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.

Clinical artificial intelligence: teaching a large language model to generate recommendations that align with guidelines for the surgical management of GERD.

BACKGROUND: Large Language Models (LLMs) provide clinical guidance with inconsistent accuracy due to limitations with their training dataset. LLMs are "teachable" through customization. We compared the ability of the generic ChatGPT-4 model and a customized version of ChatGPT-4 to provide recommendations for the surgical management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) to both surgeons and patients. METHODS: Sixty patient cases were developed using eligibility criteria from the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) & United European Gastroenterology (UEG)-European Association of Endoscopic. Surgery (EAES) guidelines for the surgical management of GERD. Standardized prompts were engineered for physicians as the end-user, with separate layperson prompts for patients. A customized GPT was developed to generate recommendations based on guidelines, called the GERD Tool for Surgery (GTS). Both the GTS and generic ChatGPT-4 were queried July 21st, 2024. Model performance was evaluated by comparing responses to SAGES & UEG-EAES guideline recommendations. Outcome data was presented using descriptive statistics including counts and percentages. RESULTS: The GTS provided accurate recommendations for the surgical management of GERD for 60/60 (100.0%) surgeon inquiries and 40/40 (100.0%) patient inquiries based on guideline recommendations. The Generic ChatGPT-4 model generated accurate guidance for 40/60 (66.7%) surgeon inquiries and 19/40 (47.5%) patient inquiries. The GTS produced recommendations based on the 2021 SAGES & UEG-EAES guidelines on the surgical management of GERD, while the generic ChatGPT-4 model generated guidance without citing evidence to support its recommendations. CONCLUSION: ChatGPT-4 can be customized to overcome limitations with its training dataset to provide recommendations for the surgical management of GERD with reliable accuracy and consistency. The training of LLM models can be used to help integrate this efficient technology into the creation of robust and accurate information for both surgeons and patients. Prospective data is needed to assess its effectiveness in a pragmatic clinical environment.

The performance of artificial intelligence large language model-linked chatbots in surgical decision-making for gastroesophageal reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: Large language model (LLM)-linked chatbots may be an efficient source of clinical recommendations for healthcare providers and patients. This study evaluated the performance of LLM-linked chatbots in providing recommendations for the surgical management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS: Nine patient cases were created based on key questions addressed by the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) guidelines for the surgical treatment of GERD. ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, Copilot, Google Bard, and Perplexity AI were queried on November 16th, 2023, for recommendations regarding the surgical management of GERD. Accurate chatbot performance was defined as the number of responses aligning with SAGES guideline recommendations. Outcomes were reported with counts and percentages. RESULTS: Surgeons were given accurate recommendations for the surgical management of GERD in an adult patient for 5/7 (71.4%) KQs by ChatGPT-4, 3/7 (42.9%) KQs by Copilot, 6/7 (85.7%) KQs by Google Bard, and 3/7 (42.9%) KQs by Perplexity according to the SAGES guidelines. Patients were given accurate recommendations for 3/5 (60.0%) KQs by ChatGPT-4, 2/5 (40.0%) KQs by Copilot, 4/5 (80.0%) KQs by Google Bard, and 1/5 (20.0%) KQs by Perplexity, respectively. In a pediatric patient, surgeons were given accurate recommendations for 2/3 (66.7%) KQs by ChatGPT-4, 3/3 (100.0%) KQs by Copilot, 3/3 (100.0%) KQs by Google Bard, and 2/3 (66.7%) KQs by Perplexity. Patients were given appropriate guidance for 2/2 (100.0%) KQs by ChatGPT-4, 2/2 (100.0%) KQs by Copilot, 1/2 (50.0%) KQs by Google Bard, and 1/2 (50.0%) KQs by Perplexity. CONCLUSIONS: Gastrointestinal surgeons, gastroenterologists, and patients should recognize both the promise and pitfalls of LLM's when utilized for advice on surgical management of GERD. Additional training of LLM's using evidence-based health information is needed.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Process for quality assessment review of societal guidelines-an editorial to accompany "multi-society consensus conference and guideline on the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD)".

BACKGROUND: The SAGES Guidelines Committee has implemented processes for Quality Assessment of SAGES-endorsed guidelines, with the aim of improving the quality of published guidelines. METHODS: We provide details of the processes developed, using standardized tools for assessing the methodological quality of practice guidelines. As an example, we describe the application of our processes to the recent multi-societal GERD consensus guideline. RESULTS: Assessment of the multi-societal GERD consensus guideline by the iterative processes of SAGES Quality Assurance taskforce improved the quality of the final manuscript in all domains of appraisal. These processes are easily applicable to future guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Such systems will increase the confidence in SAGES recommendations and increase the implementation of SAGES guidelines. By demonstrating the rigor of Quality Assessment, this confidence also extends to a further increase in the assurance of the publications of the Surgical Endoscopy journal.

Surgical approach to microwave and radiofrequency liver ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastases less than 5 cm: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) represent the two most common malignant neoplasms of the liver. The objective of this study was to assess outcomes of surgical approaches to liver ablation comparing laparoscopic versus percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA), and MWA versus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in patients with HCC or CRLM lesions smaller than 5 cm. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted across seven databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane, to identify all comparative studies between 1937 and 2021. Two independent reviewers screened for eligibility, extracted data for selected studies, and assessed study bias using the modified Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Random effects meta-analyses were subsequently performed on all available comparative data. RESULTS: From 1066 records screened, 11 studies were deemed relevant to the study and warranted inclusion. Eight of the 11 studies were at high or uncertain risk for bias. Our meta-analyses of two studies revealed that laparoscopic MW ablation had significantly higher complication rates compared to a percutaneous approach (risk ratio = 4.66; 95% confidence interval = [1.23, 17.22]), but otherwise similar incomplete ablation rates, local recurrence, and oncologic outcomes. The remaining nine studies demonstrated similar efficacy of MWA and RFA, as measured by incomplete ablation, complication rates, local/regional recurrence, and oncologic outcomes, for both HCC and CRLM lesions less than 5 cm (p > 0.05 for all outcomes). There was no statistical subgroup interaction in the analysis of tumors < 3 cm. CONCLUSION: The available comparative evidence regarding both laparoscopic versus percutaneous MWA and MWA versus RFA is limited, evident by the few studies that suffer from high/uncertain risk of bias. Additional high-quality randomized trials or statistically matched cohort studies with sufficient granularity of patient variables, institutional experience, and physician specialty/training will be useful in informing clinical decision making for the ablative treatment of HCC or CRLM.

SAGES/AHPBA guidelines for the use of minimally invasive surgery for the surgical treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).

BACKGROUND: Colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) occur in roughly half of patients with colorectal cancer. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has become an increasingly acceptable and utilized technique for resection in these patients, but there is a lack of specific guidelines on the use of MIS hepatectomy in this setting. A multidisciplinary expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations regarding the decision between MIS and open techniques for the resection of CRLM. METHODS: Systematic review was conducted for two key questions (KQ) regarding the use of MIS versus open surgery for the resection of isolated liver metastases from colon and rectal cancer. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the GRADE methodology by subject experts. Additionally, the panel developed recommendations for future research. RESULTS: The panel addressed two KQs, which pertained to staged or simultaneous resection of resectable colon or rectal metastases. The panel made conditional recommendations for the use of MIS hepatectomy for both staged and simultaneous resection when deemed safe, feasible, and oncologically effective by the surgeon based on the individual patient characteristics. These recommendations were based on low and very low certainty of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: These evidence-based recommendations should provide guidance regarding surgical decision-making in the treatment of CRLM and highlight the importance of individual considerations of each case. Pursuing the identified research needs may help further refine the evidence and improve future versions of guidelines for the use of MIS techniques in the treatment of CRLM.

Multi-society consensus conference and guideline on the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common diseases in North America and globally. The aim of this guideline is to provide evidence-based recommendations regarding the most utilized and available endoscopic and surgical treatments for GERD. METHODS: Systematic literature reviews were conducted for 4 key questions regarding the surgical and endoscopic treatments for GERD in adults: preoperative evaluation, endoscopic vs surgical or medical treatment, complete vs partial fundoplication, and treatment for obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥ 35 kg/m2) and concomitant GERD. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the GRADE methodology by subject experts. Recommendations for future research were also proposed. RESULTS: The consensus provided 13 recommendations. Through the development of these evidence-based recommendations, an algorithm was proposed for aid in the treatment of GERD. Patients with typical symptoms should undergo upper endoscopy, manometry, and pH-testing; additional testing may be required for patients with atypical or extra-esophageal symptoms. Patients with normal or abnormal findings on manometry should consider undergoing partial fundoplication. Magnetic sphincter augmentation or fundoplication are appropriate surgical procedures for adults with GERD. For patients who wish to avoid surgery, the Stretta procedure and transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF 2.0) were found to have better outcomes than proton pump inhibitors alone. Patients with concomitant obesity were recommended to undergo either gastric bypass or fundoplication, although patients with severe comorbid disease or BMI > 50 should undergo Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for the additional benefits that follow weight loss. CONCLUSION: Using the recommendations an algorithm was developed by this panel, so that physicians may better counsel their patients with GERD. There are certain patient factors that have been excluded from included studies/trials, and so these recommendations should not replace surgeon-patient decision making. Engaging in the identified research areas may improve future care for GERD patients.

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.

A SAGES technology and value assessment and pediatric committee evaluation of mini-laparoscopic instrumentation.

BACKGROUND: The TAVAC and Pediatric Committees of SAGES evaluated the current use of mini-laparoscopic instrumentation to better understand the role this category of devices plays in the delivery of minimally invasive surgery today. METHODS: The role of mini-laparoscopic instrumentation, defined as minimally invasive instruments of between 1 and 4 mm in diameter, was assessed by an exhaustive review of the peer reviewed literature on the subject between 1990 and 2021. The instruments, their use, and their perceived value were tabulated and described. RESULTS: Several reported studies propose a value to using mini-laparoscopic instrumentation over the use of larger instruments or as minimally invasive additions to commonly performed procedures. Additionally, specifically developed smaller-diameter instruments appear to be beneficial additions to our minimally invasive toolbox. CONCLUSIONS: The development of small instrumentation for the effective performance of minimally invasive surgery, while perhaps best suited to pediatric populations, proves useful as adjuncts to a wide variety of adult surgical procedures. Mini-laparoscopic instrumentation thus proves valuable in selected cases.

SAGES 2022 guidelines regarding the use of laparoscopy in the era of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 has changed global healthcare since the pandemic began in 2020. The safety of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) utilizing insufflation from the standpoint of safety to the operating room personnel is currently being explored. The aims of this guideline are to examine the existing evidence to provide guidance regarding MIS for the patient with, or suspecting of having, the SARS-CoV-2 as well as the healthcare team involved. METHODS: Systematic literature reviews were conducted for 2 key questions (KQ) regarding the safety of MIS in the setting of COVID-19 pandemic. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis criteria. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using a narrative synthesis of the literature by subject experts. Recommendations for future research were also proposed. RESULTS: In KQ1, a total of 1361 articles were reviewed, with 2 articles meeting inclusion. In KQ2, a total of 977 articles were reviewed, with 4 articles met inclusions criteria, of which 2 studies reported on the SARS-CoV2 virus specifically. Despite many publications in the field, very little well-controlled and unbiased data exist to inform the recommendations. Of that which is available, it shows that both laparoscopic and open operations in Covid-positive patients had similar rates of OR staff positivity rates; however, patients who underwent laparoscopic procedures had a lower perioperative mortality than open procedures. Also, SARS-CoV-2 particles have been detected in the surgical plume at laparoscopy. CONCLUSION: With demonstrated equivalence of operating room staff exposure, and noninferiority of laparoscopic access with respect to mortality, either laparoscopic or open approaches to abdominal operations may be used in patients with SARS-CoV-2. Measures should be employed for all laparoscopic or open cases to prevent exposure of operating room staff to the surgical plume, as virus can be present in this plume.

Minimally invasive versus open hepatectomy for the resection of colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: While surgical resection has a demonstrated utility for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), it is unclear whether minimally invasive surgery (MIS) or an open approach should be used. This review sought to assess the efficacy and safety of MIS versus open hepatectomy for isolated, resectable CRLM when performed separately from (Key Question (KQ) 1) or simultaneously with (KQ2) the resection of the primary tumor. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane CENTRAL, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched to identify both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized comparative studies published during January 2000-September 2020. Two independent reviewers screened literature for eligibility, extracted data from included studies, and assessed internal validity using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 Tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed using risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD). RESULTS: From 2304 publications, 35 studies were included for meta-analysis. For staged resections, three RCTs and 20 observational studies were included. Data from RCTs indicated MIS having similar disease-free survival (DFS) at 1-year (RR 1.03, 95%CI 0.70-1.50), overall survival (OS) at 5-years (RR 1.04, 95%CI 0.84-1.28), fewer complications of Clavien-Dindo Grade III (RR 0.62, 95%CI 0.38-1.00), and shorter hospital length of stay (LOS) (MD -6.6 days, 95%CI -10.2, -3.0). For simultaneous resections, 12 observational studies were included. There was no evidence of a difference between MIS and the open group for DFS-1-year, OS-5-year, complications, R0 resections, blood transfusions, along with lower blood loss (MD -177.35 mL, 95%CI -273.17, -81.53) and shorter LOS (MD -3.0 days, 95%CI -3.82, -2.17). CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence regarding the optimal approach for CRLM resection demonstrates similar oncologic outcomes between MIS and open techniques, however MIS hepatectomy had a shorter LOS, lower blood loss and complication rate, for both staged and simultaneous resections.

Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) guidelines development: standard operating procedure.

INTRODUCTION: The mission of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) is to innovate, educate, and collaborate to improve patient care. A critical element in meeting this mission is the publishing of trustworthy and current guidelines for the practicing surgeon. METHODS: In this manuscript, we outline the steps of developing high quality practice guidelines using a completely volunteer-based professional organization. RESULTS: SAGES has developed a standardized approach to train volunteer surgeons and trainees alike to develop clinically pertinent guidelines in a timely manner, without sacrificing quality. CONCLUSIONS: This methodology can be used more widely by volunteer organizations to efficiently develop effective tools for practicing physicians.

Surgical treatment of GERD: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has a high worldwide prevalence in adults and children. There is uncertainty regarding medical versus surgical therapy and different surgical techniques. This review assessed outcomes of antireflux surgery versus medical management of GERD in adults and children, robotic versus laparoscopic fundoplication, complete versus partial fundoplication, and minimal versus maximal dissection in pediatric patients. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched (2004-2019) to identify randomized control and non-randomized comparative studies. Two independent reviewers screened for eligibility. Random effects meta-analysis was performed on comparative data. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias and Newcastle Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: From 1473 records, 105 studies were included. Most had high or uncertain risk of bias. Analysis demonstrated that anti-reflux surgery was associated with superior short-term quality of life compared to PPI (Std mean difference = - 0.51, 95%CI - 0.63, - 0.40, I2 = 0%) however short-term symptom control was not significantly superior (RR = 0.75, 95%CI 0.47, 1.21, I2 = 82%). A proportion of patients undergoing operative treatment continue PPI treatment (28%). Robotic and laparoscopic fundoplication outcomes were similar. Compared to total fundoplication, partial fundoplication was associated with higher rates of prolonged PPI usage (RR = 2.06, 95%CI 1.08, 3.94, I2 = 45%). There was no statistically significant difference for long-term symptom control (RR = 0.94, 95%CI 0.85, 1.04, I2 = 53%) or long-term dysphagia (RR = 0.73, 95%CI 0.52, 1.02, I2 = 0%). Ien, minimal dissection during fundoplication was associated with lower reoperation rates than maximal dissection (RR = 0.21, 95%CI 0.06, 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence regarding the optimal treatment of GERD often suffers from high risk of bias. Additional high-quality randomized control trials may further inform surgical decision making in the treatment of GERD.

SAGES guidelines for the surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux (GERD).

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) is an extremely common condition with several medical and surgical treatment options. A multidisciplinary expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations to support clinicians, patients, and others in decisions regarding the treatment of GERD with an emphasis on evaluating different surgical techniques. METHODS: Literature reviews were conducted for 4 key questions regarding the surgical treatment of GERD in both adults and children: surgical vs. medical treatment, robotic vs. laparoscopic fundoplication, partial vs. complete fundoplication, and division vs. preservation of short gastric vessels in adults or maximal versus minimal dissection in pediatric patients. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the GRADE methodology by subject experts. Recommendations for future research were also proposed. RESULTS: The panel provided seven recommendations for adults and children with GERD. All recommendations were conditional due to very low, low, or moderate certainty of evidence. The panel conditionally recommended surgical treatment over medical management for adults with chronic or chronic refractory GERD. There was insufficient evidence for the panel to make a recommendation regarding surgical versus medical treatment in children. The panel suggested that once the decision to pursue surgical therapy is made, adults and children with GERD may be treated with either a robotic or a laparoscopic approach, and either partial or complete fundoplication based on surgeon-patient shared decision-making and patient values. In adults, the panel suggested either division or non-division of the short gastric vessels is appropriate, and that children should undergo minimal dissection during fundoplication. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations should provide guidance with regard to surgical decision-making in the treatment of GERD and highlight the importance of shared decision-making and patient values to optimize patient outcomes. Pursuing the identified research needs may improve future versions of guidelines for the treatment of GERD.

The economics of a pediatric surgical ICU.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to describe quality and financial economic principles that form the foundation for complex care delivery systems for the critically ill pediatric surgical population. RECENT FINDINGS: Advances in neonatology along with innovation in surgical techniques in children led to the need to care for more complex postoperative surgical patients. Several studies have demonstrated improved outcomes in specialized pediatric centers. Furthermore, there is some evidence to suggest that there is overall financial benefit with decreased costs and more efficient resource use to pediatric subspecialty critical care. SUMMARY: As more becomes known regarding the impact of specialized ICU environments, pediatric surgical critical care, and pediatric surgical ICUs have the potential to improve the value of care delivered to these complex patients. Well-designed, prospective, observational studies are needed to assist in defining appropriate outcome and quality measures to inform the development of these specialized units. Currently, there are a variety of models used in children's hospitals to care for critically ill surgical patients. This represents a tremendous opportunity for a collaborative, multidisciplinary effort amongst pediatric medical and surgical intensivists.