Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida.
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia.
Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2022 Jun;18(6):738-746. doi: 10.1016/j.soard.2022.02.016. Epub 2022 Mar 5.
First assistance during metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) often consists of either a general surgery resident (GSR), minimally invasive surgery fellow (MISF), or advanced practice provider (APP). While APPs may be consistent members of the bariatric team, GSRs and MISFs are often rotating members. It is unclear to what extent the inclusion of APPs versus surgical trainees (GSRs or MISFs) affect surgical outcomes.
The aim of this study was to determine the effect of first assistant type on adverse outcomes following sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).
Academic hospital.
From the 2015-2019 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program databases, we identified conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted SG or RYGB performed with an APP, GSR, or MISF as first assistant. Patient demographics, co-morbidities, and operative characteristics were used to create 1:1 case-matched first-assistant cohorts, and perioperative outcomes were compared. Variables were compared using the χ test, Mann-Whitney U test, and regression models. Analyses were performed with StataMP 17. A P value <.05 and a 95% confidence interval exclusive of 1 or 0 were considered statistically significant.
Of 414,623 included cases, an APP, GSR, and MISF served as first assistant in 58%, 28%, and 14%, respectively. Mean operative length was longer in GSR (P < .001) and MISF (P < .001) versus APP cases and similar between GSR and MISF cases (P = .08). Compared with an APP as first assistant, the odds of approach conversion (P < .001), readmission (P < .001), and overall morbidity (P < .001) were significantly higher in GSR and MISF cases. Compared with an APP, GSR cases also were associated with higher odds of admission to the intensive care unit (P < .001), reintervention (P < .001), bleeding (P = .002), venous thromboembolism (P < .001), and surgical site infection (P < .001). Most outcomes were similar between GSR and MISF as first assistant cases.
While training future surgeons is an important aspect of bariatric surgery, inexperienced trainees or shifting roles within a surgical team may confer increased surgical risks to patients. Strategies are needed to optimize patient safety while maintaining a robust resident experience.
代谢和减重手术(MBS)的初步急救通常由普外科住院医师(GSR)、微创外科研究员(MISF)或高级实践提供者(APP)担任。虽然 APP 可能是减重团队的固定成员,但 GSR 和 MISF 往往是轮换成员。尚不清楚 APP 与外科培训生(GSR 或 MISF)的纳入程度如何影响手术结果。
本研究旨在确定第一助手类型对袖状胃切除术(SG)和 Roux-en-Y 胃旁路术(RYGB)后不良结局的影响。
学术医院。
我们从 2015-2019 年代谢和减重手术认证和质量改进计划数据库中确定了由 APP、GSR 或 MISF 担任第一助手的常规腹腔镜和机器人辅助 SG 或 RYGB。使用患者人口统计学、合并症和手术特征创建 1:1 病例匹配的第一助手队列,并比较围手术期结局。使用 χ 检验、Mann-Whitney U 检验和回归模型比较变量。使用 StataMP 17 进行分析。P 值<.05 且 95%置信区间不包括 1 或 0 被认为具有统计学意义。
在 414,623 例纳入病例中,APP、GSR 和 MISF 分别作为第一助手的比例为 58%、28%和 14%。GSR(P<.001)和 MISF(P<.001)病例的手术长度均长于 APP 病例,而 GSR 与 MISF 病例之间无差异(P=0.08)。与 APP 作为第一助手相比,GSR 和 MISF 病例的手术方法转换(P<.001)、再入院(P<.001)和总发病率(P<.001)的几率明显更高。与 APP 相比,GSR 病例还与更高的入住重症监护病房(P<.001)、再次干预(P<.001)、出血(P=0.002)、静脉血栓栓塞(P<.001)和手术部位感染(P<.001)的几率相关。GSR 和 MISF 作为第一助手的大多数结果相似。
虽然培训未来的外科医生是减重手术的一个重要方面,但经验不足的培训生或外科团队内部角色的转变可能会给患者带来更高的手术风险。需要制定策略来优化患者安全,同时保持强大的住院医师经验。