Shaun C Daly1, Daniel J Deziel2, Xuan Li2, Milot Thaqi2, Keith W Millikan2, Jonathan A Myers2, Steven Bonomo3, Minh B Luu2. 1. Rush University Medical Center, 1725 West Harrison Street, Suite 810, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA. Shaun_Daly@rush.edu. 2. Rush University Medical Center, 1725 West Harrison Street, Suite 810, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA. 3. John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital of Cook County, Chicago, IL, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Since the widespread adoption of laparoscopic techniques in biliary surgery, the incidence of bile duct injures (BDI) has not significantly declined despite increased operative experience and recognition of the critical view of safety (CVS) method for anatomic identification. We hypothesized that operative approaches in clinical practice may vary from well-described technical recommendations. The objective of this study was to access how practicing surgeons commonly identify anatomy during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). METHODS: We performed a cohort study assessing practices in biliary surgery among current practicing surgeons. Surgeons belonging to the Midwest Surgical Association and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons were surveyed. Items surveyed include preferred methods for cystic duct identification, recognition of the CVS, and use of intraoperative imaging. RESULTS: In total, 374 of 849 surgeons responded. The CVS was not correctly identified by 75 % of surgeons descriptively and by 21 % of surgeons visually. 56 % of surgeons practiced the infundibular method for identification of the cystic duct; 27 % practiced the CVS method. Intraoperative cholangiography was used by 16 % and laparoscopic ultrasound by <1 %. CONCLUSION: A majority of surgeons preferably do not use the CVS method of identification during LC. A large percentage of practicing surgeons are unable to describe or visually identify the CVS. These results suggest an urgent need to reexamine the tenets of how LC is being taught and disseminated and present a clear target for improvement to reduce BDI.
INTRODUCTION: Since the widespread adoption of laparoscopic techniques in biliary surgery, the incidence of bile duct injures (BDI) has not significantly declined despite increased operative experience and recognition of the critical view of safety (CVS) method for anatomic identification. We hypothesized that operative approaches in clinical practice may vary from well-described technical recommendations. The objective of this study was to access how practicing surgeons commonly identify anatomy during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). METHODS: We performed a cohort study assessing practices in biliary surgery among current practicing surgeons. Surgeons belonging to the Midwest Surgical Association and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons were surveyed. Items surveyed include preferred methods for cystic duct identification, recognition of the CVS, and use of intraoperative imaging. RESULTS: In total, 374 of 849 surgeons responded. The CVS was not correctly identified by 75 % of surgeons descriptively and by 21 % of surgeons visually. 56 % of surgeons practiced the infundibular method for identification of the cystic duct; 27 % practiced the CVS method. Intraoperative cholangiography was used by 16 % and laparoscopic ultrasound by <1 %. CONCLUSION: A majority of surgeons preferably do not use the CVS method of identification during LC. A large percentage of practicing surgeons are unable to describe or visually identify the CVS. These results suggest an urgent need to reexamine the tenets of how LC is being taught and disseminated and present a clear target for improvement to reduce BDI.
Keywords:
Common bile duct; Critical view; Injury; Safety
Authors: João Araújo Teixeira; Carlos Ribeiro; Luís M Moreira; Fabiana de Sousa; André Pinho; Luís Graça; José Costa Maia Journal: Acta Med Port Date: 2014-12-30
Authors: Arthur Rawlings; Steven E Hodgett; Brent D Matthews; Steven M Strasberg; Mary Quasebarth; L Michael Brunt Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2010-04-28 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Joshua Weis; L Michael Brunt; Amin Madani; Dana Telem; Madhuri Nagaraj; Horacio Asbun; Brian R Davis; Sharmila Dissanaike; Michael B Ujiki; Carl J Westcott; Adnan Alseidi Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-08-25 Impact factor: 3.453
Authors: Lucia Ilaria Sgaramella; Angela Gurrado; Alessandro Pasculli; Nicola de Angelis; Riccardo Memeo; Francesco Paolo Prete; Stefano Berti; Graziano Ceccarelli; Marco Rigamonti; Francesco Giuseppe Aldo Badessi; Nicola Solari; Marco Milone; Fausto Catena; Stefano Scabini; Francesco Vittore; Gennaro Perrone; Carlo de Werra; Ferdinando Cafiero; Mario Testini Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2020-08-11 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Paweł Bogacki; Jan Krzak; Katarzyna Gotfryd-Bugajska; Mirosław Szura Journal: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne Date: 2019-03-04 Impact factor: 1.195