Can open cholecystectomy be taught by cadaveric simulation?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the current standard of treatment for surgical gallbladder removal as it has an overall improved post-operative recovery compared to Open Cholecystectomy (OC). This has resulted in the loss of exposure to surgical trainees and the associated technical skills and decision-making required to convert to OC. The aim of this study is to provide construct validity to the proposition that cadaveric simulation can be used successfully to teach and learn open cholecystectomy. METHODS: Participants (n = 25) were surveyed on a 9-point questionnaire using a 5-point Likert scale to determine their opinion on cadaveric simulation as a tool for teaching OC. RESULTS: Overall respondents deemed the tool as highly translatable. There was no significant correlation in the responses between candidates versus tutors (P = 0.05, r = 0.51). CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of the survey revealed that participants agreed that cadaveric simulation is a positive learning tool to aid in OC.

Impact of Robotic Surgery on Residency Training for Herniorrhaphy and Cholecystectomy.

Robotic surgery has increased for common general surgery procedures. This study evaluates how robotic use affects the case distributions of herniorrhaphy and cholecystectomy for general surgery residents according to postgraduate year (PGY). We reviewed Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) biliary or hernia cases logged by surgical residents in the academic year 2017-2018. Operative reports were reviewed to compare approaches (robotic, laparoscopic, and open) by resident role and PGY level. Open cholecystectomies were excluded. Overall, 470 hernia and 657 cholecystectomy cases were logged. Hernia repairs were performed robotically in 15.9%, laparoscopically in 9.5%, and open in 74.7%. Cholecystectomies were performed robotically in 16.4% and laparoscopically in 83.6%. Residents were teaching assistants in 1.8% of hernia repairs and 1.5% of cholecystectomies. Distribution of cases by technique and PGY level was significantly different for both procedures, with chief residents performing the majority of robotic cholecystectomies (52.6%, P < .0001) and hernia repairs (59.7%, P < .0001). Migration of robotic cases to senior resident level and low percentage of teaching assistant roles held by residents suggest exposure to common operations may be delayed during general surgery residency training. Introduction of new technology in surgical training should be carefully reviewed and may benefit from a structured curriculum.

The impact of guided instrument insertion during laparoscopy: a randomized study with novices in an optical box trainer.

BACKGROUND: During laparoscopic operations, the trocars are often out of the viewing field of the laparoscope. Blind insertion of laparoscopic instruments is potentially dangerous especially when they are pointed or hot. A guidance of the instrument to the target point has the potential to improve the safety of instrument insertion. METHODS: In this study, the effect of a mechanical and an optical tool for guided instrument insertion into the abdominal cave was evaluated. The controlled prospective randomized study measured safety and efficiency of instrument insertion by 60 novices in an inanimate standardized box trainer. A post-test questionnaire based on the NASA Task Load Index prompted for the subjective impressions of the subjects. RESULTS: Instrument insertion with optical guidance showed a shorter (p = 0.002) insertion time (median 87.5 s for nine insertions) compared with blind insertion (median 112.0 s for nine insertions). The error number with optical guidance (median 0.5) was lower (p = 0.064) compared with blind insertion (median 1.0). The mechanical guidance showed a shorter (p = 0.001) insertion time (median 89.0 s for nine insertions) and less (p = 0.044) touch errors (median 0) compared with blind insertion. The results of the two guidance tools (mechanical vs. optical guidance) showed no significant difference. In the questionnaire, 89% of the novices subjectively judged the mechanical guidance tool better than blind insertion. The assessments of optical compared to mechanical guidance turned out quite similar. CONCLUSIONS: In the experimental setup, instrument insertion with a guidance tool performed faster and safer compared with blind insertion. The subjective assessments confirmed the benefit of instrument guidance.

Resident involvement in minimally-invasive vs. open procedures.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of resident involvement on surgical outcomes in laparoscopic compared to open procedures. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2007-2012 was queried for open and laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (VHR), inguinal hernia repair (IHR), splenectomy, colectomy, or cholecystectomy (CCY). Multivariable regression analyses were performed to assess the impact of resident involvement on surgical outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 88,337 VHR, 20,586 IHR, 59,254 colectomies, 3301 splenectomies, and 95,900 CCY were identified. Resident involvement was predictive for major complication during open VHR (AOR, 1.29; p < 0.001), but not during any other procedure. Resident participation significantly prolonged operative time for open, as well as laparoscopic VHR, IHR, colectomy, splenectomy, and CCY (all p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that resident participation has a similar impact on surgical outcomes during laparoscopic and open surgery, and is generally safe.

A robotic flexible endoscope with shared autonomy: a study of mockup cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Endoscope is the eye of surgeon in minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Prevailing handheld endoscopes are manually steered, which can cause endoscope-instrument fencing. Robotic endoscopes can reduce the fatigue but could not reduce collisions. Handheld endoscopes with a flexible bending tip can reduce the shaft pivoting and collisions. However, its steering is challenging. In this paper, we present a robotic flexible endoscope with auto-tracking function and compare it with the conventional rigid endoscopes. METHODS: A robotic flexible endoscope (RFE) with shared autonomy is developed. The RFE could either track the instruments automatically or be controlled by a foot pedal. A mockup cholecystectomy was designed to evaluate the performance. Five surgeons were invited to perform the mockup cholecystectomy in an abdominal cavity phantom with a manual rigid endoscope (MRE), a robotic rigid endoscope (RRE), and the RFE. Space occupation, time consumption, and questionnaires based on the NASA task load index were adopted to evaluate the performances and compare the three endoscope systems. An ex vivo experiment was conducted to demonstrate the feasibility of using the RFE in a biological tissue environment. RESULTS: All surgeons completed the mockup cholecystectomy with the RFE independently. Failure occurred in the cases involving the RRE and the MRE. Inside the body cavity, the space occupied when using the RFE is 17.28% and 23.95% (p < 0.05) of that when using the MRE and the RRE, respectively. Outside the body cavity, the space occupied when using the RFE is 14.60% and 15.53% (p < 0.05) of that by using MRE and RRE. Time consumed in the operations with MRE, RRE, and RFE are 28.3 s, 93.2 s and 34.8 s, respectively. Questionnaires reveal that the performance of the RFE is the best among the three endoscope systems. CONCLUSIONS: The RFE provides a wider field of view (FOV) and occupies less space than rigid endoscopes.

Single-site robotic cholecystectomy and robotics training: should we start in the junior years?

BACKGROUND: It has become increasingly important to expose surgical residents to robotic surgery as its applications continue to expand. Single-site robotic cholecystectomy (SSRC) is an excellent introductory case to robotics. Resident involvement in SSRC is known to be feasible. Here, we sought to determine whether it is safe to introduce SSRC to junior residents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 98 SSRC cases were performed by general surgery residents between August 2015 and August 2016. Cases were divided into groups based on resident level: second- and third-years (juniors) versus fourth- and fifth-years (seniors). Patient age, gender, race, body mass index, and comorbidities were recorded. The number of prior laparoscopic cholecystectomies completed by participating residents was noted. Outcomes including operative time, console time, rate of conversion to open cholecystectomy, and complication rate were compared between groups. RESULTS: Juniors performed 54 SSRC cases, whereas seniors performed 44. There were no significant differences in patient age, gender, race, body mass index, or comorbidities between the two groups. Juniors had less experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. There was no significant difference in mean operative time (92.7 min versus 98.0 min, P = 0.254), console time (48.7 min versus 50.8 min, P = 0.639), or complication rate (3.7% versus 2.3%, P = 0.68) between juniors and seniors. CONCLUSIONS: SSRC is an excellent way to introduce general surgery residents to robotics. This study shows that with attending supervision, SSRC is feasible and safe for both junior and senior residents with very low complication rates and no adverse effect on operative time.

Building a Single-Site Robotic Cholecystectomy Program in a Public Teaching Hospital: Is It Safe for Patients and Feasible for Residents to Participate?

Single-site robotic cholecystectomy (SSRC) accounts for most of the robotic surgery cases performed by general surgeons at our institution since acquiring the da Vinci Si Surgical SystemTM (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA) in 2014. We sought to determine whether a SSRC program is safe to start in a public teaching hospital and to determine whether resident participation in this procedure is feasible. Data on age, gender, race, BMI, total operative time, length of stay, comorbidities, and conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery were examined for elective SSRC and laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LCs) performed by two faculty surgeons between February 2015 and August 2015. Thirty-eight patients underwent elective SSRC, whereas 27 patients underwent LC. Residents participated as operating surgeons for some portion of the case in 15 SSRC cases and in all LC cases. There were no significant differences in operative time, length of stay, or 30-day readmission rates, regardless of resident involvement. Patients in the SSRC group had a significantly lower BMI (25.8 vs 33.7, P = 0.008). This study suggests that resident participation does not increase complications or total operative time and that SSRC is a safe procedure to start in a public teaching hospital after proper faculty and resident training.

Open cholecystectomy: Exposure and confidence of surgical trainees and new fellows.

BACKGROUND: The laparoscopic approach to cholecystectomy has overtaken open procedures in terms of frequency, despite open procedures playing an important role in certain clinical situations. This study explored exposure and confidence of Australasian surgical trainees and new fellows in performing an open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online survey was disseminated via the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons to senior general surgery trainees (years 3-5 of surgical training) and new fellows (fellowship within the previous 5 years). The survey included questions regarding level of experience and confidence in performing an open cholecystectomy and converting from a laparoscopic to an open approach. RESULTS: A total of 135 participants responded; 58 (43%) were surgical trainees, 58 (43%) were fellows and 19 (14%) did not specify their level of training. Respondents who were involved in more than 20 open cholecystectomy procedures as an assistant or independent operator compared with those less exposed were more likely to feel confident to independently perform an elective open cholecystectomy (87.8% vs. 57.3%, P = 0.001), independently convert from a laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy (87.8% vs. 58.7%, P = 0.001) and independently perform an open cholecystectomy as a surgical consultant based on their level of exposure as a trainee (73.2% vs. 45.3%, P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: This study suggests the need to ensure surgical trainees are exposed to sufficient open cholecystectomies to enable confidence and skill with performing these procedures when indicated. Greater recognition of the need for exposure during training, including meaningful simulation, may assist.

Adoption of robotics in a general surgery residency program: at what cost?

BACKGROUND: Robotic technology is increasingly being utilized by general surgeons. However, the impact of introducing robotics to surgical residency has not been examined. This study aims to assess the financial costs and training impact of introducing robotics at an academic general surgery residency program. METHODS: All patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair (VHR), and inguinal hernia repair (IHR) at our institution from 2011-2015 were identified. The effect of robotic surgery on laparoscopic case volume was assessed with linear regression analysis. Resident participation, operative time, hospital costs, and patient charges were also evaluated. RESULTS: We identified 2260 laparoscopic and 139 robotic operations. As the volume of robotic cases increased, the number of laparoscopic cases steadily decreased. Residents participated in all laparoscopic cases and 70% of robotic cases but operated from the robot console in only 21% of cases. Mean operative time was increased for robotic cholecystectomy (+22%), IHR (+55%), and VHR (+61%). Financial analysis revealed higher median hospital costs per case for robotic cholecystectomy (+$411), IHR (+$887), and VHR (+$1124) as well as substantial associated fixed costs. CONCLUSIONS: Introduction of robotic surgery had considerable negative impact on laparoscopic case volume and significantly decreased resident participation. Increased operative time and hospital costs are substantial. An institution must be cognizant of these effects when considering implementing robotics in departments with a general surgery residency program.

["I will do laparoscopy somewhere else" : Total, highly immersive virtual reality without side effects?] / "Ich laparoskopier' dann woanders weiter" : Totale, hochimmersive virtuelle Realität ohne Nebenwirkungen?

BACKGROUND: For virtual reality laparosopic simulation we developed a new, highly immersive simulation mode. The goal of the current pilot study was to investigate if kinetosis or other negative vegetative side effects can be caused by a total virtual training set-up (TVRL). METHODS: In this study 20 participants with varying degrees of expertise in laparoscopy performed 3 tasks (i.e. ring exchange, fine dissection and cholecystectomy) in regular (VRL) and immersive mode (TVRL) with a head-mounted display (HMD) on a laparoscopic simulator. Aside from performance scores, the heart rate was recorded and the occurrence of vertigo was investigated. RESULTS: Surgical performance was independent of the VR mode (VRL or TVRL). Participants' heart rate was higher in TVRL without reaching statistical significance. Kinetosis occurred in two participants (10%) with a history of motion sickness. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic training can take place in a total virtual environment with limited nagative vegetative side effects. Special attention should be paid to participants with a history of motion sickness. The development of TVRL enables new perspectives for surgical training.

Validation of NOViSE.

The goal of this study was to establish face, content, and construct validity of NOViSE-the first force-feedback enabled virtual reality (VR) simulator for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES). Fourteen surgeons and surgical trainees performed 3 simulated hybrid transgastric cholecystectomies using a flexible endoscope on NOViSE. Four of them were classified as "NOTES experts" who had independently performed 10 or more simulated or human NOTES procedures. Seven participants were classified as "Novices" and 3 as "Gastroenterologists" with no or minimal NOTES experience. A standardized 5-point Likert-type scale questionnaire was administered to assess the face and content validity. NOViSE showed good overall face and content validity. In 14 out of 15 statements pertaining to face validity (graphical appearance, endoscope and tissue behavior, overall realism), ≥50% of responses were "agree" or "strongly agree." In terms of content validity, 85.7% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that NOViSE is a useful training tool for NOTES and 71.4% that they would recommend it to others. Construct validity was established by comparing a number of performance metrics such as task completion times, path lengths, applied forces, and so on. NOViSE demonstrated early signs of construct validity. Experts were faster and used a shorter endoscopic path length than novices in all but one task. The results indicate that NOViSE authentically recreates a transgastric hybrid cholecystectomy and sets promising foundations for the further development of a VR training curriculum for NOTES without compromising patient safety or requiring expensive animal facilities.

Objective assessment of trainee operative experience in a tertiary hepatobiliary unit.

INTRODUCTION: Indicative numbers for completion of training (CCT) in the UK requires 35 upper Gastrointestinal/Hepatobiliary resections and 110 (50 non HPB trainees) cholecystectomies. We aim to identify whether the training experience in our centre meets the CCT requirements for hepatobiliary surgery and compare training opportunities to those in international fellowships. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our hospital's operating theatre database for all patients undergoing a liver or gallbladder resection between January 2008 and July 2015 using corresponding procedural codes and consultant name. The cohort was categorized based on case and primary operating surgeon. The training grade of the surgeon was split into junior registrar (ST3/5), senior registrar (ST6/8) and senior fellow (post-CCT). RESULTS: Over a 7.5 year period we performed 2301 hepatobiliary procedures. The senior fellows and senior registrars performed a median of 42 liver resections (range 15-94) and 77 (range 35-110) cholecystectomies as the primary operator in any given 12 month period. The academic output for the unit was 104 over this period, with a median publication rate of 1.34 papers/trainee in any given 12 months. 15/16 senior fellow/senior registrars went on to secure substantive hepatobiliary consultant posts. CONCLUSIONS: Our centre delivers in excess of the required operative volume and clinical competencies for CCT in Hepatobiliary surgery in a 12 month period and exposure of trainees to operative experience is commensurate to the best performing international fellowships.

Face and content validation of a Virtual Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery Trainer (VTEST™).

BACKGROUND: Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is an emerging surgical paradigm, where peritoneal access is achieved through one of the natural orifices of the body. It is being reported as a safe and feasible surgical technique with significantly reduced external scarring. Virtual Translumenal Endoscopic Surgical Trainer (VTEST™) is the first virtual reality simulator for the NOTES. The VTEST™ simulator was developed to train surgeons in the hybrid transvaginal NOTES cholecystectomy procedure. The initial version of the VTEST™ simulator underwent face validation at the 2013 Natural Orifice Surgery Consortium for Assessment and Research (NOSCAR) summit. Several areas of improvement were identified as a result, and the corresponding modifications were implemented in the simulator. This manuscript outlines the results of the subsequent evaluation study, performed in order to assess the face and content validity of the latest VTEST™ simulator. METHODS: Twelve subjects participated in an institutional review board-approved study that took place at the 2014 NOSCAR summit. Six of the 12 subjects, who are experts with NOTES experience, were used for face and content validation. The subjects performed the hybrid transvaginal NOTES cholecystectomy procedure on VTEST™ that included identifying the Calot's triangle, clipping and cutting the cystic duct/artery, and detaching the gallbladder. The subjects then answered five-point Likert scale feedback questionnaires for face and content validity. RESULTS: Overall, subjects rated 12/15 questions as 3.0 or greater (60 %), for face validity questions regarding the realism of the anatomical features, interface, and the tasks. Subjects also highly rated the usefulness of the simulator in learning the fundamental NOTES technical skills (3.50 ± 0.84). Content validity results indicate a high level of usefulness of the VTEST™ for training prior to operating room experience (4.17 ± 0.75).

Who Will Be Able to Perform Open Biliary Surgery in 2025?

BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the gold standard, some patients still require an open cholecystectomy (OC). This study evaluates the mean number of OCs performed by each graduating general surgery resident during each of 3 decades. STUDY DESIGN: Data were obtained from all patients undergoing a cholecystectomy during 3 decades: prelaparoscopic era (1981 to 1990), first decade of LC (1991 to 2001), and recent decade of LC (2004 to 2013). Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed and analyzed by chi-square or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Compared with the prelaparoscopic decade, the number of patients undergoing an OC decreased considerably, by 67%, during the first decade of LC, and by 92% during the most recent decade at the 2 core teaching hospitals. Mean number of OCs performed per graduating chief general surgery resident decreased significantly for both laparoscopic decades compared with the prelaparoscopic decade (70.4, 22.4, and 3.6, respectively). In the last decade at the core institutions, 683 (8.8%) patients also underwent an intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) and 36 (0.5%) underwent common bile duct exploration (CBDE). When biliary cases done at affiliated institutions during the last decade were included, the mean number of OCs (from 3.6 to 10.2), IOCs (from 683 to 2,098), and CBDEs (from 36 to 116) all increased (p < 0.001) per graduating chief general surgery resident. CONCLUSIONS: There has been a considerable decline in the number of OCs, IOCs, and CBDEs available to our trainees during the past 30 years. New training paradigms should include renewed focus on performing an IOC and/or CBDE as clinically indicated during LC; high-quality simulation programs for OC, IOC, and CBDE; and the availability of an advanced video library depicting complicated open biliary procedures.

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery as a teaching procedure: a single-center experience of more than 2100 procedures.

PURPOSE: To confirm the safety and feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and to compare the patient outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for laparoscopic appendectomy (SILS-LA) performed by resident doctors vs. staff surgeons. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent SILS between May, 2009 and May, 2015 at Osaka Police Hospital. RESULTS: We analyzed 2172 patients. The operations performed consisted of cholecystectomy (n = 598), appendectomy (n = 202), inguinal hernia repair (n = 301), colorectal surgery (n = 673), and gastrectomy (n = 398). SILS was performed safely for a wide range of procedures with acceptable conversion and perioperative complication rates. The resident doctors in our department operated safely on 77 % (156/202) of patients undergoing SILS-LA. The staff surgeons operated on more elderly patients and patients with complicated appendicitis than did the resident doctors. The operative outcomes of the resident-performed SILS-LAs were better than those of the staff surgeons, although there was a patient selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: SILS seems safe and feasible for a wide range of procedures. Based on our findings, we believe that SILS-LA could be a useful teaching procedure for resident doctors to perform on selected patients, under the guidance of an experienced staff surgeon.

A blinded assessment of video quality in wearable technology for telementoring in open surgery: the Google Glass experience.

BACKGROUND: The goal of telementoring is to recreate face-to-face encounters with a digital presence. Open-surgery telementoring is limited by lack of surgeon's point-of-view cameras. Google Glass is a wearable computer that looks like a pair of glasses but is equipped with wireless connectivity, a camera, and viewing screen for video conferencing. This study aimed to assess the safety of using Google Glass by assessing the video quality of a telementoring session. METHODS: Thirty-four (n = 34) surgeons at a single institution were surveyed and blindly compared via video captured with Google Glass versus an Apple iPhone 5 during the open cholecystectomy portion of a Whipple. Surgeons were asked to evaluate the quality of the video and its adequacy for safe use in telementoring. RESULTS: Thirty-four of 107 invited surgical attendings (32%) responded to the anonymous survey. A total of 50% rated the Google Glass video as fair with the other 50% rating it as bad to poor. A total of 52.9% of respondents rated the Apple iPhone video as good. A significantly greater proportion of respondents felt Google Glass video quality was inadequate for telementoring versus the Apple iPhone's (82.4 vs 26.5%, p < 0.0001). Intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.924 (95% CI 0.660-0.999, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: While Google Glass provides a great breadth of functionality as a wearable device with two-way communication capabilities, current hardware limitations prevent its use as a telementoring device in surgery as the video quality is inadequate for safe telementoring. As the device is still in initial phases of development, future iterations or competitor devices may provide a better telementoring application for wearable devices.

Single-Site Robotic Cholecystectomy: The Timeline of Progress.

AIM: To investigate the learning curve and perioperative outcomes of single-site robotic cholecystectomy during the first 102 cases by a single surgeon. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was performed on the first 102 cases of single-site robotic cholecystectomy. Patients were divided into five chronological groups based on the date of surgery, with 20 patients in each group except the 5th group which had 22 patients. The groups were compared by docking time, robotic dissection time, and overall surgery time. A P value of 0.05 was used as statistically significant. RESULTS: The female to male ratio was 2:1. The mean age was 51 years (18-87) and the mean BMI was 28.26 (18-41). Overall, 69 % of the patients underwent elective cholecystectomy and 31 % required urgent surgery. In all, 17 % of patients had previous abdominal surgeries. In total, 45 % of procedures were regarded as same day surgery. The total mean length of stay was 1.97 days (0-8). The mean operative time was 110 min (36-265), mean robotic console time 70 min (26-179), and mean docking time 9 min (1-26). The overall conversion rate was 3.9 % and the complication rate was 4 %. The docking time, robotic time, and average operative time were significantly different in the first group as compared to the remaining the five groups (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Single-site robotic cholecystectomy is safe in both elective and urgent conditions, and in patients with previous abdominal surgeries. It has a short learning curve.

Biliary leak rates after cholecystectomy and intraoperative cholangiogram in surgical residency.

Postoperative bile leak (BL) after cholecystectomy is a rare but dreaded complication, and is felt to be increased during surgical training. We sought to determine the incidence of BL after selective intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) at a teaching hospital and identify risk factors for predicting BLs. A retrospective review was performed analyzing all cholecystectomy with IOCs between September 2004 and September 2011. Residents performed under staff supervision. Of 1,799 cholecystectomies performed during the study period, only 96 (5.3%) were with IOCs (mean age 43, 65% female) and 4 BLs occurred (4.2%, 1 major duct injury, 3 cystic duct stump leaks). Univariate analysis demonstrated that male gender, significant medical comorbidities, case duration, preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and surgery type (laparoscopic versus open) increased the patient's risk of BL; however, age, performance of secondary procedures, common bile duct exploration, resident level (PGY), and diagnosis did not increase BL risk. Multivariate regression revealed that only surgery type lead to an increased risk of BL (p = 0.001) (OR 31.61, 95% CI 3.96-252.18). Patient factors and PGY level did not significantly affect BL rates, although open and converted procedures were associated with higher rates, suggesting an increased risk of a BL with more complex cases.