Search

The traditional and majoritarian view of medicine as a vocation rather than a job remains the basic principle that motivates doctors. Nevertheless, over the last two decades, there has been an erosion of their authority and an inability to fulfil the best care they can provide with successive cuts to the NHS and a relative salary reduction. That festering discontentment likely spurred many doctors to seek a route to express their feelings by taking IA. Nevertheless, for many, the ethical turmoil of potentially causing harm to patients from withdrawing services cannot be overemphasised. The conflict between professional duty and personal gain is at its acutest at such times. It remains to be seen how this will be reflected in campaign turnouts and on the picket line. Ultimately, full-blown strike action is neither in doctors' nor the government's interest. Patients have long memories, especially as many are still reeling from the injustices of the pandemic, albeit doctors and others on the front line were celebrated as heroes. The media has little regard for the legal case of strikes or any ethical basis. They will record events for posterity, ensuring that stories on both sides are personalised and sensationalised. The real casualty in this could be the NHS, which is yet again at the forefront for the wrong reasons. On the other hand, the doctors’ strike actions and those of others in healthcare might, in part, hope that these would wake the public to defend an institution at the highest risk in its 75 years since Aneurin Bevan gave birth to it.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are glucose-lowering agents being increasingly used for cardio-renal protection in patients with or without type 2 diabetes (T2DM). This systematic review identified the clinical risk factors and outcomes of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) in patients undergoing bariatric and metabolic surgery (BMS) on SGLT2i. We found 12 studies with a total of 16 patients (10 females; mean age of 51 years). Apart from one patient, all patients developed DKA in the post-operative period presenting at a median of 5 days after surgery. Most of the patients were euglycaemic on presentation with DKA. Patients undergoing BMS on SGLT2i are at increased risk of developing DKA that can mimic post-operative surgical complications causing diagnostic dilemmas, especially with the euglycaemic variant, and delaying treatment.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the standard of care for benign gallstone disease. There are no robust Indian data on the 30-day morbidity and mortality of this procedure. A prospective multicentre observational study was conducted by the Indian Association of Gastro-Intestinal Endo Surgeons (IAGES) to assess the 30-day morbidity and mortality of LC in India.Participating surgeons were invited to submit data on all consecutive LCs for benign diseases performed between 09/12/2020 and 08/03/2021 in adults. Primary outcome measures were 30-day morbidity and mortality. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify variables significantly associated with primary outcomes.A total of 293 surgeons from 125 centres submitted data on 6666 patients. Of these, 71.7% (n = 4780) were elective. A total LC was carried out in 95% (n = 6331). Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy was performed in 1.9% (n = 126) and the procedure were converted to open in 1.4% of patients. Bile duct injury was seen in 0.3% (n = 20). Overall, 30-day morbidity and mortality were 11.1% (n = 743) and 0.2% (n = 14), respectively. Nature of practice, ischemic heart disease, emergency surgery, postoperative intensive care, and postoperative hospital stay were independently associated with 30-day mortality. Age, weight, body mass index, duration of symptoms, nature of the practice, history of Coronavirus Disease-2019, previous major abdominal surgery, acute cholecystitis, use of electrosurgical or ultrasonic or bipolar energy for cystic artery control; use of polymer clips for cystic duct control; conversion to open surgery, subtotal cholecystectomy, simultaneous common bile duct exploration, mucocele, gangrenous gall bladder, dense adhesions, intraoperative cholangiogram, and use of drain were independently associated with 30-day morbidity.LC has 30-day morbidity of 11.1%, 30-day mortality of 0.2%, conversion to open rate of 1.4%, and bile duct injury rate of 0.3% in India.

Patient and public involvement (PPI) has gained increased attention in research circles. The consistency of PPI reporting has been addressed by the development of validated checklists such as GRIPP and GRIPP2. The primary aim of this study was to identify the incidence of PPI reporting in bariatric research. MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL/Cochrane databases were searched for publications between 1st January 2018 to 31st December 2021 for "bariatric surgery" OR "weight loss surgery" OR "obesity surgery" AND "randomized controlled trials." Ninety studies fulfilled exclusion criteria; two studies reported direct PPI involvement, one indirectly used PPI and one reported not using PPI methods. No other study made direct or indirect mention of PPI. Concluding, that GRIPP2 and PPI reporting in bariatric surgery trials is lacking.

Marginal ulcers are a recognized complication of gastric bypass procedures for obesity. Perforated marginal ulcer (PMU) is a life-threatening complication of marginal ulcers. We performed a systematic review to understand the presentation, management, and outcomes of PMUs. PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase databases were searched to identify all studies on PMUs after gastric bypass procedures. A total of 610 patients were identified from 26 articles. The mean age was 39.8±2.59 years, and females represented most of the cohort (67%). The mean body mass index was 43.2±5.67 kg/m

BACKGROUND: Never Events (NE) are serious clinical incidents that are wholly preventable if appropriate institutional safeguards are in place and followed. They are often used as a surrogate of the quality of healthcare delivered by an institution. Most NEs are surgical and orthopaedic surgery is one of the most involved specialties. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify common NE themes associated with orthopaedics within the National Health Service (NHS) of England. METHOD: We conducted an observational study analysing the annual NE data published by the NHS England from 2012 to 2020 to collate all orthopaedic surgery-related NE and construct relevant recurring themes. RESULTS: We identified 460 orthopaedic NE out of a total of 3247 (14.16%) reported NE to NHS England. There were 206 Wrong implants/prostheses under 8 different themes. Wrong hip and knee prosthesis were the commonest “wrong implants” (n = 94; 45.63% and n = 91; 44.17% respectively). There were 197 “wrong-site surgery” incidents in 22 different themes. The commonest of these was the laterality problems accounting for 64 (32.48%) incidents followed by 63 (31.97%) incidents of wrong spinal level interventions. There were 18 (9.13%) incidents of intervention on the wrong patients and 17 (8.62%) wrong incisions. Retained pieces of instruments were the commonest retained foreign body with 15 (26.13%) incidents. The next categories were retained drill parts and retained instruments with 13 (22.80%) incidents each. CONCLUSION: We identified 47 different themes of NE specific to orthopaedic surgery. Awareness of these themes would help in their prevention. Site marking can be challenging in the presence of cast and on operating on the digits and spine. Addition of a real-time intra-operative implant scan to the National Joint Registry can avoid wrong implant selection while fiducial markers, intraoperative imaging, O-arm navigation, and second time-out could help prevent wrong level spinal surgery.

Background When surgery resumed following outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, guidelines recommended the prioritization of patients with greater obesity-related comorbidity and/or higher Body Mass Index (BMI). Objectives The aim of this study was to record the effect of the pandemic on total number, patient demographic and peri-operative outcomes of elective bariatric surgery in the United Kingdom. Setting and Method The United Kingdom National Bariatric Surgical Registry was used to identify patients that underwent elective bariatric surgery during the pandemic (one year from 1st April 2020). Characteristics of this group were compared with a pre-pandemic cohort. Primary outcomes were case volume, case-mix and provider. National Health Service (NHS) cases were analyzed for baseline health status and peri-operative outcomes. Chi-square, Fisher’s exact or Student’s t-test were used as appropriate. Results Total number of cases reduced to one third of pre-pandemic volume (8615 to 2930). Operating volume reduction varied, with thirty-six (45%) hospitals experiencing a 75-100% reduction. Cases performed in the NHS fell from 74% to 53% (p

Background Bariatric surgery can influence the presentation, diagnosis, and management of gastrointestinal cancers. Oesophago-Gastric (OG) malignancies in patients who have had a prior bariatric procedure have not been fully characterised. Objective To characterise OG malignancies after bariatric procedures. Setting University Hospital, United Kingdom. Methods We performed a retrospective, multi-centre observational study of patients with OG malignancies after bariatric surgery to characterise this condition. Results This study includes 170 patients from 75 centres in 25 countries who underwent bariatric procedures between 1985 and 2020. At the time of the bariatric procedure, the mean age was 50.2 ± 10 years and the mean weight 128.8 ± 28.9 kg. Females comprised 57.3% (n=98) of the population. Most (n=64) patients underwent a Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) followed by Adjustable Gastric Band (AGB) (n = 46) and Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG) (n = 43). Time to cancer diagnosis after bariatric surgery was 9.5 ± 7.4 years and mean weight at diagnosis was 87.4 ± 21.9 kg. The time lag was 5.9 ± 4.1 years after SG compared to 9.4 ± 7.1 years after RYGB and 10.5 ± 5.7 years after AGB. One-third of patients presented with metastatic disease. The majority of tumours were adenocarcinoma (82.9%). Approximately 1 in 5 patients underwent palliative treatment from the outset. Time from diagnosis to mortality was under one year for most patients who died over the intervening period. Conclusions The OGMOS (Oesophago-Gastric Malignancies after Obesity/ Bariatric Surgery) study presents the largest series to date of patients developing OG malignancies after bariatric surgery and attempts to characterise this condition.

Background Bariatric surgery in patients with BMI over 50 kg/m2 is a challenging task. The aim of this study was to address main issues regarding perioperative management of these patients by using a worldwide survey. Methods An online 48-item questionnaire-based survey on perioperative management of patients with a BMI superior to 50 kg/m2 was ideated by 15 bariatric surgeons from 9 different countries. The questionnaire was emailed to all members of the International Federation of Surgery for Obesity (IFSO). Responses were collected and analyzed by the authors. Results 789 bariatric surgeons from 73 countries participated in the survey. Most surgeons (89.9%) believed that metabolic/bariatric surgery (MBS) on patients with BMI over 50 kg/m2 should only be performed by expert bariatric surgeons. Half of the participants (55.3%) believed that weight loss must be encouraged before surgery and 42.6% of surgeons recommended an excess weight loss of at least 10%. However, only 3.6% of surgeons recommended the insertion of an Intragastric Balloon as bridge therapy before surgery. Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG) was considered the best choice for patients younger than 18 or older than 65 years old. SG and One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass were the most common procedures for individuals between 18 and 65 years. Half of the surgeons believed that a 2-stage approach should be offered to patients with BMI > 50 kg/m2, with SG being the first step. Postoperative thromboprophylaxis was recommended for 2 and 4 weeks by 37.8% and 37.7% of participants, respectively. Conclusion This survey demonstrated worldwide variations in bariatric surgery practice regarding patients with a BMI superior to 50 kg/m2. Careful analysis of these results is useful for identifying several areas for future research and consensus building.

Laparoscopic surgery has many advantages over open surgery. At the same time, it is not without its risks. In this review, we discuss steps that could enhance the safety of laparoscopic surgery. Some of the important safety considerations are ruling out pregnancy in women of the childbearing age group; advanced discussion with the patient regarding unexpected intraoperative situations, and ensuring appropriate equipment is available. Important perioperative safety considerations include thromboprophylaxis; antibiotic prophylaxis; patient allergies; proper positioning of the patient, stack, and monitor(s); patient appropriate pneumoperitoneum; ergonomic port placement; use of lowest possible intra-abdominal pressure; use of additional five-millimetre (mm) ports as needed; safe use of energy devices and laparoscopic staplers; low threshold for a second opinion; backing out if unsafe to proceed; avoiding hand-over in the middle of the procedure; ensuring all planned procedures have been performed; inclusion of laparoscopic retrieval bags and specimens in the operating count; avoiding 10-15 mm ports for placement of drains; appropriate port closures; and use of long-acting local anaesthetic agents for analgesia. Important postoperative considerations include adequate analgesia; early ambulation; careful attention to early warning scores; and appropriate discharge advice.

Baseline demographic characteristics and operations undertaken for patients having bariatric surgery in the United Kingdom are largely unknown. This study aimed to describe the profile of patients having primary bariatric surgery in the National Health Service (NHS) or by self-pay, and associated operations performed for both pathways. The National Bariatric Surgery Registry dataset for 5 years between January 2015 and December 2019 was used. 34 580 patients underwent primary bariatric surgery, of which 75.9% were NHS patients. Mean patient age and initial body mass index were significantly higher for NHS compared to self-pay patients (mean age 45.8 ± 11.3 [SD] vs. 43.0 ± 12.0 years and initial body mass index 48.0 ± 7.9 vs. 42.9 ± 7.3 kg/m2, p

Aim Bariatric-metabolic surgery is approved by the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for people with severe obesity and type 2 diabetes (T2DM) (including class 1 obesity after 2014). This study analysed baseline characteristics, disease severity and operations undertaken in people with obesity and T2DM undergoing bariatric-metabolic surgery in the UK National Health Service (NHS) compared to those without T2DM. Methods Baseline characteristics, trends over time and operations undertaken were analysed for people undergoing primary bariatric-metabolic surgery in the NHS using the National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR) for 11 years from 2009 to 2019. Clinical practice before and after the publication of the NICE guidance (2014) was examined. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine associations with T2DM status and the procedure undertaken. Results 14,948/51,715 (28.9%) participants had T2DM, with 10,626 (71.1%) on oral hypoglycaemics, 4322 (28.9%) on insulin/other injectables, and with T2DM diagnosed 10+ years before surgery in 3876 (25.9%). Participants with T2DM, compared to those without T2DM, were associated with older age (p

Background: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common metabolic and bariatric surgical (MBS) procedure worldwide. Despite the desired effect of SG on weight loss and remission of obesity-associated medical problems, there are some concerns regarding the need to do revisional/conversional surgeries after SG. This study aims to make an algorithmic clinical approach based on an expert-modified Delphi consensus regarding redo-surgeries after SG, to give bariatric and metabolic surgeons a guideline that might help for the best clinical decision. Methods: Forty-six recognized bariatric and metabolic surgeons from 25 different countries participated in this Delphi consensus study in two rounds to develop a consensus on redo-surgeries after SG. An agreement/disagreement ≥ 70.0% on statements was considered to indicate a consensus. Results: Consensus was reached for 62 of 72 statements and experts did not achieve consensus on 10 statements after two rounds of online voting. Most of the experts believed that multi-disciplinary team evaluation should be done in all redo-procedures after SG and there should be at least 12 months of medical and supportive management before performing redo-surgeries after SG for insufficient weight loss, weight regain, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Also, experts agreed that in case of symptomatic GERD in the presence of adequate weight loss, medical treatment for at least 1 to 2 years is an acceptable option and agreed that Roux-en Y gastric bypass is an appropriate option in this situation. There was disagreement consensus on efficacy of omentopexy in rotation and efficacy of fundoplication in the presence of a dilated fundus and GERD. Conclusion: Redo-surgeries after SG is still an important issue among bariatric and metabolic surgeons. The proper time and procedure selection for redo-surgery need careful considerations. Although multi-disciplinary team evaluation plays a key role to evaluate best options in these situations, an algorithmic clinical approach based on the expert's consensus as a guideline can help for the best clinical decision-making. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Background Bariatric and metabolic surgery (BMS) has a low complication and readmission rate; complications however, when they do occur, can be major and life-threatening. Routine post-operative blood testing (POBT) is commonplace following BMS to assess for complications but has resource implications. We aimed to assess whether POBT in our unit predicted complication or readmission rates. We found no existing studies evaluating the efficacy of routine POBT in the bariatric surgery cohort. Methods All patients undergoing BMS between July ’20 – June ’21 were retrospectively identified from our local database. Data gathered were: Patient demographics; operation, POBT (FBC, U&E, CRP); length of stay; 30-day complications and 30-day readmissions. Financial cost of POBT were also calculated. Descriptive statistics and Fishers exact test were used to analyse results. Results 149 patients were identified (OAGB - 81, RYGB - 32, LSG - 36); all had POBT. 115 patients (77%) were discharged on the expected post-operative day (median LOS - 1 days). 38 patients (25.5%) had abnormal POBT results according to defined parameters laid out in our protocol. Abnormal POBT resulted in a change to management plan in 8 patients (5.4%), with subsequent increased LOS for further investigation or observation; in all of these cases there were signs of deterioration via observations and/or clinical symptoms. 8 (5.4%) patients were readmitted in 30-days, 3 of whom had abnormal POBT following their surgery. There was no statistical correlation between abnormal POBT and 30-day readmission rate, p=0.42. POBT in the cohort total cost was in the region of £2400. Conclusions In this study we observed that POBT did not predict adverse outcome without clinical signs of deterioration. A considerable number of POBT are performed routinely without clinical indication. A patient-specific approach is recommended based on intra-operative and post-operative clinical assessment rather than routine usage, resulting in cost savings to the Trust and better patient flow with safe and efficient discharges. It is also important to consider the financial impact of performing routine POBT in all patients undergoing BMS; due to both the costs of POBT, staff hours as well as the potential costs due to delayed discharges.

Background Preoperative Obstructive Sleep Apnoea (OSA) screening, followed by sleep studies as indicated, is commonly performed for patients undergoing bariatric surgery in our hospital but not for patients with similar weight undergoing other surgeries such as laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The purpose of this audit was to understand if laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be performed safely in patients with a Body Mass Index (BMI) ≥35 kg/m2 without such screening. Methods Patients with a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy between 2nd May 2014 and 4th April 2022 were included. Patients with known OSA were excluded and no patients were referred for sleep studies. Data on patient demographics, co-morbidities, and any intraoperative or postoperative surgical complications were extracted and analysed. Univariate associations between different preoperative and operative variables and 30-day morbidity were studied using the Fisher's exact test. Results A total of 434 patients were included in the audit (64 male, 370 female). The mean age was 49 +/- 15 years. The mean weight and BMI were 110 +/- 20 kg (range 70–79kg) and 37 +/- 6 kg/m2 respectively. The mean operating time was 70 +/- 31 minutes (median=62). Approximately, 92% (398/434) had a day case procedure. The readmission rate at 30-day was 1% (5/434). There were no intraoperative complications. 17 patients had post-operative complications including deep vein thrombosis (n=2), leak in transverse colon secondary to cholecysto-colic fistula (n=1), wound infection (n=9), bile leak and post-op ERCP (n=3), common bile duct stone requiring ERCP (n=1) and pneumonia (n=1). No patients required ITU or HDU admission for further organ support. The 30-day mortality rate was 0% (0/434) while the 30-day morbidity rate was 3.9% (17/434). ASA grade, previous abdominal surgery, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, smoking history, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, ischemic heart disease, fatty liver disease, preoperative liver reducing diet, number of ports, and conversion to laparotomy were not associated with increased 30-day morbidity rate (p Conclusions This audit demonstrated that laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be performed safely without the need for preoperative sleep studies in patients with BMI ≥35 kg/m2.

Background The availability and popularity of bariatric and metabolic surgery (BMS) continues to increase worldwide and in turn so do the resources allocated to it. The last NBSR report (2020) demonstrated that 70% of patients were discharged on the second postoperative day and 80% left after the third day. An amended protocol was implemented within our Trust switching from a 2–3 night stay and reducing this to a planned one-night stay for a more efficient service. This review evaluates the safety and efficacy of a one-night stay protocol. Methods All patients undergoing BMS between two sets of dates were retrospectively identified from our local database, pre and post protocol change. Group A (old protocol, July-December ’19) and Group B (one-night stay protocol, July ’20-July ’21). Group B capture time was extended due to smaller numbers due to COVID. Data gathered included: Patient demographics (Age, Gender, ASA, Weight, BMI); operation; length of stay (LOS); 30-day complications, 30-day mortality, and 30-day readmission rates. Descriptive statistics and Chi-squared test were used to analyse results. Results Group A had 94 patient and Group B 149 patients. Patient demographics, weight and ASA were similar in both groups. There were significantly more RYGB in Group A whilst more OAGBs and sleeves in Group B: RYGB; (48[51%] vs. 30[20%]), OAGB; (32[34%] vs. 80[53%]), Sleeve; (13[14%] vs. 36[24%]). Median LOS reduced from 3 days to 1 day and mean LOS 3.2 days to 1.3 days. In Group B, 115 patients (77%) were discharged on post-operative day 1 vs. 18 (19%) in Group A. In the 34 (23%) of patients that required stay beyond day 1 in Group B the most common reason was post-operative nausea and vomiting (n=8). Other frequent reasons were pain (n=5), low urine output/AKI (n=5) and not tolerating oral diet (n=4). There were no statistically significant differences between groups for 30-day complication (6[6%] vs. 5[3%] p=0.4) or re-admission (4[4%] vs. 8[5%] p=0.9) rates. In sub-group analysis, there was no difference between operation type and LOS/complication rates. In a review of the readmissions, it was not felt any were avoidable and only 1/8 readmissions were within 48h of discharge - this patient already had an extended admission. Conclusions This study demonstrated that a planned one-night stay following BMS is both safe and effective; facilitating early patient discharges whilst having the necessary safety netting steps for those who require a require an extended period in hospital. The next step would be to explore the safety of day case surgery for selected patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy.

Purpose of Review Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) has had an enormous impact on all aspects of healthcare, but its effect on patients needing surgery and surgeons has been disproportionate. In this review, we aim to understand the impact of the pandemic on surgical patients and teams. We compiled the emerging data on pre-operative screening methods, vaccinations, safe-surgery pathways and surgical techniques and make recommendations for evidence-based safe-surgical pathways. We also present surgical outcomes for emergency, oncological and benign surgery in the context of the pandemic. Finally, we attempt to address the impact of the pandemic on patients, staff and surgical training and provide perspectives for the future. Recent Findings Surgical teams have developed consensus guidelines and established research priorities and safety precautions for surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence supports that surgery in patients with a peri-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection carries substantial risks, but risk mitigation strategies are effective at reducing harm to staff and patients. Summary Surgery has increased risk for patients and staff, but this can be mitigated effectively, especially for elective surgery. Elective surgery can be safely performed during the COVID-19 pandemic employing the strategies discussed in this review.

UK guidelines recommend an HbA1c 0.05). There was no difference in 30-day re-admission rates between groups 2.8%, 2.9% and 3.3% (p = 0.983). At 6 months and 1 year, there was sustained and equal reduction in HbA1c in all groups (p

Background Fasting during Ramadan is one of the five pillars of the Muslim faith. Despite the positive effects of fasting on health, there are no guidelines or clear recommendations regarding fasting after metabolic/bariatric surgery (MBS). The current study reports the result of a modified Delphi consensus among expert metabolic/bariatric surgeons with experience in managing patients who fast after MBS. Methods A committee of 61 well-known metabolic and bariatric surgeons from 24 countries was created to participate in the Delphi consensus. The committee voted on 45 statements regarding recommendations and controversies around fasting after MBS. An agreement/disagreement ≥ of 70.0% was regarded as consensus. Results The experts reached a consensus on 40 out of 45 statements after two rounds of voting. One hundred percent of the experts believed that fasting needs special nutritional support in patients who underwent MBS. The decision regarding fasting must be coordinated among the surgeon, the nutritionist and the patient. At any time after MBS, 96.7% advised stopping fasting in the presence of persistent symptoms of intolerance. Seventy percent of the experts recommended delaying fasting after MBS for 6 to 12 months after combined and malabsorptive procedures according to the patient's situation and surgeon's experience, and 90.1% felt that proton pump inhibitors should be continued in patients who start fasting less than 6 months after MBS. There was consensus that fasting may help in weight loss, improvement/remission of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, dyslipidemia, hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus among 88.5%, 90.2%, 88.5%, 85.2% and 85.2% of experts, respectively. Conclusion Experts voted and reached a consensus on 40 statements covering various aspects of fasting after MBS.

Major updates to 1991 National Institutes of Health guidelines for bariatric surgeryMetabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is recommended for individuals with a body mass index (BMI) >35 kg/m2, regardless of presence, absence, or severity of co-morbidities.MBS should be considered for individuals with metabolic disease and BMI of 30-34.9 kg/m2.BMI thresholds should be adjusted in the Asian population such that a BMI >25 kg/m2 suggests clinical obesity, and individuals with BMI >27.5 kg/m2 should be offered MBS.Long-term results of MBS consistently demonstrate safety and efficacy.Appropriately selected children and adolescents should be considered for MBS.(Surg Obes Relat Dis 2022; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2022.08.013) © 2022 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. All rights reserved.

Background It has been suggested that patients with a Body Mass Index (BMI) of >60 kg/m2 should be offered expedited Bariatric Surgery (BS) during the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The main objective of this study was to assess the safety of this approach. Methods We conducted a global study of patients who underwent BS between 1/05/2020 and 31/10/2020. Patients were divided into three groups according to their preoperative BMI - Group I (BMI60 kg/m2). The effect of preoperative BMI on 30-day morbidity and mortality, procedure choice, COVID-19 specific safety protocols, and comorbidities was assessed. Results This study included 7084 patients (5197;73.4% females). The mean preoperative weight and BMI were 119.49±24.4 Kgs and 43.03±6.9 Kg/m2, respectively. Group I included 6024 (85%) patients, whereas Groups II and III included 905 (13%) and 155 (2%) patients, respectively. The 30-day mortality rate was higher in Group III (p=0.001). The complication rate and COVID-19 infection were not different. Comorbidities were significantly more likely in Group III (p=70 kg/m2 had a 30-day mortality of 7.7% (2/26). None of these patients underwent a Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass. Conclusion The 30-day mortality rate was significantly higher in patients with BMI >60 kg/m2. There was, however, no significant difference in complications rates in different BMI groups, probably due to differences in procedure selection.

Introduction Laparoscopic surgery is now firmly established in the field of gastrointestinal (GI) surgery and has replaced open surgery in many areas. The purpose of this exercise was to prepare a consensus statement highlighting the important principles of laparoscopic GI surgery. Methods A committee of 38 experts in laparoscopic GI surgery proposed and voted on 149 statements in two rounds following a modified Delphi protocol. Results A consensus was achieved on 133 statements after two rounds. There was 100% consensus on informing the team of unusual complex operations, asking for a second opinion when needed and following the ergonomics principles. Additionally, 94.7% advised to have multiple options for abdominal entry, 100% agreed on tailoring the first port site to the patient, and 84.2% advised to use Veress needles with caution. Moreover, 97.4% consensus was reached on keeping the intra-abdominal pressure at the minimum required, and 92.1% agreed that a pressure of 12 mm Hg is adequate for most intra-abdominal surgery. There was a complete (100%) consensus on using cartridges of appropriate height, checking the doughnuts after using circular staplers, adding any foreign body inserted into the abdomen to the operating count, ensuring the integrity of instruments on removal from the abdomen, and avoiding handing over an operation in the middle. There was a 100% consensus on focusing on precision, not the speed, and learning to use the non-dominant hand effectively. Conclusion A 38 experts achieved a consensus on 133 statements. Increased awareness of these should enhance the safety of patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery.

Background The progressive growth of the older patients with obesity represents a challenge to the weight management teams. Although initially, old age was a relative contraindication to the surgical option, current advances in laparoscopic techniques and perioperative optimization protocols have changed the old notion. However, the performance of bariatric procedures in the older patients during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic carries a potential risk. This study aimed to assess the safety of bariatric surgery (BS) in older patients during the pandemic. Methods We conducted a prospective international study of patients who underwent BS between 1/05/2020 and 31/10/2020. Patients were divided into two groups - older patients ≥65-year-old (Group I) and young < 65-year-old (Group II). Two groups were compared for 30-day morbidity and mortality. Results We included 7084 patients, the mean age was 40.35±11.9 years, and 5197 (73.4%) were females. The mean preoperative weight and BMI were 119.49±24.4 Kgs and 43.03±6.9 Kg/m2, respectively. The overall comorbidities were significantly higher in Group I, p= Conclusions Bariatric surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in the older patients (≥65 years old) is associated with a higher complication rate than the younger age group. However, the mortality and postoperative COVID-19 infection rates are comparable to the younger age group.

Background Avoidable medical errors and never events represent a significant problem with negative consequences on the patient, the healthcare professionals, and the healthcare facilities. Hand surgery is a unique multidisciplinary speciality in which orthopaedics, plastic and general surgery are usually involved in the care of their patients, which makes this speciality prone to medical errors. The study highlights these preventable errors in hand surgery in NHS England. Methods We analysed hand surgery-related preventable medical errors published by the NHS England during the last ten years from 2012 till July 2021. Results Out of 3742 never events during the review period, only 50 never events related to hand surgery were found, representing (1.3%). The majority were under wrong-site surgery category 30 (60%), which included 17 (57%) wrong finger or digit surgery followed by five wrong digit or thumb injections, three wrong K wire placement, and three scaphoid bones were mistakenly removed during trapeziectomy. The second most common category was wrong incision 15 (30%), with 13 wrong finger incisions, two wrong carpal tunnel incisions for trigger finger release. Four patients had wrong procedures, including CTR rather than trigger finger or Dequervain release or an unnecessary carpal tunnel release in addition to one wrong hand tendon transfer. Lastly, only one patient had a wrong injection for carpal tunnel that was intended for another patient. Conclusions Hand surgery-related medical errors represent 1.3% of the whole Never Events reported. Awareness of these incidents will help prevent their occurrence in the future.

Background The ward round is an integral part of everyday surgical practice. It is a complex clinical activity that requires clinical management and communication skills. It has an impact on patient safety, mortality and quality of the healthcare services delivered. This study reports the results of a consensus-building exercise on the common aspects of the general surgical ward rounds. Methods The consensus-building committee involving a range of stakeholders from 16 NHS trusts took part in this consensus exercise. The members discussed and suggested a series of statements concerning surgical ward round. An agreement of ≥ 70% amongst members was regarded as a consensus. Results Thirty-two members voted on 60 statements. There was a consensus on fifty-nine statements after the first round of voting, and one statement was modified before it reached consensus in the second round. The statements covered nine sections: a preparation phase, team allocation, multidisciplinary approach to the ward round, structure of the round, teaching considerations, confidentiality and privacy, documentation, post-round arrangements, and weekend round. There was a consensus on spending time to prepare for the round, consultant-led round, involving the nursing staff, an MDT round at the beginning and end of the week, a minimum of 5 minutes allocated to each patient, utilisation of round checklist, afternoon virtual round, and a clear handover and plan for the weekend. Conclusion The consensus committee achieved agreement on several aspects concerning the surgical ward round. This should help improve the care of general surgical practice on wards.

Background Emergency general surgery (EGS) patients account for more than one-third of admissions to hospitals in the National Health Service (NHS) in England. The associated mortality of these patients has been quoted as approximately eight times higher than that of elective surgical admissions. This study used a modified Delphi approach to identify research priorities in EGS. The aim was to establish a research agenda using a formal consensus-based approach in an effort to identify questions relevant to EGS that could ultimately guide research to improve outcomes for this cohort. Methods Three rounds were conducted using an electronic questionnaire and involved health care professionals, research personnel, patients and their relatives. In the first round, stakeholders were invited to submit clinical research questions that they felt were priorities for future research. In rounds two and three, participants were asked to score individual questions in order of priority using a 5-point Likert scale. Between rounds, an expert panel analysed results before forwarding questions to subsequent rounds. Results Ninety-two EGS research questions were proposed in Phase 1. Following the first round of prioritisation, forty-seven questions progressed to the final phase. A final list of seventeen research questions were identified from the final round of prioritisation, categorised as condition-specific questions of high interest within general EGS, emergency colorectal surgery, non-technical and health services research. A broad range of research questions were identified including questions on peri-operative strategies, EGS outcomes in older patients, as well as non-technical and technical influences on EGS outcomes. Conclusions Our study provides a consensus delivered framework that should determine the research agenda for future EGS projects. It may also assist setting priorities for research funding and multi-centre collaborative strategies within the academic clinical interest of EGS.

There is no published data on the factors bariatric surgeons think make bariatric surgery challenging. This study aimed to identify factors that bariatric surgeons feel and increase the technical complexity of bariatric surgery. Bariatric surgeons from around the world were invited to participate in a questionnaire-based survey on Survey Monkey®. An Average Weighted Score was calculated for each factor. A score of