Evaluation of a Magnetic Compression Anastomosis for Jejunoileal Partial Diversion in Rhesus Macaques

PURPOSE

Metabolic surgery remains underutilized for treating type 2 diabetes, as less invasive alternative interventions with improved risk profiles are needed. We conducted a pilot study to evaluate the feasibility of a novel magnetic compression device to create a patent limited caliber side-to-side jejunoileal partial diversion in a nonhuman primate model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using an established nonhuman primate model of diet-induced insulin resistance, a magnetic compression device was used to create a side-to-side jejunoileal anastomosis. Primary outcomes evaluated feasibility (e.g., device mating and anastomosis patency) and safety (e.g., device-related complications). Secondary outcomes evaluated the device's ability to produce metabolic changes associated with jejunoileal partial diversion (e.g., homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance [HOMA-IR] and body weight).

RESULTS

Device mating, spontaneous detachment, and excretion occurred in all animals (n = 5). There were no device-related adverse events. Upon completion of the study, ex vivo anastomoses were widely patent with healthy mucosa and no evidence of stricture. At 6 weeks post-device placement, HOMA-IR improved to below baseline values (p < 0.05). Total weight also decreased in a linear fashion (R2 = 0.97) with total weight loss at 6 weeks post-device placement of 14.4% (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The use of this novel magnetic compression device to create a limited caliber side-to-side jejunoileal anastomosis is safe and likely feasible in a nonhuman primate model. The observed glucoregulatory and metabolic effects of a partial jejunoileal bypass with this device warrant further investigation to validate the long-term glucometabolic impact of this approach.

Virtual Interviews: Assessing How Expectations Meet Reality

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the post-matriculation perceptions of interns and faculty who participated in the 2020-2021 virtual interview process and how their expectations of the program and the applicants, respectively, aligned with reality.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Published surveys on virtual interviewing were reviewed and modified to design two surveys, for interns and for faculty who interviewed. Interns and faculty members from the Departments of Surgery and Medicine at one institution who participated in the 2020-2021 virtual interview process completed the surveys four to six months after the start of the academic year. Following survey completion, surgical interns from the same application cycle participated in one in-person focus group nine months after the start of the academic year to clarify points raised in the surveys.

RESULTS

Forty-six interns and faculty members responded to the survey (subgroup response rates ranging from 13-30%) and ten interns participated in the focus group (participation rate 100%). Most faculty and intern participants found that expectations formed during virtual interviews were accurate. However, our respondents noted limitations to virtual interviews that reduced their usefulness, including challenges with unnatural social interactions, understanding city fit, and getting a sense of resident and program culture. Participants provided possible solutions to address these challenges.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, this mixed-methods study at a single institution found that perceptions from virtual interviews were generally accurate but with some limitations. We describe several opportunities to improve the virtual interview process and optimize the application experience.

Detection of viral gene expression in risk-stratified biopsies reveals no active HPV in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is known to promote the development of mucosal squamous cell carcinoma (mSCC), including pathologically high-grade lesions, but its role in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cuSCC) remains unclear, particularly in lesions that are considered high risk.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine whether enhanced HPV transcriptional activity can be detected in high-risk cuSCC samples compared with low-grade SCC samples or normal skin.

METHODS

We performed RNA sequencing of cuSCC across 23 risk-stratified skin lesions. A subset of samples was tested for the presence of HPV DNA. High-quality, non-human reads from each sample group were used for viral analysis using Microbiome Coverage Profiler.

RESULTS

None of the samples analysed had detectable expression of HPV RNA, while 64% of samples tested positive for HPV DNA. All samples were found to have expression of human endogenous retrovirus, and multiple samples showed expression of other viruses.

CONCLUSIONS

Viral and prophage gene expression can be monitored in cuSCC or normal skin biopsies, yet no sample in our study showed evidence of active HPV gene expression despite evidence of HPV genome presence. This suggests HPV transcription does not play a role in differentiating high-risk cuSCCs from low-risk cuSCCs or normal skin.

Mandatory Operative Re-Exploration after Initial Debridement of Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infections: Is it Mandatory?

Necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTIs) are aggressive infections requiring prompt diagnosis and extensive surgical debridement. Traditionally, patients undergo mandatory re-exploration to ensure adequacy of source control. The purpose of this study is to determine if re-exploration in the operating room is mandatory for all patients with NSTIs. An eight-year retrospective analysis of adult patients with NSTIs was performed comparing two groups: mandatory operative re-exploration versus operative re-exploration based on clinical examination findings. Outcomes measured included mortality, number of debridements, and length of stay (LOS). Twenty-two per cent of patients underwent a mandatory re-exploration. These patients were older, had a higher incidence of diabetes, and a longer duration of symptoms. There were no significant differences between groups with regard to the physical examination, severity of sepsis, time to repeat debridements, or in-hospital mortality, whereas LOS and the total number of debridements were increased in mandatory re-exploration. Bacteremia and septic shock were predictive of the need for further debridement in patients in the operative re-exploration based on clinical examination findings group. Mandatory re-exploration after initial debridement may not be necessary in all patients with NSTIs. Instead, bedside wound checks may be a safe strategy to determine the need for further operative debridement.

Mandatory Operative Re-Exploration after Initial Debridement of Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infections: Is it Mandatory?

Necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTIs) are aggressive infections requiring prompt diagnosis and extensive surgical debridement. Traditionally, patients undergo mandatory re-exploration to ensure adequacy of source control. The purpose of this study is to determine if re-exploration in the operating room is mandatory for all patients with NSTIs. An eight-year retrospective analysis of adult patients with NSTIs was performed comparing two groups: mandatory operative re-exploration versus operative re-exploration based on clinical examination findings. Outcomes measured included mortality, number of debridements, and length of stay (LOS). Twenty-two per cent of patients underwent a mandatory re-exploration. These patients were older, had a higher incidence of diabetes, and a longer duration of symptoms. There were no significant differences between groups with regard to the physical examination, severity of sepsis, time to repeat debridements, or in-hospital mortality, whereas LOS and the total number of debridements were increased in mandatory re-exploration. Bacteremia and septic shock were predictive of the need for further debridement in patients in the operative re-exploration based on clinical examination findings group. Mandatory re-exploration after initial debridement may not be necessary in all patients with NSTIs. Instead, bedside wound checks may be a safe strategy to determine the need for further operative debridement.