Advertisement

Current Surgery Reports

, 5:6 | Cite as

Using Video Analysis to Understand and Improve Technical Quality in Bariatric Surgery

  • Oliver A. VarbanEmail author
  • Amir A. Ghaferi
  • Justin B. Dimick
Bariatric Surgery (A. Ghaferi, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Bariatric Surgery

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Bariatric surgery is the most effective and durable treatment for severe obesity. Operative technique for some bariatric procedures can be technically challenging and requires an advanced skill set. Variation in procedure type, operative technique, and surgeon skill can affect outcomes.

Recent Findings

Most bariatric surgery is performed laparoscopically, allowing for video recording and thus an opportunity to study videos for quality improvement.

Summary

Current strategies for utilizing surgical videos are discussed herein, along with our early experience and specific areas for future growth.

Keywords

Bariatric surgery Sleeve gastrectomy Gastric bypass Outcomes Complications Technique Video assessment 

Notes

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Drs. Varban, Ghaferi and Dimick obtain salary support from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Supplementary material

Video 1

Comparison of surgical skill between two different surgeons performing laparoscopic gastric bypass [12••]

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Flegal KM, Kruszon-Moran D, Carroll MD, Fryar CD, Ogden CL. Trends in obesity among adults in the United States, 2005 to 2014. JAMA. 2016;315:2284–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ogden CL, Carroll MD, Kit BK, Flegal KM. Prevalence of obesity among adults: United States, 2011–2012. NCHS Data Brief. 2013;131:1–8.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kaplan LM. Body weight regulation and obesity. J Gastrointest Surg. 2003;7:443–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kokkinos A, et al. Improvement in cardiovascular indices after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy for morbid obesity. Obes Surg. 2013;23:31–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Weiner RA. Indications and principles of metabolic surgery. Chirurg. 2010;81:379–94; quiz 395.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Adams TD, et al. Long-term mortality after gastric bypass surgery. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:753–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wittgrove AC, Clark GW. Laparoscopic gastric bypass, Roux-en-Y-500 patients: technique and results, with 3-60 month follow-up. Obes Surg. 2000;10:233–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    • Nguyen NT, Vu S, Kim E, Bodunova N, Phelan MJ. Trends in utilization of bariatric surgery, 2009-2012. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:2723–7. The annual volume of inpatient bariatric surgery continues to be staple with the majority of procedures being performed laparoscopically. In-hospital mortality continues to be low. Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sjöström L, et al. Effects of bariatric surgery on mortality in Swedish obese subjects. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:741–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buchwald H, et al. Bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2004;292:1724–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Davis MM, Slish K, Chao C, Cabana MD. National trends in bariatric surgery, 1996-2002. Arch Surg. 2006;141:71–4; discussion 75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    •• Birkmeyer JD, et al. Surgical skill and complication rates after bariatric surgery. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1434–42. Technical skill of surgeons varied widely and greater skill was associated with fewer postoperative adverse events. Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martin JA, et al. Objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS) for surgical residents. Br J Surg. 1997;84:273–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    • Scally CP, Varban OA, Carlin AM, Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB, Michigan BSC. Video Ratings of Surgical Skill and Late Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery. JAMA Surg. 2016;151:e160428. Surgical skill did not affect postoperative weight loss or resolution of medical comorbidities at 1 year after laparoscopic gastric bypass. Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    •• Varban OA et al. Surgical skill in bariatric surgery: does skill in one procedure predict outcomes for another. Surgery. 2016;160:1172–81. Video ratings of surgical skill with one procedure does not predict outcomes of another related procedure, indicating that each procedure may require independent assessment of surgical technical proficiency. Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zevin B et al. Development, feasibility, validity, and reliability of a scale for objective assessment of operative performance in laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216:955–65.e8; quiz 1029. Validation of a instrument for objective assessment of operative performance in laparoscopic gastric bypass. Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Matsuda T, et al. Reliability of laparoscopic skills assessment on video: 8-year results of the endoscopic surgical skill qualification system in Japan. J Endourol. 2014;28:1374–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mori T, Kimura T, Kitajima M. Skill accreditation system for laparoscopic gastroenterologic surgeons in Japan. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2010;19:18–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tanigawa N, et al. The endoscopic surgical skill qualification system for gastric surgery in Japan. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2011;4:112–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pradarelli JC, Varban OA, Ghaferi AA, Weiner M, Carlin AM, Dimick JB. Hospital variation in perioperative complications for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in Michigan. Surgery. 2016;159:1113–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    • Rosenthal RJ, et al. International sleeve gastrectomy expert panel consensus statement: best practice guidelines based on experience of >12,000 cases. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2012;8:8–19. A consensus report for the best practice guidelines for performing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy are developed based on an international expert panel of surgeons who had performed >500 cases. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    •• Berger ER, et al. The impact of different surgical techniques on outcomes in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomies: the first report from the metabolic and bariatric surgery accreditation and quality improvement program (MBSAQIP). Ann Surg. 2016;264:464–73. Outcomes for techniques of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy were analyzed at the patient and surgeon-level. Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stefanidis D, Chintalapudi N, Anderson-Montoya B, Oommen B, Tobben D, Pimentel M. How often do surgeons obtain the critical view of safety during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc. 2016;31:142–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Santonicola A, Angrisani L, Cutolo P, Formisano G, Iovino P. The effect of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy with or without hiatal hernia repair on gastroesophageal reflux disease in obese patients. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2014;10:250–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    van Rutte PW, Luyer MD, de Hingh IH, Nienhuijs SW. To sleeve or NOT to sleeve in bariatric surgery. ISRN Surg. 2012;2012:674042.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Varban OA, et al. Variation in utilization of acid-reducing medication at 1 year following bariatric surgery: results from the Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2015;11:222–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mahawar KK, Carr WR, Jennings N, Balupuri S, Small PK. Simultaneous sleeve gastrectomy and hiatus hernia repair: a systematic review. Obes Surg. 2015;25:159–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    •• Ibrahim AM, Varban OA, Dimick JB. Novel Uses of Video to Accelerate the Surgical Learning Curve. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2016. Novel uses of surgical video evaluation in the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative setting are reviewed. Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    •• Greenberg CC, Ghousseini HN, Pavuluri Quamme SR, Beasley HL, Wiegmann DA. Surgical coaching for individual performance improvement. Ann Surg. 2015;261:32–4. A conceptual framework of surgical coaching is established through evaluations of other disciplines and a literature review of the topic. Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Greenberg CC, Klingensmith ME. The continuum of coaching: opportunities for surgical improvement at all levels. Ann Surg. 2015;262:217–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    • Greenberg CC, Dombrowski J, Dimick JB. Video-Based Surgical Coaching: An Emerging Approach to Performance Improvement. JAMA Surg. 2016;151:282–3. A review of the key advantages, evidence and barriers to implementing a video-based approach to surgical coaching for quality improvement. Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hu YY, et al. Postgame analysis: using video-based coaching for continuous professional development. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;214:115–24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chen C, et al. Crowd-sourced assessment of technical skills: a novel method to evaluate surgical performance. J Surg Res. 2014;187:65–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Glarner CE, et al. Quantifying technical skills during open operations using video-based motion analysis. Surgery. 2014;156:729–34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mason JD, Ansell J, Warren N, Torkington J. Is motion analysis a valid tool for assessing laparoscopic skill. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1468–77.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yamaguchi S, et al. Objective assessment of laparoscopic suturing skills using a motion-tracking system. Surg Endosc. 2011;25:771–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Oropesa I, et al. EVA: laparoscopic instrument tracking based on Endoscopic Video Analysis for psychomotor skills assessment. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1029–39.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Partridge RW, Hughes MA, Brennan PM, Hennessey IA. Accessible laparoscopic instrument tracking (”InsTrac”): construct validity in a take-home box simulator. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2014;24:578–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Stefanidis D, Yonce TC, Korndorffer JR, Phillips R, Coker A. Does the incorporation of motion metrics into the existing FLS metrics lead to improved skill acquisition on simulators? A single blinded, randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2013;258:46–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zendejas B, Brydges R, Hamstra SJ, Cook DA. State of the evidence on simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review. Ann Surg. 2013;257:586–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tausch TJ, Kowalewski TM, White LW, McDonough PS, Brand TC, Lendvay TS. Content and construct validation of a robotic surgery curriculum using an electromagnetic instrument tracker. J Urol. 2012;188:919–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Oliver A. Varban
    • 1
    Email author
  • Amir A. Ghaferi
    • 1
  • Justin B. Dimick
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Michigan Health SystemAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations