Professor Jonathan Gani

Backgrounds: Acute surgical care nowadays usually involves access to urgent imaging. There is a paucity of data on how often the images or radiologist reports of these images are used by the surgical team. We aimed to identify the rates and timeliness of radiology images and report viewing for acute surgical admissions in an Australian tertiary university teaching hospital. Methods: We utilized a data set comprising radiological studies completed at our institute during a one-month period. Investigations were classified by modality and whether images or reports were available 'in-hours' or 'after-hours'. The time taken from imaging to reports available for viewing by the surgical team was calculated using timestamps derived from electronic hospital systems. Spearman's rho test was used to assess correlation between the Study Ascribable Time and time to view an image or report. Results: Of 40 042 investigations, 1156 (3%) satisfied study criteria. Both images and reports were viewed in 82% (n = 950/1156) of cases. CT scans had the shortest median time for image (14 min, IQR 4¿47 min) and report (25 min, IQR 8¿68 min) viewing. CT (95%, n = 410/430) and MRI (95%, n = 38/40) scans had the highest proportion of both images and reports viewed, regardless of whether the scan was completed 'in-hours' or 'after-hours'. X-ray reports were viewed least often (73%). Conclusion: This study demonstrates a high level of viewing of acute surgical radiological imaging and reports by surgical teams. The 'simpler' the study the less likely the radiology report will be viewed.

Objective: The objective of this study is to assess and improve VTE prophylaxis practices in major abdominal surgery through a hospital audit and nurses' survey. Primary aims: Evaluate adherence to VTE prophylaxis guidelines in abdominal surgery, identify improvement opportunities in VTE prevention and assess the effectiveness of current prophylactic measures. Nurses' survey: Evaluate surgical nurses' knowledge and implementation of VTE prophylaxis and identify educational gaps to improve VTE prevention. Secondary aims: Integrate audit and survey insights: Gain insight into VTE management practices, to develop quality improvement programs for better prophylaxis and outcomes. Background: Guidelines for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in surgical patients involve risk assessment, followed by chemical and mechanical prophylaxis. Often, VTE risk assessments are not completed which leads to inappropriate or inadequate prophylaxis. The current guidelines suggest that a healthcare provider, such as a nurse or physician, should conduct the VTE risk assessment for each patient.Study design and methods: Initially, a prospective audit was conducted to examine VTE prophylaxis practices at a tertiary hospital. This VTE audit was conducted alongside a nurses' survey to assess current VTE prophylaxis practices. Both measures were taken to review the quality of care provided to surgical patients. Results: The practice of VTE prophylaxis shows high utilisation of all three prophylactic modalities but a lack of risk assessment documentation in the medical records. Nurses, although perceiving it as their responsibility, do not conduct assessments for venous thromboembolism risk. Conclusion: Based on the audit and survey results, the hospital has not fully adopted the guidelines for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in major abdominal surgery cases. There is a lack of proper risk assessment documentation, and nurses are not consistently engaged in conducting these. Implications for research, policy, and practice: This paper presents valuable insights into the current prescribing practices for VTE prophylaxis after major abdominal surgery, as gleaned from a clinical audit and a survey of nurses. The hospital audit indicates that overall, all three are being used, instead of two. While this approach does not contravene current guidelines, the use of both stockings and compression devices is not needed, instead adding new risks, unnecessary nursing workload and financial cost to health services. Further, this approach may prolong recovery with patients unable to mobilise while wearing compression devices to take part in rehabilitation programs. What this paper adds:This paper adds to the existing literature by highlighting the gap between recommended guidelines and the actual implementation of VTE prophylaxis practices in the context of major abdominal surgery. These results provide meaningful clinical relevance about VTE prophylaxis practice for nurses and surgeons involved major abdominal surgery. The continuing education of Australian nurses should include an emphasis on VTE risk assessment and prevention.

Background: Emergency laparotomy (EL) is performed on about 15 500 patients in Australia each year. Aside from mortality there is significant concern about the possibility that previously independent patients discharged after EL will become reliant on long-term dependent care. This study aimed to establish the proportion of patients not returning to their pre-admission residence, a proxy for dependent care, following EL. Methods: Data were collected on all adult patients who underwent EL across four Australian hospitals over 2 years. A total of 113 data points were collected including pre-hospital residence, discharge destination, mortality and place of residence at 90 and 365 days. Results: A total of 782 patients underwent EL, the mean age was 64 years. Pre-admission, 95.5% of patients were living in their own home. Inpatient mortality was 7.0% and at discharge 72.4% of patients returned directly back to their pre-hospital residence. At 90 days, mortality was 10.5%, and 87% of patients had returned to their pre-hospital residence, including all patients under 70 years of age. By 365 days, overall mortality was 16.8%, and only 1.5% of patients (all aged >70 years) had not returned to their pre-hospital residence. Conclusion: Patients who survive 90 and 365 days following EL nearly all return to their pre-hospital residence, with only a very small proportion of previously independent patients entering dependent care. This should help inform shared decision-making regarding emergency laparotomy in the acute setting.

Background: Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide. Methods: A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study¿a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3·85 [95% CI 2·58¿5·75]; p<0·0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63·0% vs 82·7%; OR 0·35 [0·23¿0·53]; p<0·0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer. Interpretation: Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research.

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19¿free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19¿free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19¿free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19¿free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19¿free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score¿matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19¿free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19¿free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks.

Background: The aims of this study were to provide data on the safety of head and neck cancer surgery currently being undertaken during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: This international, observational cohort study comprised 1137 consecutive patients with head and neck cancer undergoing primary surgery with curative intent in 26 countries. Factors associated with severe pulmonary complications in COVID-19¿positive patients and infections in the surgical team were determined by univariate analysis. Results: Among the 1137 patients, the commonest sites were the oral cavity (38%) and the thyroid (21%). For oropharynx and larynx tumors, nonsurgical therapy was favored in most cases. There was evidence of surgical de-escalation of neck management and reconstruction. Overall 30-day mortality was 1.2%. Twenty-nine patients (3%) tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) within 30 days of surgery; 13 of these patients (44.8%) developed severe respiratory complications, and 3.51 (10.3%) died. There were significant correlations with an advanced tumor stage and admission to critical care. Members of the surgical team tested positive within 30 days of surgery in 40 cases (3%). There were significant associations with operations in which the patients also tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 within 30 days, with a high community incidence of SARS-CoV-2, with screened patients, with oral tumor sites, and with tracheostomy. Conclusions: Head and neck cancer surgery in the COVID-19 era appears safe even when surgery is prolonged and complex. The overlap in COVID-19 between patients and members of the surgical team raises the suspicion of failures in cross-infection measures or the use of personal protective equipment. Lay Summary: Head and neck surgery is safe for patients during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic even when it is lengthy and complex. This is significant because concerns over patient safety raised in many guidelines appear not to be reflected by outcomes, even for those who have other serious illnesses or require complex reconstructions. Patients subjected to suboptimal or nonstandard treatments should be carefully followed up to optimize their cancer outcomes. The overlap between patients and surgeons testing positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is notable and emphasizes the need for fastidious cross-infection controls and effective personal protective equipment.

Aim: This study aimed to describe the change in surgical practice and the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on mortality after surgical resection of colorectal cancer during the initial phases of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Method: This was an international cohort study of patients undergoing elective resection of colon or rectal cancer without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Centres entered data from their first recorded case of COVID-19 until 19 April 2020. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic leak, postoperative SARS-CoV-2 and a comparison with prepandemic European Society of Coloproctology cohort data. Results: From 2073 patients in 40 countries, 1.3% (27/2073) had a defunctioning stoma and 3.0% (63/2073) had an end stoma instead of an anastomosis only. Thirty-day mortality was 1.8% (38/2073), the incidence of postoperative SARS-CoV-2 was 3.8% (78/2073) and the anastomotic leak rate was 4.9% (86/1738). Mortality was lowest in patients without a leak or SARS-CoV-2 (14/1601, 0.9%) and highest in patients with both a leak and SARS-CoV-2 (5/13, 38.5%). Mortality was independently associated with anastomotic leak (adjusted odds ratio 6.01, 95% confidence interval 2.58¿14.06), postoperative SARS-CoV-2 (16.90, 7.86¿36.38), male sex (2.46, 1.01¿5.93), age >70¿years (2.87, 1.32¿6.20) and advanced cancer stage (3.43, 1.16¿10.21). Compared with prepandemic data, there were fewer anastomotic leaks (4.9% versus 7.7%) and an overall shorter length of stay (6 versus 7¿days) but higher mortality (1.7% versus 1.1%). Conclusion: Surgeons need to further mitigate against both SARS-CoV-2 and anastomotic leak when offering surgery during current and future COVID-19 waves based on patient, operative and organizational risks.

Background: The National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) highlights the importance of identifying high-risk patients due to the potential for significant morbidity and mortality. The NELA risk prediction calculator (NRPC) was developed from data in England and Wales and is one of several calculators available. We seek to determine the utility of NRPC in the Australian population and compare it with Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enumeration of mortality and Morbidity (P-POSSUM) and American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) calculators. Methods: A retrospective review of all emergency laparotomies undertaken at four Australian centers was performed between January 2016 and December 2017. Data extracted from patient records were used to calculate NRPC, ACS-NSQIP, and P-POSSUM scores for 30-day mortality risk. The sensitivity of NRPC was assessed using the NELA high-risk cohort score of =10% and this was compared with the other two calculators. Results: There were 562 (M = 261, mean age = 66 [±17] y) patient charts reviewed in the study period. 59 patients died within 30 d (10.5%). NRPC was able to identify 52 (sensitivity = 88.1%) of these as being within the high-risk group. Using the NELA high-risk cutoff, NRPC identified 52 deaths of 205 (25.4%) high-risk patients, P-POSSUM identified 46 of 245 (18.8%), and ACS-NSQIP identified 46 of 201 (22.9%). Using the McNemar test, no significant difference was noted between NRPC and P-POSSUM (P = 0.07) or NRPC and ACS-NSQIP (P = 0.18). Conclusions: In the Australian context, the NRPC is a highly sensitive and useful tool for predicting 30-day mortality in high-risk emergency laparotomy patients and is comparable with P-POSSUM and ACS-NSQIP calculators.

Background: A direct access colonoscopy service (DACS) for the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program has become standard of care in Newcastle public hospitals because of the effect it has on time to colonoscopy. Cost-effectiveness has not been studied to date. Aim: The aim of this retrospective study was to analyse the cost-effectiveness of a DACS. Methods: Data were collected for patients referred to DACS between January 2014 and June 2016, and patients who were treated on the normal service pathway in 2013 prior to the introduction of the process. A cost-benefit analysis from the patient's and local health district's perspective was undertaken. Results: Introduction of the DACS produces a direct financial gain to patients in the form of reduced direct costs. It produces an indirect financial gain in terms of increased productivity if the patient is in work, and of increased leisure time if not in work. The DACS is modest income generating for the local health district, an evaluation which is sensitive to internal policies for distribution of government funding within a district. The DACS increases the availability of outpatient consultations to other patients, which is not a quantifiable economic benefit, but is likely to be an overall health benefit. Conclusion: The introduction of DACS in the public system in Australia is of financial benefit to patients and to the local health service provider. It is likely to produce health benefits to non-screening patients, by means of freeing consultations to be used for other indications.

Background: The 2017 National Bowel Cancer Screening Program report records a median time from positive faecal occult blood test to colonoscopy of 53 days. There is some intrinsic delay in accessing specialist medical opinion prior to colonoscopy. Aim: To examine the effect of the introduction of a Direct Access Colonoscopy Service (DACS). Methods: Using prospectively maintained databases, patients undergoing normal service (NS) colonoscopy and those referred to DACS were compared. The primary outcome measure was the time from general practitioner (GP) referral to colonoscopy. Secondary outcome measures included the proportion of patients who met the current recommended 30 days from GP referral to colonoscopy, and the proportion of patients who waited longer than 90 days. Results: There were 289 patients in the NS group, and 601 patients who progressed on the DACS pathway. The demographics of both groups were comparable. DACS patients had a median waiting time of 49 days, significantly shorter than NS patients whose median wait was 79 days (P < 0.0001). Approximately 15.1% patients in the DACS group had their colonoscopy within 30 days from GP referral, significantly better than in the NS group (4.5%, P < 0.001). In the NS group, 41.2% patients waited longer than 90 days from GP referral to colonoscopy, compared with 16.3% in the DACS group (P < 0.001). Conclusion: DACS reduces waiting times to colonoscopy and is associated with an increased proportion of patients undergoing colonoscopy in a timely manner.

Introduction: Previous studies have shown single CRP measurements at time of presentation to have limited predictive benefit for appendicitis. Our objective was to determine the diagnostic utility of serial CRP measurements (to determine CRP velocity [CRPv]) in patients with right iliac fossa (RIF) pain. Methods: A single-centre prospective observational study was conducted on adult patients admitted with RIF pain. CRP was measured on admission, at midnight, and the following morning. Appendicitis was diagnosed on histopathology, or diagnostic imaging in non-operatively managed patients. Therapeutic interventions included all appropriate operative procedures and effective non-operative treatment with antibiotics. Logistic regression was used to generate predictors of therapeutic intervention, and then used to create a new risk score incorporating CRPv. Results: 98 of 112 (87.5%) participants had complete CRP data. 58 patients met the criteria for appendicitis (59.2%). Most patients presented with intermediate Modified Alvarado Scores (MAS) 5¿6 (40.8%) or Appendicitis Inflammatory Response Scores (AIRS) 5¿8 (49%). Our risk score had an AUROC of 0.88 (95% CI 0.81¿0.96) in predicting therapeutic intervention. This score was superior to MAS, AIRS, and single admission biomarker measurements. Patients with an increasing CRPv had 14 times the odds (OR 14.07, 95% CI 0.63¿315.2) of complicated appendicitis, and no cases of complicated appendicitis were observed in patients with a flat CRPv. Conclusions: CRP velocity is superior to single CRP at predicting intervention. Our v-Score shows promise as a decision making-aide by predicting the need for surgical intervention in RIF pain. A flat CRPv identifies a group of patients with a very low risk of complicated appendicitis.

Currently in Australasia, concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis are usually managed with two procedures: laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and pre or postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). This approach exposes the patient to the risk of complications from the common bile duct stone(s) while awaiting ERCP, the risks of the ERCP itself (particularly pancreatitis) and the need for a second anaesthetic. This article explores the evidence for a newer hybrid approach, single stage LC and intraoperative ERCP (SSLCE) and compares this approach with the commonly used alternatives. SSLCE offers reduced rates of pancreatitis, reduced length of hospital stay and reduced cost compared with the two-stage approach and requires only one anaesthetic. There is a reduced risk of bile leak compared with procedures that involve a choledochotomy, and ductal clearance rates are superior to trans-cystic exploration and equivalent to the standard two-stage approach. Barriers to widespread implementation relate largely to operating theatre logistics and availability of appropriate endoscopic expertise, although when bile duct stones are anticipated these issues are manageable. There is compelling justification in the literature to gather prospective evidence surrounding SSLCE in the Australian Healthcare system.

Introduction: Acute general surgical units (AGSUs) are changing the way in which acute appendicitis is managed. In the AGSU at John Hunter Hospital, some patients wait more than 48 hours from admission to undergo an appendicectomy, usually because they are not unwell enough to precipitate an operation before that time. We analysed this subgroup of appendicectomy patients to determine how effectively they are being managed and how this might be improved. Methods: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was conducted of all patients who received an appendicectomy while admitted under the AGSU at John Hunter Hospital in the five years between January 2009 and December 2013. Results: A total of 1,039 appendicectomies were performed in the study period, with 81 patients (7.8%) waiting > 48 hours for their operation (delayed appendicectomy group). Overall, the negative appendicectomy (NA) rate was 21.6%; the NA rate in delayed appendicectomies was 50.62% and a non-therapeutic operation occurred in 47% of this group (n=38). No significant difference was found in the incidence of perforation/gangrenous appendicitis between patients having surgery in <48 hours and the delayed appendicectomy groups (11.2% vs 9.9%, p=0.85). A combination of negative diagnostic imaging result, a normal white cell count and normal C-reactive protein (ie a negative 'triple test') was the best predictor of a negative appendicectomy (p=0.0158, negative predictive value: 0.91, 95% confidence interval: 0.59-0.99), in the delayed appendicectomy group. Conclusions: In the delayed appendicectomy group, the incidence of perforation/gangrenous appendicitis was not significantly different from that found in patients having appendicectomy performed sooner. However, the NA and non-therapeutic operation rates were unacceptably high. An appendix triple test can improve diagnostic accuracy significantly without an unacceptable rise in the rates of perforation/gangrenous appendicitis.

Introduction: Hepaticojejunostomy is the standard biliary bypass technique for periampullary cancer when trial dissection reveals unresectable disease or endoscopic stent placement is not possible. This anastomosis can be technically demanding and potentially difficult. The simpler technique of hepaticocholecystoenterostomy (HCE) has only previously been reported in very limited numbers and without outcome data. Methods: All patients undergoing HCE for the management of periampullary cancer were identified from a prospectively maintained computerised database of a single surgeon and were reviewed retrospectively. The HCE technique achieves a biliary bypass by two anastomoses, using the gallbladder as a conduit. It involves an anastomosis of the infundibulum of the gallbladder to the common hepatic duct followed by a second anastomosis of the gallbladder fundus to the proximal small bowel. Results: From 1996 to 2010, 30 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma required a biliary bypass after a failed trial of Whipple procedure (80%) or failed endoscopic stenting (20%). There were 19 men and 11 women with a mean age of 64.5 years. The mean operative time for HCE alone was 92 minutes. The mean length of hospital stay was nine days. There was a single grade 2 complication (readmission with gastric emptying delay) and a single grade 3 complication (bile leak requiring reoperation). Thirty-day mortality was zero and the mean survival was 12 months (with one patient still alive at the time of writing). There were no readmissions with recurrent biliary obstruction or cholangitis. One patient had developed an incisional hernia by the 24-month follow-up appointment. Conclusions: HCE in periampullary cancer is safe and effective in selected patients. It involves two simple anastomoses with good access rather than one more demanding anastomosis. Morbidity, patency and overall survival are comparable with contemporary published series of hepaticojejunostomy.