Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add more filters










Publication year range
1.
Ann Surg ; 279(1): 45-57, 2024 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37450702

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To develop and update evidence-based and consensus-based guidelines on laparoscopic and robotic pancreatic surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS), including laparoscopic and robotic surgery, is complex and technically demanding. Minimizing the risk for patients requires stringent, evidence-based guidelines. Since the International Miami Guidelines on MIPS in 2019, new developments and key publications have been reported, necessitating an update. METHODS: Evidence-based guidelines on 22 topics in 8 domains were proposed: terminology, indications, patients, procedures, surgical techniques and instrumentation, assessment tools, implementation and training, and artificial intelligence. The Brescia Internationally Validated European Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (EGUMIPS, September 2022) used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology to assess the evidence and develop guideline recommendations, the Delphi method to establish consensus on the recommendations among the Expert Committee, and the AGREE II-GRS tool for guideline quality assessment and external validation by a Validation Committee. RESULTS: Overall, 27 European experts, 6 international experts, 22 international Validation Committee members, 11 Jury Committee members, 18 Research Committee members, and 121 registered attendees of the 2-day meeting were involved in the development and validation of the guidelines. In total, 98 recommendations were developed, including 33 on laparoscopic, 34 on robotic, and 31 on general MIPS, covering 22 topics in 8 domains. Out of 98 recommendations, 97 reached at least 80% consensus among the experts and congress attendees, and all recommendations were externally validated by the Validation Committee. CONCLUSIONS: The EGUMIPS evidence-based guidelines on laparoscopic and robotic MIPS can be applied in current clinical practice to provide guidance to patients, surgeons, policy-makers, and medical societies.


Subject(s)
Laparoscopy , Surgeons , Humans , Artificial Intelligence , Pancreas/surgery , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/methods , Laparoscopy/methods
4.
Obes Surg ; 26(8): 1970-7, 2016 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27272321

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Due to the rise in severe obesity in Western countries and the increase in bariatric surgery, enhanced recovery (ER) pathways should be developed and promoted. METHODS: A monocentric prospective series of 103 bariatric surgery patients managed with the ER pathway (group ER) was compared with a retrospective and immediately previous series of 103 patients managed with standard care (group CS). The aim of the present study was to assess and compare the differences in terms of mean postoperative length of stay (LOS), costs for surgery and recovery, and the differences in terms of complications, readmission, and reoperation rate in the short term between the ER and CS groups. RESULTS: The mean LOS was 4.18 days in group CS and 1.79 days in group ER (p < 0.0001). The mean operative time (OT) per patient was 190.20 min in the group CS and 133.54 min in the group ER, resulting in an average cost of 7272.57€ per patient in group CS and 5424.09€ per patient in group ER. The average recovery cost was 1809.94€ for the group CS series and 775.07 for the group ER one. Overall complications (Clavien-Dindo up to II) occurred in 6 patients (5.8 %) in group CS and in 2 patients (1.9 %) in group ER (p = 0.149) and specific complications (Clavien-Dindo IIIb) occurred for 9 patients (8.7 %) in Group CS and for 14 patients (13.5 %) in group ER (p = 0.268) after hospital discharge within 1-month of follow-up. Twelve patients (11.5 %) in group CS and 13 (12.5 %) in group ER were readmitted after discharge (p = 0.831) within 1-month of follow-up; 8 patients (7.7 %) in group CS versus 9 patients (8.8 %) in group ER needed to be reoperated (p = 0.800) within 1-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Enhanced recovery pathway reduces significantly LOS in bariatric surgical patients and shortens the mean OT of the procedure, with no significant differences in terms of surgical outcomes. Furthermore, recovery charges were lower and operative time was shorter allowing for procedural cost reduction.


Subject(s)
Bariatric Surgery/economics , Bariatric Surgery/methods , Obesity, Morbid/surgery , Adult , Bariatric Surgery/adverse effects , Case-Control Studies , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Critical Pathways/economics , Female , Humans , Length of Stay/economics , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Obesity, Morbid/economics , Obesity, Morbid/epidemiology , Patient Discharge , Patient Readmission/economics , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , Postoperative Complications/economics , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Period , Retrospective Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...