Search

Background: Surgical care significantly contributes to healthcare-associated greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). Surgeon attitudes about mitigation of the impact of surgical practice on environmental sustainability remains poorly understood. To better understand surgeon perspectives globally, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery established a joint Sustainability in Surgical Practice (SSP) Task Force and distributed a survey on sustainability., Methods: Our survey asked about (1) surgeon attitudes toward sustainability, (2) ability to estimate the carbon footprint of surgical procedures and supplies, (3) concerns about the negative impacts of sustainable interventions, (4) willingness to change specific practices, and (5) preferred educational topics and modalities. Questions were primarily written in Likert-scale format. A clustering analysis was performed to determine whether survey respondents could be grouped into distinct subsets to inform future outreach and education efforts., Results: We received 1024 responses, predominantly from North America and Europe. The study revealed that while 63% of respondents were motivated to enhance the sustainability of their practice, less than 10% could accurately estimate the carbon footprint of surgical activities. Most were not concerned that sustainability efforts would negatively impact their practice and showed readiness to adopt proposed sustainable practices. Online webinars and modules were the preferred educational methods. A clustering analysis identified a group particularly concerned yet willing to adopt sustainable changes., Conclusion: Surgeons believe that operating room waste is a critical issue and are willing to change practice to improve it. However, there exists a gap in understanding the environmental impact of surgical procedures and supplies, and a sizable minority have some degree of concern about potential adverse consequences of implementing sustainable policies. This study uniquely provides an international, multidisciplinary snapshot of surgeons' attitudes, knowledge, concerns, willingness, and preferred educational modalities related to mitigating the environmental impact of surgical practice., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The aim of this study was to evaluate the trend in use, feasibility and safety of laparoscopy in a single level 1 European trauma centre. Laparoscopy in abdominal trauma is gaining acceptance as a diagnostic and a therapeutic tool as it reduces surgical invasiveness and may reduce post-operative morbidity. All trauma patients who underwent a laparoscopic procedure between January 2013 and December 2017 were retrospectively analysed. A sub-analysis of isolated abdominal trauma was also performed. There has been a significant increase in the use of this technique in the considered time period. A total of 40 patients were included in the study: 17 diagnostic laparoscopies and overall 32 therapeutic laparoscopies. Conversion rate was 15%. All patients were hemodynamically stable. The majority of patients were younger than 60 years, with an ASA score of I-II and sustained a blunt trauma. Mean ISS score was 17. Colon and diaphragm were the most commonly laparoscopically diagnosed injuries, while splenectomy was the most common operation. The average operating time was 106 min. There were no missed injuries, no SSI, no re-interventions and no mortality related to the surgical procedure. The average length of stay was 14 days. No significant difference was found in the isolated abdominal trauma group. Laparoscopy is an emergent safe and effective technique for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes in selected stable abdominal penetrating or blunt trauma patients. However, these results need to be put in relation with the level of the centre and the expertise of the surgeon.