Background: Single-use negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been shown to encourage wound healing. It is often used when patient factors impair wound healing, or in more complex wounds, such as in implant-based breast reconstruction. We report the findings of a prospective cohort study comparing the use of NPWT with standard dressings in prepectoral breast reconstruction. Methods: A prospective database of implant-based reconstruction from a single institution was mined to identify patients who underwent prepectoral reconstruction. Patient demographics, operative data, surgical complications, and 90-day outcomes were compared between patients who had NPWT and those who had standard dressings. Results: Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction was performed on 307 breasts. NPWT dressings were used in 126 cases, with standard dressings used in 181 cases. Wound breakdown occurred in 10 cases after standard dressings versus 1 where NPWT was utilized. Of the standard dressing cases, only 3 implants were salvaged, while 7 cases led to implant loss. The 1 case of wound breakdown in the NPWT cohort settled with conservative measures. The cost of a reconstructive failure was £14,902, and the use of NPWT resulted in a cost savings of £426 per patient. Conclusions: The utilization of single-use NPWT reduces the rate of wound breakdown and implant loss in prepectoral implant-based reconstruction. In addition to the significant clinical benefits, this approach is cost-saving compared with standard dressings. These data suggest that prepectoral implant reconstruction should be considered as an indication for the use of NPWT.

Background Ileus is common after elective colorectal surgery, and is associated with increased adverse events and prolonged hospital stay. The aim was to assess the role of non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for reducing ileus after surgery. Methods A prospective multicentre cohort study was delivered by an international, student‐ and trainee‐led collaborative group. Adult patients undergoing elective colorectal resection between January and April 2018 were included. The primary outcome was time to gastrointestinal recovery, measured using a composite measure of bowel function and tolerance to oral intake. The impact of NSAIDs was explored using Cox regression analyses, including the results of a centre‐specific survey of compliance to enhanced recovery principles. Secondary safety outcomes included anastomotic leak rate and acute kidney injury. Results A total of 4164 patients were included, with a median age of 68 (i.q.r. 57–75) years (54·9 per cent men). Some 1153 (27·7 per cent) received NSAIDs on postoperative days 1–3, of whom 1061 (92·0 per cent) received non‐selective cyclo‐oxygenase inhibitors. After adjustment for baseline differences, the mean time to gastrointestinal recovery did not differ significantly between patients who received NSAIDs and those who did not (4·6 versus 4·8 days; hazard ratio 1·04, 95 per cent c.i. 0·96 to 1·12; P = 0·360). There were no significant differences in anastomotic leak rate (5·4 versus 4·6 per cent; P = 0·349) or acute kidney injury (14·3 versus 13·8 per cent; P = 0·666) between the groups. Significantly fewer patients receiving NSAIDs required strong opioid analgesia (35·3 versus 56·7 per cent; P < 0·001). Conclusion NSAIDs did not reduce the time for gastrointestinal recovery after colorectal surgery, but they were safe and associated with reduced postoperative opioid requirement.

No abstract

Background Surgical advanced clinical practitioners (SACPs) form part of the extended surgical workforce drawn from a variety of allied healthcare backgrounds. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether there was a financial benefit in having minor surgical procedures undertaken by dedicated SACPs compared with operating lists assigned to consultant surgeons. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study including all patients who had minor ‘lumps and bumps’ procedures undertaken between April 2014 and August 2019 at East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust under local anaesthetic by the general surgery team. Clinical patient information, including lesion type, was collected along with operating room staffing levels and duration of operation. The cost of the procedure was calculated as operating time multiplied by cost of staff per minute according to local banding. Results A total of 1399 patients had a lesion excised; 907 procedures were carried out by a doctor, and the rest independently by a SACP. The majority of lesions excised were lipomas and cysts. There was no difference in the median surgical time taken between SACPs and doctors (20 (i.q.r. 14–28) min). Minor procedures carried out on consultant surgeon lists cost 62.3 per cent (€25.33) more on average than those on SACP lists (median €65.96 versus 40.63 respectively; P &lt; 0.001). Conclusion A dedicated and independent SACP ‘lumps and bumps’ list was financially beneficial. Operating times were similar to those of doctors. These lists safely free trainee and consultant surgeons to undertake more complex work.

Background Postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication of major gastrointestinal surgery with an impact on short- and long-term survival. No validated system for risk stratification exists for this patient group. This study aimed to validate externally a prognostic model for AKI after major gastrointestinal surgery in two multicentre cohort studies. Methods The Outcomes After Kidney injury in Surgery (OAKS) prognostic model was developed to predict risk of AKI in the 7 days after surgery using six routine datapoints (age, sex, ASA grade, preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate, planned open surgery and preoperative use of either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker). Validation was performed within two independent cohorts: a prospective multicentre, international study (‘IMAGINE’) of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery (2018); and a retrospective regional cohort study (‘Tayside’) in major abdominal surgery (2011–2015). Multivariable logistic regression was used to predict risk of AKI, with multiple imputation used to account for data missing at random. Prognostic accuracy was assessed for patients at high risk (greater than 20 per cent) of postoperative AKI. Results In the validation cohorts, 12.9 per cent of patients (661 of 5106) in IMAGINE and 14.7 per cent (106 of 719 patients) in Tayside developed 7-day postoperative AKI. Using the OAKS model, 558 patients (9.6 per cent) were classified as high risk. Less than 10 per cent of patients classified as low-risk developed AKI in either cohort (negative predictive value greater than 0.9). Upon external validation, the OAKS model retained an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve of range 0.655–0.681 (Tayside 95 per cent c.i. 0.596 to 0.714; IMAGINE 95 per cent c.i. 0.659 to 0.703), sensitivity values range 0.323–0.352 (IMAGINE 95 per cent c.i. 0.281 to 0.368; Tayside 95 per cent c.i. 0.253 to 0.461), and specificity range 0.881–0.890 (Tayside 95 per cent c.i. 0.853 to 0.905; IMAGINE 95 per cent c.i. 0.881 to 0.899). Conclusion The OAKS prognostic model can identify patients who are not at high risk of postoperative AKI after gastrointestinal surgery with high specificity. Presented to Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) International Conference 2018 (Edinburgh, UK), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP) International Conference 2018 (Nice, France), SARS (Society of Academic and Research Surgery) 2020 (Virtual, UK).

Aims Surgical Advanced Clinical Practitioners (SACP) form part of the extended surgical workforce and are drawn from allied health care backgrounds. The primary aim of this study was to determine if there is a financial benefit performing minor surgical procedures on dedicated SACP lists compared to consultant surgeon lists. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study including all patients who had a minor ‘lumps and bumps’ procedure undertaken between April 2014 and August 2019 at Anonymous Hospitals NHS Trust (AHT) under local anaesthetic by the general surgery team. Data such as lesion type, theatre staffing levels and operating time was collected. The cost of the procedure was calculated by operating time multiplied by cost of staff of per minute according to local banding. Results A total of 1399 patients had a lesion excised; the majority were carried out by a doctor n = 907, the rest independently by a SACP. The majority of lesions excised were lipomas and cysts. There was no difference in the median surgical time (20 minutes, IQR 14) taken to operate on each patient by SACPs and doctors. Minor procedures carried out on consultant surgeon lists cost 62.4% (£21.72) more on average than those on SACP lists (£56.55 vs £34.83 median respectively, p &lt; 0.001) due to excess staff for these cases. Conclusion A dedicated and independent SACP ‘lumps and bumps’ list has shown to be a financially beneficial service. Operative times are similar to doctors. These lists free staff for consultant lists, potentially permitting more major cases.