Uncertainties and opportunities in delivering environmentally sustainable surgery: the surgeons' view.

Surgery is a carbon-heavy activity and creates a high volume of waste. Surgical teams around the world want to deliver more environmentally sustainable surgery but are unsure what to do and how to create change. There are many interventions available, but resources and time are limited. Capital investment into healthcare and engagement of senior management are challenging. However, frontline teams can change behaviours and drive wider change. Patients have a voice here too, as they would like to ensure their surgery does not harm their local community but are concerned about the effects on them when changes are made. Environmentally sustainable surgery is at the start of its journey. Surgeons need to rapidly upskill their generic knowledge base, identify which measures they can implement locally and take part in national research programmes. Surgical teams in the NHS have the chance to create a world-leading programme that can bring change to hospitals around the world. This article provides an overview of how surgeons see the surgical team being involved in environmentally sustainable surgery.

Resource requirements for reintroducing elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: modelling study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 response required the cancellation of all but the most urgent surgical procedures. The number of cancelled surgical procedures owing to Covid-19, and the reintroduction of surgical acivirt, was modelled. METHODS: This was a modelling study using Hospital Episode Statistics data (2014-2019). Surgical procedures were grouped into four urgency classes. Expected numbers of surgical procedures performed between 1 March 2020 and 28 February 2021 were modelled. Procedure deficit was estimated using conservative assumptions and the gradual reintroduction of elective surgery from the 1 June 2020. Costs were calculated using NHS reference costs and are reported as millions or billions of euros. Estimates are reported with 95 per cent confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 4 547 534 (95 per cent c.i. 3 318 195 to 6 250 771) patients with a pooled mean age of 53.5 years were expected to undergo surgery between 1 March 2020 and 28 February 2021. By 31 May 2020, 749 247 (513 564 to 1 077 448) surgical procedures had been cancelled. Assuming that elective surgery is reintroduced gradually, 2 328 193 (1 483 834 - 3 450 043) patients will be awaiting surgery by 28 February 2021. The cost of delayed procedures is €5.3 (3.1 to 8.0) billion. Safe delivery of surgery during the pandemic will require substantial extra resources costing €526.8 (449.3 to 633.9) million. CONCLUSION: As a consequence of the Covid-19 pandemic, provision of elective surgery will be delayed and associated with increased healthcare costs.

Assessing barriers to quality trauma care in low and middle-income countries: A Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Most deaths from injury occur in Low and Middle Income Countries (LMICs) with one third potentially avoidable with better health system access. This study aimed to establish consensus on the most important barriers, within a Three Delays framework, to accessing injury care in LMICs that should be considered when evaluating a health system. METHODS: A three round electronic Delphi study was conducted with experts in LMIC health systems or injury care. In round one, participants proposed important barriers. These were synthesized into a three delays framework. In round 2 participants scored four components for each barrier. Components measured whether barriers were feasible to assess, likely to delay care for a significant proportion of injured persons, likely to cause avoidable death or disability, and potentially readily changed to improve care. In round 3 participants re-scored each barrier following review of feedback from round 2. Consensus was defined for each component as ≥70% agreement or disagreement. RESULTS: There were 37 eligible responses in round 1, 30 in round 2, and 27 in round 3, with 21 countries represented in all rounds. Of the twenty conceptual barriers identified, consensus was reached on all four components for 11 barriers. This included 2 barriers to seeking care, 5 barriers to reaching care and 4 barriers to receiving care. The ability to modify a barrier most frequently failed to achieve consensus. CONCLUSION: 11 barriers were agreed to be feasible to assess, delay care for many, cause avoidable death or disability, and be readily modifiable. We recommend these barriers are considered in assessments of LMIC trauma systems.

Study protocol for a multicenter prospective cohort study on esophagogastric anastomoses and anastomotic leak (the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit/OGAA).

Esophagectomy is a mainstay in curative treatment for esophageal cancer; however, the reported techniques and outcomes can vary greatly. Thirty-day mortality of patients with an intact anastomosis is 2-3% as compared to 17-35% in patients who have an anastomotic leak. The subsequent management of leaks postesophagectomy has great global variability with little consensus on a gold standard of practice. The aim of this multicentre prospective audit is to analyze current techniques of esophagogastric anastomosis to determine the effect on the anastomotic leak rate. Leak rates and leak management will be assessed to determine their impact on patient outcomes. A 12-month international multicentre prospective audit started in April 2018 and is coordinated by a team from the West Midlands Research Collaborative. This will include patients undergoing esophagectomy over 9 months and encompassing a 90-day follow-up period. A pilot data collection period occurred at four UK centers in 2017 to trial the data collection form. The audit standards will include anastomotic leak and the conduit necrosis rate should be less than 13% and major postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo Grade III or more) should be less than 35%. The 30-day mortality rate should be less than 5% and the 90-day mortality rate should be less than 8%. This will be a trainee-led international audit of esophagectomy practice. Key support will be given by consultant colleagues and anesthetists. Individualized unit data will be distributed to the respective contributing sites. An overall anonymized report will be made available to contributing units. Results of the audit will be published in peer-reviewed journals with all collaborators fully acknowledged. The key information and results from the audit will be disseminated at relevant scientific meetings.

Mesh versus suture repair of primary inguinal hernia in Ghana.

Background: Most patients in Ghana undergo suture repair for primary inguinal hernia. Although there is strong evidence from high-income country settings to indicate superiority of mesh repair for inguinal hernia, the evidence to support the safety and effectiveness of mesh repair in the Ghanaian setting is limited. This study aimed to compare hernia recurrence rates following suture versus mesh repair in Ghana. Methods: Men aged 18 years or over presenting with symptomatic, reducible inguinal hernias were included. Over the first 6 months all consecutive patients were enrolled prospectively and underwent a standardized suture repair; an equal number of patients were subsequently enrolled to undergo mesh repair. The primary outcome was hernia recurrence within 3 years of the index operation. Multivariable analysis was adjusted for age and right or left side. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals are reported. Results: A total of 116 sutured and 116 mesh inguinal hernia repairs were performed. Three years after surgery, follow-up data were available for 206 of the 232 patients (88·8 per cent). Recurrence occurred significantly more frequently in the suture repair group (23 of 103, 22·3 per cent) than in the mesh group (7 of 103, 6·8 per cent) (P = 0·002). In multivariable analysis, suture repair was independently associated with an increased risk of recurrence (OR 4·51, 95 per cent c.i. 1·76 to 11·52; P = 0·002). Conclusion: In Ghana, mesh inguinal hernia repair was associated with reduced 3-year recurrence compared with sutured repair. Controlled dissemination across Ghana should now be assessed.

Feasibility study for a randomized clinical trial of bupivacaine, lidocaine with adrenaline, or placebo wound infiltration to reduce postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Background: Short-term pain relief can be achieved by local anaesthetic infiltration of port sites at the end of laparoscopic surgery. This study aimed to assess feasibility of performing an RCT to evaluate short-term postoperative analgesia after laparoscopic surgery in Nigeria using two local anaesthetics for port-site infiltration versus saline placebo. Methods: This was a placebo-controlled, patient- and outcome assessor-blinded, external feasibility RCT. Patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic ultrasound-proven gallstones were randomized into three groups: lidocaine with adrenaline (epinephrine), bupivacaine or saline control. The feasibility of recruitment, compliance with randomized treatment allocation, and completion of pain and nausea outcome measures were evaluated. Pain was assessed at 2, 6, 12 and 24 h after surgery using a 0-10-point numerical rating scale (NRS) and a four-point verbal rating scale. Nausea was assessed using NRS at the same time points. Clinical outcomes were assessed only in patients who received the correct randomized treatment allocation. Results: Of 79 patients screened for eligibility, 69 were consented and randomized (23 per group). Overall, compliance with randomized treatment allocation was achieved in 64 patients (93 per cent). All pain and nausea assessments were completed in these 64 patients. On the NRS, most patients had moderate to severe pain at 2 h (39 of 64, 61 per cent), which gradually reduced. Only six patients (9 per cent) had moderate to severe pain at 24 h. Conclusion: Recruitment, compliance with the randomized allocation, and completion of pain outcome measures were satisfactory. This study demonstrates the feasibility of conducting a surgical RCT in a resource-limited setting. Registration number: ISRCTN 17667918 (https://www.isrctn.com).

Patient and healthcare professional perceptions of colostomy-related problems and their impact on quality of life following rectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: The perception of colostomy-related problems and their impact on health-related quality of life (QoL) may differ between patients and healthcare professionals. The aim of this study was to investigate this using the Colostomy Impact Score (CIS) tool. METHODS: Healthcare professionals including consultant colorectal surgeons, stoma nurses, ward nurses, trainees and medical students were recruited. An online survey was designed. From the 17 items used to develop the CIS, participants chose the seven factors they thought to confer the strongest negative impact on the QoL of patients with a colostomy. They were then asked to rank the 12 responses made by patients to the final seven factors contained in the CIS. Results were compared with the original patient rankings at the time of development of the CIS. RESULTS: A total of 156 healthcare professionals (50·4 per cent of the pooled professionals) from 17 countries completed the survey. Of the original seven items in the CIS, six were above the threshold for random selection. Ranking the responses, a poor match between participants and the original score was detected for 49·7 per cent of the professionals. The most under-rated item originally present in the CIS was stool consistency, reported by 47 of the 156 professionals (30·1 per cent), whereas frequency of changing the stoma bag was the item not included in the CIS that was chosen most often by professionals (124, 79·5 per cent). Significant differences were not observed between different groups of professionals. CONCLUSION: The perspective of colostomy-related problems differs between patients with a colostomy and healthcare professionals.

Academic requirements for Certificate of Completion of Training in surgical training: Consensus recommendations from the Association of Surgeons in Training/National Research Collaborative Consensus Group.

BACKGROUND: Surgical trainees are expected to demonstrate academic achievement in order to obtain their certificate of completion of training (CCT). These standards are set by the Joint Committee on Surgical Training (JCST) and specialty advisory committees (SAC). The standards are not equivalent across all surgical specialties and recognise different achievements as evidence. They do not recognise changes in models of research and focus on outcomes rather than process. The Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) and National Research Collaborative (NRC) set out to develop progressive, consistent and flexible evidence set for academic requirements at CCT. METHODS: A modified-Delphi approach was used. An expert group consisting of representatives from the ASiT and the NRC undertook iterative review of a document proposing changes to requirements. This was circulated amongst wider stakeholders. After ten iterations, an open meeting was held to discuss these proposals. Voting on statements was performed using a 5-point Likert Scale. Each statement was voted on twice, with ≥80% of votes in agreement meaning the statement was approved. The results of this vote were used to propose core and optional academic requirements for CCT. RESULTS: Online discussion concluded after ten rounds. At the consensus meeting, statements were voted on by 25 delegates from across surgical specialties and training-grades. The group strongly favoured acquisition of 'Good Clinical Practice' training and research methodology training as CCT requirements. The group agreed that higher degrees, publications in any author position (including collaborative authorship), recruiting patients to a study or multicentre audit and presentation at a national or international meeting could be used as evidence for the purpose of CCT. The group agreed on two essential 'core' requirements (GCP and methodology training) and two of a menu of four 'additional' requirements (publication with any authorship position, presentation, recruitment of patients to a multicentre study and completion of a higher degree), which should be completed in order to attain CCT. CONCLUSION: This approach has engaged stakeholders to produce a progressive set of academic requirements for CCT, which are applicable across surgical specialties. Flexibility in requirements whilst retaining a high standard of evidence is desirable.

Defining our destiny: trainee working group consensus statement on the future of emergency surgery training in the United Kingdom.

The United Kingdom National Health Service treats both elective and emergency patients and seeks to provide high quality care, free at the point of delivery. Equal numbers of emergency and elective general surgical procedures are performed, yet surgical training prioritisation and organisation of NHS institutions is predicated upon elective care. The increasing ratio of emergency general surgery consultant posts compared to traditional sub-specialities has yet to be addressed. How should the capability gap be bridged to equip motivated, skilled surgeons of the future to deliver a high standard of emergency surgical care? The aim was to address both training requirements for the acquisition of necessary emergency general surgery skills, and the formation of job plans for trainee and consultant posts to meet the current and future requirements of the NHS. Twenty nine trainees and a consultant emergency general surgeon convened as a Working Group at The Association of Surgeons in Training Conference, 2015, to generate a united consensus statement to the training requirement and delivery of emergency general surgery provision by future general surgeons. Unscheduled general surgical care provision, emergency general surgery, trauma competence, training to meet NHS requirements, consultant job planning and future training challenges arose as key themes. Recommendations have been made from these themes in light of published evidence. Careful workforce planning, education, training and fellowship opportunities will provide well-trained enthusiastic individuals to meet public and societal need.

Outcomes of isolated limb perfusion in the treatment of extremity soft tissue sarcoma: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Isolated limb perfusion (ILP) may provide a limb salvage option for locally advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) not amenable to local resection. METHODS: A systematic review was performed for studies reporting outcome of ILP for locally advanced STS performed after 1980 in patients aged ≥ 12 years old. The main endpoints were tumour response and limb salvage rates. Complication and recurrence rates were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Eighteen studies were included, providing outcomes for 1030 patients. Tumour necrosis factor-alpha with melphalan was the commonest chemotherapy regime. When reported, 22% of cases achieved a complete tumour response (216/964, 15 studies) with an overall response rate of 72% (660/911, 15 studies). At median follow-up times ranging between 11 and 125 months, the limb salvage rate was 81% in patients who otherwise would have been subjected to amputation. However, 27% of patients suffered local recurrence and 40% suffered distant failure. ILP was associated with severe locoregional reactions in 4% (22/603) of patients. Amputation due to complications within 30 days was necessary in 1.2% of cases (7/586, nine studies). There was insufficient evidence to determine the effect of ILP on survival. CONCLUSION: ILP induces a high tumour response rate, leads to a high limb salvage rate but is associated with a high recurrence rate. It provides a limb salvage alternative to amputation when local control is necessary.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes following emergency surgery for Clostridium difficile colitis.

BACKGROUND: Only a small proportion of patients with severe Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) undergo emergency surgery, the timing and nature of which is unclear. The aim of this study was to describe the operations performed and to identify factors predictive of death following emergency surgery for CDI. METHODS: A systematic review of published literature was performed for studies comparing survivors and non-survivors of emergency surgery for CDI. Meta-analysis was carried out for 30-day and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Overall 31 studies were included, which presented data on a total of 1433 patients undergoing emergency surgery for CDI. Some 1·1 per cent of all patients with CDI and 29·9 per cent with severe CDI underwent emergency surgery, although rates varied between studies (0·2-7·6 and 2·2-86 per cent respectively). The most commonly performed operation was total colectomy with end ileostomy (89·0 per cent, 1247 of 1401 detailed surgical procedures). When total colectomy with end ileostomy was not performed, reoperation to resect further bowel was needed in 15·9 per cent (20 of 126). Where described, the 30-day mortality rate was 41·3 per cent (160 of 387). Meta-analysis of high-quality studies revealed that the strongest predictors of postoperative death were those relating to preoperative physiological status: preoperative intubation, acute renal failure, multiple organ failure and shock requiring vasopressors. CONCLUSION: This systematic review supports total colectomy with end ileostomy as the primary surgical treatment for patients with severe CDI; other surgical procedures are associated with high rates of reoperation and mortality. Less extensive surgery may have a role in selected patients with earlier-stage disease.