertiary referral centers across Canada. Patients with degenerative conditions of the spine were enrolled in a national research network from January 2015 to August 2020. Patients were linked to a demographic survey distributed to spine surgeons who enrolled the patients. Elective surgery for degenerative spine conditions were followed up for a minimum of 1 year after operation. The data were analyzed in January 2024.

Exposure

Surgeons were classified according to their age: younger (age 35-44 years), middle age (45-59 years), and older (≥60 years).

Main Outcome and Measures

The primary outcomes were the Ostwestry Disability Index (ODI) and Neck Disability Index (NDI), numerical pain scores, expectation fulfillment, and overall satisfaction with spine surgery. Baseline demographic and clinical data and surgical procedure complexity were collected. Multivariate logistic regression models were employed, using generalized estimating equations to account for clustering within surgeons, to compare patient outcomes, expectation fulfillment, and satisfaction by surgeon age.

Results

A total of 3421 patients (1236 [36.1%] aged 65 years or older; 1603 female [46.9%]) were included in the study for analysis, with 811 (23.7%) treated by younger surgeons, 1643 (48.0%) by middle-age surgeons, and 967 (28.3%) by older surgeons. There were 2857 procedures of the lumbar spine (83.5%). After accounting for patient demographic, clinical, surgical, and surgeon characteristics, there were no significant differences in disability and pain (ODI and NDI or pain score) at 12 months among younger (mean ODI and NDI score, 25.6; 95% CI, 24.3-26.9; mean pain score, 3.4; 95% CI, 3.2-3.6), middle-age (mean ODI and NDI score, 25.8; 95% CI, 24.9-26.8; mean pain score, 3.3; 95% CI, 3.2-3.4), and older (mean ODI and NDI score, 24.6; 95% CI, 23.4-25.8; mean pain score, 3.4; 95% CI, 3.2-3.6) surgeons. Patients treated by younger (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.57; 95% CI, 1.02-2.40) and middle-age (aOR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.06-1.86) surgeons reported having all their expectations fulfilled compared with older surgeons. Additionally, patients treated by younger surgeons reported higher satisfaction levels (aOR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.01-1.69) compared with middle-aged and older surgeons.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent elective spine surgery, there was no difference in outcomes by surgeon age at 1 year, but patients treated by younger surgeons reported higher levels of satisfaction and expectation fulfillment. These findings suggest that spine surgeons of all ages are a valuable resource given similar patient outcomes for all groups.

Erectile dysfunction is an underdiagnosed consequence of low anterior resection and abdominoperineal resection for colorectal cancer

To explore the frequency and predictive factors of erectile dysfunction diagnosis after colorectal cancer surgery. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database was used to identify a national sample of men undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer from 2004 to 2015. Men aged > 65 years with any index surgery within 1 year of diagnosis of colorectal cancer were included. Men with a history of prior erectile dysfunction, metastatic cancer, or genitourinary cancer prior to their index procedure were excluded. The primary outcome was a new diagnosis of erectile dysfunction within 2 years of the index procedure. A total of 28,248 men aged > 65 years who underwent colorectal cancer surgery were identified. The rates of erectile dysfunction diagnosis 2 years after surgery were 3.6% for hemicolectomy, 5.3% for low anterior resection, and 6.4% for abdominoperineal resection. On multivariable analysis, low anterior resection (HR: 1.27, 95%CI 1.08 to 1.51, p < 0.01) and abdominoperineal resection (HR: 1.49, 95%CI 1.14 - 1.93, p < 0.01) were independently associated with increased risk of erectile dysfunction compared to hemicolectomy. Minimally invasive surgery was independently associated with an increased risk of erectile dysfunction compared to open surgery (HR: 1.44, 95% CI 1.25-1.65, p < 0.001). Compared to hemicolectomy, men treated with low anterior resection and abdominoperineal resection have a higher risk of being diagnosed with erectile dysfunction within 2 years of treatment. The absolute rate of erectile dysfunction diagnosis was low compared to rates reported in prior controlled trials, suggesting that patients are underdiagnosed in real-world settings.

Predicting Anastomotic Leak After Elective Colectomy: Utility of a Modified Frailty Index

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak is the most dreaded complication following colonic resection. While patient frailty is increasingly being recognized as a risk factor for surgical morbidity and mortality, the current colorectal body of literature has not assessed the relationship between frailty and anastomotic leak.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the relationship between patient frailty and anastomotic leak as well as patient frailty and failure to rescue in patients who experienced an anastomotic leak.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database from 2015 to 2017.

PATIENTS

Patients with the diagnosis of colonic neoplasia undergoing an elective colectomy during the study time period.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Anastomotic leak, failure to rescue.

RESULTS

A total of 30,180 elective colectomies for neoplasia were identified. The leak rate was 2.9% (n = 880). Compared to nonfrail patients, frail patients were at increased odds of anastomotic leak (frailty score = 1: OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.10-1.63; frailty score = 2: OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.04-1.68; frailty score = 3: OR = 2.41, 95% CI 1.47-3.96). After an anastomotic leak, compared to nonfrail patient, a greater proportion of frail patients experienced mortality (3.4% vs 5.9%), septic shock (16.1% vs 21.0%), myocardial infarction (1.1% vs 2.9%), and pneumonia (6.8% vs 11.8%). Furthermore, the odds of mortality, septic shock, myocardial infarction, and pneumonia increased in frail patients with higher frailty scores.

LIMITATIONS

Potential misclassification bias from lack of a strict definition of anastomotic leak and retrospective design of the study.

CONCLUSION

Frail patients undergoing colectomy for colonic neoplasia are at increased risk of an anastomotic leak. Furthermore, once a leak occurs, they are more vulnerable to failure to rescue. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B784.

PREDICCIN DE LA FUGA ANASTOMTICA DESPUS DE UNA COLECTOMA ELECTIVA UTILIDAD DE UN NDICE DE FRAGILIDAD MODIFICADO

ANTECEDENTES:La fuga anastomótica es la complicación más temida después de la resección colónica. Si bien la fragilidad del paciente se reconoce cada vez más como un factor de riesgo de morbilidad y mortalidad quirúrgicas, la bibliografía colorrectal actual no ha evaluado la relación entre la fragilidad y la fuga anastomótica.OBJETIVO:Evaluar la relación entre la fragilidad del paciente y la fuga anastomótica, así como la fragilidad del paciente y la falta de rescate en pacientes que sufrieron una fuga anastomótica.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Base de datos del Programa Nacional de Mejora de la Calidad Quirúrgica del Colegio Estadounidense de Cirujanos de 2015 a 2017.PACIENTES:Pacientes con diagnóstico de neoplasia de colon sometidos a colectomía electiva durante el período de estudio.PRINCIPAL MEDIDA DE RESULTADO:Fuga anastomótica, falta de rescate.RESULTADOS:Se identificaron 30.180 colectomías electivas por neoplasia. La tasa de fuga fue del 2,9% (n = 880). En comparación con los pacientes no frágiles, los pacientes frágiles tenían mayores probabilidades de fuga anastomótica para (puntuación de fragilidad = 1: OR = 1,34, IC del 95%: 1,10-1,63; puntuación de fragilidad = 2: OR = 1,32, IC del 95%: 1,04- 1,68; puntuación de fragilidad = 3: OR 2,41; IC del 95%: 1,47-3,96). Después de una fuga anastomótica, en comparación con un paciente no frágil, una mayor proporción de pacientes frágiles experimentó mortalidad (3,4% frente a 5,9%), choque séptico (16,1% frente a 21,0%), infarto de miocardio (1,1% frente a 2,9%) y neumonía (6,8% vs 11,8%). Además, las probabilidades de mortalidad, choque séptico, infarto de miocardio y neumonía aumentaron en pacientes frágiles con puntuaciones de fragilidad más altas.LIMITACIONES:Posible sesgo de clasificación errónea debido a la falta de una definición estricta de fuga anastomótica, diseño retrospectivo del estudio.CONCLUSIÓN:Los pacientes frágiles sometidos a colectomía por neoplasia de colon tienen un mayor riesgo de una fuga anastomótica. Además, una vez que ocurre una fuga, son más vulnerables a fallas en el rescate. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B784.

Physician Experience in Technical Success of Achieving NPVR ≥ 80% of High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation for Uterine Fibroids: A Multicenter Study

Objective

To evaluate the experience of the physician of the technical success in high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) ablation of uterine fibroids with a nonperfused volume ratio (NPVR) of at least 80%.

Methods

Patients from a 20-center prospective study were enrolled in this study. In this study, among the 20 clinical centers, five centers had physician with >3 years of HIFU experience, and the other 15 centers initiated HIFU therapy <3 years, were defined as the experienced group and the inexperienced group, respectively. Technical success was defined as achieving NPVR ≥ 80% of uterine fibroids with no major complications and it was defined as the successful group; otherwise, it was defined as the unsuccessful group.

Results

A total of 1,352 patients were included at the age of 41.32 ± 5.08 years. The mean NPVR (87.48 ± 14.91%) was obtained in the inexperienced group (86.50 ± 15.76%) and in the experienced group (89.21 ± 13.12%), respectively. The multivariate analysis showed that the volume of uterus, location of fibroids, and physician experience were significantly correlated with technical success (p < 0.05). In the experienced group, 82.20% of uterine fibroids obtained NPVR ≥ 80%, compared with 75.32% in the inexperienced group, and the difference was significant (p = 0.003). The technical success rate of the experienced group was 82.00% which was higher than 75.20% of the inexperienced group (p = 0.004).

Conclusion

In technical success of achieving NPVR ≥ 80%, experience of the physician was positively correlated with technical success; NPVR and major complications for the inexperienced group were comparable to those of the experienced group from a clinical perspective; inexperienced physicians could reach NPVR ≥ 80% of sufficient ablation and were trustworthy in efficacy. Smaller uterus and fibroids of anterior wall were correlated with better technical success; experienced physicians still have better technical success when choosing patients with larger uterus, contributing to clinical decision-making and patient referral.

Lower reoperation rates after open and laparoscopic groin hernia repair when performed by high-volume surgeons: a nationwide register-based study

PURPOSE

Previous studies have shown a correlation between surgeons with high annual volume and better outcomes after various surgical procedures. However, the preexisting literature regarding groin hernia repair and annual surgeon volume is limited. The aim was to investigate how annual surgeon volume affected the reoperation rates for recurrence after primary groin hernia repair.

METHODS

This nationwide cohort study was based on data from the Danish Hernia Database and the Danish Patient Safety Authority's Online Register. Patients ≥ 18 years undergoing laparoscopic or Lichtenstein primary groin hernia repair between November 2011 and January 2020 were included. Annual surgeon volume was divided into five categories: ≤ 10, 11-25, 26-50, 51-100, and > 100 cases/year.

RESULTS

We included 25,262 groin hernia repairs performed in 23,088 patients. The risk of reoperation for recurrence after Lichtenstein repair was significantly higher for the volume categories of ≤ 10 (HR 4.02), 11-25 (HR 3.64), 26-50 (HR 3.93), or 51-100 (HR 4.30), compared with the > 100 category. The risk of reoperation for recurrence after laparoscopic repair was significantly increased for the volume categories of ≤ 10 (HR 1.89), 11-25 (HR 2.08), 26-50 (HR 1.80), and 51-100 (HR 1.58) compared with the > 100 category.

CONCLUSION

The risk of reoperation for recurrence was significantly higher after Lichtenstein and laparoscopic repairs performed by surgeons with < 100 cases/year compared with > 100 cases/year. This indicates that higher surgeon volume minimizes the risk of reoperation for recurrence after groin hernia repair.

Effects of laparoscopic vs open abdominal surgery on costs and hospital readmission rate and its effect modification by surgeons' case volume

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy provides a minimally invasive alternative to open abdominal surgery. Current data describing its association with hospital readmission and costs in relation to surgeon laparoscopic case volume is limited to smaller databases and subsets of operations.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study of 23,285 adult abdominal operations from 2007 to 2015 compares 30-day readmission rate and costs between laparoscopic and open abdominal operations and examines effect modification by surgeon laparoscopic case volume. Outcomes were all-cause hospital readmission within 30 days after discharge and index hospital admission cost.

RESULTS

All-cause hospital readmission rates were significantly lower after laparoscopic abdominal operations compared with open operations (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.56, 95% CI 0.46-0.69, p < 0.001) with a difference in readmission risk attributable to laparoscopic approach of - 4.0% (95% CI - 5.4 to - 2.6%) in complete-case analysis. Among surgeons with a high laparoscopic case volume, the estimated difference in readmission risk through laparoscopy was magnified (- 5.8%, 95% CI - 7.5 to - 4.1%) compared to low surgeon laparoscopic case volume (- 2.9%, 95% CI - 4.8 to -1.1%, p for interaction = 0.005). The estimated difference in costs of the index hospital admission attributable to laparoscopic approach was - $3869 (95% CI - $4200 to - $3538; adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.77, 95% CI 0.75-0.79, p < 0.001). Laparoscopy was followed by significantly lower rates of readmissions related to gastrointestinal (aOR 0.68, 95% CI 0.55-0.85, p = 0.001), wound complications (infection: aOR 0.33, 95% CI 0.23-0.47, p < 0.001; non-infectious: aOR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.74, p = 0.001), and malignancy (aOR 0.68, 95% CI 0.55-0.85, p < 0.001). The findings remain robust after multiple imputation and sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy versus open abdominal surgery is associated with reduced hospital readmissions related to malignancy, gastrointestinal, and wound complications. Effect modification by higher laparoscopy case volume argues for continued proliferation of laparoscopy in abdominal surgeries.

Impact of hospital volume on outcomes after emergency management of obstructive colon cancer: a nationwide study of 1957 patients

PURPOSE

Volume-outcome relationship is well established in elective colorectal surgery for cancer, but little is known for patients managed for obstructive colon cancer (OCC). We aimed to compare the management and outcomes according to the hospital volume in this particular setting.

METHODS

Patients managed for OCC between 2005 and 2015 in centers of the French National Surgical Association were retrospectively analyzed. Hospital volume was dichotomized between low and high volume on the median number of patients included per center during the study period.

RESULTS

A total of 1957 patients with OCC were managed in 56 centers with a median number of 28 (1-123) patients per center: 298 (15%) were treated in low-volume hospitals (LVHs) and 1659 (85%) in high-volume hospitals (HVHs). Patients in LVH were significantly younger, and had fewer comorbidities and synchronous metastases. Proximal diverting stoma was the preferred surgical option in LVH (p < 0.0001), whereas tumor resection with primary anastomosis was more frequently performed in HVH (p < 0.0001). Cumulative morbidity (59 vs. 50%, p = 0.003), mortality (13 vs. 8%, p = 0.03), and length of hospital stay (22 ± 19 vs. 18 ± 14 days, p = 0.002) were significantly higher in LVH. At multivariate analysis, LVH was a predictor for cumulative morbidity (p < 0.0001) and mortality (p = 0.03). There was no difference between the two groups for tumor resection and stoma rates, and for oncological outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The hospital volume has no impact on outcomes after the first-stage surgery in OCC patients. When all surgical stages are considered, hospital volume influences cumulative postoperative morbidity and mortality but has no impact on oncological outcomes.

The Ethical Dilemma in the Surgical Management of Low Grade Gliomas According to the Variable Availability of Resources and Surgeon Experience

Low grade gliomas (LGGs) affect young individuals in the prime of life. Management may alternatively include biopsy and observation or surgical resection. Recent evidence strongly favors maximal and supramaximal resection of LGGs in optimizing survival metrics. Awake craniotomy with cortical mapping and electrical stimulation along with other preoperative and intraoperative surgical adjuncts, including intraoperative magnetic resonance and diffusion tensor imaging, facilitates maximization of resection and eschews precipitating neurological deficits. Intraoperative imaging permits additional resection of identified residual to be completed within the same surgical session, improving extent of resection and consequently progression free and overall survival. These resources are available in only a few centers throughout the United States, raising an ethical dilemma as to where patients harboring LGGs should most appropriately be treated.

Impact of Surgeon Volume on Outcomes and Expenditure Among Medicare Beneficiaries Undergoing Liver Resection: the Effect of Minimally Invasive Surgery

BACKGROUND

Although the role of annual surgeon volume on perioperative outcomes after liver resection (LR) has been investigated, there is a paucity of data regarding the impact of surgeon volume on outcomes of minimally invasive LR (MILR) versus open LR (OLR).

METHODS

Patients undergoing LR between 2013 and 2015 were identified in the Medicare inpatient Standard Analytic Files. Patients were classified into three groups based on surgeons' annual caseload: low (≤ 2 cases), medium (3-5 cases), or high (≥ 6 cases). Short-term outcomes and expenditures of LR, stratified by surgeon volume and minimally invasive surgery (MIS), were examined.

RESULTS

Among 3403 surgeons performing LR on 7169 patients, approximately 90% of surgeons performed less than 5 liver resections per year for Medicare patients. Only 7.1% of patients underwent MILR (n = 506). After adjustment, the likelihood of experiencing a complication and death within 90 days decreased with increasing surgeon volume. Outcomes of open and MILR among low- or high-volume surgeon groups, including rates of complications, 30- and 90-day readmission and mortality were similar. However, the difference of average total episode payment between open and MIS was higher in the high-volume surgeon group (low volume: $2929 vs. medium volume: $2333 vs. high volume: $7055).

CONCLUSION

Annual surgeon volume was an important predictor of outcomes following LR. MILR had comparable results to open LR among both the low- and high-volume surgeons.

Surgical Outcomes of Rectal Resection: Our 10 Years Experience

Background: Colorectal cancer, one of the most common tumor- and cancer-related deaths worldwide, requires a multidisciplinary management including neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery. Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is gaining popularity due to its safety profile and good oncological results, if performed by experienced surgeons in specialized centers. This study describes our 10 years experience in minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery. Methods: We have retrospectively evaluated a series of 140 patients treated with laparoscopic approach for rectal malignant and benign diseases. Results: A total of 134 patients (95.7%) underwent anterior rectal resection, in the remaining 6 cases (4.3%) abdominoperineal amputation was performed. All but 13 cases have been treated with laparoscopic approach, with conversion rate of 5.7%. Postoperative morbidity rate was 8.6% (2 cases of peritoneal bleeding and 10 cases of anastomotic fistulae; in 2 cases, fistula occurred in patients previously treated with chemoradiation). Conclusions: Conventional laparoscopy can provide adequate oncological outcomes even in patients with advanced rectal cancer, with advantages in terms of postoperative hospital stay, recovery time, acceptable operative time, and low complication and conversion rates.

Long-term retreatment rates of cerebral aneurysms in a population-level cohort

BACKGROUND

The likelihood of retreatment in patients undergoing procedures for cerebral aneurysms (CAs) has an important role in deciding the optimal treatment type. Existing determinations of retreatment rates, particularly for unruptured CAs, may not represent current clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

To use population-level data to examine a large cohort of patients with treated CAs over a 10-year period to estimate retreatment rates for both ruptured and unruptured CAs and explore the effect of changing treatment practices.

METHODS

We used administrative data from all non-federal hospitalizations in California (2005-2011) and Florida (2005-2014) and identified patients with treated CAs. Surgical clipping (SC) and endovascular treatments (ETs) were defined by corresponding procedure codes and an accompanying code for ruptured or unruptured CA. Retreatment was defined as subsequent SC or ET.

RESULTS

Among 19 482 patients with treated CAs, ET was performed in 12 007 (62%) patients and SC in 7475 (38%). 9279 (48%) patients underwent treatment for unruptured CAs and 10203 (52%) for ruptured. Retreatment after 90 days occurred in 1624 (8.3%) patients (11.2% vs 3.7%, ET vs SC). Retreatment rates for SC were greater in unruptured than in ruptured aneurysms (4.6% vs 3.1%), but the opposite was true for ET (10.6% vs 11.8%). 85% of retreatments were within 2 years of the index treatment. Retreatment was associated with age (OR=0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 0.99), female sex (OR=1.5, 95% CI 1.3 to 1.7), Hispanic versus white race (OR=0.86, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98), and ET versus SC (OR=3.25, 95% CI 2.85 to 3.71). The adjusted 2-year retreatment rate decreased from 2005 to 2012 for patients with unruptured CAs treated with ET (11% to 8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Retreatment rates for CAs treated with ET were greater than those for SC. However, for patients with unruptured CAs treated with ET, we identify a continuous decline in retreatment rate over the past decade.