Current practices in biliary surgery: Do we practice what we teach?
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 hypothe...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Surgical endoscopy 2016-08, Vol.30 (8), p.3345-3350 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | 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 |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0930-2794 1432-2218 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00464-015-4609-8 |