Bronikowski Diane, Lilly Christa, Tabone Lawrence, Abunnaja Salim, Szoka Nova
Department of Surgery, West Virginia University School of Medicine, 64 Medical Center Drive, PO BOX 9238, Morgantown, WV, 26506, USA.
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, West Virginia University School of Public Health, 64 Medical Center Drive, Morgantown, WV, 26506, USA.
Obes Surg. 2024 Dec;34(12):4472-4481. doi: 10.1007/s11695-024-07589-4. Epub 2024 Nov 16.
The study objective was to identify variations in calibration tube use during sleeve gastrectomy and understand elements of ideal calibration tube performance.
A survey was distributed via email and social media to bariatric surgeons, who were asked to rate the performance of their current calibration tube and an ideal calibration tube for five technical milestones involving visualization, positioning, suction capability, and sleeve sizing. Data was analyzed using descriptive and bivariate analyses including chi-square, Mann-Whitney, and Kruskal-Wallis tests.
After eliminating incorrect screening question responses, 552 of 585 responses were analyzed. Demographics included 82% practicing in the USA, 64% in community practice, performing an average of 114 (SD = 94.5) sleeves annually. Calibration tubes used were most commonly reusable (54.2%) versus disposable (27.4%), endoscope (5.3%), or other (13.2%). Ninety-six percent of calibration tube sizes were 32 to 44 French. The reusable calibration tube had the lowest mean scores in all five technical areas, while the endoscope performed the best. When comparing surgeon current to ideal calibration tube performance, the endoscope performed closest to an ideal device, with significant p-values for technical milestones (i-iv). Despite the endoscope having the highest ratings for technical performance, surgeons rated higher satisfaction using disposable calibration tubes.
Significant variation exists among the size and type of calibration tubes used for sleeve gastrectomy. Calibration tubes incorporating the visualization of an endoscope with the workflow of a disposable device could bridge technical performance and satisfaction goals for surgeons.
本研究的目的是确定袖状胃切除术中校准管使用的差异，并了解理想校准管性能的要素。
通过电子邮件和社交媒体向减重外科医生发放调查问卷，要求他们对当前校准管和理想校准管在涉及可视化、定位、抽吸能力和袖带尺寸的五个技术里程碑方面的性能进行评分。使用描述性和双变量分析（包括卡方检验、曼-惠特尼检验和克鲁斯卡尔-沃利斯检验）对数据进行分析。
在剔除不正确的筛查问题回复后，对585份回复中的552份进行了分析。人口统计学数据包括82%在美国执业，64%在社区执业，每年平均进行114例（标准差=94.5）袖状胃切除术。使用的校准管最常见的是可重复使用的（54.2%），而一次性的（27.4%）、内窥镜（5.3%）或其他类型（13.2%）。96%的校准管尺寸为32至44法式。可重复使用的校准管在所有五个技术领域的平均得分最低，而内窥镜表现最佳。当比较外科医生当前校准管与理想校准管的性能时，内窥镜最接近理想设备，在技术里程碑（i-iv）方面具有显著的p值。尽管内窥镜在技术性能方面评分最高，但外科医生对使用一次性校准管的满意度更高。
用于袖状胃切除术的校准管在尺寸和类型上存在显著差异。将内窥镜的可视化与一次性设备的工作流程相结合的校准管可以兼顾外科医生的技术性能和满意度目标。
