Individual surgeon mortality rates: can outliers be detected? A national utility analysis

Objectives: There is controversy on the proposed benefits of publishing mortality rates for individual surgeons. In some procedures, analysis at the level of an individual surgeon may lack statistical power. The aim was to determine the likelihood that variation in surgeon performance will be detected using published outcome data. Design: A national analysis surgeon-level mortality rates to calculate the level of power for the reported mortality rate across multiple surgical procedures. Setting: The UK from 2010 to 2014. Participants: Surgeons who performed colon cancer resection, oesophagectomy or gastrectomy, elective aortic aneurysm repair, hip replacement, bariatric surgery or thyroidectomy. Outcomes: The likelihood of detecting an individual with a 30-day, 90-day or in-patient mortality rate of up to 5 times the national mean or median (as available). This was represented using a novel heat-map approach. Results: Overall mortality rates for the procedures ranged from 0.07% to 4.5% and mean/median surgeon volume was between 23 and 75 cases. The national median case volume for colorectal (n=55) and upper gastrointestinal (n=23) cancer resections provides around 20% power to detect a mortality rate of 3 times the national median, while, for hip replacement, this is a rate 5 times the national average. At the mortality rates reported for thyroid (0.08%) and bariatric (0.07%) procedures, it is unlikely a surgeon would perform a sufficient number of procedures in his/her entire career to stand a good chance of detecting a mortality rate 5 times the national average. Conclusions: At present, surgeons with increased mortality rates are unlikely to be detected. Performance within an expected mortality rate range cannot be considered reliable evidence of acceptable performance. Alternative approaches should focus on commonly occurring meaningful outcome measures, with infrequent events analysed predominately at the hospital level

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Liver Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations 2022.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) has been widely applied in liver surgery since the publication of the first ERAS guidelines in 2016. The aim of the present article was to update the ERAS guidelines in liver surgery using a modified Delphi method based on a systematic review of the literature. A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. A modified Delphi method including 15 international experts was used. Consensus was judged to be reached when >80% of the experts agreed on the recommended items. Recommendations were based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations system. A total of 7541 manuscripts were screened, and 240 articles were finally included. Twenty-five recommendation items were elaborated. All of them obtained consensus (>80% agreement) after 3 Delphi rounds. Nine items (36%) had a high level of evidence and 16 (64%) a strong recommendation grade. Compared to the first ERAS guidelines published, 3 novel items were introduced: prehabilitation in high-risk patients, preoperative biliary drainage in cholestatic liver, and preoperative smoking and alcohol cessation at least 4 weeks before hepatectomy. These guidelines based on the best available evidence allow standardization of the perioperative management of patients undergoing liver surgery. Specific studies on hepatectomy in cirrhotic patients following an ERAS program are still needed

New insights into the genetic etiology of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias

Characterization of the genetic landscape of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementias (ADD) provides a unique opportunity for a better understanding of the associated pathophysiological processes. We performed a two-stage genome-wide association study totaling 111,326 clinically diagnosed/'proxy' AD cases and 677,663 controls. We found 75 risk loci, of which 42 were new at the time of analysis. Pathway enrichment analyses confirmed the involvement of amyloid/tau pathways and highlighted microglia implication. Gene prioritization in the new loci identified 31 genes that were suggestive of new genetically associated processes, including the tumor necrosis factor alpha pathway through the linear ubiquitin chain assembly complex. We also built a new genetic risk score associated with the risk of future AD/dementia or progression from mild cognitive impairment to AD/dementia. The improvement in prediction led to a 1.6- to 1.9-fold increase in AD risk from the lowest to the highest decile, in addition to effects of age and the APOE ε4 allele

Pancreatic Cancer Surgery: What Matters to Patients?

Pancreatic cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related death, with a poor overall survival rate. Although certain risk factors have been identified, the origins of pancreatic cancer are still not fully understood. Surgical resection remains the primary curative treatment, but pancreatic surgery is still associated with high morbidity and mortality rates, and most patients will experience recurrence. The impact of pancreatic cancer on patients' quality of life is significant, with an important loss of healthy life in affected individuals. Traditional outcome parameters, such as length of hospital stay, do not fully capture what matters to patients during recovery. Patient-centered care is therefore central, and the patient's perspective should be considered in pre-operative discussions. Patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs) could play an important role in assessing patient perspectives, but standardized methodology for evaluating and reporting them is needed. This narrative review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of patient perspectives and different patient-reported measures in pancreatic cancer surgery. Understanding the patient perspective is crucial for delivering patient-centered care and improving outcomes for patients with pancreatic cancer

The effectiveness of an online, distance-learning Master’s in Surgical Sciences programme in Malawi

Background. Postgraduate surgical training is limited in Malawi, one of the world’s poorest countries, and doctors who pursue further training abroad may fail to return. One solution is to deliver education online, allowing trainees to complement their in-the-workplace learning.Objective. To evaluate the perceived effectiveness of an online MSc in Surgical Sciences programme for trainees continuing to train and work full time in their Malawian clinical environment.Methods. Twenty-four Malawian surgical trainees enrolled on the programme since 2010. Students’ perspectives regarding the MSc were explored by questionnaires, and Malawian student performance was measured using a variety of metrics and compared with that of other students in their year. Training programme supervisors in Malawi were surveyed on their opinions of the effectiveness of the programme.Results. Feedback revealed that students valued the structured presentation of the basic sciences integrated into interactive virtual patients, the access to e-journals and the opportunity for discussion with international surgical colleagues. Academic performance of Malawian trainees was comparable with that of the cohort average in the first 2 years of the programme. Attitudes of students and supervisors regarding the educational benefits of the programme were positive.Conclusions. The MSc in Surgical Sciences provides a culture of studying and sharing knowledge with peers and mentors globally, and has increased the academic support network for Malawian trainees from a few dedicated surgeons in the country to an international network. This innovative approach can serve as a model in other developing countries with critical shortages of healthcare workers

Attitudes of patients and care providers to enhanced recovery after surgery programs after major abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a well-established pathway of perioperative care in surgery in an increasing number of specialties. To implement protocols and maintain high levels of compliance, continued support from care providers and patients is vital. This survey aimed to assess the perceptions of care providers and patients of the relevance and importance of the ERAS targets and strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pre- and post-operative surveys were completed by patients who underwent major hepatic, colorectal, or oesophagogastric surgery in three major centers in Scotland, Norway, and The Netherlands. Anonymous web-based and article surveys were also sent to surgeons, anesthetists, and nurses experienced in delivering enhanced recovery protocols. Each questionnaire asked the responder to rate a selection of enhanced recovery targets and strategies in terms of perceived importance. RESULTS: One hundred nine patients and 57 care providers completed the preoperative survey. Overall, both patients and care providers rated the majority of items as important and supported ERAS principles. Freedom from nausea (median, 10; interquartile range [IQR], 8-10) and pain at rest (median, 10; IQR, 8-10) were the care components rated the highest by both patients and care providers. Early return of bowel function (median, 7; IQR, 5-8) and avoiding preanesthetic sedation (median, 6; IQR, 3.75-8) were scored the lowest by care providers. CONCLUSIONS: ERAS principles are supported by both patients and care providers. This is important when attempting to implement and maintain an ERAS program. Controversies still remain regarding the relative importance of individual ERAS components