Sustainability in surgical practice: a collaborative call toward environmental sustainability in operating rooms.

BACKGROUND: The healthcare system plays a pivotal role in environmental sustainability, and the operating room (OR) significantly contributes to its overall carbon footprint. In response to this critical challenge, leading medical societies, government bodies, regulatory agencies, and industry stakeholders are taking measures to address healthcare sustainability and its impact on climate change. Healthcare now represents almost 20% of the US national economy and 8.5% of US carbon emissions. Internationally, healthcare represents 5% of global carbon emissions. US Healthcare is an outlier in both per capita cost, and per capita greenhouse gas emission, with almost twice per capita emissions compared to every other country in the world. METHODS: The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) established the Sustainability in Surgical Practice joint task force in 2023. This collaborative effort aims to actively promote education, mitigation, and innovation, steering surgical practices toward a more sustainable future. RESULTS: Several key initiatives have included a survey of members' knowledge and awareness, a scoping review of terminology, metrics, and initiatives, and deep engagement of key stakeholders. DISCUSSION: This position paper serves as a Call to Action, proposing a series of actions to catalyze and accelerate the surgical sustainability leadership needed to respond effectively to climate change, and to lead the societal transformation towards health that our times demand.

Thirty day outcomes for laparoscopic versus robotic sleeve gastrectomy: Does the stapler matter?

BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) remains a safe and effective treatment for severe obesity. The number of robotic SG (RSG) has steadily increased from 2015 to 2021. Prior studies have shown higher rates of some adverse outcomes with RSG but have not accounted for staplers used. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare outcomes for RSG compared to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), accounting for stapler type used. SETTING: National hospital derived administrative data. METHODS: The PINC AI Healthcare Database was used for the current study. Analyzed cohort included elective LSG or RSG performed between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2021. Patient, hospital, billing, provider, insurance, and operative data were captured. Bleeding, leak, and other outcomes were identified by ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes. Propensity score matching (PSM) compared outcomes between RSG with SureForm stapler vs. LSG with powered stapler. RESULTS: 56,013 LSG and 13,832 RSG were analyzed. RSG increased from 15 % in 2019 to 25 % in 2021 with an absolute 27 â€‹% increase in robotic stapler utilization for RSG. PSM analysis compared, 5434 RSG with SureForm Stapler vs. 5434 LSG with powered staplers showed equivalent complication rates, shorter LOS, but longer operative time with RSG. CONCLUSIONS: When stapler type used is accounted for, patient outcomes following RSG and LSG are equivalent.

Updates on Monogenic Obesity in a Multifactorial Disease.

Obesity is a worldwide epidemic with rates nearly doubling over the last 30 years. Despite increasing prevalence, the multifactorial pathogenesis of obesity continues to be widely misunderstood. Investigating genetic drivers in the development of obesity is an important area of focus, as genetics move to the forefront of medicine and personalized treatment evolves. Thus, this narrative review focused on four genes which have genome-wide association study-documented links to obesity and obesity syndromes. We explored their involvement in the predisposition, progression, and prognosis of obesity. Leptin, leptin receptor, pro-opiomelanocortin, and melanocortin 4 receptor are our four genes of interest, and herein we elaborated on the current literature, pathogenesis, and available treatments for patients with these specific genetic mutations.

Laparoscopic versus robotic adrenalectomy: a review of the national inpatient sample.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) has become the standard treatment of adrenal lesions. Recently, robotic-assisted adrenalectomy (RA) has become an option, however, short-term outcomes for RA have not been well studied and benefits over LA are debatable. The aim of this study was to explore differences in short-term outcomes between LA and RA using the national inpatient sample (NIS) database. METHODS: Patient data were collected from the NIS. All patients undergoing LA or RA from January 2009 to December 2012 were included. Univariate analysis and propensity matching were performed to look for differences between the groups. RESULTS: A total of 1006 patients (66.4% in LA group and 33.6% in RA group) were identified. Patient age group, gender, race, risk of mortality, severity of illness or indication for adrenalectomy did not differ significantly between the LA or RA cohorts. Insurance type predicted procedure type (45% of medicare patients underwent RA versus 29% of patients with private insurance, p < 0.0001). Patients living in the highest income areas were more likely to receive the laparoscopic approach (31.7 versus 17.4%, p < 0.0001). Hospital volume, bed size and teaching status of the hospital were not significant factors in the decision of RA versus LA. There was no difference in complication and conversion rates between RA versus LA. The mean length of stay was shorter in the RA group (2.2 versus 1.9 days, p = 0.03). Total charges were higher in the RA group ($42,659 versus $33,748, p < 0.0001). There was a significant trend towards more adrenalectomies being performed robotic assisted by year. Only 22% of adrenalectomies were performed robotic-assisted in 2009 compared with 48% in 2012. CONCLUSIONS: The overall benefit for RA remains small and higher total charges for RA may currently outweigh the benefits. These findings may change as more cases are performed robotically assisted and robotic technology improves.

Results of a cross-sectional survey about lipid-management practices among cardiologists in Pakistan: assessment of adherence to published treatment guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to assess how closely cardiologists in Pakistan followed published recommendations for lipid management and to identify the factors associated with such behavior. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was delivered in person between September and December 2007 to all cardiologists practicing in 4 major cities in Pakistan (Karachi, Lahore, Quetta, and Peshawar). A standard questionnaire was used to obtain information from cardiologists. Adherence to the guidelines established by the 2004 National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III was computed based on answers to 14 questions; each correct answer (ie, the answer that followed the guidelines) was assigned 1 point, for a maximum cumulative score of 14. Multivariable linear regression was performed to determine the factors independently associated with guideline knowledge. RESULTS: A total of 295 cardiologists were approached; 239 consented to participate (overall response rate, 81.0%). The median score was 9 out of a maximum of 14 (interquartile range, 8-11). There were important points of divergence from practice recommendations, including suboptimal targets for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (< or = 70 mg/dL was the target used by only 16.7% of respondents [40/239]), undertreatment of revascularized patients (31.4% [75/239]), cessation of statin therapy once LDL-C targets were achieved (20.9% [50/239]), and use of different treatment thresholds for patients aged >65 years (41.8% [100/239]) and female patients (46.4% [111/239]). In the adjusted analysis, experienced physicians, interventional cardiologists, and those who pursued continuing medical education activities (journals and conferences) had higher scores (P = 0.005, P = 0.041, P = 0.008, and P = 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: We found important self-reported departures from recommended lipid-management guidelines among cardiologists in Pakistan.