Analysis of bariatric surgical complications requiring interhospital transfers using a modified Victorian Audit of Surgical Mortality framework.

BACKGROUND: Surgical audit is key in upholding the standards of surgical care but may be inadequate in capturing morbidity experienced by patients being transferred across different health systems. The aim of this study was to assess the utility of an objective framework in the evaluation of clinical issues surrounding interhospital transfers (IHTs). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a Victorian state bariatric hospital. Patients transferred with bariatric surgery related complications between 2014 and 2021 were included. Each case was reviewed by two surgeons using an objective framework developed via a modified Delphi-process. Key issues and preventability surrounding each transfer were evaluated. Inter-observer agreement was assessed using weighted Cohen's Kappa coefficient. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients were included. The most common indication for transfer was proximal staple line leak post sleeve gastrectomy (34/73, 46.6%). Length of stay was 38.3 ± 58.8 days. Cost of care amounted to AUD $110 666.18 per patient. Delay in transfer and complication recognition were present in 20% of cases (Cohen's Kappa 0.51;0.61). Human factors and patient related factors were the most common principal underlying causes (Cohen's Kappa 0.59). A third of the complications (n = 25/73, 34.2%), were potentially preventable (Cohen's Kappa 0.58) and more than half (39/73, 53.4%) did not have documented objective feedback to referring clinicians. CONCLUSION: IHTs associated with bariatric surgery complications have significant morbidity and costs. A structured framework in reviewing IHT can consistently identify potentially modifiable factors that improve clinical outcomes, and constructive feedback to the referring clinician should be actively facilitated and documented.

Modified One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Following Sleeve Gastrectomy for Severe Reflux and Delayed Gastric Emptying: A Prospective Trial with Clinical and Physiological Outcome Measures.

BACKGROUND: Gastro-esophageal reflux (GORD) following sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is a central challenge, and precise indications for revisional surgery or the physiology have not been precisely defined. We aimed to determine whether OAGB performed for reflux post-SG (1) accelerates gastric emptying half-time, (2) reduces the frequency and severity of reflux events, and (3) improves reflux symptoms. METHODS: We undertook a prospective trial (ACTRN12616001089426). There were 22 participants who underwent measurement before and after revisional surgery with 29 optimal SG (patients with optimal outcome from their primary surgery) as controls. All participants underwent a protocolized nuclear scintigraphy, 24-h pH monitoring, and gastroscopy and completed objective questionnaires. RESULTS: Trial patients were 90.9% female, age 44.4 years. Conversion from SG to OAGB was at a median of 45.2 ± 19.6 months. Scintigraphy showed an increased rate of gastric emptying post-OAGB 34 (IQR 14) vs 24 (IQR 10.3) min, p-value 0.008, with decreased number of reflux events post-prandially (39 (IQR 13) vs 26 (IQR 7), p-value 0.001). This data correlated with the pH analysis; total acid events substantially reduced post-OAGB 58.5 (IQR 88) vs 12 (IQR 9.4) events, p-value 0.017. Endoscopic findings indicated a reduction in incidence of bile stasis 72.7% vs 40.9% post-OAGB, p-value < 0.00010. Post-OAGB, patients experienced less frequent regurgitation (12 ± 4.1 vs. 5.5 ± 3, p-value 0.012) and reflux (37.1 ± 15.7 vs. 16.8 ± 12.6, p-value 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: We found OAGB is an effective treatment for reflux associated with delayed gastric emptying post-SG. The likely mechanisms is by, an increase in the rate of gastric clearance and reduced reflux events and overall esophageal acid exposure. This suggests that some forms of post-SG reflux are driven by slower emptying of the residual stomach and are amenable to treatment with drainage above the incisura.

Emerging multi-port soft tissue robotic systems: a systematic review of clinical outcomes.

Multiple novel multi-port robotic surgical systems have been introduced into clinical practice. This systematic review aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes of these novel robotic systems to conventional laparoscopic technique and established da Vinci robotic surgical platforms. A literature search of Embase, Medline, Pubmed, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines from 2012 to May 2023. Studies comparing clinical outcomes of novel multi-port robotic surgical systems with laparoscopic or the da Vinci platforms were included. Case series with no comparison groups were excluded. Descriptive statistics were used to report patient and outcome data. A systematic narrative review was provided for each outcome. Twelve studies comprised of 1142 patients were included. A total of 6 novel multi-port robotic systems: Micro Hand S, Senhance, Revo-i MSR-5000, KangDuo, Versius, and Hugo™ RAS were compared against the laparoscopic or the da Vinci robotic platforms. Clinical outcomes of these novel robotic platforms were comparable to the established da Vinci platforms. When compared against conventional laparoscopic approaches, the robotic platforms demonstrated lower volume of blood loss, shorter length of stay but longer operative time. This systematic review highlighted the safe implementation and efficacy of 6 new robotic systems. The clinical outcomes achieved by these new robotic systems are comparable to the established da Vinci robotic system in simple to moderate case complexities. There is emerging evidence that these new robotic systems provide a viable alternative to currently available robotic platforms.

Robotic versus laparoscopic gastric bypass in bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis on perioperative outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted surgery has emerged as a compelling approach to bariatric surgery. However, current literature has not consistently demonstrated superior outcomes to laparoscopic bariatric surgery to justify its higher cost. With its mechanical advantages, the potential gains from the robotic surgical platform are likely to be apparent in more complex cases such as gastric bypass, especially revisional cases. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the literature and evaluate the peri-operative outcomes of patients with obesity undergoing robotic gastric bypass versus laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery. SETTING: Systematic review. METHODS: A literature search of Embase, Medline, Pubmed, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies comparing outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic gastric bypass for obesity were included. RESULTS: Twenty-eight eligible studies comprised a total of 82,155 patients; 9051 robotic bypass surgery (RBS) versus 73,104 laparoscopic bypass surgery (LBS) were included. All included studies compared Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. RBS was noted to have higher reoperation rate within 30 days (4.4% versus 3.4%; odds ratio 1.31 [95% CI, 1.04-1.66]; P = .027; I2 = 43.5%) than LBS. All other endpoints measured (complication rate, anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, surgical site infections, hospital readmission, length of stay, operative time, conversion rate and mortality) did not show any difference between RBS and LBS. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in key outcome measures in robotic versus laparoscopic gastric bypass. RBS was associated with a slightly higher reoperation rate and there was no reduction in overall complication rate with the use of robotic platform.

Surgical management of pancreatic trauma in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic trauma is rare and complex. Non-operative management of pancreatic injuries is often appropriate, and when surgical intervention is required there may be a choice between resectional or more conservative approaches. This is especially true for distal injuries. Operative management of proximal pancreatic injuries is extremely challenging and has less room for conservatism. We sought to characterize the surgical treatment of pancreatic injuries, comparing outcomes for those undergoing formal resection (FR) versus those undergoing more conservative surgical treatment. Our hypothesis was that 'biting the bullet' and resecting is not associated with worse outcomes than less invasive approaches. METHODS: All patients undergoing surgery for pancreatic injuries between June 2001 and June 2019 at the Alfred Hospital in Melbourne were included. Outcome measures including length of stay, return to theatre, total parenteral nutrition use, pancreatic fistula, intra-abdominal infection and mortality were compared between patients undergoing FR and those undergoing non-resectional procedures. RESULTS: Of nearly 60 000 trauma presentations, 194 patients sustained pancreatic injury and 51 underwent surgical intervention. Over 70% were secondary to blunt trauma. There were 27 FR and 22 non-resectional procedures. No major outcome differences were detected. FR was not associated with worse outcomes. CONCLUSION: In distal injuries, where there is doubt regarding parenchymal viability or ductal integrity, FR can safely be performed with non-inferior outcomes to more conservative surgery. Patients with high-grade proximal injuries will usually have multiple other injuries and require resuscitation, temporization and staged reconstruction.

Enterocutaneous fistula: analysis of clinical outcomes from a single Victorian tertiary referral centre.

BACKGROUND: Enterocutaneous fistulas (ECFs) are complex and can result in significant morbidity and mortality. The study aimed to evaluate ECF outcomes in a single tertiary hospital. METHODS: A retrospective study of all patients treated with ECF between the period of January 2009 and June 2014 was conducted. Baseline demographic data assessed included the primary aetiology of the fistula, site of the fistula and output of the fistula. Outcomes measures assessed included re-fistulation rate, return to theatre, wound complications, fistula closure rate and death over the study period. RESULTS: A total of 16 patients with ECF were recorded within the study period. Mean age of the patient cohort was 55.8 ± 11.8 years with a female predominance (11 females, 5 males). Primary aetiology were Crohn's disease (31%), post intra-abdominal surgery not related to bowel neoplasia (50%) and post intra-abdominal surgery related to bowel neoplasia (19%). Majority of the fistulas developed from the small bowel (75%) and had low output (63%). Operative intervention was required in 81% of patients with an overall closure rate of 100%. Median operations required for successful closure was 1.15 operations. Mean duration between index operation and curative operation was 8 ± 12.7 months. CONCLUSION: Appropriate bundle of care (perioperative care, surgical timing and surgical technique) can produce excellent results in patients with ECF.