Research on surgical interventions is associated with several methodological and practical challenges of which few, if any, apply only to surgery. However, surgical evaluation is especially demanding because many of these challenges coincide. In this report, the second of three on surgical innovation and evaluation, we discuss obstacles related to the study design of randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies assessing surgical interventions. We also describe the issues related to the nature of surgical procedures—for example, their complexity, surgeon-related factors, and the range of outcomes. Although difficult, surgical evaluation is achievable and necessary. Solutions tailored to surgical research and a framework for generating evidence on which to base surgical practice are essential.
Thirty-seven patients (33 women and four men, median age 78 years) were operated on for gallstone ileus over a 12-year period with a median follow-up of 6.2 years. Twenty-three patients (62 per cent) had serious concomitant diseases. Plain abdominal radiographs performed at admission were diagnostic in only 17 patients (46 per cent) and other procedures such as ultrasonography, gastrointestinal contrast studies and computed tomographic scan were required in ten patients (27 per cent). The diagnosis was made before operation in 27 patients (73 per cent) but in only 17 (46 per cent) at admission. Obstructing stones were located in the terminal ileum in 27 patients (73 per cent), in the proximal ileum or jejunum in five (14 per cent), in the duodenum in two (5 per cent), and in the colon in three (8 per cent). In six instances (16 per cent), more than one stone was involved. Cholecystduodenal fistula was the most frequent fistula type (n = 25, 68 per cent), followed by cholecystcolonic (n = 2, 5 per cent) and cholecystduodenocolonic (n = 2, 5 per cent) types. The site of the fistula was not established in the other eight instances. A one-stage procedure consisting of the removal of the impacted stone, fistula repair and cholecystectomy was performed in eight patients, two of whom died. A second group of six patients underwent a two-stage procedure consisting of enterolithotomy followed by elective biliary surgery, with no mortality. Removal of impacted stones was the only surgical treatment in the remaining 23 patients, with five deaths. Operative mortality and morbidity rates associated with the initial procedure did not differ significantly among the three therapeutic groups, which were comparable in terms of patient age, associated concomitant diseases and APACHE II score. However, later biliary complications were prominent in patients treated only by enterolithotomy. These results support the view that a one-stage procedure is, when feasible, a valid option and may be the procedure of choice. When local or surgical conditions argue against a one-stage procedure, biliary surgery at a second stage should be considered, if residual stones are present. In poor risk patients, non-operative methods should be considered.
Benchmarking is a popular quality‐improvement tool in economic practice. Its basic principle consists of identifying the best (the benchmark), then comparing with the best, and learning from the best. In healthcare, the concept of benchmarking or establishing benchmarks has been less specific, where comparisons often do not target the best, but the average results. The goal, however, remains improvement in patient outcome. This article outlines the application of benchmarking and proposes a standard approach of benchmark determination in surgery, including the establishment of best achievable real‐world postoperative outcomes. Parameters used for this purpose must be reproducible, objective and universal. A systematic approach for determining benchmarks enables self‐assessment of surgical outcome and facilitates the detection of areas for improvement. The intention of benchmarking is to stimulate surgeons' genuine endeavour for perfection, rather than to judge centre or surgeon performance.
One-stage surgery appears to be superior to two- or three-stage procedures. Stenting is a promising option, allowing the resection to be carried out in an elective setting.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.