Analysis of overlapping surgery in patients undergoing microsurgical aneurysm clipping: acute and long-term outcomes from the Barrow Ruptured Aneurysm Trial

Endovascular treatment of ruptured basilar artery trunk aneurysms: complications and long-term outcomes

OBJECT

Treatment of ruptured basilar artery trunk (BAT) aneurysms is challenging, and is associated with high complication and mortality rates. Herein, we analyzed the complications, long-term outcomes, and outcome predictors of endovascular treatment for ruptured BAT aneurysms.

METHODS

Between January 2011 and July 2023, 36 patients with 36 ruptured BAT aneurysms underwent endovascular treatment at our institution. The postprocedural complications and clinical and angiographic outcomes were subsequently reviewed, and the risk factors for postprocedural complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

All 36 aneurysms in 36 patients were treated successfully. The median clinical follow-up time was 47.0 (IQR: 10.5, 84.5) months. Overall, complications occurred in 10 (27.8%) patients, including 3 (8.3%) deaths. Ischemic events occurred in seven (19.4%) patients, while three (8.3%) patients had shunt-dependent hydrocephalus, of whom one (2.8%) patient had both shunt-dependent hydrocephalus and ischemic events. The cumulative survival rates at 3 and 5 years were 94.1% and 87.8%, respectively. The cumulative 3- and 5-year complication-free survival rates were 75.0% and 70.0%, respectively. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that diabetes mellitus (HR:8.76, 95%CI:2.35-32.69, p=0.001), and Glasgow coma scale score ≤ 12 before the procedure (HR:5.04, 95%CI:1.40-18.12, p=0.013) were associated with overall postprocedural complications. The complete aneurysm occlusion rate was 61.5% at a median angiography follow-up time of 6.0 (IQR: 5.0, 6.0) months.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular treatment is a safe and feasible option for treating ruptured BAT aneurysms. The rate of favorable outcomes at the final follow-up was satisfactory. However, postprocedural complications, particularly ischemic events, should be carefully considered.

Impact of the Percentage of Overlapping Surgery on Patient Outcomes: A Retrospective Cohort Study of 87,000 Surgical Cases

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study was to analyze the relationship of percentage of surgical overlap with patient outcomes to determine if a detrimental level of overlap exists.

BACKGROUND

Overlapping surgery is defined as 1 attending physician supervising 2 or more operative cases simultaneously, without the critical portions of the cases occurring concurrently. To date, no study has examined the relationship of percent overlap, or the percentage of 1 case that is spent overlapping with another, to outcomes, efficiency, safety, and complications.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective cohort study conducted at a large tertiary referral center. The primary outcomes of interest included operative duration, in-hospital mortality, 30-day readmission, and patient safety indicators (PSIs). The Cochran-Armitage test for trend was used to evaluate the outcomes of interest. P values of ≤0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 87,426 cases were included in this study. There were 62,332 cases without overlap (Group 0), 10,514 cases with 1% to 25% overlap (Group 1), 5303 cases with 26% to 50% overlap (Group 2), 4296 cases with 51% to 75% overlap (Group 3), and 4981 cases with >75% overlap (Group 4). In-hospital mortality decreased as overlap increased ( Ptrend <0.0001). Operative time increased with increasing overlap ( Ptrend <0.0001) while readmission rates showed no statistical significance between groups ( Ptrend =0.5078). Rates of PSIs were lower for Groups 1, 2, and 3 (1.69%, 2.01%, and 2.08%) when compared to Group 0 (2.24%). Group 4 had the highest rate of PSIs at 2.35% ( P =0.0086).

CONCLUSION

Overlapping surgery was shown to have reduced in-hospital mortality and similar PSI and readmission rates when compared to nonoverlapping cases. Operative time was shown to increase in overlapping surgeries when compared to nonoverlapping surgeries. The results from this study indicate that the percentage of surgical overlap does not detrimentally affect most patient outcomes, especially with overlap of <75%.

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.

Establishing a Reference Procedure Length for Anterior Cervical Fusions: The Role for Standards in Surgical Process Improvement

Surgical process improvement strategies are increasingly being applied to specific procedures to improve value. A critical step in any process improvement strategy is the identification of performance benchmarks. Procedure length is a performance benchmark for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedures; therefore, we sought to establish reference procedure lengths for 1-level, 2-level, and 3-level ACDFs at both teaching and non-teaching institutions and to describe methods for using this information to advance surgical process improvement initiatives. We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive ACDFs performed at a resident teaching institution (RT) and a non-teaching institution (NT) for all 1-level, 2-level, and 3-level ACDFs. Mean case lengths and patient outcomes were calculated for individual surgeons and institutions. After limiting cases to 1-level, 2-level, and 3-level ACDFs and applying all exclusion criteria, 991 cases at the RT institution and 131 cases at the NT institution (a total of 1122 cases) were available for analysis. The mean (SD) procedure length for 1-level, 2-level, and 3-level ACDFs at the RT versus NT institutions were 121.9 min (36.3 min) and 73.6 min (29.7 min) (p<0.001), 172.7 min (44.8 min) and 112.0 min (43.0 min) (p<0.001), and 218.3 min (54.9 min) and 167.6 min (54.2 min) (p<0.001), respectively. Thirty-day outcomes were the same between institutions, except that the RT institution had a shorter mean hospital length of stay for 2-level ACDFs (1.6 days versus 2.9 days, p=0.001). This study is the first to attempt to establish a standard reference procedure length for 1-level, 2-level, and 3-level ACDFs. These data can guide efforts in surgical process improvement.

Detection of impending perfusion deficits by intraoperative computed tomography (iCT) in aneurysm surgery of the anterior circulation

Background

The aim of our study was to evaluate the additional benefit of intraoperative computed tomography (iCT), intraoperative computed tomography angiography (iCTA), and intraoperative computed tomography perfusion (iCTP) in the intraoperative detection of impending ischemia to established methods (indocyanine green videoangiography (ICGVA), microDoppler, intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM)) for initiating timely therapeutic measures.

Methods

Patients with primary aneurysms of the anterior circulation between October 2016 and December 2019 were included. Data of iCT modalities compared to other techniques (ICGVA, microDoppler, IONM) was recorded with emphasis on resulting operative conclusions leading to inspection of clip position, repositioning, or immediate initiation of conservative treatment strategies. Additional variables analyzed included patient demographics, aneurysm-specific characteristics, and clinical outcome.

Results

Of 194 consecutive patients, 93 patients with 100 aneurysms received iCT imaging. While IONM and ICGVA were normal, an altered vessel patency in iCTA was detected in 5 (5.4%) and a mismatch in iCTP in 7 patients (7.5%). Repositioning was considered appropriate in 2 patients (2.2%), where immediate improvement in iCTP could be documented. In a further 5 cases (5.4%), intensified conservative therapy was immediately initiated treating the reduced CBP as clip repositioning was not considered causal. In terms of clinical outcome at last FU, mRS0 was achieved in 85 (91.4%) and mRS1-2 in 7 (7.5%) and remained mRS4 in one patient with SAH (1.1%).

Conclusions

Especially iCTP can reveal signs of impending ischemia in selected cases and enable the surgeon to promptly initiate therapeutic measures such as clip repositioning or intraoperative onset of maximum conservative treatment, while established tools might fail to detect those intraoperative pathologic changes.

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.

Perceptions and Awareness of Overlapping Surgery in Patients With Shoulder Pain Presenting to an Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Clinic

Purpose

To determine patients’ baseline understanding of overlapping surgery and to evaluate how education changes the perception of the practice in orthopaedic shoulder pain patients at a single institution.

Methods

All patients who visit the clinic with a chief complaint of shoulder pain were given a 15-question survey. The initial 15-question survey assessed demographics, pre-existing knowledge on the practice of overlapping surgery, and their perception of it. They immediately read a statement on the practice of overlapping surgery. After reading the statement, patients were re-evaluated on their level of concern.

Results

A total of 100 patients (55 female, 45 male) completed the survey. Mean age was 53.0 (range, 18-85) years. In total, 38 (38%) had no knowledge on the practice of overlapping surgery; 27 (27%) reported their level of concern as a 1, the lowest level of concern. Overall, 84 (84%) patients reported a level of concern of 3 (median) or lower, indicating a low level of concern. A total of 95 (95%) patients reported either a decrease or no change in level of concern after reading an educational statement on overlapping surgery practices, and 60 (60%) believed there would be no impact if an overlapping surgery was performed. If a patient reported a high level of concern, the most common reasons cited were that the attending physician may not be available during the whole case (15%); that a resident, fellow, or physician assistant may jeopardize the patient’s care (24%); or that a critical step would be missed (37%).

Conclusions

There is a low level of baseline understanding of overlapping surgery in patients with shoulder pain. An educational component added during patient counseling proved to be effective in decreasing the level of concern. This study suggests that counseling and education on overlapping surgery may change patient perception and opinion of the practice.

Clinical Relevance

Serves as an evaluation of the knowledge of a specific patient population on overlapping surgery and how it changes with counseling and education.

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.

Change in Policy Allowing Overlapping Surgery Decreases Length of Stay in an Academic, Safety-Net Hospital

BACKGROUND

The practice of surgeons running overlapping operating rooms has recently come under scrutiny.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact of hospital policy allowing overlapping rooms in the case of patients admitted to a tertiary care, safety-net hospital for urgent neurosurgical procedures.

METHODS

The neurosurgery service at the hospital being studied transitioned from routinely allowing 1 room per day (period 1) to overlapping rooms (period 2), with the second room being staffed by the same attending surgeon. Patients undergoing neurosurgical intervention in each period were retrospectively compared. Demographics, indication, case type, complications, outcomes, and total charges were tracked.

RESULTS

There were 59 urgent cases in period 1 and 63 in period 2. In the case of these patients, the length of stay was significantly decreased in period 2 (13.09 d vs 19.52; P = .006). The time from admission to surgery (wait time) was also significantly decreased in period 2 (5.12 d vs 7.00; P = .04). Total charges also trended towards less in period 2 (${\$}$150 942 vs ${\$}$200 075; P = .05). Surgical complications were no different between the groups (16.9% vs 14.3%; P = .59), but medical complications were significantly decreased in period 2 (14.3% vs 30.5%; P = .009). Significantly more patients were discharged to home in period 2 (69.8% vs 42.4%; P = .003).

CONCLUSION

As a matter of policy, allowing overlapping rooms significantly reduces the length of stay in the case of a vulnerable population in need of urgent surgery at a single safety-net academic institution. This may be due to a reduction in medical complications in these patients.

What Does it Mean for a Surgeon to “Run Two Rooms”? A Comprehensive Literature Review of Overlapping and Concurrent Surgery Policies

The aim of this study was to review and analyze all of the “concurrent surgery” (CS) and “overlapping surgery” (OS) literature with the goal of: standardizing terminology, defining discrepancies in the literature and proposing solutions for the current challenges of regulating surgery to achieve maximal safety and efficiency. The CS and OS literature has grown exponentially over the past two years. Before this, there were no significant publications addressing this topic. There is an extremely wide variance on how “running two rooms” is defined and whether it should be permitted. These differences affect our patients’ perception of this practice. The literature lacks any comprehensive review of the topic and terminology. We performed a PubMed search to identify studies that considered the issue of OS. The terms “overlapping surgery”, “concurrent surgery”, and “simultaneous surgery” (SS) were used in the query. We then analyzed the publications identified. The literature contained 18 published studies analyzing OS safety between November 2016 and June 2018. Eight were neurosurgical studies, three were orthopedic, and the remaining seven articles were in other surgical specialties. A total of 1,207,155 surgical cases (range 250–>500,000 patients) were analyzed among the 18 studies. There were 57,880 (5.04%) OS cases. The OS rates in the individual studies ranged from 1.2 to 68 per cent (Table 1). Neurosurgical studies had the highest average OS rate of 54 per cent (range 37–68%), whereas the average OS rate in orthopedic surgery was 43 per cent (range 2.7–68%). Approximately one-third of the studies were multicenter investigations (27.7%). The studies measured more than 20 distinct outcomes, but there were only five outcomes that were included in the majority of the studies: mortality rates, reoperation rates, procedure length of time, readmission rates, and hospital length of stay. The current body of literature repeatedly demonstrates that OS is a safe and effective option when undertaken by experienced surgeons who practice it frequently. For successful OS, the Mandatory Attending Portion for two surgeries must not overlap and Unnecessary Anesthesia Time must be prohibited. Hospitals and surgical specialty organizations must implement policies to assure the safe practice of OS.

In Vivo Microscopy in Neurosurgical Oncology

Intraoperative neurosurgical histopathologic diagnoses rely on evaluation of rapid tissue preparations such as frozen sections and smears with conventional light microscopy. Although useful, these techniques are time consuming and therefore cannot provide real-time intraoperative feedback. In vivo molecular imaging techniques are emerging as novel methods for generating real-time diagnostic histopathologic images of tumors and their surrounding tissues. These imaging techniques rely on contrast generated by exogenous fluorescent dyes, autofluorescence of endogenous molecules, fluorescence decay of excited molecules, or light scattering. Large molecular imaging instruments are being miniaturized for clinical in vivo use. This review discusses pertinent imaging systems that have been developed for neurosurgical use and imaging techniques currently under development for neurosurgical molecular imaging.