Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK.
Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK.
Surgery. 2022 Jul;172(1):53-59. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2021.11.032. Epub 2021 Dec 31.
Ileal pouch anal anastomosis is a complex procedure associated with significant morbidity, with several complications after ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery leading to pouch failure. The aim of the study is to evaluate the heterogeneity surrounding the technique of ileoanal J-pouch surgery by assessing the safety and quality of published online peer-reviewed surgical videos.
Ileal pouch anal anastomosis videos published on peer-reviewed surgical journals and video channels were edited and anonymized to demonstrate specific steps of the surgical procedure: mobilization and division of the rectum, formation of the ileoanal J-pouch reservoir, anastomosis, and lengthening techniques. The anonymized videos were presented to a group of reviewers with expertise in ileal pouch anal anastomosis blinded to the names and affiliations of the surgeons performing the procedure. Primary outcome was the rate of interobserver variability in the assessment of specific technical steps of the ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery procedure. Secondary outcome was the appropriateness of the use of surgical videos review as an assessment tool for ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery, measured as rate of reviewers being unable to answer for poor video quality.
In total, 29 video fragments were distributed, and 13 assessors completed a 60-item survey, organized in 7 major domains. The survey completion rate was 93.4%. Out of a total 729 answers, in 23 (3.2%) the reviewers indicated they were unable to comment due to poor video image, and in 48 (6.5%) were unable to comment due to the particular step not being shown in the procedure. The proportion of assessors rating rectal mobilization technically appropriate ranged from 30.7% to 92.3% and from 7.7% to 69.2% for safety. The level of rectal division was considered appropriate in 0 to 53.8% of the videos, whereas the stapling technique used for rectal division was appropriate in 0 to 70% of the videos.
Our study assessed published peer-reviewed videos on ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery and reported heterogeneity in the safety of the demonstrated techniques. Blind assessment of published peer-reviewed ileal pouch anal anastomosis videos reported a high rate of unsafe or inappropriate technique for rectal mobilization and transection in the reviewed videos, with fair interobserver agreement among reviewers. There is a need for consensus on what is considered safe and appropriate in ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery. Peer review of ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery videos could facilitate training and accreditation in this complex procedure.
回肠贮袋肛管吻合术是一种复杂的手术,其相关发病率较高,且在手术后存在多种可能导致贮袋失败的并发症。本研究旨在通过评估发表的同行评议手术视频,评估回肠贮袋肛管吻合术技术的异质性,以评估发表的同行评议手术视频的安全性和质量。
对发表在同行评议外科杂志和视频频道上的回肠贮袋肛管吻合术视频进行编辑和匿名处理,以展示手术过程的特定步骤:直肠的游离和分离、回肠贮袋的形成、吻合和延长技术。匿名视频被展示给一组具有回肠贮袋肛管吻合术专业知识的审查者,这些审查者对进行手术的外科医生的姓名和隶属关系并不知情。主要结果是评估回肠贮袋肛管吻合术手术过程的特定技术步骤时,观察者间的变异性发生率。次要结果是评估使用手术视频作为回肠贮袋肛管吻合术手术评估工具的适当性,以由于视频质量差而导致无法回答的审查者比例来衡量。
总共分发了 29 个视频片段,13 名评估者完成了 60 项调查,调查分为 7 个主要领域。调查完成率为 93.4%。在总共 729 个答案中,有 23 个(3.2%)评估者因视频图像质量差而无法发表评论,有 48 个(6.5%)因特定步骤未在手术中显示而无法发表评论。评估者对直肠游离术技术评价合适的比例范围为 30.7%至 92.3%,对安全性的评价合适的比例范围为 7.7%至 69.2%。在评估的视频中,直肠分离的水平被认为合适的比例为 0 至 53.8%,而用于直肠分离的吻合技术被认为合适的比例为 0 至 70%。
本研究评估了发表的同行评议回肠贮袋肛管吻合术手术视频,并报告了所展示技术的安全性存在差异。对发表的同行评议回肠贮袋肛管吻合术视频进行盲法评估,报告了在审查的视频中,直肠游离和横断术的不安全或不合适技术的比例较高,且评估者之间的观察者间一致性较好。需要就回肠贮袋肛管吻合术手术中的安全和合适技术达成共识。对回肠贮袋肛管吻合术手术视频进行同行评议可能有助于该复杂手术的培训和认证。