Impact of fellow compared to resident assistance on outcomes of minimally invasive surgery.

introductionAs fellowship training after general surgery residency has become increasingly common, the impact on resident education must be considered. Patient safety and procedure outcomes are often used as justification by attendings who favor fellows over residents in certain minimally invasive surgery (MIS) operations. The aim of the present study was to compare the impact of trainee level on the outcomes of selected MIS operations to determine if giving preference to fellows on grounds of outcomes is warranted.

methodsPatients who underwent elective laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair (LHHR), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), laparoscopic splenectomy (LS), laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), or laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) with assistance of a general surgery chief resident or fellow were identified from the American College of Surgeon's National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2007-2012). Patients were matched 1:1 based on propensity score for the odds of undergoing operations assisted by a fellow.

results5145 patients underwent LHHR, 1396 LSG, 9656 LRYGB, 863 LS, 13,434 LC, and 3069 LVHR. Fellows assisted in 41.7% of LHHR, 49.2% of LSG, 56.4% of LRYGB, 25.7% of LS, 17.1% of LC, and 27.0% of LVHR cases. After matching, overall and severe complication rates were comparable between cases performed with assistance of a fellow or chief resident. Median operative time was longer for LSG, LRYGB, and LC when a fellow assisted.

conclusionsSurgical outcomes were similar between fellow and chief resident assistance in MIS operations, arguing that increased resident participation in basic and complex laparoscopic operations is appropriate without compromising patient safety.