Classification of Intraoperative Complications

Deep neuromuscular block reduces the incidence of intra-operative complications during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a pooled analysis of randomized controlled trials

Study objective

To assess whether different intensities of intra-abdominal pressure and deep neuromuscular blockade influence the risk of intra-operative surgical complications during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.

Design

A pooled analysis of ten previously performed prospective randomized controlled trials.

Setting

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy performed in four academic hospitals in the Netherlands: Radboudumc, Leiden UMC, Erasmus MC Rotterdam, and Amsterdam UMC.

Patients

Five hundred fifty-six patients undergoing a transperitoneal, fully laparoscopic donor nephrectomy enrolled in ten prospective, randomized controlled trials conducted in the Netherlands from 2001 to 2017.

Interventions

Moderate (tetanic count of four > 1) versus deep (post-tetanic count 1–5) neuromuscular blockade and standard (≥10 mmHg) versus low (<10 mmHg) intra-abdominal pressure.

Measurements

The primary endpoint is the number of intra-operative surgical complications defined as any deviation from the ideal intra-operative course occurring between skin incision and closure with five severity grades, according to ClassIntra. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to identify predictors of intra- and postoperative complications.

Main results

In 53/556 (9.5%) patients, an intra-operative complication with ClassIntra grade ≥ 2 occurred. Multiple logistic regression analyses showed standard intra-abdominal pressure (OR 0.318, 95% CI 0.118–0.862; p = 0.024) as a predictor of less intra-operative complications and moderate neuromuscular blockade (OR 3.518, 95% CI 1.244–9.948; p = 0.018) as a predictor of more intra-operative complications. Postoperative complications occurred in 31/556 (6.8%), without significant predictors in multiple logistic regression analyses.

Conclusions

Our data indicate that the use of deep neuromuscular blockade could increase safety during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Future randomized clinical trials should be performed to confirm this and to pursue whether it also applies to other types of laparoscopic surgery.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov LEOPARD-2 (NCT02146417), LEOPARD-3 trial (NCT02602964), and RELAX-1 study (NCT02838134), Klop et al. (NTR 3096), Dols et al. 2014 (NTR1433).

European Society of Gynaecological Oncology quality indicators for the surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Quality of surgical care as a crucial component of a comprehensive multi-disciplinary management improves outcomes in patients with endometrial carcinoma, notably helping to avoid suboptimal surgical treatment. Quality indicators (QIs) enable healthcare professionals to measure their clinical management with regard to ideal standards of care.

OBJECTIVE

In order to complete its set of QIs for the surgical management of gynecological cancers, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) initiated the development of QIs for the surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma.

METHODS

QIs were based on scientific evidence and/or expert consensus. The development process included a systematic literature search for the identification of potential QIs and documentation of the scientific evidence, two consensus meetings of a group of international experts, an internal validation process, and external review by a large international panel of clinicians and patient representatives. QIs were defined using a structured format comprising metrics specifications, and targets. A scoring system was then developed to ensure applicability and feasibility of a future ESGO accreditation process based on these QIs for endometrial carcinoma surgery and support any institutional or governmental quality assurance programs.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine structural, process and outcome indicators were defined. QIs 1-5 are general indicators related to center case load, training, experience of the surgeon, structured multi-disciplinarity of the team and active participation in clinical research. QIs 6 and 7 are related to the adequate pre-operative investigations. QIs 8-22 are related to peri-operative standards of care. QI 23 is related to molecular markers for endometrial carcinoma diagnosis and as determinants for treatment decisions. QI 24 addresses the compliance of management of patients after primary surgical treatment with the standards of care. QIs 25-29 highlight the need for a systematic assessment of surgical morbidity and oncologic outcome as well as standardized and comprehensive documentation of surgical and pathological elements. Each QI was associated with a score. An assessment form including a scoring system was built as basis for ESGO accreditation of centers for endometrial cancer surgery.

The Surgeon as the Second Victim? Results of the Boston Intraoperative Adverse Events Surgeons' Attitude (BISA) Study

BACKGROUND

An intraoperative adverse event (iAE) is often directly attributable to the surgeon's technical error and/or suboptimal intraoperative judgment. We aimed to examine the psychological impact of iAEs on surgeons as well as the surgeons' attitude about iAE reporting.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey of all surgeons at 3 major teaching hospitals of the same university. The 29-item questionnaire was developed using a systematic closed and open approach focused on assessing the surgeons' personal account of iAE incidence, emotional response to iAEs, available support systems, and perspective about the barriers to iAE reporting.

RESULTS

The response rate was 44.8% (n = 126). Mean age of respondents was 49 years, 77% were male, and 83% performed >150 procedures/year. During the last year, 32% recalled 1 iAE, 39% recalled 2 to 5 iAEs, and 9% recalled >6 iAEs. The emotional toll of iAEs was significant, with 84% of respondents reporting a combination of anxiety (66%), guilt (60%), sadness (52%), shame/embarrassment (42%), and anger (29%). Colleagues constituted the most helpful support system (42%) rather than friends or family; a few surgeons needed psychological therapy/counseling. As for reporting, 26% preferred not to see their individual iAE rates, and 38% wanted it reported in comparison with their aggregate colleagues' rate. The most common barriers to reporting iAEs were fear of litigation (50%), lack of a standardized reporting system (49%), and absence of a clear iAE definition (48%).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative AEs occur often, have a significant negative impact on surgeons' well-being, and barriers to transparency are fear of litigation and absence of a well-defined reporting system. Efforts should be made to support surgeons and standardize reporting when iAEs occur.