Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to evaluate the impact of early oral feeding (EOF) on postoperative cardiac, respiratory, and gastrointestinal (CRG) complications after McKeown minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Nil-by-mouth with enteral tube feeding is routinely practiced after esophagectomy. METHODS: Patients were randomly allocated to receive oral feeding on the first postoperative day (EOF group) or late oral feeding (LOF group) 7 days after surgery. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of postoperative CRG complications, and the secondary outcomes included bowel function recovery and short-term quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: Between February 2014 and October 2015, 280 patients were enrolled in this study. There were 140 patients in the EOF group and 140 patients in the LOF group. EOF was noninferior to LOF for CRG complications (30.0% in the EOF group vs. 32.9% in the LOF group; 95% confidence interval of the difference: -13.8% to 8.0%). Compared with the LOF group, the EOF group showed significantly shorter time to first flatus (median of 2 days vs. 3 days, P = 0.001) and bowel movement (median of 3 vs. 4 days, P < 0.001). Two weeks after the operation, patients in the EOF group reported higher global QOL and function scores and lower symptom scores than patients in the LOF group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients after McKeown minimally invasive esophagectomy is noninferior to the standard of care with regard to postoperative CRG complications. In addition, patients in the EOF group had a quicker recovery of bowel function and improved short-term QOL.

Robotic segmentectomy can be a useful technique for patients with suboptimal pulmonary reserve, or for small peripheral stage I tumors. Port placement and conduct of operation is described for the various segmentectomies. Results for robotic segmentectomy are comparable to that for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) segmentectomy.

BACKGROUND:Our objective is to show the effect that standardization of surgical trays has on the number of instruments sterilized and on cost. METHODS:We reviewed our most commonly used surgical trays with the 3 general thoracic surgeons in our division and agreed upon the least number of surgical instruments needed for mediastinoscopy, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery, robotic thoracic surgery, and thoracotomy. RESULTS:We removed 59 of 79 instruments (75%) from the mediastinoscopy tray, 45 of 73 (62%) from the video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery tray, 51 of 84 (61%) from the robotic tray, and 50 of 113 (44%) from the thoracotomy tray. From January 2016 to December 2016, the estimated savings by procedure were video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (n = 398) $21,890, robotic tray (n = 231) $19,400, thoracotomy (n = 163) $15,648, and mediastinoscopy (n = 162) $12,474. Estimated total savings were $69,412. The weight of the trays was reduced 70%, and the nonsteamed sterilization rate (opened trays that needed to be reprocessed) decreased from 2% to 0%. None of the surgeons requested any of the removed instruments. CONCLUSIONS:Standardization of thoracic surgical trays is possible despite having multiple thoracic surgeons. This process of lean (the removal of nonvalue steps or equipment) reduces the number of instruments cleaned and carried and reduces cost. It may also reduce the incidence of "wet loads" that require the resterilization of instruments.

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for lung cancer has been associated with decreased perioperative morbidity while maintaining similar long-term survival when compared to open thoracotomy. Robotic thoracic surgery constitutes an evolutionary step in this field, beckoning dramatic advancements both in visualization as well as surgical instrument range of motion and ergonomics. As such, robotic thoracic surgery is growing in adoption worldwide. One of its oft-cited disadvantages, however, is increased operative time, especially for less-experienced surgeons. We describe an assortment of tips and tricks that we conclude can safely reduce robotic operative duration.

Minimally invasive thoracic surgery, when compared with open thoracotomy, has been shown to have improved perioperative outcomes as well as comparable long-term survival. Robotic surgery represents a powerful advancement of minimally invasive surgery, with vastly improved visualization and instrument maneuverability, and is increasingly popular for thoracic surgery. However, there remains debate over the best robotic approaches for lung resection, with several different techniques evidenced and described in the literature. We delineate our method for total port approach with four robotic arms and discuss how its advantages outweigh its disadvantages. We conclude that it is preferred to other robotic approaches, such as the robotic assisted approach, due to its enhanced visualization, improved instrument range of motion, and reduced potential for injury.

Our purpose is to identify the metrics used by the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) to rank lobectomy and to show our process to improve. This is a review of our STS data for lobectomy and our results using the process of root cause analysis and lean methodology to improve our outcomes. The STS metrics are 30-day mortality, pneumonia, adult respiratory distress syndrome, bronchopleural fistula, pulmonary embolus, initial ventilator support greater than 48 hours, reintubation and respiratory failure, tracheostomy, myocardial infarction, or unexpected return to the operating room. Sixteen of 231 programs (7%) were ranked 3-star over a 3-year period from July 2011 to June 2014. The most common root cause analysis was failure to escalate care. The lean and process improvements we employed that seemed to improve the results were increasing exercise before surgery, adding a respiratory therapist, eliminating Foley catheters and arterial lines to reduce infection and to increase ambulation, offering stereotactic radiotherapy for marginal patients, favoring left upper segmentectomy over left upper lobectomy, and performing 91% of the last 493 lobectomies via a minimally invasive platform. Our major morbidity complications from August 2003 to December 2014 fell from 9.5% to 5.3% (P = 0.001) and mortality decreased from 3.3% to 0.54% (P < 0.0001). The metrics the STS used to rank lobectomy programs are 30-day mortality and predominantly respiratory complications. Root cause analysis, lean methodology, and process improvements allowed us to improve our lobectomy patient outcomes over time and to achieve a 3-star ranking over a 3-year time frame. These results may be obtainable by others.