BackgroundPost-operative nausea and vomiting remain an unresolved concern in Türkiye and some parts of the world, impacting the quality of the patient's recovery process and diminishing overall satisfaction.ObjectiveThis study was conducted as a descriptive investigation to compare the incidence of nausea and vomiting following breast cancer surgery with the nausea and vomiting risk scores proposed by Apfel and Koivuranta.MethodsThis study was conducted with 100 patients admitted to the General Surgery service of a university hospital between 31 August 2019 and 31 May 2021 for breast cancer surgery. The patient information form developed by the researchers, Apfel Nausea and Vomiting Risk Score, and Koivuranta Nausea and Vomiting Risk Score were used as data collection tools.ResultsIt was identified that 61% of the patients experienced nausea and vomiting within the initial 24 h following surgery. A significant correlation was found between age, post-operative opioid use, motion sickness or history of PONV, and nausea and vomiting (p < 0,05). The sensitivity of the Apfel score obtained was 80%, the specificity was 46%, and the AUC value was 0.686. The sensitivity of the Koivuranta score was 80%, the specificity was 35%, and the AUC value was 0.675 (p < 0.05).ConclusionIt has been observed that patients experience high rates of nausea and vomiting after breast cancer surgery and that the Apfel and Koivuranta Risk Scores are equally applicable in predicting post-operative nausea and vomiting.

The da Vinci Single-Port Robot System (DVSP) allows three robotic instruments and an articulated scope to be inserted through a single small incision. It received FDA approval in 2014 and was first introduced in 2018. The aim of this new system was to overcome the limitations of single-incision laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Since then, it has been approved for use only for urologic and transoral surgeries in some countries. It has been used as part of experimental protocols in general surgery. By obtaining the CE mark at the end of January 2024, DVSP will soon enter the European market. This review aims to comprehensively describe the applications of DVSP in general surgery. A search of PubMed, Embase, and Ebsco databases up to March 2024 was conducted, with registration in PROSPERO (CRD42024536430), following the preferred reporting items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses for scoping review (PRISMA-Scr) guidelines. All the studies about the use of DVSP in general surgery were included. Fifty-six studies were included. The following surgical areas of use were identified: transabdominal and transanal colorectal, cholecystectomy, abdominal wall repair, upper gastroesophageal tract, liver, pancreas, breast, and thyroid surgery. The reported surgical and short-term outcomes are promising; a wide range of procedures have been performed safely. Some groups have found advantages, such as faster discharge, shorter operative time, and less postoperative pain compared to multiport robotic surgery. Five years after its initial clinical applications, the use of the DVSP in general surgery procedures has demonstrated feasibility and safety. Hernia repair, cholecystectomy, and colorectal surgery emerge as the most frequently conducted interventions with this robotic system. Nevertheless, there is anticipation for further studies with larger sample sizes and extended follow-up periods to provide more comprehensive insights and data on the long-term outcomes, including the incidence of incisional hernia.

The BRC II was a panel of 67 experts selected on the basis of experience and leadership in surgical education and training. It was organized into subcommittees, each of which was asked to prepare a manuscript on their findings and recommendations. The BRC II Subcommittees were: Blue Ribbon Committee 1 Review and Assessment; Surgical Workforce; Medical Student Education; Work Life Integration; Resident Education; Goals, Structure and Financing of Training; Education Support and Faculty Development; Research Training; Educational Technology and Assessment. BRC II used the Delphi approach with consensus defined as equal to or greater than 80% and identified and recommended 31 priorities for surgical education in 2024. The initial findings were presented to a general surgery and related specialty resident and fellow focus group for comments and written feedback, and they were asked to prepare a manuscript as well. The reports of the Subcommittees of the BRC II provide an assessment and key recommendations concerning surgical education and training in 2024.

Background: Gold standard treatment for chronic anal fissure is lateral internal sphincterotomy. Bilateral internal sphincterotomy (BIS) as a treatment option for chronic anal fissure has not been evaluated. Aims and Objectives: The aims and objectives of the study are to compare the efficacy of unilateral versus bilateral internal anal sphincterotomy in treatment of chronic anal fissure. Materials and Methods: Study design: A prospective randomized comparative study. Study area: Patients coming to General Surgery outpatient department at College of Medicine and Sagore Dutta Hospital with chronic anal fissure. Study period: July 2022 to December 2023 (18 months). Sample Size: 100 patients. Study Group: Group A=Patients who had undergone unilateral internal sphincterotomy (UIS)=50 patients and Group B=Patients who had undergone BIS=50 patients. Results: 2 (4%) patients in Group A and 3 (6%) patients in Group B developed incontinence for flatus postoperatively. No patients in either group developed incontinence for stools. The Mean Fissure Healing Time (Mean±SD) (Weeks) post-sphincterotomy was 4.32±0.91339 in Group A and 2.66±0.65807 in Group B. There were 6 cases of recurrence in the unilateral sphincterotomy group. Second surgery was needed in 4 patients who underwent unilateral sphincterotomy. Conclusion: As compared to UIS, BIS results in a faster healing of chronic anal fissure, with no increase in incontinence, decreased pain score, and less recurrence rates.

To date, robotic surgery has gained much popularity, impacting deeply on surgical fields such as genitourinary system branches, general surgery, and cardiac surgery. We aim to outline the landscape of robotic surgery, focusing on design improvements, which have improved both the technical skills of surgeons and the outcomes of minimally invasive technique for patients. A thorough narrative literature review was conducted on PubMed/MEDLINE, employing keywords such as “robotic surgical system”, “robotic surgical device”, and “robotics AND urology”. Furthermore, the reference lists of the retrieved articles were scrutinized. The analysis focused on urological surgical systems from the 2000s to the present day. Beginning with the daVinci® Era in the 2000s, new robotic competitors, including Senhance®, Revo-I®, Versius®, Avatera®, Hi-notori®, and HugoTM RAS, have entered the medical market. While daVinci® has maintained a high competitiveness, even more new platforms are now emerging in the medical market with new intriguing features. The growing competition, driven by unique features and novel designs in emerging robotic technologies, has the potential to improve application fields, enhance diffusion, and ameliorate the cost effectiveness of procedures. Since the impact of these new surgical technologies on different specialties and healthcare systems remains unclear, more experience and research are required to define their evolving role.

This report summarizes the status of pediatric surgical oncology services in low- and middle-income countries. Factors such as surgical capacity and enablers, and barriers to providing pediatric surgical oncology services are discussed. A review of the literature was conducted to examine the evidence for the capacity of low- and middle-income countries to provide childhood cancer surgery services, focusing on general surgery. Unpublished, ongoing work and initiatives of international organizations are also described.

BackgroundSphincter-preserving techniques like autologous compound platelet-rich fibrin foam have gained popularity, offering potential for better functional outcomes in anal fistula treatment. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Obsidian RFT®.MethodsThe study conducted a retrospective analysis from January 2018 to December 2022 on patients who received anal fistula closure with Obsidian RTF® at the Department of General Surgery, Medical University of Vienna. Clinical diagnosis, complemented by radiographic imaging, was employed to confirm inconclusive cases.Demographic and fistula characteristics and postoperative data were collected from electronic records following STROCSS criteria.ResultsFifteen patients received Obsidian RFT® treatment for anal fistulas. We found no intra- and postoperative complications. The median hospital stay was 3 days. After a median follow-up of 32 months, a closure rate of 53.3% was detected.Non-significant differences were observed in various variables, yet trends emerged, indicating associations between abscess presence and non-healing fistulas. A distinct age threshold (≥ 42.7 years) served as an indicator for an inability to achieve anal fistula cure.ConclusionObsidian RFT® represents a safe, minimally invasive operative procedure. Approximately half the patients experienced healing, with better outcome in a younger population.Trial RegistrationEthical Approval number Medical University of Vienna (#1258/2018). This study was registered retrospectively in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06136325).

Objective: To evaluate the long-term outcomes and prognostic factors of locally advanced gastric cancer with serosa-invasion. Methods: This study is a retrospective cohort study. The clinical and pathological data of 495 patients with locally advanced gastric cancer with serosa-invasion who underwent laparoscopic radical gastrectomy in Department of General Surgery, the First Hospital Affiliated to Army Medical University from October 2012 to October 2018 was analyzed retrospectively. There were 356 males and 139 females with an age (M(IQR)) of 59 (16) years (range: 18 to 75 years). Observation indicators included postoperative results and long-term prognosis. The survival curve was drawn by the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate prognostic analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Among the 495 patients, a total of 57 patients (11.5%) were lost to follow-up, with a follow-up time of 89 (40) months (range: 23 to 134 months). The 5-year disease-free survival rate (DFS) and the 5-year overall survival rate (OS) were 56.0% and 58.2%, respectively. The 5-year DFS for patients with stage ⅡB, ⅢA, ⅢB, ⅢC were 71.2%, 60.5%, 51.6%, 33.3%, respectively. The 5-year OS for patients with stage ⅡB, ⅢA, ⅢB, ⅢC were 71.2%, 62.2%, 54.1%, 39.3%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that age >65 years (DFS: HR=1.402, 95%CI: 1.022 to 1.922, P=0.036; OS: HR=1.461, 95%CI: 1.057 to 2.019, P=0.022), lymph node dissection number less than 25 (DFS: HR=1.348, 95%CI: 1.019 to 1.779, P=0.036; OS: HR=1.376, 95%CI: 1.035 to 1.825, P=0.028), pathological stage Ⅲ (DFS: HR=2.131, 95%CI: 1.444 to 3.144, P<0.01; OS: HR=2.079, 95%CI: 1.406 to 3.074, P<0.01), and no postoperative chemotherapy (DFS: HR=3.127, 95%CI: 2.377 to 4.113, P<0.01; OS: HR=3.768, 95%CI: 2.828 to 5.020, P<0.01) were independent prognostic factors for the decrease in DFS and OS rates. Conclusions: Laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer with serosa-invasion could achieve satisfactory long-term oncological outcomes. More lymph node dissection and standardized postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy are expected to further improve the prognosis of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer with serous invasion after laparoscopic radical surgery.

Antibiotic use in paediatric surgical specialties is understudied. We investigated the antibiotic prescribing practices of paediatric general and cardiovascular surgical teams in a tertiary hospital in South India. Mixed-methods study including observations from ward rounds, semi-structured interviews, and review of antibiotic prescribing. Field notes from observations and interview transcripts were coded using NVivo and thematically analysed. Data collection and analysis were iterative and continued until thematic saturation. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Data included 62 h of observation, 24 interviews, one case study and 200 patient chart reviews (100/specialty). Senior surgeons make key decisions, referring to their own experience when prescribing antibiotics. Being outcome-driven, the doctors often prescribe antibiotics at the earliest indication of infection with a reluctance to de-escalate, even when an infection is not diagnosed. This practice is more acute among surgeons who consider themselves responsible for their patients' health and attribute the consistently low surgical site infection rates to this practice.In general surgery, 83.3% (80/96; 4 lost to follow-up) of patients were prescribed antibiotics for the duration of their stay with oral antibiotics prescribed at discharge. The surgeons use antibiotics prophylactically for patients who may be vulnerable to infection. The antimicrobial stewardship team was considered to have limited influence in the decision-making process. Outcome-driven decision-making in surgery leads to overprescription of antibiotics and prolonged surgical prophylaxis. The rationale for suboptimal practices is complicated by the surgeons' beliefs about the contextual determinants of health in India.