[Surgery for primary splenic tumors and metastases of the spleen]. / Chirurgie bei primären Milztumoren und Metastasen der Milz.

The correct indications for surgical treatment of primary splenic tumors as well as metastases of the spleen are challenging due to the rarity of the various entities. Primary solid splenic tumors include benign lesions, such as hemangiomas, hamartomas and sclerosing angiomatous nodular transformation (SANT) of the spleen. In these cases, surgical treatment is indicated only in the case of inconclusive imaging and after careful consideration of the risk-benefit ratio, even in the case of pronounced symptoms. In contrast, primary angiosarcoma or undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma as highly malignant tumors represent an urgent indication for surgery. Although more frequent than primary splenic malignancies, secondary splenic tumors are also not that frequent. Solitary splenic metastases are rare; however, from an oncological point of view they can be treated by resection. In the case of oligometastasis with splenic involvement, splenectomy is used only as part of a palliative concept in cases of pronounced symptoms or in the context of cytoreductive surgery. In general, the laparoscopic approach is to be preferred when the operation is technically feasible as it is associated with fewer pulmonary and infectious complications and a shorter hospital stay. In addition, to reduce the risk of severe infections after splenectomy, the option of partial splenectomy should be considered, especially for benign lesions. A thorough informing of the patient regarding both intraoperative and perioperative risks as well as potential long-term sequelae, especially severe infectious diseases, is an essential component of informed consent before surgery.

Education Team Time Out in Oncologic Visceral Surgery Optimizes Surgical Resident Training and Team Communication-Results of a Prospective Trial.

BACKGROUND: Surgical education is highly dependent on intraoperative communication. Trainers must know the trainee's training level to ensure high-quality surgical training. A systematic preoperative dialogue (Educational Team Time Out, ETO) was established to discuss the steps of each surgical procedure. METHODS: Over 6 months, ETO was performed within a time limit of 3 minutes. Digital surveys on the utility of ETO and its impact on performance were conducted immediately after surgery and at the end of the study period among the staff of the participating disciplines (trainer, trainee, surgical nursing staff, anaesthesiologists, and medical students). The number of surgical substeps performed was recorded and compared with the equivalent period one year earlier. RESULTS: ETO was performed in 64 of the 103 eligible operations (62%). Liver resection (n = 37) was the most frequent procedure, followed by left-sided colorectal surgery (n = 12), partial pancreaticoduodenectomy (n = 6), right-sided hemicolectomies (n = 5), and thyroidectomies (n = 4). Anaesthesiologists most frequently reported that ETO had a direct impact on their work during surgery (90.9%). The influence scores were 46.8% for trainees, 8.8% for trainers, 53.3% for surgical nursing staff and 66.6% for medical students. During the implementation of ETO, a trend towards more assisted substeps in oncologic visceral surgery was seen compared to the corresponding period one year earlier (51% vs.40%; p = 0.11). CONCLUSION: ETO leads to improved intraoperative communication and more performed substeps during complex procedures, which increases motivation and practical training. This concept can easily be implemented in all surgical specialties to improve surgical education.

Rating of camera navigation skills in colorectal surgery.

PURPOSE: In advanced minimally invasive surgery the laparoscopic camera navigation (LCN) quality can influence the flow of the operation. This study aimed to investigate the applicability of a scoring system for LCN (SALAS score) in colorectal surgery and whether an adequate scoring can be achieved using a specified sequence of the operation. METHODS: The score was assessed by four blinded raters using synchronized video and voice recordings of 20 randomly selected laparoscopic colorectal surgeries (group A: assessment of the entire operation; group B: assessment of the 2nd and 3rd quartile). Experience in LCN was defined as at least 100 assistances in complex laparoscopic procedures. RESULTS: The surgical teams consisted of three residents, three fellows, and two attendings forming 15 different teams. The ratio between experienced and inexperienced camera assistants was balanced (n = 11 vs. n = 9). Regarding the total SALAS score, the four raters discriminated between experienced and inexperienced camera assistants, regardless of their group assignment (group A, p < 0.05; group B, p < 0.05). The score's interrater variability and reliability were proven with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.88. No statistically relevant correlation was achieved between operation time and SALAS score. CONCLUSION: This study presents the first intraoperative, objective, and structured assessment of LCN in colorectal surgery. We could demonstrate that the SALAS score is a reliable tool for the assessment of LCN even when only the middle part (50%) of the procedure is analyzed. Construct validity was proven by discriminating between experienced and inexperienced camera assistants.

Structured assessment of laparoscopic camera navigation skills: the SALAS score.

BACKGROUND: Tools are needed to assess laparoscopic camera navigation (LCN) in the operating room. Here, we aimed to develop an objective rating scale for LCN. STUDY DESIGN: We defined the following key aspects of LCN: operational field centering, correct angle of the horizon, correct instrument visualization, verbal commands from the operating surgeon, and manual corrections from the operating surgeon. We then developed a score based on intraoperative error evaluation from intraoperative recordings of 80 procedures. Finally, the newly developed score was validated by four different raters using video-based analysis of 20 elective laparoscopic cholecystectomies. RESULTS: We developed and validated a tool for the structured assessment of laparoscopic assistant skills (SALAS). This score showed good internal consistency, with a Cronbach's alpha of > 0.7. Intraclass correlation revealed a low interrater variability (ICC 0.866) for the total score. Comparison of experienced and inexperienced camera assistants revealed significantly better SALAS scores for experienced assistants (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our present results show that SALAS score is valid, reliable, and practicable. This score can be used for future investigations of camera navigation efficiency and training.