Impact of a more restrictive overlapping surgery policy: an analysis of pre- and postimplementation complication rates, resident involvement, and surgical wait times at a high-volume neurosurgical department

Training in Sylvian Arachnoid Dissection: The Art of Using Kamiyama Scissors and a Simple Novel Model for Practice Sylvian Arachnoid Dissection Using Cotton Fiber with Brain Model

Background  Transsylvian approach is one of the main approaches for a variety of vascular, tumor, and skull-base lesions. Sylvian fissure harbors a lot of critical structures including the middle cerebral artery and many venous structures. If not done properly, the transsylvian approach could cause several complications. Up to now, there is no simple training model for practicing Sylvian fissure dissection. In this article, we describe the technique of using microscissors for the sharp dissection of arachnoid trabeculae. We also propose a new model for practicing Sylvian arachnoid dissection using a three-dimensional (3D) brain model with cotton fiber. Materials and Method  We inserted cotton fiber into the Sylvian fissure of the brain model (aneurysm box from UpsurgeOn) and covered the Sylvian fissure with a cotton sheet, then sprayed the water over it. We dissected this model under a microscope by using Kamiyama scissors in the right hand and suction in the left hand. Result  Under the microscope, our model appears comparable with the real Sylvian fissure. We can use this model for practicing arachnoid dissection with Kamiyama scissors. Conclusion  The arachnoid dissection model by using a 3D brain model with cotton fiber is a simplified and novel approach for practicing the Sylvian fissure dissection.

Do overlapping neurosurgical procedures affect patient outcomes? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Overlapping surgery (OS) is a common practice in neurosurgery that has recently come under scrutiny. This study includes a systematic review and meta-analysis on articles evaluating the effects of OS on patient outcomes. PubMed and Scopus were searched for studies that analyzed outcome differences between overlapping and non-overlapping neurosurgical procedures. Study characteristics were extracted, and random-effects meta-analyses were performed to analyze the primary outcome (mortality) and secondary outcomes (complications, 30-day readmissions, 30-day operating room returns, home discharge, blood loss, and length of stay). Mantel-Haenszel tests were completed for binary outcomes, whereas the inverse variance tests were conducted for continuous outcomes. Heterogeneity was measured using the I² and X² tests. The Egger's test was conducted to evaluate publication bias. Eight of 61 non-duplicate studies were included. Overall, 21,249 patients underwent non-OS (10,504 female) and 15,863 patients underwent OS (8393 female). OS was associated with decreased mortality (p = 0.002), 30-day returns to OR (p < 0.001), and blood loss (p < 0.001) along with increased home discharges (p < 0.001). High heterogeneity was observed for home discharge (p = 0.002) and length of stay (p < 0.001). No publication bias was observed. OS was not associated with worse patient outcomes compared to non-OS. However, considering multiple sources of limitation in the methodology of the included studies (such as limited number of studies, reports originating from mostly high-volume academic centers, discrepancy in the definition of "critical portion(s)" of the surgery across studies, and selection bias), extra caution is advised in interpretation of our results and further focused studies are warranted.

Surgeon Perspectives on Benefits and Downsides of Overlapping Surgery: In-depth, Qualitative Interviews

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to characterize surgeon perspectives regarding the benefits and downsides of conducting overlapping surgery.

BACKGROUND

Although surgeons are key stakeholders in current discussions surrounding overlapping surgery, little has been published regarding their opinions on the practice. Further characterization of surgeon perspectives is needed to guide future studies and policy development regarding overlapping surgery.

METHODS

Study information was sent to all members of 3 professional surgical societies. Interested individuals were eligible to participate if they identified as attending surgeons in an academic setting who work with trainees. Purposive selection was used to diversify surgeons interviewed across multiple dimensions, including subspecialty and opinion regarding appropriateness of overlapping surgery. In-depth, qualitative interviews were conducted with participants regarding their opinions on overlapping surgery.

RESULTS

The 51 surgeons interviewed identified a wide array of potential benefits and disadvantages of overlapping surgery, some of which have not previously been measured, including downsides to surgeon wellness and patient experience, less surgeon control over procedures, and difficulty in scheduling cases. Interviewees often disagreed as to whether overlapping surgery negatively or positively affects each dimension discussed, particularly regarding the impact on resident training.

CONCLUSIONS

The utilization of the novel perspectives presented here will allow for targeted assessment of physician perspectives in future quantitative studies and increase the likelihood that variables measured encompass the range of factors that surgeons find meaningful and relevant. Priority areas of future research should include examining effects of overlapping surgery on surgical training and surgeon wellness.

Not without my attending: a survey of patient and family member attitudes and perceptions about concurrent and overlapping surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Recent media coverage of overlapping surgery has led to several studies investigating public perception of concurrent and overlapping surgery, both of which involve a single attending surgeon working on two separate cases in two separate operating rooms. In concurrent surgery, the critical periods of the surgeries overlap, while in overlapping surgery they do not. The literature revealed a general lack of knowledge about these practices and strong disapproval of their use by the public.

PURPOSE

To determine the comfort level of spine surgery patients and their family members toward concurrent and overlapping surgery.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This cross-sectional survey study was performed at an urban, adult academic spine surgery clinic.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients and their companions who were waiting to be seen at their initial clinic visit or follow-up visit were approached to participate in the study.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The survey queried respondents' baseline knowledge of and comfort level with concurrent and overlapping surgery, in addition to comfort level with different levels of surgical trainees on a 5-point Likert scale.

METHODS

A five-section, 36-item questionnaire was administered by a research assistant to respondents over a 3-month period spanning June 2019 - August 2019. A research assistant described the terms overlapping surgery and concurrent surgery to participants of the survey using diagrams and a preformulated script after self-reported knowledge questions. Statistical analysis was performed using the chi-square test for categorical variables, and Kendall's tau-c rank correlation coefficient with ordinal independent variables for correlations.

RESULTS

Knowledge about concurrent and overlapping surgery was low in our study population (8.22% and 6.16%, respectively). Over half of respondents reported that they felt comfortable with overlapping surgery (58.22%). Most respondents reported that they would like their surgeon to disclose the participation of surgical trainees (residents and fellows) in their surgery (98%). In addition, the 4th and 5th years of surgical training were associated with a significant increase in patient comfort with surgical trainee participation. There was no difference in response distribution between patients versus nonpatients.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge about concurrent and overlapping surgery remains poor in our study population. Lack of general knowledge about overlapping surgery can be a serious impediment to obtaining informed consent, and further study is required to determine the best methods to raising patient awareness.

A Survey of Overlapping Surgery Policies at U.S. Hospitals

The authors surveyed hospitals across the country on their policies regarding overlapping surgery, and found large variation between hospitals in how this practice is regulated. Specifically, institutions chose to define "critical portions" in a variety of ways, ultimately affecting not only surgical efficiency but also the autonomy of surgical trainees and patient experiences at these different hospitals.

Overlapping Urological Surgeries at a Tertiary Academic Center

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the practice of procedure-time overlapping surgery (OS) is associated with inferior outcomes compared to nonoverlapping surgery (NOS) in urology, to address the paucity of data surrounding urologic surgeries to support or refute this practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of all urological surgeries at a single tertiary-level academic center, Emory University Hospital, from July 2016 to July 2018. Patients who received OS were matched 1:2 to patients who had NOS. The primary outcomes were perioperative and postoperative complications and mortality.

RESULTS

We reviewed 8535 urological surgeries. In-room time overlap was seen in 50.5% of cases and procedure-time overlap in 7.4%. Eleven out of the 13 attending urologists performed OS. The average time in the operating room was greater for OS by an average of 14 minutes. The average operative time was greater for OS than NOS by 11 minutes, but this did not reach statistical significance. There was no significant difference between the cohorts for rate of blood transfusions, ICU stay, need for postoperative invasive procedures, length of postoperative hospital stay, discharge location, Emergency Room visits, hospital readmission rate, 30 and 90-day rates of postoperative complications, and mortality.

CONCLUSION

Procedure-time overlapping surgeries constituted a minority of urological cases. OS were associated with greater in-room time. We found no increased risk of perioperative or postoperative adverse outcomes in OS compared to matched NOS.

Assessment of Short-Term Patient Outcomes Following Overlapping Orthopaedic Surgery at a Large Academic Medical Center

BACKGROUND

Overlapping surgery is a long-standing practice that has not been well studied. The aim of this study was to assess whether overlapping surgery is associated with untoward outcomes for orthopaedic patients.

METHODS

Coarsened exact matching was used to assess the impact of overlap on outcomes among elective orthopaedic surgical interventions (n = 18,316) over 2 years (2014 and 2015) at 1 health-care system. Overlap was categorized as any overlap, and subcategories of exclusively beginning overlap and exclusively end overlap. Study subjects were matched on the Charlson comorbidity index score, duration of surgery, surgical costs, body mass index, length of stay, payer, and race, among others. Serious unanticipated events were studied.

RESULTS

A total of 3,395 patients had any overlap and were matched (a match rate of 90.8% of 3,738). For beginning and end overlap, matched groups were created, with a match rate of 95.2% of 1043 and 94.7% of 863, respectively. Among matched patients, any overlap did not predict an unanticipated return to surgery at 30 days (8.2% for any overlap and 8.3% for no overlap; p = 0.922) or 90 days (14.1% and 14.1%, respectively; p = 1.000). Patients who had surgery with any overlap demonstrated no difference compared with controls with respect to reoperation, readmission, or emergency room (ER) visits at 30 or 90 days (a reoperation rate of 3.1% and 3.2%, respectively [p = 0.884] at 30 days and 4.2% and 3.5% [p = 0.173] at 90 days; a readmission rate of 10.3% and 11.0% [p = 0.352] at 30 days and 5.5% and 5.2% [p = 0.570] at 90 days; and an ER visit rate of 5.2% and 4.6% [p = 0.276] at 30 days and 4.8% and 4.3% [p = 0.304] at 90 days). Patients with surgical overlap showed reduced mortality compared with controls during follow-up (1.8% and 2.6%, respectively; p = 0.029). Patients with beginning and/or end overlap had a similar lack of association with serious unanticipated events; however, patients with end overlap showed an increased unexpected rate of return to the operating room after reoperation at 90 days (13.3% versus 9.7%; p = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

Nonconcurrent overlapping surgery was not associated with adverse outcomes in a large, matched orthopaedic surgery population across 1 academic health system.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Association of overlapping cardiac surgery with short-term patient outcomes

OBJECTIVE

This study seeks to assess the safety of overlap in cardiac surgery.

METHODS

Coarsened exact matching was used to assess the impact of overlap on outcomes among cardiac surgical interventions (n = 4463) over 2 years (2014-2016). Overlap was categorized as any, beginning, or end overlap. Study subjects were matched 1:1 on 11 variables, including Charlson comorbidity score, surgical costs, body mass index, length of postoperative hospitalization, and race, among others. Serious unanticipated events were studied, including readmission, unplanned return to the operating room, and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 984 patients had any overlap and were matched to similar patients without overlap (n = 1501). For beginning/end overlap, separate matched groups were created (n = 462, n = 329 patients, respectively). Among matched patients, any overlap did not predict unanticipated return to surgery at 30 or 90 days. Any overlap did not predict increased readmission, reoperation, or emergency department visits at 30 or 90 days. Overlap did not predict higher rates of death over follow-up. Beginning/end overlap had results similar to any overlap.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonconcurrent, overlapping surgery is not associated with an increase in adverse outcomes in a large, matched cardiac surgery population.