比较颈动脉内膜切除术的手术效果:评估顾问与实习生病例对患者护理和外科培训的影响。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Annals of vascular surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-03 DOI:10.1016/j.avsg.2024.07.098
Celso Nunes, Luís Antunes, Catarina Lopes, João O'neill Pedrosa, Eduardo Silva, Manuel Fonseca
{"title":"比较颈动脉内膜切除术的手术效果:评估顾问与实习生病例对患者护理和外科培训的影响。","authors":"Celso Nunes, Luís Antunes, Catarina Lopes, João O'neill Pedrosa, Eduardo Silva, Manuel Fonseca","doi":"10.1016/j.avsg.2024.07.098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study assesses the impact of having a surgical trainee performing a carotid endarterectomy (CEA) procedure on the postoperative rates of stroke and death.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this observational retrospective study, consecutive patients, who underwent CEA between May 01, 2016, and July 31, 2022, were entered into a retrospectively collected database. Patients were stratified into 2 categories - consultant-led cases and trainees-led cases. Primary outcomes were 30-day stroke rate, and 30-day morbimortality. A sub analysis was performed after grouping the patients in whether there was a neurological event in the previous 6 months - symptomatic or asymptomatic.</p><p><strong>Results/conclusions: </strong>Trainees-led cases had significantly longer clamping times and higher rates of stroke in asymptomatic patients compared with consultant-led cases. Patient's safety should be our top priority. Any practice leading to a significantly increased rate of postoperative stroke must be discontinued. Training protocols and adequate supervision must ensure that trainees possess the necessary skills and knowledge to safely and effectively perform CEA procedures, thereby prioritizing patient safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":8061,"journal":{"name":"Annals of vascular surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing the Surgical Outcomes of Carotid Endarterectomy: Assessing the Impact of Consultant versus Trainee Cases on Patient Care and Surgical Training.\",\"authors\":\"Celso Nunes, Luís Antunes, Catarina Lopes, João O'neill Pedrosa, Eduardo Silva, Manuel Fonseca\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.avsg.2024.07.098\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study assesses the impact of having a surgical trainee performing a carotid endarterectomy (CEA) procedure on the postoperative rates of stroke and death.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this observational retrospective study, consecutive patients, who underwent CEA between May 01, 2016, and July 31, 2022, were entered into a retrospectively collected database. Patients were stratified into 2 categories - consultant-led cases and trainees-led cases. Primary outcomes were 30-day stroke rate, and 30-day morbimortality. A sub analysis was performed after grouping the patients in whether there was a neurological event in the previous 6 months - symptomatic or asymptomatic.</p><p><strong>Results/conclusions: </strong>Trainees-led cases had significantly longer clamping times and higher rates of stroke in asymptomatic patients compared with consultant-led cases. Patient's safety should be our top priority. Any practice leading to a significantly increased rate of postoperative stroke must be discontinued. Training protocols and adequate supervision must ensure that trainees possess the necessary skills and knowledge to safely and effectively perform CEA procedures, thereby prioritizing patient safety.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8061,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of vascular surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of vascular surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2024.07.098\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of vascular surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2024.07.098","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本研究评估了由外科实习生实施颈动脉内膜切除术对术后中风和死亡率的影响:观察性回顾研究 方法:将2016年5月1日至2022年7月31日期间接受颈动脉内膜切除术的连续患者录入回顾性收集的数据库。患者分为两类--顾问主导的病例和学员主导的病例。主要结果为 30 天卒中率和 30 天死亡率。在对患者进行分组后,对其在过去六个月中是否发生过神经系统事件(无症状或无症状)进行了次级分析:结果/结论:与顾问主导的病例相比,学员主导的病例钳夹时间明显更长,无症状患者的中风发生率更高。患者的安全应该是我们的首要任务。任何导致术后中风发生率明显增加的做法都必须停止。培训方案和充分的监督必须确保受训者掌握必要的技能和知识,以安全有效地实施颈动脉内膜剥脱术(CEA),从而将患者安全放在首位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparing the Surgical Outcomes of Carotid Endarterectomy: Assessing the Impact of Consultant versus Trainee Cases on Patient Care and Surgical Training.

Background: This study assesses the impact of having a surgical trainee performing a carotid endarterectomy (CEA) procedure on the postoperative rates of stroke and death.

Methods: In this observational retrospective study, consecutive patients, who underwent CEA between May 01, 2016, and July 31, 2022, were entered into a retrospectively collected database. Patients were stratified into 2 categories - consultant-led cases and trainees-led cases. Primary outcomes were 30-day stroke rate, and 30-day morbimortality. A sub analysis was performed after grouping the patients in whether there was a neurological event in the previous 6 months - symptomatic or asymptomatic.

Results/conclusions: Trainees-led cases had significantly longer clamping times and higher rates of stroke in asymptomatic patients compared with consultant-led cases. Patient's safety should be our top priority. Any practice leading to a significantly increased rate of postoperative stroke must be discontinued. Training protocols and adequate supervision must ensure that trainees possess the necessary skills and knowledge to safely and effectively perform CEA procedures, thereby prioritizing patient safety.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
13.30%
发文量
603
审稿时长
50 days
期刊介绍: Annals of Vascular Surgery, published eight times a year, invites original manuscripts reporting clinical and experimental work in vascular surgery for peer review. Articles may be submitted for the following sections of the journal: Clinical Research (reports of clinical series, new drug or medical device trials) Basic Science Research (new investigations, experimental work) Case Reports (reports on a limited series of patients) General Reviews (scholarly review of the existing literature on a relevant topic) Developments in Endovascular and Endoscopic Surgery Selected Techniques (technical maneuvers) Historical Notes (interesting vignettes from the early days of vascular surgery) Editorials/Correspondence
期刊最新文献
Appropriateness of the Treatment of Non-Complicated Acute Type B Dissections in Zone 0 and 1 Preventive Revascularization of the Supra-Aortic Trunks During the Treatment of Type A Dissections Improves the Neurological Prognosis of These Patients: Results of Multidisciplinary Care in an Aortic Center Predicting the Risk of Type 1A Endoleaks by Numerical Modelling Helps with the Technical Choice in the Surgical Management of Infrarenal Aortic Aneurysms Relationship Between the Volume of Iodine Contrast During Vascular Surgery and the Occurrence of Postoperative Renal Failure Experimental Analysis of the Impact of EndoAnchor on the Textile Structure of Aortic Stentgrafts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1