Learning of Intracorporal Knot Tying in Minimally Invasive Surgery by Video or Expert Instruction.

INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive surgery skill laboratories are indispensable in training, especially for complex procedural skills such as intracorporal suturing and knot tying (ICKT). However, maintaining a laboratory is expensive, and specially trained teachers are in short supply. During the COVID-19 pandemic, in-person instruction has reduced to almost zero, while model learning via video instruction (VID) has become an integral part of medical education. The aim of this study was to compare the learning effectiveness and efficiency of ICKT by laparoscopically inexperienced medical students through video versus direct expert instruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A secondary analysis of two randomized controlled trials was performed. We drew data from students who were trained in ICKT with expert instruction (EXP, n = 30) and from students who were trained via VID, n = 30). A laparoscopic box trainer including laparoscope was used for ICKT. Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS), knot quality, and total ICKT time were the parameters for the assessment in this study. Proficiency criteria were also defined for these parameters. RESULTS: Students in the EXP group performed significantly better in OSATS-procedure-specific checklist (PSC) and knot quality compared with students in the VID group, with no difference in task time. Of the students who reached the proficiency criteria for OSATS-PSC and knot quality, those in the EXP group required fewer attempts to do so than those in the VID group. Students in both groups improved significantly in all parameters over the first hour of evaluation. CONCLUSION: For the laparoscopically inexperienced, training in ICKT through expert instruction presents an advantage compared with video-based self-study in the form of faster understanding of the procedure and the associated consistent implementation of good knot quality. Both teaching methods significantly improved participants' ICKT skills.

Surgical challenges and research priorities in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic: EAES membership survey.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems and general surgeons are being challenged by the current pandemic. The European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) aimed to evaluate surgeons' experiences and perspectives, to identify gaps in knowledge, to record shortcomings in resources and to register research priorities. METHODS: An ad hoc web-based survey of EAES members and affiliates was developed by the EAES Research Committee. The questionnaire consisted of 69 items divided into the following sections: (Ι) demographics, (II) institutional burdens and management strategies, and (III) analysis of resource, knowledge, and evidence gaps. Descriptive statistics were summarized as frequencies, medians, ranges,, and interquartile ranges, as appropriate. RESULTS: The survey took place between March 25th and April 16th with a total of 550 surgeons from 79 countries. Eighty-one percent had to postpone elective cases or suspend their practice and 35% assumed roles not related to their primary expertise. One-fourth of respondents reported having encountered abdominal pathologies in COVID-19-positive patients, most frequently acute appendicitis (47% of respondents). The effect of protective measures in surgical or endoscopic procedures on infected patients, the effect of endoscopic surgery on infected patients, and the infectivity of positive patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery were prioritized as knowledge gaps and research priorities. CONCLUSIONS: Perspectives and priorities of EAES members in the era of the pandemic are hereto summarized. Research evidence is urgently needed to effectively respond to challenges arisen from the pandemic.

EAES Recommendations for Recovery Plan in Minimally Invasive Surgery Amid COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic presented an unexpected challenge for the surgical community in general and Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) specialists in particular. This document aims to summarize recent evidence and experts' opinion and formulate recommendations to guide the surgical community on how to best organize the recovery plan for surgical activity across different sub-specialities after the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Recommendations were developed through a Delphi process for establishment of expert consensus. Domain topics were formulated and subsequently subdivided into questions pertinent to different surgical specialities following the COVID-19 crisis. Sixty-five experts from 24 countries, representing the entire EAES board, were invited. Fifty clinicians and six engineers accepted the invitation and drafted statements based on specific key questions. Anonymous voting on the statements was performed until consensus was achieved, defined by at least 70% agreement. RESULTS: A total of 92 consensus statements were formulated with regard to safe resumption of surgery across eight domains, addressing general surgery, upper GI, lower GI, bariatrics, endocrine, HPB, abdominal wall and technology/research. The statements addressed elective and emergency services across all subspecialties with specific attention to the role of MIS during the recovery plan. Eighty-four of the statements were approved during the first round of Delphi voting (91.3%) and another 8 during the following round after substantial modification, resulting in a 100% consensus. CONCLUSION: The recommendations formulated by the EAES board establish a framework for resumption of surgery following COVID-19 pandemic with particular focus on the role of MIS across surgical specialities. The statements have the potential for wide application in the clinical setting, education activities and research work across different healthcare systems.