What to expect when you're expecting a hepatopancreatobiliary surgeon: self‐reported experiences of HPB surgeons from different training pathways

BackgroundHepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgery fellowship training has multiple paths. Prospective trainees and employers must understand the differences between training pathways. This study examines self‐reported fellowship experiences and current scope of practice across three pathways.MethodsAn online survey was disseminated to 654 surgeons. These included active Americas Hepato‐Pancreato‐Biliary Association (AHPBA) members and recent graduates of HPB, transplant–HPB and HPB–heavy surgical oncology fellowships.ResultsA total of 416 (64%) surgeons responded. Most respondents were male (89%) and most were practising in an academic setting (83%). 290 (70%) respondents underwent formal fellowship training. Although fellowship experiences varied, current practice was largely similar. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and ultrasound were the most commonly identified areas of training deficiencies and were, respectively, cited as such by 47% and 34% of HPB‐, 49% and 50% of transplant‐, and 52% and 25% of surgical oncology‐trained respondents. Non‐HPB cases performed in current practice included gastrointestinal (GI) and general surgery cases (56% and 49%, respectively) for HPB‐trained respondents, transplant and general surgery cases (87% and 21%, respectively) for transplant‐trained respondents, and GI surgery and non‐HPB surgical oncology cases (70% and 28%, respectively) for surgical oncology‐trained respondents.ConclusionsFellowship training in HPB surgery varies by training pathway. Training in MIS and ultrasound is deficient in each pathway. The ultimate scope of non‐transplant HPB practice appears similar across training pathways. Thus, training pathway choice is best guided by the training experience desired and non‐HPB components of anticipated practice.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/113167/1/hpb12430.pd

Laparoscopic versus open extended radical left pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: an international propensity-score matched study

Background A radical left pancreatectomy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) may require extended, multivisceral resections. The role of a laparoscopic approach in extended radical left pancreatectomy (ERLP) is unclear since comparative studies are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after laparoscopic vs open ERLP in patients with PDAC. Methods An international multicenter propensity-score matched study including patients who underwent either laparoscopic or open ERLP (L-ERLP; O-ERLP) for PDAC was performed (2007-2015). The ISGPS definition for extended resection was used. Primary outcomes were overall survival, margin negative rate (R0), and lymph node retrieval. Results Between 2007 and 2015, 320 patients underwent ERLP in 34 centers from 12 countries (65 L-ERLP vs. 255 O-ERLP). After propensity-score matching, 44 L-ERLP could be matched to 44 O-ERLP. In the matched cohort, the conversion rate in L-ERLP group was 35%. The L-ERLP R0 resection rate (matched cohort) was comparable to O-ERLP (67% vs 48%; P = 0.063) but the lymph node yield was lower for L-ERLP than O-ERLP (median 11 vs 19, P = 0.023). L-ERLP was associated with less delayed gastric emptying (0% vs 16%, P = 0.006) and shorter hospital stay (median 9 vs 13 days, P = 0.005), as compared to O-ERLP. Outcomes were comparable for additional organ resections, vascular resections (besides splenic vessels), Clavien-Dindo grade >= III complications, or 90-day mortality (2% vs 2%, P = 0.973). The median overall survival was comparable between both groups (19 vs 20 months, P = 0.571). Conversion did not worsen outcomes in L-ERLP. Conclusion The laparoscopic approach may be used safely in selected patients requiring ERLP for PDAC, since morbidity, mortality, and overall survival seem comparable, as compared to O-ERLP. L-ERLP is associated with a high conversion rate and reduced lymph node yield but also with less delayed gastric emptying and a shorter hospital stay, as compared to O-ERLP

The Brescia Internationally Validated European Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (EGUMIPS)

Objective: To develop and update evidence-based and consensus-based guidelines on laparoscopic and robotic pancreatic surgery. Summary Background Data: Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS), including laparoscopic and robotic surgery, is complex and technically demanding. Minimizing the risk for patients requires stringent, evidence-based guidelines. Since the International Miami Guidelines on MIPS in 2019, new developments and key publications have been reported, necessitating an update. Methods: Evidence-based guidelines on 22 topics in 8 domains were proposed: terminology, indications, patients, procedures, surgical techniques and instrumentation, assessment tools, implementation and training, and artificial intelligence. The Brescia Internationally Validated European Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (EGUMIPS, September 2022) used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology to assess the evidence and develop guideline recommendations, the Delphi method to establish consensus on the recommendations among the Expert Committee, and the AGREE II-GRS tool for guideline quality assessment and external validation by a Validation Committee. Results: Overall, 27 European experts, 6 international experts, 22 international Validation Committee members, 11 Jury Committee members, 18 Research Committee members, and 121 registered attendees of the 2-day meeting were involved in the development and validation of the guidelines. In total, 98 recommendations were developed, including 33 on laparoscopic, 34 on robotic, and 31 on general MIPS, covering 22 topics in 8 domains. Out of 98 recommendations, 97 reached at least 80% consensus among the experts and congress attendees, and all recommendations were externally validated by the Validation Committee. Conclusions: The EGUMIPS evidence-based guidelines on laparoscopic and robotic MIPS can be applied in current clinical practice to provide guidance to patients, surgeons, policy-makers, and medical societies.</p

Surgical education interventions in liver surgery: a systematic review

The objective of the study was to identify and to evaluate the impact of educational interventions to learn and train liver surgery outside the operating room. A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and ERIC databases from inception to September 2019 according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies describing and assessing outcomes of educational interventions in liver surgery, outside the operating room, were included. Neither language nor date of publication restriction was applied. Methodological quality was appraised using NOS-E (Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for Education), and the level of evidence was evaluated based on GRADE (Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) standards. Of the 10,403 screened abstracts, 53 articles were eligible for inclusion, comprising 27 descriptive studies (50.9%), 14 case series assessing any relevant outcome (26.4%), 8 non-randomized controlled trials (15.1%), and 4 randomized controlled studies (7.5%). Almost half (26/53) of the studies did not include any participants, while the remainder of the publications (27/53) involved 1306 learners. The majority of the studies focused on cognitive knowledge (31/53) and/or psychomotor skills training (24/53). Only one publication assessed affective skills. The GRADE score was very low or low in most articles (46/53). Five studies were scored high (5–6) according to NOS-E. Two studies reported data regarding the reliability and validity of employed assessment tools. High-quality studies, particularly well-designed randomized controlled trials that evaluate the effectiveness of simulation-based training on learner behavior and patient outcomes in liver surgery, are still lacking. Forthcoming studies should use robust assessment tools supported by validity evidence

New Trends at 25 Years: An American Board of Surgery Academic Certifying Examination Review Course.

BACKGROUND: In the 1980s, a small research group began identifying variables affecting applicant success on the American Board of Surgery (ABS) Certifying Examination (CE). We now report success and trends as we complete 25 years. We had multiple challenges as identified through faculty focus groups and participant feedback that needed to be addressed: increase the national optics of the program, integrate new innovative experiences, maintain the integrity of the collected data on excel files, incorporate national trends in surgery, attract experienced clinical volunteer faculty and staff, security of capital, and schedule management. METHOD: The primary purpose of the program is to define the root cause interfering with success on the ABS CE. All of the listed changes in course design (2012-2016) were entered into excel files along with participants demographics, including results of the pretesting modules, the communication inventory, all self-reported stressors, and interview results to track the effect of faculty interventions, trends and ABS outcomes. RESULTS: The profiles of the participants have changed over time, including: marital status, presence of DSM-5 stressors, gender, fellowship training, study habits, financial burdens, and international graduate status. International graduates demonstrated communication issues that were present, though rarely addressed, during residency training. The gradual absorption of junior faculty allowed a seamless transition over time as part of the succession plan. Although the national success rates on the CE were 72% to 80%, this program\u27s success rate still remained in the 90 percentile (94%-97%) for those who followed their education improvement plan. Deidentified excel files will be converted to REDCap for preservation and analysis. DISCUSSION: The small course design has continued to be effective at identifying variables that interfere with success on the CE examination. The inclusion of additional PhD education scientists facilitated focused individual interventions. A pilot program for international graduate status residents is in development

Laparoscopic Liver Surgery Training Course on Thiel-Embalmed Human Cadavers: Program Evaluation, Trainer’s Long-Term Feedback and Steps Forward

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feedback of participants upon laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) course on Thiel-embalmed human bodies. Methods: From 2010 to 2017, ten LLS masterclasses have been organized by the Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery at Ghent University Hospital. A 23-question anonymous survey was electronically sent to 119 participants between November 2017 and January 2018, exploring their characteristics and asking for evaluation of the course. The obstacles for implementing LLS in their centers have been assessed. Results: Sixty-four surgeons (53.8%) responded to the survey; 42 (65.6%) were employed at a university hospital; and 39 (60.9%) were in the first decade of their practice as a consultant surgeon. Forty-three (67.2%) surgeons reported an increased percentage of LLS cases afterward. Training on Thiel cadavers was considered superior (49.2%) to other training options including proctoring in the operating room (34.9%), virtual reality (6.3%), video training (4.8%) and practicing on pigs (4.8%). Obstacles identified contained inadequate training, patient’s referral pattern, financial issues, lack of dedicated surgical team and time constrains. Conclusions: This survey revealed that a structured short-time program incorporating interactive discussion, live operations and hands-on training on human bodies under proctorship may enhance efficient training in laparoscopic liver surgery. In a step forward for upcoming courses, the importance of team building has to be addressed

Advocating for a New Residency Application Process: A Student Perspective

ObjectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic provided an opportunity for surgical residency programs to rethink their methods of evaluating and recruiting candidates. However, the past year has not been seamless, with a soaring number of applications, reports of programs and applicants having difficulty evaluating each other, and an increasingly uneven distribution of interviews among applicants. Consequently, many have called for national changes to the residency application process to address these longstanding concerns.ResultsHere, we review the evolving literature and advocate for the permanent adoption of visiting rotations, virtual interviews with a universal release date and data-driven attendance limits, and opportunities for in-person applicant visits.ConclusionsWe believe these changes leverage the strengths of each format, allow for satisfactory bidirectional evaluation, and promote principles of justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion

The miami international evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection

© 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Objective: The aim of tis study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019). Summary Background Data: MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking. Methods: The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, and the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary. Results: After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety. Conclusion: These IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery

Trends in the characteristics and perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic and open resections for benign liver lesions: An international multicenter retrospective cohort study of 845 patients

Background: Solid benign liver lesions (BLL) are increasingly discovered, but clear indications for surgical treatment are often lacking. Concomitantly, laparoscopic liver surgery is increasingly performed. The aim of this study was to assess if the availability of laparoscopic surgery has had an impact on the characteristics and perioperative outcomes of patients with BLL. Methods: This is a retrospective international multicenter cohort study, including patients undergoing a laparoscopic or open liver resection for BLL from 19 centers in eight countries. Patients were divided according to the time period in which they underwent surgery (2008–2013, 2014–2016, and 2017–2019). Unadjusted and risk-adjusted (using logistic regression) time-trend analyses were performed. The primary outcome was textbook outcome (TOLS), defined as the absence of intraoperative incidents ≥ grade 2, bile leak ≥ grade B, severe complications, readmission and 90-day or in-hospital mortality, with the absence of a prolonged length of stay added to define TOLS+. Results: In the complete dataset comprised of patients that underwent liver surgery for all indications, the proportion of patients undergoing liver surgery for benign disease remained stable (12.6% in the first time period, 11.9% in the second time period and 12.1% in the last time period, p = 0.454). Overall, 845 patients undergoing a liver resection for BLL in the first (n = 374), second (n = 258) or third time period (n = 213) were included. The rates of ASA-scores≥3 (9.9%–16%,p &lt; 0.001), laparoscopic surgery (57.8%–77%,p &lt; 0.001), and Pringle maneuver use (33.2%–47.2%,p = 0.001) increased, whereas the length of stay decreased (5 to 4 days,p &lt; 0.001). There were no significant changes in the TOLS rate (86.6%–81.3%,p = 0.151), while the TOLS + rate increased from 41.7% to 58.7% (p &lt; 0.001). The latter result was confirmed in the risk-adjusted analyses (aOR 1.849,p = 0.004). Conclusion: The surgical treatment of BLL has evolved with an increased implementation of the laparoscopic approach and a decreased length of stay. This evolution was paralleled by stable TOLS rates above 80% and an increase in the TOLS + rate