Early career members at the ers international congress 2017: Highlights from the assemblies

The 2017 ERS International Congress was, as always, well organised, providing participants with a good mixture of translational and clinical science. Early career members were very well represented in thematic poster, poster discussion and oral presentation sessions and were also actively involved in chairing sessions. The efforts of the Early Career Members Committee (ECMC) to increase the number of early career members included in the competence list (the list of early career members with an interest in being more actively involved in the society) paid off immensely, because the number of early career members registered improved hugely across all assemblies after the Congress. Several newly registered early career members have collated some highlights of the Congress for their assemblies, which should be of interest to all members. As assemblies 12 and 13 are new, there is no report from assembly 12 as there is not yet, at the time of writing, an early career member representative for this newly created assembly

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Comment on: Randomized clinical trial on closure versus non-closure of mesenteric defects during laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery

[No abstract available

Radiomics Represent a New Opportunity for Bariatric Surgery When Implemented in a Quality Improvement Context

[No abstract available

Comparing Patient Selection and 30‑Day Outcomes Between One Anastomosis and Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Closer Look

[No abstract available

Letter to the Editor Concerning: Clinical Outcomes of Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass After Failed Adjustable Gastric Banding

[No abstract available

Comment on: Single-stage conversions from failed gastric band to sleeve gastrectomy versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a closer look

[No abstract available

The Necessity for Routine Administration of Ursodeoxycholic Acid After Bariatric Surgery

[No abstract available