Predicting quality in surgery

Trainee surgeons do not cause more conversions in laparoscopic colorectal surgery if they are well supervised

INTRODUCTION

This study was designed to look at the conversion rates and morbidity associated with laparoscopic operations performed by trainee surgeons ascending the learning curve when they are well supervised by staff surgeons.

METHODS

A review of 204 consecutive cases was performed. We defined experienced staff surgeons as those who have performed more than 300 laparoscopic resection cases. The trainee surgeons had less than 50 cases of experience during the study period. All operations were performed by the experienced staff surgeon or by the trainee surgeon with the staff surgeon as the first assistant and supervisor.

RESULTS

A total of 204 laparoscopic resections for colorectal cancer were studied. The dissection was D3 in 73% (n = 149) of cases with a mean lymph node harvest of 19.4 nodes (range 1-56). The staff surgeons performed 90 cases and trainees performed 114 cases. Twenty-one cases (10.3%) required conversion. The overall morbidity rate was 17.6% and perioperative mortality rate was 1.5%. On bivariate analysis, trainee surgeons were not found to be significantly associated with a higher conversion risk. Multivariate analysis revealed that only the factor of T3 and above was an independent predictor of conversion (odds ratio (OR) 4.1; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09-15.48). Multivariate analysis of risk factors for morbidity revealed that it was not conversion (OR 2.37; 95% CI, 0.86-6.76) but rectal surgery (OR 4.09; 95% CI 2.04-9.9) that was the independent risk factor of morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Inexperienced surgeons do not cause more conversions or postoperative morbidity in laparoscopic colorectal surgery if they are well supervised. Conversion is not independently associated with increased postoperative morbidity.

Surgeon volume does not predict outcomes in the setting of technical credentialing: results from a randomized trial in colon cancer

OBJECTIVE

To test the hypothesis that surgeon volume would not predict short- and long-term outcomes when evaluated in the setting of technical credentialing.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Surgical volume is a known predictor of outcomes; the importance of technical credentialing has not been evaluated.

METHODS

Fifty-three credentialed surgeons operated on 871 patients in the Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study (NCT00002575), investigating laparoscopic versus open surgery for colon cancer. Credentialing required that each surgeon document performance of at least 20 laparoscopic colon cases and demonstrate oncologic techniques on a video-recorded case. Surgeons were separated based on volume entered into the trial (low, < or =5 cases (n = 39); medium, 6-10 cases (n = 9); or high, >10 cases (n = 5)) and compared by outcomes.

RESULTS

Patients treated by high volume compared with medium or low volume surgeons were older (70, 66, and 68 years; P < 0.001), more often had right-sided tumors (63%, 46%, and 53%; P < 0.001) and had more previous operations (48%, 38% and 45%; P < 0.004), respectively. Mean operative times were shorter (123, 147 and 145 minutes; P < 0.001), distal margins longer (13.4, 12.4 and 11.6 cm; P = 0.005), and lymph node harvest greater (14.8, 12.8, 12.6; P = 0.05) for high versus medium versus low volume surgeons. However, rates of conversion, complications, 5-year survival, and disease-free survival showed no significant differences.

CONCLUSION

When tested in a randomized controlled trial with case-specific surgical technical credentialing and auditing, surgeon volume did not predict differences in rates of conversion, complications, or long-term cancer outcomes. Case-specific technical credentialing should be further studied specific to the role it could play in creating consistent, high quality outcomes.