LAsting Symptoms after Oesophageal Resectional Surgery (LASORS): multicentre validation cohort study

BackgroundLong-term symptom burden and health-related quality-of-life outcomes after curative oesophageal cancer treatment are poorly understood. Existing tools are cumbersome and do not address the post-treatment population specifically. The aim of this study was to validate the six-symptom LASORS tool for identifying patients after curative oesophageal cancer treatment with poor health-related quality of life and to assess its clinical utility.MethodsBetween 2015 and 2019, patients from 15 UK centres who underwent curative-intent oesophageal cancer treatment, and were disease-free at least 1 year after surgery, were invited to participate in the study and complete LASORS and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25 questionnaires. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to examine the accuracy of the LASORS tool for identifying patients with poor health-related quality of life.ResultsA total of 263 patients completed the questionnaire. Four of the six LASORS symptoms were associated with poor health-related quality of life: reduced energy (OR 2.13 (95% c.i. 1.45 to 3.13)); low mood (OR 1.86 (95% c.i. 1.20 to 2.88)); diarrhoea more than three times a day unrelated to eating (OR 1.48 (95% c.i. 1.06 to 2.07)); and bloating or cramping after eating (OR 1.35 (95% c.i. 1.03 to 1.77)). The LASORS tool showed good diagnostic accuracy with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.858 for identifying patients with poor health-related quality of life.ConclusionThe six-symptom LASORS tool generated a reliable model for identification of patients with poor health-related quality of life after curative treatment for oesophageal cancer. This is the first tool of its kind to be prospectively validated in the post-esophagectomy population. Clinical utility lies in identification of patients at risk of poor health-related quality of life, ease of use of the tool, and in planning survivorship services

Systematic reviews and consensus definitions for the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) initiative: mortality, morbidity, and organ failure

Background: Mortality, morbidity, and organ failure are important and common serious harms after surgery. However, there are many candidate measures to describe these outcome domains. Definitions of these measures are highly variable, and validity is often unclear. As part of the International Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) initiative, this study aimed to derive a set of standardised and valid measures of mortality, morbidity, and organ failure for use in perioperative clinical trials. Methods: Three domains of endpoints (mortality, morbidity, and organ failure) were explored through systematic literature review and a three-stage Delphi consensus process using methods consistently applied across the StEP initiative. Reliability, feasibility, and patient-centredness were assessed in round 3 of the consensus process. Results: A high level of consensus was achieved for two mortality time points, 30-day and 1-yr mortality, and these two measures are recommended. No organ failure endpoints achieved threshold criteria for consensus recommendation. The Clavien–Dindo classification of complications achieved threshold criteria for consensus in round 2 of the Delphi process but did not achieve the threshold criteria in round 3 where it scored equivalently to the Post Operative Morbidity Survey. Clavien–Dindo therefore received conditional endorsement as the most widely used measure. No composite measures of organ failure achieved an acceptable level of consensus. Conclusions: Both 30-day and 1-yr mortality measures are recommended. No measure is recommended for organ failure. One measure (Clavien–Dindo) is conditionally endorsed for postoperative morbidity, but our findings suggest that no single endpoint offers a reliable and valid measure to describe perioperative morbidity that is not dependent on the quality of deli-vered care. Further refinement of current measures, or development of novel measures, of postoperative morbidity might improve consensus in this area

Intraoperative assessment of biliary anatomy for prevention of bile duct injury: a review of current and future patient safety interventions

Background Bile duct injury (BDI) is a dreaded complication of cholecystectomy, often caused by misinterpretation of biliary anatomy. To prevent BDI, techniques have been developed for intraoperative assessment of bile duct anatomy. This article reviews the evidence for the different techniques and discusses their strengths and weaknesses in terms of efficacy, ease, and cost-effectiveness. Method PubMed was searched from January 1980 through December 2009 for articles concerning bile duct visualization techniques for prevention of BDI during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Results Nine techniques were identified. The critical-view-of-safety approach, indirectly establishing biliary anatomy, is accepted by most guidelines and commentaries as the surgical technique of choice to minimize BDI risk. Intraoperative cholangiography is associated with lower BDI risk (OR 0.67, CI 0.61-0.75). However, it incurs extra costs, prolongs the operative procedure, and may be experienced as cumbersome. An established reliable alternative is laparoscopic ultrasound, but its longer learning curve limits widespread implementation. Easier to perform are cholecystocholangiography and dye cholangiography, but these yield poor-quality images. Light cholangiography, requiring retrograde insertion of an optical fiber into the common bile duct, is too unwieldy for routine use. Experimental techniques are passive infrared cholangiography, hyperspectral cholangiography, and near-infrared fluorescence cholangiography. The latter two are performed noninvasively and provide real-time images. Quantitative data in patients are necessary to further evaluate these techniques. Conclusions The critical-view-of-safety approach should be used during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Intraoperative cholangiography or laparoscopic ultrasound is recommended to be performed routinely. Hyperspectral cholangiography and near-infrared fluorescence cholangiography are promising novel techniques to prevent BDI and thus increase patient safety

30-day morbidity and mortality of sleeve gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and one anastomosis gastric bypass: a propensity score-matched analysis of the GENEVA data

Background: There is a paucity of data comparing 30-day morbidity and mortality of sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB). This study aimed to compare the 30-day safety of SG, RYGB, and OAGB in propensity score-matched cohorts. Materials and methods: This analysis utilised data collected from the GENEVA study which was a multicentre observational cohort study of bariatric and metabolic surgery (BMS) in 185 centres across 42 countries between 01/05/2022 and 31/10/2020 during the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. 30-day complications were categorised according to the Clavien–Dindo classification. Patients receiving SG, RYGB, or OAGB were propensity-matched according to baseline characteristics and 30-day complications were compared between groups. Results: In total, 6770 patients (SG 3983; OAGB 702; RYGB 2085) were included in this analysis. Prior to matching, RYGB was associated with highest 30-day complication rate (SG 5.8%; OAGB 7.5%; RYGB 8.0% (p = 0.006)). On multivariate regression modelling, Insulin-dependent type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypercholesterolaemia were associated with increased 30-day complications. Being a non-smoker was associated with reduced complication rates. When compared to SG as a reference category, RYGB, but not OAGB, was associated with an increased rate of 30-day complications. A total of 702 pairs of SG and OAGB were propensity score-matched. The complication rate in the SG group was 7.3% (n = 51) as compared to 7.5% (n = 53) in the OAGB group (p = 0.68). Similarly, 2085 pairs of SG and RYGB were propensity score-matched. The complication rate in the SG group was 6.1% (n = 127) as compared to 7.9% (n = 166) in the RYGB group (p = 0.09). And, 702 pairs of OAGB and RYGB were matched. The complication rate in both groups was the same at 7.5 % (n = 53; p = 0.07). Conclusions: This global study found no significant difference in the 30-day morbidity and mortality of SG, RYGB, and OAGB in propensity score-matched cohorts

30-Day morbidity and mortality of bariatric metabolic surgery in adolescence during the COVID-19 pandemic – The GENEVA study

Background: Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is an effective treatment for adolescents with severe obesity. Objectives: This study examined the safety of MBS in adolescents during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: This was a global, multicentre and observational cohort study of MBS performed between May 01, 2020, and October 10,2020, in 68 centres from 24 countries. Data collection included in-hospital and 30-day COVID-19 and surgery-specific morbidity/mortality. Results: One hundred and seventy adolescent patients (mean age: 17.75 ± 1.30 years), mostly females (n = 122, 71.8%), underwent MBS during the study period. The mean pre-operative weight and body mass index were 122.16 ± 15.92 kg and 43.7 ± 7.11 kg/m2, respectively. Although majority of patients had pre-operative testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (n = 146; 85.9%), only 42.4% (n = 72) of the patients were asked to self-isolate pre-operatively. Two patients developed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection post-operatively (1.2%). The overall complication rate was 5.3% (n = 9). There was no mortality in this cohort. Conclusions: MBS in adolescents with obesity is safe during the COVID-19 pandemic when performed within the context of local precautionary procedures (such as pre-operative testing). The 30-day morbidity rates were similar to those reported pre-pandemic. These data will help facilitate the safe re-introduction of MBS services for this group of patients

Litigation following groin hernia repair in England

Purpose Since 1995, litigation following surgical procedures has cost the National Health Service (NHS) over 1.3 billion GBP (Great British Pounds)/2.1 billion USD (United States Dollars)/1.4 billion Euros. Despite it being the most commonly undertaken general surgical operation, no study has examined clinical negligence claims in England following groin hernia repairs. Methods Data from the NHS Litigation Authority of all claims made from 1995 to 2009 was obtained and interrogated. Results In total, 398 claims were made. Of these, 209 cases had been settled, of which 144 (46.6%) were in favour of the claimant to a cost of 7.35 million GBP/ 12 million USD/7.93 million Euros. Testicular injury and chronic pain featured in 40% of all claims. Visceral injuries and injuries requiring corrective procedures were the only predictors of a successful claim (P = 0.015 and P = 0.002, respectively). Claims associated with visceral and vascular injuries were more likely to occur in laparoscopic than in open repairs. Sexual dysfunction and chronic pain resulted in the highest average payouts of 85,467 GBP/140,565 USD/92,177 Euros and 81,288 GBP/ 133,693 USD/87,674 Euros, respectively. Conclusion Patients should be fully informed of the incidence of testicular injury and chronic pain during the consent process. Approaches minimising visceral and vascular injury particularly in laparoscopic repair should be adopted to reduce litigation and improve patient care.</p

Litigation claims following laparoscopic and open inguinal hernia repairs

PurposeGroin hernia repair is the most frequently performed general surgical operation in the UK. Complications from laparoscopic and open repair are well recognised; however, potential differences are yet to be considered in relation to litigation.MethodsAdministrative data were obtained and analysed from the NHS Litigation Authority for inguinal hernia-related claims from 1995 to 2016. Claims identified as using an open or laparoscopic approach were compared.Results880 claims were made, 760 had been settled. 88 laparoscopic and 241 open procedures were identified; 65% laparoscopic and 63% open hernia claims were found to be in favour of the claimant. Payouts totalled to 4.1GBP/4.8EUR/5.3USD million and 9.4GBP/11.0EUR/12.1USD million for laparoscopic (mean 82,824GBP/96,579EUR/106,453USD) and open (mean 66,796GBP/77,892EUR/85,852USD) approaches, respectively. The most common reasons for claim initiation were visceral/vascular injury (54%) in the laparoscopic group, and testicular complications or chronic pain (35%) in the open group. Additional procedures were necessary for 48% and 44% of laparoscopic and open claims, respectively. The highest average payouts were associated with visceral injury, (laparoscopic 116,482GBP/135,820EUR/149,715USD; open 199,103GBP/232,246EUR/255,905USD) and vascular injury (laparoscopic 88,624GBP/103,369EUR/113,892USD; open 64,460GBP/75,163EUR/82,870USD). Additional procedures resulted in an average payout of 93,352GBP/108,917EUR/120,008USD (laparoscopic) and 60,408GBP/70,506EUR/77,657USD (open). The most common additional procedures were corrective visceral/vascular repairs, orchidectomy and recurrent hernia repair.ConclusionsThe rate of litigation for clinical negligence in inguinal hernia surgery in the UK is increasing. Whilst there has been a recent increase in laparoscopic hernia repair claims, the volume and burden of claims related to open procedures remain greater