Smoking History and the Development of Incisional Umbilical Hernia After Laparoscopic and Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Cholecystectomy.

The aim of this study was to analyze umbilical hernia occurrences in patients who underwent laparoscopic or laparoendoscopic single-sight (LESS) cholecystectomy. Patients who underwent cholecystectomy by a single surgeon between 2015 and 2020 were surveyed. Data are presented as median (mean +/- standard deviation). Two hundred and fifty-three patients were sent the survey and 130 (51%) patients responded. The overall age was 57 (31 +/- 18) and the overall BMI was 30 (31 +/- 7). Twelve (9%) patients developed an umbilical hernia. Seventeen patients were active smokers and four (24%) developed an umbilical hernia. One hundred and thirteen patients were inactive smokers and eight (7%) developed an umbilical hernia. There was a statistical significance between umbilical hernia occurrence and smoking history (P < .05). Active smokers have a higher risk of developing an umbilical hernia following a minimally invasive cholecystectomy, regardless of operative approach. Elective cholecystectomy should be reconsidered for current smokers.

High-volume surgeons vs high-volume hospitals: are best outcomes more due to who or where?

BACKGROUND: High-volume hospitals are purported to provide "best" outcomes. We undertook this study to evaluate the outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy when high-volume surgeons relocate to a low-volume hospital (ie, no pancreaticoduodenectomies in >5 years). METHODS: Outcomes after the last 50 pancreaticoduodenectomies undertaken at a high-volume hospital in 2012 (ie, before relocation) were compared with the outcomes after the first 50 pancreaticoduodenectomies undertaken at a low-volume hospital (ie, after relocation) in 2012 to 2013. RESULTS: Patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomies at a high-volume vs a low-volume hospital were not different by age or sex. Patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy at the low-volume hospital had shorter operations with less blood loss, spent less time in the intensive care unit, and had shorter length of stay (P < .05 for each); 30-day mortality and 30-day readmission rates were not different. CONCLUSIONS: The salutary benefits of undertaking pancreaticoduodenectomy at a high-volume hospital are transferred to a low-volume hospital when high-volume surgeons relocate. The "best" results follow high-volume surgeons.

The Effect of Product Safety Courses on the Adoption and Outcomes of LESS Surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: As technology in surgery evolves, the medical instrument industry is inevitability involved in promoting the use and appropriate (ie, effective and safe) application of its products. This study was undertaken to evaluate industry-supported product safety courses in laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery, by using the metrics of surgeons' adoption of the technique, safety of the procedure, and surgeons' perception of the surgery. METHODS: LESS surgery courses that involved didactic lectures, operative videos, operation observation, collaborative learning, and simulation, were attended by 226 surgeons. With Florida Hospital Tampa Institutional Review Board approval, the surgeons were queried before and immediately after the course, to assess their attitudes toward LESS surgery. Then, well after the course, the surgeons were contacted, repeatedly if necessary, to complete questionnaires. RESULTS: Before the course, 82% of the surgeons undertook more than 10 laparoscopic operations per month. Immediately after the course, 86% were confident that they were prepared to perform LESS surgery. Months after the course, 77% of the respondents had adopted LESS surgery, primarily cholecystectomy; 59% had added 1 or more trocars in 0-20% of their procedures; and 73% held the opinion that operating room observation was the most helpful learning experience. Complications with LESS surgery were noted 12% of the time. Advantages of the technique were better cosmesis (58%) and patient satisfaction (38%). Disadvantages included risk of complications (37%) and higher technical demand (25%). Seventy-eight percent viewed LESS surgery as an advancement in surgical technique. CONCLUSION: In multifaceted product safety courses, operating room observation is thought to provide the most helpful instruction for those wanting to undertake LESS surgery. The procedure has been safely adopted by surgeons who frequently perform laparoscopies. The tradeoff is in performing a more difficult technique to obtain better cosmesis for the patient. We must continue to conduct critical evaluations of product safety courses for the introduction of new technology in surgery.

Outcomes after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt: a "bridge" to nowhere.

BACKGROUND: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt (TIPS) has become the modality of choice for complicated portal decompression. This study was undertaken to determine outcomes after TIPS and the usefulness of TIPS as a "bridge" to transplantation. METHODS: Patients undergoing TIPS from 2001 to 2010 at a teaching hospital with a transplant program were studied. The median data are presented. RESULTS: TIPS was undertaken in 256 patients. TIPS decreased portal vein-inferior vena cava (IVC) gradients from 17 to 5 mm Hg (P < .001). Reinterventions were undertaken in 54 patients (21%). Survival after TIPS was 26 months; liver transplantation was undertaken in 35 (14%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: TIPS effectively decompresses portal hypertension but leads to frequent reinterventions and short survival. After TIPS, liver transplantation is uncommonly undertaken. TIPS is a "bridge" to transplantation that is seldom "crossed," and TIPS continues to be plagued by frequent reinterventions. Outcomes after TIPS and the infrequency of transplantation after TIPS make it difficult to recommend on merit.

Immunotherapy for gastrointestinal malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal (GI) cancers are the most common human tumors encountered worldwide. The majority of GI cancers are unresectable at the time of diagnosis, and in the subset of patients undergoing resection, few are cured. There is only a modest improvement in survival with the addition of modalities such as chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Due to an increasing global cancer burden, it is imperative to integrate alternative strategies to improve outcomes. It is well known that cancers possess diverse strategies to evade immune detection and destruction. This has led to the incorporation of various immunotherapeutic strategies, which enable reprogramming of the immune system to allow effective recognition and killing of GI tumors. METHODS: A review was conducted of the results of published clinical trials employing immunotherapy for esophageal, gastroesophageal, gastric, hepatocellular, pancreatic, and colorectal cancers. RESULTS: Monoclonal antibody therapy has come to the forefront in the past decade for the treatment of colorectal cancer. Immunotherapeutic successes in solid cancers such as melanoma and prostate cancer have led to the active investigation of immunotherapy for GI malignancies, with some promising results. CONCLUSIONS: To date, monoclonal antibody therapy is the only immunotherapy approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for GI cancers. Initial trials validating new immunotherapeutic approaches, including vaccination-based and adoptive cell therapy strategies, for GI malignancies have demonstrated safety and the induction of antitumor immune responses. Therefore, immunotherapy is at the forefront of neoadjuvant as well as adjuvant therapies for the treatment and eradication of GI malignancies.