SAGES guidelines for the surgical treatment of hiatal hernias.

BACKGROUND: Hiatal hernia (HH) is a common condition. A multidisciplinary expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations to support clinicians, patients, and others in decisions regarding the treatment of HH. METHODS: Systematic reviews were conducted for four key questions regarding the treatment of HH in adults: surgical treatment of asymptomatic HH versus surveillance; use of mesh versus no mesh; performing a fundoplication versus no fundoplication; and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) versus redo fundoplication for recurrent HH. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations methodology by subject experts. When the evidence was insufficient to base recommendations on, expert opinion was utilized instead. Recommendations for future research were also proposed. RESULTS: The panel provided one conditional recommendation and two expert opinions for adults with HH. The panel suggested routinely performing a fundoplication in the repair of HH, though this was based on low certainty evidence. There was insufficient evidence to make evidence-based recommendations regarding surgical repair of asymptomatic HH or conversion to RYGB in recurrent HH, and therefore, only expert opinions were offered. The panel suggested that select asymptomatic patients may be offered surgical repair, with criteria outlined. Similarly, it suggested that conversion to RYGB for management of recurrent HH may be appropriate in certain patients and again described criteria. The evidence for the routine use of mesh in HH repair was equivocal and the panel deferred making a recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations should provide guidance regarding surgical decision-making in the treatment of HH and highlight the importance of shared decision-making and consideration of patient values to optimize outcomes. Pursuing the identified research needs will improve the evidence base and may allow for stronger recommendations in future evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of HH.

Morbidity and mortality following hiatal hernia repair in geriatric patients: a multicenter research network study.

BACKGROUND: Hiatal hernia is a common surgical pathology. Such hernias can be found incidentally and patients may opt for an initial nonoperative approach though many will pursue surgery after symptom progression. Data on the effects of age on the outcomes of hiatal hernia repair may help inform this decision-making process. METHODS: The TriNetX database was queried for all adult patients undergoing hiatal hernia repair from 2000 to 2023. Patients were divided into elective and emergent cohorts on the basis of diagnosis codes indicating obstruction or gangrene. Patients aged 80-89 were compared against those aged 65-79 in unadjusted analysis. Logistic regression models controlling for additional health history covariates were created to calculate odds ratios for primary outcomes. RESULTS: There were 2310 octogenarians and 15,295 seniors who underwent elective hiatal hernia repair, and 406 octogenarians and 1462 seniors who underwent emergent repair during the study period. The vast majority of patients in both groups underwent minimally invasive operations. In the elective cohort, octogenarians had higher rates of mortality, malnutrition, sepsis, respiratory failure, pneumonia, DVT, blood transfusion, and discharge to nursing facility. In the emergent cohort, octogenarians had higher rates of mortality, malnutrition, sepsis, and respiratory failure. The odds ratios for mortality in the elective and emergent cohorts were 3.9 (95% CI 3.1-5.0) and 3.5 (95% CI 2.1-5.6), respectively. CONCLUSION: Octogenarians are at a meaningfully increased risk for mortality and morbidity after both elective and emergent hiatal hernia repair compared to senior-aged patients. Greater consideration should be given to surgical repair prior to the 8th decade of life.

SAGES guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Appendicitis is an extremely common disease with a variety of medical and surgical treatment approaches. A multidisciplinary expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations to support clinicians and patients in decisions regarding the diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted from 2010 to 2022 to answer 8 key questions relating to the diagnosis of appendicitis, operative or nonoperative management, and specific technical and post-operative issues for appendectomy. The results of this systematic review were then presented to a panel of adult and pediatric surgeons. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the GRADE methodology by subject experts. RESULTS: Conditional recommendations were made in favor of uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis being managed operatively, either delayed (>12h) or immediate operation (<12h), either suction and lavage or suction alone, no routine drain placement, treatment with short-term antibiotics postoperatively for complicated appendicitis, and complicated appendicitis previously treated nonoperatively undergoing interval appendectomy. A conditional recommendation signals that the benefits of adhering to a recommendation probably outweigh the harms although it does also indicate uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations should provide guidance with regard to current controversies in appendicitis. The panel also highlighted future research opportunities where the evidence base can be strengthened.

SAGES guidelines for the use of laparoscopy during pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: When pregnant patients present with nonobstetric pathology, the physicians caring for them may be uncertain about the optimal management strategy. The aim of this guideline is to develop evidence-based recommendations for pregnant patients presenting with common surgical pathologies including appendicitis, biliary disease, and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS: The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Guidelines Committee convened a working group to address these issues. The group generated five key questions and completed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. An expert panel then met to form evidence-based recommendations according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Expert opinion was utilized when the available evidence was deemed insufficient. RESULTS: The expert panel agreed on ten recommendations addressing the management of appendicitis, biliary disease, and IBD during pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Conditional recommendations were made in favor of appendectomy over nonoperative treatment of appendicitis, laparoscopic appendectomy over open appendectomy, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy over nonoperative treatment of biliary disease and acute cholecystitis specifically. Based on expert opinion, the panel also suggested either operative or nonoperative treatment of biliary diseases other than acute cholecystitis in the third trimester, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography rather than common bile duct exploration for symptomatic choledocholithiasis, applying the same criteria for emergent surgical intervention in pregnant and non-pregnant IBD patients, utilizing an open rather than minimally invasive approach for pregnant patients requiring emergent surgical treatment of IBD, and managing pregnant patients with active IBD flares in a multidisciplinary fashion at centers with IBD expertise.

Management of symptomatic, asymptomatic, and recurrent hiatal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The surgical management of hiatal hernia remains controversial. We aimed to compare outcomes of mesh versus no mesh and fundoplication versus no fundoplication in symptomatic patients; surgery versus observation in asymptomatic patients; and redo hernia repair versus conversion to Roux-en-Y reconstruction in recurrent hiatal hernia. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and the ClinicalTrials.gov databases between 2000 and 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, and case series (asymptomatic and recurrent hernias). Screening was performed by two trained independent reviewers. Pooled analyses were performed on comparative data. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and Newcastle Ottawa Scale for randomized and non-randomized studies, respectively. RESULTS: We included 45 studies from 5152 retrieved records. Only six RCTs had low risk of bias. Mesh was associated with a lower recurrence risk (RR = 0.50, 95%CI 0.28, 0.88; I2 = 57%) in observational studies but not RCTs (RR = 0.98, 95%CI 0.47, 2.02; I2 = 34%), and higher total early dysphagia based on five observational studies (RR = 1.44, 95%CI 1.10, 1.89; I2 = 40%) but was not statistically significant in RCTs (RR = 3.00, 95%CI 0.64, 14.16). There was no difference in complications, reintervention, heartburn, reflux, or quality of life. There were no appropriate studies comparing surgery to observation in asymptomatic patients. Fundoplication resulted in higher early dysphagia in both observational studies and RCTs ([RR = 2.08, 95%CI 1.16, 3.76] and [RR = 20.58, 95%CI 1.34, 316.69]) but lower reflux in RCTs (RR = 0.31, 95%CI 0.17, 0.56, I2 = 0%). Conversion to Roux-en-Y was associated with a lower reintervention risk after 30 days compared to redo surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for optimal management of symptomatic and recurrent hiatal hernia remains controversial, underpinned by studies with a high risk of bias. Shared decision making between surgeon and patient is essential for optimal outcomes.

What Happens After Discharge? A 2+ Year Follow-Up After Laparoscopic Subtotal Fenestrating and Reconstituting Cholecystectomy.

Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy (LSC) is utilized to prevent complications in the difficult cholecystectomy. Medium-term outcomes are poorly studied for fenestrating and reconstituting operative techniques. A single-institution retrospective review was undertaken of all LSCs. A telephone survey was used to identify complications addressed at other institutions. We performed subgroup analyses by operative approach and of patients requiring postoperative endoscopic intervention (ERC). 28 patients met inclusion criteria. The median follow-up was 32.7 months. There were no bile duct injuries or reoperations. 21% of patients required a postoperative ERC and 50% were discharged home with a drain. Bile leaks were found to be more prevalent in the fenestrating LSC group (38% vs 0%, P = .003). The case series suggested more severe recurrent biliary disease in patients undergoing reconstituting LSC. Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy appears to have satisfactory medium-term outcomes. The reconstituting LSC group trends toward more severe recurrent disease which warrants further investigation.

Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons guidelines development: health equity update to standard operating procedure.

INTRODUCTION: The SAGES Guidelines Committee creates evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Due to existing health disparities, recommendations made in these guidelines may have different impacts on different populations. The updates to our standard operating procedure described herein will allow us to produce well-designed guidelines that take these disparities into account and potentially reduce health inequities. METHODS: This paper outlines updates to the SAGES Guidelines Committee Standard Operating Procedure in order to incorporate issues of heath equity into our guideline development process with the goal of minimizing downstream health disparities. RESULTS: SAGES has developed an evidence-based, standardized approach to consider issues of health equity throughout the guideline development process to allow physicians to better counsel patients and make research recommendations to better address disparities. CONCLUSION: Societies that promote guidelines within their organization must make an intentional effort to prevent the widening of health disparities as a result of their recommendations. The updates to the Guidelines Committee Standard Operating Procedure will hopefully lead to increased attention to these disparities and provide specific recommendations to reduce them.

SAGES peritoneal dialysis access guideline update 2023.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery has been used for both de novo insertion and salvage of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters. Advanced laparoscopic, basic laparoscopic, open, and image-guided techniques have evolved as the most popular techniques. The aim of this guideline was to develop evidence-based guidelines that support surgeons, patients, and other physicians in decisions on minimally invasive peritoneal dialysis access and the salvage of malfunctioning catheters in both adults and children. METHODS: A guidelines committee panel of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons reviewed the literature since the prior guideline was published in 2014 and developed seven key questions in adults and four in children. After a systematic review of the literature, by the panel, evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Recommendations for future research were also proposed. RESULTS: After systematic review, data extraction, and evidence to decision meetings, the panel agreed on twelve recommendations for the peri-operative performance of laparoscopic peritoneal dialysis access surgery and management of catheter dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: In the adult population, conditional recommendations were made in favor of: staged hernia repair followed by PD catheter insertion over simultaneous and traditional start over urgent start of PD when medically possible. Furthermore, the panel suggested advanced laparoscopic insertion techniques rather than basic laparoscopic techniques or open insertion. Conditional recommendations were made for either advanced laparoscopic or image-guided percutaneous insertion and for either nonoperative or operative salvage. A recommendation could not be made regarding concomitant clean-contaminated surgery in adults. In the pediatric population, conditional recommendations were made for either traditional or urgent start of PD, concomitant clean or clean-contaminated surgery and PD catheter placement rather than staged, and advanced laparoscopic placement rather than basic or open insertion.

Diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The optimal diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis remains controversial. This systematic review details the evidence and current best practices for the evaluation and management of uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis in adults and children. METHODS: Eight questions regarding the diagnosis and management of appendicitis were formulated. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane and clinicaltrials.gov/NLM were queried for articles published from 2010 to 2022 with key words related to at least one question. Randomized and non-randomized studies were included. Two reviewers screened each publication for eligibility and then extracted data from eligible studies. Random effects meta-analyses were performed on all quantitative data. The quality of randomized and non-randomized studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 or Newcastle Ottawa Scale, respectively. RESULTS: 2792 studies were screened and 261 were included. Most had a high risk of bias. Computerized tomography scan yielded the highest sensitivity (> 80%) and specificity (> 93%) in the adult population, although high variability existed. In adults with uncomplicated appendicitis, non-operative management resulted in higher odds of readmission (OR 6.10) and need for operation (OR 20.09), but less time to return to work/school (SMD - 1.78). In pediatric patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, non-operative management also resulted in higher odds of need for operation (OR 38.31). In adult patients with complicated appendicitis, there were higher odds of need for operation following antibiotic treatment only (OR 29.00), while pediatric patients had higher odds of abscess formation (OR 2.23). In pediatric patients undergoing appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, higher risk of reoperation at any time point was observed in patients who had drains placed at the time of operation (RR 2.04). CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates the diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis remains nuanced. A personalized approach and appropriate patient selection remain key to treatment success. Further research on controversies in treatment would be useful for optimal management.

SAGES/AHPBA guidelines for the use of microwave and radiofrequency liver ablation for the surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma or colorectal liver metastases less than 5 cm.

BACKGROUND: Primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) represent the liver's two most common malignant neoplasms. Liver-directed therapies such as ablation have become part of multidisciplinary therapies despite a paucity of data. Therefore, an expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations regarding the use of microwave ablation (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for HCC or CRLM less than 5 cm in diameter in patients ineligible for other therapies. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted for six key questions (KQ) regarding MWA or RFA for solitary liver tumors in patients deemed poor candidates for first-line therapy. Subject experts used the GRADE methodology to formulate evidence-based recommendations and future research recommendations. RESULTS: The panel addressed six KQs pertaining to MWA vs. RFA outcomes and laparoscopic vs. percutaneous MWA. The available evidence was poor quality and individual studies included both HCC and CRLM. Therefore, the six KQs were condensed into two, recognizing that these were two disparate tumor groups and this grouping was somewhat arbitrary. With this significant limitation, the panel suggested that in appropriately selected patients, either MWA or RFA can be safe and feasible. However, this recommendation must be implemented cautiously when simultaneously considering patients with two disparate tumor biologies. The limited data suggested that laparoscopic MWA of anatomically more difficult tumors has a compensatory higher morbidity profile compared to percutaneous MWA, while achieving similar overall 1-year survival. Thus, either approach can be appropriate depending on patient-specific factors (very low certainty of evidence). CONCLUSION: Given the weak evidence, these guidelines provide modest guidance regarding liver ablative therapies for HCC and CRLM. Liver ablation is just one component of a multimodal approach and its use is currently limited to a highly selected population. The quality of the existing data is very low and therefore limits the strength of the guidelines.