Validation of the Modena bleeding score in endoscopic sinus surgery

IntroductionThe Modena bleeding score is a categorical rating scale that allows the assessment of the surgical field in relation to bleeding during endoscopic surgery. It has recently been presented and validated in the field of endoscopic ear surgery by the present authors. The Modena bleeding score provides five grades for rating the surgical field during endoscopic procedures (from grade 1 ? no bleeding to grade 5 ? bleeding that prevents every surgical procedure except those dedicated to bleeding control).ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to validate the Modena bleeding score in the setting of endoscopic sinus surgery.MethodsFifteen three-minute videos of endoscopic sinus surgery procedures (each containing three bleeding situations) were evaluated by 15 specialists, using the Modena bleeding score. Intra and inter-rater reliability were assessed, and the clinical validity of the Modena bleeding score was calculated using a referent standard.ResultsThe data analysis showed an intra-rater reliability ranging from 0.6336 to 0.861. The inter-rater reliability ranged from 0.676 to 0.844. The clinical validity was α = 0.70; confidence limits: 0.64 ? 0.75, corresponding to substantial agreement.ConclusionThe Modena bleeding score is an effective method to score bleeding during endoscopic sinus surgery. Its application in future research could facilitate the performance and efficacy assessment of surgical techniques, materials or devices aimed to bleeding control during endoscopic sinus surgery.     

Reacreditación o recertificación de los cirujanos generales en España: esa es la cuestión. Resultados de una encuesta nacional

IntroductionThe Law for the Regulation of Health Professions (LOPS) indicates that health professionals will carry out continuous training throughout their professional life, and will regularly prove their professional competence. The objective of the study was to carry out a national survey to find out the opinion of Spanish surgeons and thus be able to prepare a recertification project by the Spanish Association of Surgeons (AEC).MethodsCross-sectional observational study carried out in June-July 2020, through a survey sent to the members of the AEC.ResultsThe survey had a total of 1230 visits and an overall completion rate of 784 responses (67.3%). 69.6% were unaware of the LOPS forecasts and 83.4% were unaware of similar initiatives in other specialties and 95.5% agreed to demand adequate information. 71.4% believed it necessary but only 57% believed that it should be mandatory. 82.9% would agree that it should be regulated through an objective and predictable official procedure.ConclusionsThe concept of re-accreditation is not well known in our specialty and in view of the results obtained, adequate and reliable information seems necessary. Therefore, it would be pertinent to propose by the AEC a specific project to assess activities and skills.     

Clinical presentation,management, screening and surveillance for colorectal cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic

Management of colorectal cancer (CRC) was severely affected by the changes implemented during the pandemic, and this resulted in delayed elective presentation, increased emergency presentation, reduced screening and delayed definitive therapy. This review was conducted to analyze the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on management of CRC and to identify the changes made in order to adapt to the pandemic. We performed a literature search in PubMed, Medline, Index Medicus, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Reference Citation Analysis (https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/) and Google Scholar using the following keywords in various combinations: Colorectal cancer, elective surgery, emergency surgery, stage upgrading, screening, surveillance and the COVID-19 pandemic. Only studies published in English were included. To curtail the spread of COVID-19 infection, there were modifications made in the management of CRC. Screening was limited to high risk individuals, and the screening tests of choice during the pandemic were fecal occult blood test, fecal immunochemical test and stool DNA testing. The use of capsule colonoscopy and open access colonoscopy was also encouraged. Blood-based tests like serum methylated septin 9 were also encouraged for screening of CRC during the pandemic. The presentation of CRC was also affected by the pandemic with more patients presenting with emergencies like obstruction and perforation. Stage migration was also observed during the pandemic with more patients presenting with more advanced tumors. The operative therapy of CRC was altered by the pandemic as more emergencies surgeries were done, which may require exteriorization by stoma. This was to reduce the morbidity associated with anastomosis and encourage early discharge from the hospital. There was also an initial reduction in laparoscopic surgical procedures due to the fear of aerosols and COVID-19 infection. As we gradually come out of the pandemic, we should remember the lessons learned and continue to apply them even after the pandemic passes.     

Utilization of and Outcomes Associated with Intravascular Ultrasound during Deep Venous Stent Placement among Medicare Beneficiaries

PurposeTo evaluate temporal trends, practice variation, and associated outcomes with the use of intravascular ultrasound (US) during deep venous stent placement among Medicare beneficiaries.Materials and MethodsAll lower extremity deep venous stent placement procedures performed between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019 among Medicare beneficiaries were included. Temporal trends in intravascular US use were stratified by procedural setting and physician specialty. The primary outcome was a composite of 12-month all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalization, or repeat target vessel intervention. The secondary outcome was a composite of 12-month stent thrombosis, embolization, or restenosis.ResultsAmong the 20,984 deep venous interventions performed during the study period, 15,184 (72.4%) utilized intravascular US. Moderate growth in intravascular US use was observed during the study period in all clinical settings. There was a variation in the use of intravascular US among all operators (median, 77.3% of cases; interquartile range, 20.0%–99.2%). In weighted analyses, intravascular US use during deep venous stent placement was associated with a lower risk of both the primary (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69–0.76; P < .001) and secondary (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.27–0.39; P < .001) composite end points.ConclusionsIntravascular US is frequently used during deep venous stent placement among Medicare beneficiaries, with further increase in use from 2017 to 2019. The utilization of intravascular US as part of a procedural strategy was associated with a lower cumulative incidence of adverse outcomes after the procedure, including venous stent thrombosis and embolization.