Sociodemographic reporting in videomics research: a review of practices in otolaryngology - head and neck surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To assess reporting practices of sociodemographic data in Upper Aerodigestive Tract (UAT) videomics research in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (OHNS). STUDY DESIGN: Narrative review. METHODS: Four online research databases were searched for peer-reviewed articles on videomics and UAT endoscopy in OHNS, published since January 1, 2017. Title and abstract search, followed by a full-text screening was performed. Dataset audit criteria were determined by the MINIMAR reporting standards for patient demographic characteristics, in addition to gender and author affiliations. RESULTS: Of the 57 studies that were included, 37% reported any sociodemographic information on their dataset. Among these studies, all reported age, most reported sex (86%), two (10%) reported race, and one (5%) reported ethnicity and socioeconomic status. No studies reported gender. Most studies (84%) included at least one female author, and more than half of the studies (53%) had female first/senior authors, with no significant differences in the rate of sociodemographic reporting in studies with and without female authors (any female author: p = 0.2664; first/senior female author: p > 0.9999). Most studies based in the US reported at least one sociodemographic variable (79%), compared to those in Europe (24%) and in Asia (20%) (p = 0.0012). The rates of sociodemographic reporting in journals of different categories were as follows: clinical OHNS: 44%, clinical non-OHNS: 40%, technical: 42%, interdisciplinary: 10%. CONCLUSIONS: There is prevalent underreporting of sociodemographic information in OHNS videomics research utilizing UAT endoscopy. Routine reporting of sociodemographic information should be implemented for AI-based research to help minimize algorithmic biases that have been previously demonstrated.

Applications of ChatGPT in Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery: A State of the Art Review.

OBJECTIVE: To review the current literature on the application, accuracy, and performance of Chatbot Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT) in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. DATA SOURCES: PubMED, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. REVIEW METHODS: A comprehensive review of the literature on the applications of ChatGPT in otolaryngology was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT provides imperfect patient information or general knowledge related to diseases found in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. In clinical practice, despite suboptimal performance, studies reported that the model is more accurate in providing diagnoses, than in suggesting the most adequate additional examinations and treatments related to clinical vignettes or real clinical cases. ChatGPT has been used as an adjunct tool to improve scientific reports (referencing, spelling correction), to elaborate study protocols, or to take student or resident exams reporting several levels of accuracy. The stability of ChatGPT responses throughout repeated questions appeared high but many studies reported some hallucination events, particularly in providing scientific references. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: To date, most applications of ChatGPT are limited in generating disease or treatment information, and in the improvement of the management of clinical cases. The lack of comparison of ChatGPT performance with other large language models is the main limitation of the current research. Its ability to analyze clinical images has not yet been investigated in otolaryngology although upper airway tract or ear images are an important step in the diagnosis of most common ear, nose, and throat conditions. This review may help otolaryngologists to conceive new applications in further research.

Elective Surgery Trends and Outcomes of Nonagenarians and Centenarians in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery: A NSQIP Study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe types and outcomes of elective otolaryngological surgeries undergone by patients ≥90 years of age and to assess whether very old age is an independent risk factor for postsurgical complications and death. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, a validated national prospective surgical outcomes database, was used to identify all patients aged 65 years and older who underwent elective otolaryngological procedures from 2011 to 2020. Study outcomes included minor complications, major life-threatening complications, and 30-day mortality. Predictors of outcomes, including frailty, were identified using univariable analyses and age was added into the final logistic regression models with stepwise selection. RESULTS: A total of 40,723 patients met inclusion criteria; 629 (1.5%) patients were ≥90 years of age. Of the 63,389 procedures, head and neck (67.6%) and facial plastics and reconstructive (15.0%) procedures were most common. The overall incidence of major life-threatening complications, minor complications, and death was 2.0%, 3.5%, and 0.4%, respectively. Age ≥90 was significantly associated with an increased risk for 30-day mortality, but not with major or minor postoperative complications. A high modified frailty index was significantly associated with an increased risk for major postoperative complications and death amongst patients ≥90 years. CONCLUSIONS: Elective otolaryngological surgery can be safe in relatively healthy nonagenarians and centenarians, though there is a small increased risk of 30-day mortality. Although older age can predispose patients to other comorbidities, age alone should not deter surgeons and patients from considering elective otolaryngological procedures. Frailty may be a better predictor for surgical outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV Laryngoscope, 2024.

Access to Otolaryngologic Telemedicine Care Across the COVID-19 Pandemic at an Urban Tertiary Hospital System.

Objective: To describe associations between patients' demographic characteristics and access to telemedicine services in an urban tertiary academic medical system across the COVID-19 pandemic, and to identify potential barriers to access. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted at a single-center tertiary academic medical center. The study included adult patients undergoing outpatient otolaryngologic care in person or via telemedicine during 8 week timeframes: before the pandemic, at the onset of the pandemic, and during later parts of the pandemic. Patients were characterized by age, sex, race, insurance type, primary language, portal activation status, income estimate, and visit type. Where appropriate, chi-squared tests, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, and logistic regression were used to compare demographic factors between the cohorts. Results: A total of 14,240 unique patients [median age, 58 years (range, 18-107 years); 56.5% were female] resulting in a total of 29,457 visits (94.8% in-person and 5.2% telemedicine) were analyzed. Patients seen in person were older than those using telemedicine. Telemedicine visits included a higher proportion of patients with private insurance, and fewer patients with government or no insurance compared to in-person visits. Race, income, and English as primary language were not found to have a significant effect on telemedicine use. Conclusion: In an urban tertiary medical center, we found significant differences in sociodemographic characteristics between patients who accessed otolaryngologic care in person versus via telemedicine through different phases of the COVID pandemic, reflecting possible barriers to care associated with telemedicine. Further studies are needed to develop interventions to improve access.

Design and Usability of an Open-Source, Low-Cost Flexible Laryngoscope for Resource-Limited Settings.

Importance: Endoscopes are paramount to the practice of otolaryngology. To provide physicians in low-middle-income countries with adequate tools to treat otolaryngologic problems, it is necessary to create a low-cost sustainable option. Objective: To describe the design and usability of an open-source, low-cost flexible laryngoscope that addresses the lack of affordable and accessible methods for otolaryngologic visualization in resource-limited settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study used a mixed-methods approach, including a technical description of device design as well as quantitative and qualitative survey evaluation of device usability. Engineering involved device design, sourcing or manufacturing individual components, fabricating a prototype, and iterative testing. Key assumptions and needs for the device were identified in collaboration with otolaryngologists in Zimbabwe, and designed and simulated by biomedical engineers in a US university laboratory. Board-certified otolaryngologists at a single US university hospital trialed a completed prototype on simulated airways between May 2023 and June 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Technical details on the design of the device are provided. Otolaryngologist gave feedback on device characteristics, maneuverability, and visualization using the System Usability Scale, a customized Likert-scale questionnaire (5-point scale), and semistructured interviews. Results: A functional prototype meeting requirements was completed consisting of a distal-chip camera, spring bending tip, handle housing the control mechanism and electronics, and flexible polyether block amide-coated silicone sheath housing the camera and control wires; an external monitor provided real-time visualization and ability to store data. A total of 14 otolaryngologists participated in the device review. The mean (SD) System Usability Scale score was 88.93 (10.08), suggesting excellent usability. The device was rated highly for ease of set up, physical attributes, image quality, and functionality. Conclusions and Relevance: This quality improvement study described the design of a novel open-source low-cost flexible laryngoscope that external review with otolaryngologists suggests was usable and feasible in various resource-limited environments. Future work is needed to translate the model into a clinical setting.

An introduction to machine learning and generative artificial intelligence for otolaryngologists-head and neck surgeons: a narrative review.

PURPOSE: Despite the robust expansion of research surrounding artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) and their applications to medicine, these methodologies often remain opaque and inaccessible to many otolaryngologists. Especially, with the increasing ubiquity of large-language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT and their potential implementation in clinical practice, clinicians may benefit from a baseline understanding of some aspects of AI. In this narrative review, we seek to clarify underlying concepts, illustrate applications to otolaryngology, and highlight future directions and limitations of these tools. METHODS: Recent literature regarding AI principles and otolaryngologic applications of ML and LLMs was reviewed via search in PubMed and Google Scholar. RESULTS: Significant recent strides have been made in otolaryngology research utilizing AI and ML, across all subspecialties, including neurotology, head and neck oncology, laryngology, rhinology, and sleep surgery. Potential applications suggested by recent publications include screening and diagnosis, predictive tools, clinical decision support, and clinical workflow improvement via LLMs. Ongoing concerns regarding AI in medicine include ethical concerns around bias and data sharing, as well as the "black box" problem and limitations in explainability. CONCLUSIONS: Potential implementations of AI in otolaryngology are rapidly expanding. While implementation in clinical practice remains theoretical for most of these tools, their potential power to influence the practice of otolaryngology is substantial.

Voice as an AI Biomarker of Health-Introducing Audiomics.

This Viewpoint discusses the need to create standards for audiomics to identify unique audio biomarkers of health and disease­now possible because of more efficient voice data analysis available through the use of artificial intelligence (AI)­and to improve patient care.

Trust in Machine Learning Driven Clinical Decision Support Tools Among Otolaryngologists.

BACKGROUND: Machine learning driven clinical decision support tools (ML-CDST) are on the verge of being integrated into clinical settings, including in Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery. In this study, we investigated whether such CDST may influence otolaryngologists' diagnostic judgement. METHODS: Otolaryngologists were recruited virtually across the United States for this experiment on human-AI interaction. Participants were shown 12 different video-stroboscopic exams from patients with previously diagnosed laryngopharyngeal reflux or vocal fold paresis and asked to determine the presence of disease. They were then exposed to a random diagnosis purportedly resulting from an ML-CDST and given the opportunity to revise their diagnosis. The ML-CDST output was presented with no explanation, a general explanation, or a specific explanation of its logic. The ML-CDST impact on diagnostic judgement was assessed with McNemar's test. RESULTS: Forty-five participants were recruited. When participants reported less confidence (268 observations), they were significantly (p = 0.001) more likely to change their diagnostic judgement after exposure to ML-CDST output compared to when they reported more confidence (238 observations). Participants were more likely to change their diagnostic judgement when presented with a specific explanation of the CDST logic (p = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that otolaryngologists are susceptible to accepting ML-CDST diagnostic recommendations, especially when less confident. Otolaryngologists' trust in ML-CDST output is increased when accompanied with a specific explanation of its logic. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Laryngoscope, 134:2799-2804, 2024.

Availability of evidence and comparative effectiveness for surgical versus drug interventions: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to examine the prevalence of comparisons of surgery to drug regimens, the strength of evidence of such comparisons and whether surgery or the drug intervention was favoured. DESIGN: Systematic review of systematic reviews (umbrella review). DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Systematic reviews attempt to compare surgical to drug interventions. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted whether the review found any randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for eligible comparisons. Individual trial results were extracted directly from the systematic review. SYNTHESIS: The outcomes of each meta-analysis were resynthesised into random-effects meta-analyses. Egger's test and excess significance were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 188 systematic reviews intended to compare surgery versus drugs. Only 41 included data from at least one RCT (total, 165 RCTs) and covered a total of 103 different outcomes of various comparisons of surgery versus drugs. A GRADE assessment was performed by the Cochrane reviewers for 87 (83%) outcomes in the reviews, indicating the strength of evidence was high in 4 outcomes (4%), moderate in 22 (21%), low in 27 (26%) and very low in 33 (32%). Based on 95% CIs, the surgical intervention was favoured in 38/103 (37%), and the drugs were favoured in 13/103 (13%) outcomes. Of the outcomes with high GRADE rating, only one showed conclusive superiority in our reanalysis (sphincterotomy was better than medical therapy for anal fissure). Of the 22 outcomes with moderate GRADE rating, 6 (27%) were inconclusive, 14 (64%) were in favour of surgery and 2 (9%) were in favour of drugs. There was no evidence of excess significance. CONCLUSIONS: Though the relative merits of surgical versus drug interventions are important to know for many diseases, high strength randomised evidence is rare. More randomised trials comparing surgery to drug interventions are needed.

A deep learning pipeline for automated classification of vocal fold polyps in flexible laryngoscopy.

PURPOSE: To develop and validate a deep learning model for distinguishing healthy vocal folds (HVF) and vocal fold polyps (VFP) on laryngoscopy videos, while demonstrating the ability of a previously developed informative frame classifier in facilitating deep learning development. METHODS: Following retrospective extraction of image frames from 52 HVF and 77 unilateral VFP videos, two researchers manually labeled each frame as informative or uninformative. A previously developed informative frame classifier was used to extract informative frames from the same video set. Both sets of videos were independently divided into training (60%), validation (20%), and test (20%) by patient. Machine-labeled frames were independently verified by two researchers to assess the precision of the informative frame classifier. Two models, pre-trained on ResNet18, were trained to classify frames as containing HVF or VFP. The accuracy of the polyp classifier trained on machine-labeled frames was compared to that of the classifier trained on human-labeled frames. The performance was measured by accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: When evaluated on a hold-out test set, the polyp classifier trained on machine-labeled frames achieved an accuracy of 85% and AUROC of 0.84, whereas the classifier trained on human-labeled frames achieved an accuracy of 69% and AUROC of 0.66. CONCLUSION: An accurate deep learning classifier for vocal fold polyp identification was developed and validated with the assistance of a peer-reviewed informative frame classifier for dataset assembly. The classifier trained on machine-labeled frames demonstrates improved performance compared to the classifier trained on human-labeled frames.

Female Surgical Ergonomics in Otolaryngology: A National Survey Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the nature and impact surgical ergonomic challenges experienced by female otolaryngologists. STUDY DESIGN: National survey study. SETTING: Female otolaryngology residents, fellows and attendings recruited via social media posting and email distribution. METHODS: We distributed a survey study to female otolaryngologists throughout the United States. The height and glove size of participants reporting difficulties with equipment and instruments were compared to those not reporting difficulties. RESULTS: Ninety-six female otolaryngologists participated in our study, comprised of 43% residents, 10% fellows, and 47% attendings. Ninety percent of participants reported difficulties using equipment and 77% of participants reported difficulty with instruments, the most common being nasal endoscopic instruments (28%). The vast majority of participants reported pain during and (or) after the operation (92%). Head and neck (53%) and rhinology (44%) were identified as particularly challenging specialities, but only 25% of participants reported that ergonomics affected their career plans. Participants felt that adjustable equipment (60%), a variety of sizes of instruments (43%), and more discussion around ergonomics (47%) would help. Respondents reported adjusting the operating room to accommodate their size took extra time (44%) and was a mental burden (39%). Participants reporting difficulties with operating room equipment were significantly shorter than those without difficulties (64 inches vs 67 inches, P = .037), and those reporting difficulties with instruments had a smaller median glove size (6 vs 6.5, P = .018). CONCLUSION: Surgical ergonomics represent a challenge for female otolaryngologists, particularly those with smaller hands and shorter height. Partnering with industry, we must address the needs of an increasingly diverse workforce to ensure that all surgeons can operate effectively and comfortably.

The Readability of Patient-Facing Social Media Posts on Common Otolaryngologic Diagnoses.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the readability of patient-facing educational information about the most common otolaryngology diagnoses on popular social media platforms. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Social media platforms. METHODS: The top 5 otolaryngologic diagnoses were identified from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey Database. Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, and Instagram were searched using these terms, and the top 25 patient-facing posts from unique accounts for each search term and poster type (otolaryngologist, other medical professional, layperson) were identified. Captions, text, and audio from images and video, and linked articles were extracted. The readability of each post element was calculated with multiple readability formulae. Readability was summarized and was compared between poster types, platforms, and search terms via Kruskal-Wallis testing. RESULTS: Median readability, by grade level, by grade level, was greater than 10 for captions, 5 for image-associated text, and 9 for linked articles. Captions and images in posts by laypeople were significantly more readable than captions by otolaryngologists or other medical professionals, but there was no difference for linked articles. All post components were more readable in posts about cerumen than those about other search terms. CONCLUSIONS: When examining the readability of posts on social media regarding the most common otolaryngology diagnoses, we found that many posts are less readable than recommended for patients, and found that posts by laypeople were significantly more readable than those by medical professionals. Medical professionals should work to make educational social media posts more readable to facilitate patient comprehension.

Machine learning in the evaluation of voice and swallowing in the head and neck cancer patient.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to present recent advances and limitations in machine learning applied to the evaluation of speech, voice, and swallowing in head and neck cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Novel machine learning models incorporating diverse data modalities with improved discriminatory capabilities have been developed for predicting toxicities following head and neck cancer therapy, including dysphagia, dysphonia, xerostomia, and weight loss as well as guiding treatment planning. Machine learning has been applied to the care of posttreatment voice and swallowing dysfunction by offering objective and standardized assessments and aiding innovative technologies for functional restoration. Voice and speech are also being utilized in machine learning algorithms to screen laryngeal cancer. SUMMARY: Machine learning has the potential to help optimize, assess, predict, and rehabilitate voice and swallowing function in head and neck cancer patients as well as aid in cancer screening. However, existing studies are limited by the lack of sufficient external validation and generalizability, insufficient transparency and reproducibility, and no clear superior predictive modeling strategies. Algorithms and applications will need to be trained on large multiinstitutional data sets, incorporate sociodemographic data to reduce bias, and achieve validation through clinical trials for optimal performance and utility.

Concurrent Validity of the IOPI and Tongueometer Orofacial Strength Measurement Devices.

OBJECTIVE(S): This study examined the concurrent validity of two orofacial strength manometers: (1) the Iowa Oral Performance Instrument (IOPI) - the current, gold standard orofacial manometer; and (2) the Tongueometer - a newly-available, lower cost, orofacial manometer. METHODS: This study compared IOPI and Tongueometer pressure readings across three experimental conditions. Experiment 1 compared full setup (manometer + tongue bulb) pressure readings between the IOPI and Tongueometer. Experiment 2 compared IOPI tongue bulb and Tongueometer tongue bulb pressure readings, while controlling for manometer. Experiment 3 compared IOPI manometer and Tongueometer manometer pressure readings, while controlling for tongue bulb. Pressures were applied manually within a laboratory setting. Lin's concordance correlation (ρc ) was used to calculate level of agreement, with ρc interpreted as 'poor' if <0.90, 'moderate' if 0.90 to <0.95, 'substantial' if 0.95 to <0.99, and 'excellent' if ≥0.99. RESULTS: 539 trials were analyzed. There was a median absolute difference of 2.4 kPa in pressure readings between the IOPI and Tongueometer full setups (manometer + tongue bulb). Correlations revealed substantial agreement between IOPI and Tongueometer full setups (experiment 1: n = 292; ρc = 0.986), tongue bulbs (experiment 2: n = 146; ρc = 0.987-0.992), and manometers (experiment 3: n = 101; ρc = 0.970). CONCLUSIONS: Differences in pressures were consistently observed between the Tongueometer and IOPI. Despite these differences, substantial agreement was present. These data suggest the Tongueometer may be a valid, lower cost alternative to the IOPI for objectively assessing orofacial strength in clinical practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2 Laryngoscope, 133:3123-3131, 2023.

Female Surgical Ergonomics in Otolaryngology: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the surgical ergonomic challenges experienced by women in otolaryngology, identify specific equipment that is ergonomically challenging, and assess the impact of suboptimal ergonomics on female otolaryngologists. METHODS: We performed a qualitative study using an interpretive framework rooted in grounded theory. We performed semi-structured qualitative interviews of 14 female otolaryngologists from nine institutions at various stages in training and across subspecialties. Interviews were independently analyzed by thematic content analysis by two researchers and inter-rater reliability was assessed via Cohen's kappa. Differing opinions were reconciled via discussion. RESULTS: Participants noted difficulties with equipment including microscopes, chairs, step stools, and tables as well as difficulty using larger surgical instruments, preference for smaller instruments, frustration with lack of smaller instruments, and a desire for a larger spectrum of instrument sizes. Participants reported neck, hand, and back pain associated with operating. Participants suggested modifications to the operative environment, including a wider variety of instrument sizes, adjustable instruments, and more focus and attention on ergonomic issues and the range of surgeon physiques. Participants felt that optimizing their operating room set-up was an additional burden on them, and that lack of inclusive instrumentation affected their sense of belonging. Participants emphasized positive stories of mentorship and empowerment from peers and superiors of all genders. CONCLUSION: Female otolaryngologists face unique ergonomic challenges. As the otolaryngology workforce becomes increasingly diverse, it is important to address the needs of a diverse set of physiques to avoid inadvertently disadvantaging certain individuals. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A Laryngoscope, 133:3034-3041, 2023.

Expert Consensus Statement: Management of Dysphagia in Head and Neck Cancer Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To develop an expert consensus statement (ECS) on the management of dysphagia in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients to address controversies and offer opportunities for quality improvement. Dysphagia in HNC was defined as swallowing impairment in patients with cancers of the nasal cavity, paranasal sinuses, nasopharynx, oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx, or hypopharynx. METHODS: Development group members with expertise in dysphagia followed established guidelines for developing ECS. A professional search strategist systematically reviewed the literature, and the best available evidence was used to compose consensus statements targeted at providers managing dysphagia in adult HNC populations. The development group prioritized topics where there was significant practice variation and topics that would improve the quality of HNC patient care if consensus were possible. RESULTS: The development group identified 60 candidate consensus statements, based on 75 initial proposed topics and questions, that focused on addressing the following high yield topics: (1) risk factors, (2) screening, (3) evaluation, (4) prevention, (5) interventions, and (6) surveillance. After 2 iterations of the Delphi survey and the removal of duplicative statements, 48 statements met the standardized definition for consensus; 12 statements were designated as no consensus. CONCLUSION: Expert consensus was achieved for 48 statements pertaining to risk factors, screening, evaluation, prevention, intervention, and surveillance for dysphagia in HNC patients. Clinicians can use these statements to improve quality of care, inform policy and protocols, and appreciate areas where there is no consensus. Future research, ideally randomized controlled trials, is warranted to address additional controversies related to dysphagia in HNC patients.

Availability of evidence and comparative effectiveness for surgical versus drug interventions: an overview of systematic reviews.

Objectives: To examine the prevalence of comparisons of surgery to drug regimens, the strength of evidence of such comparisons, and whether surgery or the drug intervention was favored. Design: Systematic review of systematic reviews (umbrella review). Data sources: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). Eligibility criteria and synthesis of results: Using the search term "surg*" in CDSR, we retrieved systematic reviews of surgical interventions. Abstracts were subsequently screened to find systematic reviews that aimed to compare surgical to drug interventions; and then, among them, those that included any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for such comparisons. Trial results data were extracted manually and synthesized into random-effects meta-analyses. Results: Overall, 188 systematic reviews intended to compare surgery versus drugs. Only 41 included data from at least one RCT (total, 165 RCTs with data) and covered a total of 103 different outcomes of various comparisons of surgery versus drugs. A GRADE assessment was performed by the Cochrane reviewers for 87 (83%) outcomes in the reviews, indicating the strength of evidence was high in 4 outcomes (4%), moderate in 22 (21%), low in 27 (26%) and very low in 33 (32%). Based on 95% confidence intervals, the surgical intervention was favored in 38/103 (37%), and the drugs were favored in 13/103 (13%) outcomes. Of the outcomes with high GRADE rating, only one showed conclusive superiority (sphincterotomy was better than medical therapy for anal fissure). Of the 22 outcomes with moderate GRADE rating, 6 (27%) were inconclusive, 14 (64%) were in favor of surgery, and 2 (9%) were in favor of drugs. Conclusions: Though the relative merits of surgical versus drug interventions are important to know for many diseases, high strength randomized evidence is rare. More randomized trials comparing surgery to drug interventions are needed. Protocol registration: https://osf.io/p9x3j.