Surgical De-Escalation for Re-Excision in Patients with a Margin Less Than 2 mm and a Diagnosis of DCIS.

The current surgical guidelines recommend an optimal margin width of 2 mm for the management of patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). However, there are still many controversies regarding re-excision when the optimal margin criteria are not met in the first resection. The purpose of this study is to understand the importance of surgical margin width, re-excision, and treatments to avoid additional surgery on locoregional recurrence (LRR). The study is retrospective and analyzed surgical margins, adjuvant treatments, re-excision, and LRR in patients with DCIS who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS). A total of 197 patients were enrolled. Re-operation for a close margin rate was 13.5%, and the 3-year recurrence was 7.6%. No difference in the LRR was reported among the patients subjected to BCS regardless of the margin width (p = 0.295). The recurrence rate according to margin status was not significant (p = 0.484). Approximately 36.9% (n: 79) patients had resection margins < 2 mm. A sub-analysis of patients with margins < 2 mm showed no difference in the recurrence between the patients treated with a second surgery and those treated with radiation (p = 0.091). The recurrence rate according to margin status in patients with margins < 2 mm was not significant (p = 0.161). The margin was not a predictive factor of LRR p = 0.999. Surgical re-excision should be avoided in patients with a focally positive margin and no evidence of the disease at post-surgical imaging.

Bariatric Surgery for Patients with Overweight/Obesity. A Comprehensive Grading Methodology and Network Metanalysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on Weight Loss Outcomes and Adverse Events.

This study aims to compare different types of metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) with lifestyle intervention/medical therapy (LSI/MT) for the treatment of overweight/obesity. The present and network meta-analysis (NMA) includes randomized trials. MBS was associated with a reduction of BMI, body weight, and percent weight loss, when compared to LSI/MT, and also with a significant reduction of HbA1c and a higher remission of diabetes. Meta-regression analyses revealed that BMI, a higher proportion of women, and a longer duration of trial were associated with greater effects of MBS. The NMA showed that all surgical procedures included (except greater curvature plication) were associated with a reduction of BMI. MBS is an effective option for the treatment of obesity. The choice of BMI thresholds for eligibility for surgery of patients with different complications should be performed making an evaluation of risks and benefits in each BMI category.

Implementation of Blockchain Technology Could Increase Equity and Transparency in Organ Transplantation: A Narrative Review of an Emergent Tool.

In the last few years, innovative technology and health care digitalization played a major role in all medical fields and a great effort worldwide to manage this large amount of data, in terms of security and digital privacy has been made by different national health systems. Blockchain technology, a peer-to-peer distributed database without centralized authority, initially applied to Bitcoin protocol, soon gained popularity, thanks to its distributed immutable nature in several non-medical fields. Therefore, the aim of the present review (PROSPERO N° CRD42022316661) is to establish a putative future role of blockchain and distribution ledger technology (DLT) in the organ transplantation field and its role to overcome inequalities. Preoperative assessment of the deceased donor, supranational crossover programs with the international waitlist databases, and reduction of black-market donations and counterfeit drugs are some of the possible applications of DLT, thanks to its distributed, efficient, secure, trackable, and immutable nature to reduce inequalities and discrimination.

Protective ileostomy creation after anterior resection of the rectum: Shared decision-making or still subjective?

AIM: The choice of whether to perform protective ileostomy (PI) after anterior resection (AR) is mainly guided by risk factors (RFs) responsible for the development of anastomotic leakage (AL). However, clear guidelines about PI creation are still lacking in the literature and this is often decided according to the surgeon's preferences, experiences or feelings. This qualitative study aims to investigate, by an open-ended question survey, the individual surgeon's decision-making process regarding PI creation after elective AR. METHOD: Fifty four colorectal surgeons took part in an electronic survey to answer the questions and describe what usually led their decision to perform PI. A content analysis was used to code the answers. To classify answers, five dichotomous categories (In favour/Against PI, Listed/Unlisted RFs, Typical/Atypical, Emotions/Non-emotions, Personal experience/No personal experience) have been developed. RESULTS: Overall, 76% of surgeons were in favour of PI creation and 88% considered listed RFs in the question of whether to perform PI. Atypical answers were reported in 10% of cases. Emotions and personal experience influenced surgeons' decision-making process in 22% and 49% of cases, respectively. The most frequently considered RFs were the distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge (96%), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (88%), a positive intraoperative leak test (65%), blood loss (37%) and immunosuppression therapy (35%). CONCLUSION: The indications to perform PI following rectal cancer surgery lack standardization and evidence-based guidelines are required to inform practice. Until then, expert opinion can be helpful to assist the decision-making process in patients who have undergone AR for adenocarcinoma.

EAES rapid guideline: systematic review, meta-analysis, GRADE assessment, and evidence-informed European recommendations on appendicitis in pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice recommendations for the management of acute appendicitis in pregnancy are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To develop an evidence-informed, trustworthy guideline on the management of appendicitis in pregnancy. We aimed to address the questions of conservative or surgical management, and laparoscopic or open surgery for acute appendicitis. METHODS: We performed a systematic review, meta-analysis, and evidence appraisal using the GRADE methodology. A European, multidisciplinary panel of surgeons, obstetricians/gynecologists, a midwife, and 3 patient representatives reached consensus through an evidence-to-decision framework and a Delphi process to formulate the recommendations. The project was developed in an online authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp). RESULTS: Research evidence was of very low certainty. We recommend operative treatment over conservative management in pregnant patients with complicated appendicitis or appendicolith on imaging studies (strong recommendation). We suggest operative treatment over conservative management in pregnant patients with uncomplicated appendicitis and no appendicolith on imaging studies (weak recommendation). We suggest laparoscopic appendectomy in patients with acute appendicitis until the 20th week of gestation, or when the fundus of the uterus is below the level of the umbilicus; and laparoscopic or open appendectomy in patients with acute appendicitis beyond the 20th week of gestation, or when the fundus of the uterus is above the level of the umbilicus, depending on the preference and expertise of the surgeon. CONCLUSION: Through a structured, evidence-informed approach, an interdisciplinary panel provides a strong recommendation to perform appendectomy for complicated appendicitis or appendicolith, and laparoscopic or open appendectomy beyond the 20th week, based on the surgeon's preference and expertise. GUIDELINE REGISTRATION NUMBER: IPGRP-2022CN210.

Ostomy closure rate during COVID-19 pandemic: an Italian multicentre observational study.

During the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, most of the surgical procedures were performed for emergencies or oncologic reasons to the detriment of the remaining elective procedures for benign conditions. Ileostomy or colostomy creation are sequelae of oncologic or emergency colorectal surgery, but their closure does not fall within the definition of oncologic or emergency surgery. The aim of this retrospective multicentre observational study is to report the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the ostomy closure rate in Italy. Data regarding ileostomy and colostomy creation and closure from 24 Italian centres, during the study period (March 2020-February 2021) and during the control period (March 2019-February 2020) were collected. Three hospitals (12.5%) were COVID free. The number of colostomies and ileostomies created and closed in the same period was lower ( -18.8% and -30%, respectively) in the study period in comparison to the control period (p = 0.1915 and p = 0.0001, respectively), such as the ostomies closed in the analysed periods but created before (colostomy -36.2% and ileostomy -7.4%, p = 0.2211 and p = 0.1319, respectively). Overall, a 19.5% reduction in ostomies closed occurred in the study period. Based on the present study, a reduction in ostomy closure rate occurred in Italy between March 2020 and February 2021. During the pandemic, the need to change the clinical practice probably prolonged deterioration of quality of life in patients with ostomies, increasing number of stomas that will never be closed, and related management costs, even if these issues have not been investigated in this study.

EAES rapid guideline: systematic review, network meta-analysis, CINeMA and GRADE assessment, and European consensus on bariatric surgery-extension 2022.

BACKGROUND: The European Association for Endoscopic Surgery Bariatric Guidelines Group identified a gap in bariatric surgery recommendations with a structured, contextualized consideration of multiple bariatric interventions. OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence-informed, transparent and trustworthy recommendations on the use of sleeve gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, adjustable gastric banding, gastric plication, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch, one anastomosis gastric bypass, and single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy in patients with severe obesity and metabolic diseases. Only laparoscopic procedures in adults were considered. METHODS: A European interdisciplinary panel including general surgeons, obesity physicians, anesthetists, a psychologist and a patient representative informed outcome importance and minimal important differences. We conducted a systematic review and frequentist fixed and random-effects network meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) using the graph theory approach for each outcome. We calculated the odds ratio or the (standardized) mean differences with 95% confidence intervals for binary and continuous outcomes, respectively. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the CINeMA and GRADE methodologies. We considered the risk/benefit outcomes within a GRADE evidence to decision framework to arrive at recommendations, which were validated through an anonymous Delphi process of the panel. RESULTS: We identified 43 records reporting on 24 RCTs. Most network information surrounded sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Under consideration of the certainty of the evidence and evidence to decision parameters, we suggest sleeve gastrectomy or laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass over adjustable gastric banding, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch and gastric plication for the management of severe obesity and associated metabolic diseases. One anastomosis gastric bypass and single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy are suggested as alternatives, although evidence on benefits and harms, and specific selection criteria is limited compared to sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The guideline, with recommendations, evidence summaries and decision aids in user friendly formats can also be accessed in MAGICapp:  https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/Lpv2kE CONCLUSIONS: This rapid guideline provides evidence-informed, pertinent recommendations on the use of bariatric and metabolic surgery for the management of severe obesity and metabolic diseases. The guideline replaces relevant recommendations published in the EAES Bariatric Guidelines 2020.

Impact of COVID-19 on the Destiny of Bariatric Patients.

Obese patients reported worse outcomes of COVID-19 related to prothrombotic and low-grade inflammation status. During the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, all non-elective surgeries were postponed, including bariatric surgery (BS). This umbrella review wants to underline obesity as a condition provoking low-grade chronic inflammation, and increasing severe COVID-19 risk; to relaunch the prioritization of BS. The literature search was conducted in March 2022 via Pubmed (MEDLINE) and focused on reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses published in peer-reviewed journals. Terms "bariatric surgery" OR "obesity surgery" OR "metabolic surgery" were analyzed with "COVID-19" OR "SARS-CoV-2" using the AND modifier. Only 13 studies of the 406 screened met the objective. The procrastination of BS over the past two years determined a delay in obesity treatment and severe consequences. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a huge impact on economic costs. Although BS has high costs, a lifetime cost advantage over conventional weight loss methods was demonstrated. As the pandemic continues, health policies must recognize obesity as a disease-predisposing factor for SARS-CoV-2 infection, considering COVID-19 as a new comorbidity mitigable by BS. Care pathways for obese patients in COVID/post-COVID era should be revitalized and the concept of elective surgery attributed to BS should be reformulated.

Portomesenteric Vein Thrombosis after Bariatric Surgery: An Online Survey.

Portomesenteric vein thrombosis (PMVT) is a rare post-operative complication of bariatric procedures, occurring in between 0.3% and 1% of cases. A structured questionnaire consisting of 27 items was available online to members of the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) to investigate the occurrence of PMVT. A total of 89 bariatric surgeons from 61 countries participated. Twenty-six (29.21%) reported at least one case of PMVT (46.15% males; 53.84% females). The surgery most associated with PMVT occurrence was sleeve gastrectomy (84.6%), followed by Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (7.69%), and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) (7.69%). The time gap between surgery and PMVT was 19.28 ± 8.72 days. The predominant symptom was abdominal pain in 96.15% of patients, followed by fever in 26.9%. Complete occlusion of the portal vein was reported in 34.6% of cases, with involvement of the portal system in 69%, extension to the superior mesenteric district in 23%, and extension to the splenic vein in two patients (7.7%). Our survey, which is the largest regarding PMVT to date, revealed a diffuse lack of standardization in the choice, duration, and dosing of prophylaxis regimens as well as treatment modalities, reflecting the literature gap on the topic.

Aqueductal CSF stroke volume measurements may drive management of shunted idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus patients.

CSF shunting with adjustable valve is the treatment of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. The opening pressure valve setting is left to the neurosurgeon's experience. Aqueductal CSF stroke volume by phase-contrast magnetic resonance measures the CSF passing through the Sylvian aqueduct and it changes with intracranial hydrodynamics. We sought to identify a window of stroke volume differences associated with the best clinical outcome and lowest rate of complications. The records of 69 patients were reviewed. At every clinical check, stroke volume, opening pressure valve, clinical outcome, and CSF overdrainage were analyzed. The correlation between stroke volume differences and negative outcome was also analyzed. The median follow-up was 2.3 years (range 0.3-10.4 years). The odds of negative outcome between two consecutive checks significantly increased by 16% (95%CI 4-28%, p = 0.006). Taking the lowest risk group as reference, the odds ratio of negative outcome was 1.16 (95%CI 0.51-2.63, p = 0.726) for SV differences less than - 37.6 µL, while it was 1.96 (95%CI 0.97-3.98, p = 0.062) for stroke volume changes above + 23.1 µL. Maintaining stroke volume values within a definite range might help maximize clinical benefit and avoid the risk of CSF overdrainage.

Bariatric reduction system - BARS: device, technique and first clinical experience.

BACKGROUND: Roux-en-Y gastric by-pass (RYGB) is one of the most effective bariatric procedures, but the rate of weight regain (WR) can reach 63% after the second year. Enlargement of the gastrojejunal anastomosis is one of the reported causes. A newly CE-marked flexible endoscopic system, Bariatric Anastomotic Reduction System (BARS) (Ovesco Endoscopy, Tuebingen, Germany), derivative of the well-established endoscopic over-the-scope-clip (OTSC) clipping system, has been recently developed. It was tested in pre-clinical and preliminary clinical use for feasibility and effectiveness in bariatric anastomotic reduction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Using a single-channel endoscope with external supplemental working channel, the BARS device captures the two limbs of the anastomosis, reducing its size, thus slowing food passage. After preclinical assessment, six patients with at least a 15% WR and the presence of an enlarged gastrojejunostomy > 20 mm were enrolled. The mean patient age was 49 years (range 24-67). Average interval between gastric bypass and BARS procedure: 8 years (4-13). RESULTS: All procedures were safely performed without complications. Mean procedure time: 52 min (37 - 75). Preliminary results: mean weight loss 6 kg (4-9) at a 3-month FU. CONCLUSIONS: BARS could be a promising endoscopic system in case of WR after gastric bypass due to enlargement of the anastomosis.

EAES Recommendations for Recovery Plan in Minimally Invasive Surgery Amid COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic presented an unexpected challenge for the surgical community in general and Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) specialists in particular. This document aims to summarize recent evidence and experts' opinion and formulate recommendations to guide the surgical community on how to best organize the recovery plan for surgical activity across different sub-specialities after the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Recommendations were developed through a Delphi process for establishment of expert consensus. Domain topics were formulated and subsequently subdivided into questions pertinent to different surgical specialities following the COVID-19 crisis. Sixty-five experts from 24 countries, representing the entire EAES board, were invited. Fifty clinicians and six engineers accepted the invitation and drafted statements based on specific key questions. Anonymous voting on the statements was performed until consensus was achieved, defined by at least 70% agreement. RESULTS: A total of 92 consensus statements were formulated with regard to safe resumption of surgery across eight domains, addressing general surgery, upper GI, lower GI, bariatrics, endocrine, HPB, abdominal wall and technology/research. The statements addressed elective and emergency services across all subspecialties with specific attention to the role of MIS during the recovery plan. Eighty-four of the statements were approved during the first round of Delphi voting (91.3%) and another 8 during the following round after substantial modification, resulting in a 100% consensus. CONCLUSION: The recommendations formulated by the EAES board establish a framework for resumption of surgery following COVID-19 pandemic with particular focus on the role of MIS across surgical specialities. The statements have the potential for wide application in the clinical setting, education activities and research work across different healthcare systems.

Bariatric surgery and the COVID-19 pandemic: SICOB recommendations on how to perform surgery during the outbreak and when to resume the activities in phase 2 of lockdown.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its related disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has been rapidly spreading all over the world and is responsible for the current pandemic. The current pandemic has found the Italian national health system unprepared to provide an appropriate and prompt response, heavily affecting surgical activities. Based on the limited data available in the literature and personal experiences, the Società Italiana di Chirurgia dell'OBesità e Malattie Metaboliche (SICOB) provides recommendations regarding the triage of bariatric surgical procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic defining a dedicated path for surgery in morbidly obese patients with known or suspected COVID-19 who may require emergency operations. Finally, the current paper delineates a strategy to resume outpatient visits and elective bariatric surgery once the acute phase of the pandemic is over. Models developed during the COVID-19 crisis should be integrated into hospital practices for future use in similar scenarios. Surgeons are presented with a golden opportunity to embrace systemic change and to drive their professional future.

Feasibility and cost effectiveness of ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A retrospective cohort study.

Ambulatory surgery is an efficient, safe and widely performed procedure; this study would shows the advantages of the ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedure from the point of view of patients and the Hospital/National Health System. Materials and Methods: Single-center retrospective cohort study including 288 patients who underwent laparoscopic-cholecystectomy at **** from January 2016 to July 2018. Ambulatory LC were compared to well-matched inpatient procedures performed in the same study period. The primary endpoints was the 30-day readmission rate. Secondary endpoints were the discharge rate in the ambulatory group, the post-operative complications rate and cost effectiveness. Results: 120/288 (41.7%) patients underwent ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Thirty-two (26.7%) patients who underwent ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy had major preoperative comorbidities and 35 (29.2%) had undergone prior abdominal surgery. The readmission rates for ambulatory patients and inpatients were 0.8% and 1.7% (p = 0.56), respectively; 104 (86.7%) ambulatory patients were discharged successfully on the same day. The two groups showed the same post-operative complication rate (p = 0.40). Ambulatory procedures resulted in related cost savings of more than 300% for the hospital and a remarkable financial benefit for the National Italian Healthcare System, accounting for savings exceeding € 27 000 per year. Conclusions: Ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe and cost effective. Since a third of ambulatory patients showed comorbidity or previous abdominal surgery, we believe that this procedure may be performed safely in a tertiary HPB centre, even in complex patients.

Clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) on bariatric surgery: update 2020 endorsed by IFSO-EC, EASO and ESPCOP.

BACKGROUND: Surgery for obesity and metabolic diseases has been evolved in the light of new scientific evidence, long-term outcomes and accumulated experience. EAES has sponsored an update of previous guidelines on bariatric surgery. METHODS: A multidisciplinary group of bariatric surgeons, obesity physicians, nutritional experts, psychologists, anesthetists and a patient representative comprised the guideline development panel. Development and reporting conformed to GRADE guidelines and AGREE II standards. RESULTS: Systematic review of databases, record selection, data extraction and synthesis, evidence appraisal and evidence-to-decision frameworks were developed for 42 key questions in the domains Indication; Preoperative work-up; Perioperative management; Non-bypass, bypass and one-anastomosis procedures; Revisional surgery; Postoperative care; and Investigational procedures. A total of 36 recommendations and position statements were formed through a modified Delphi procedure. CONCLUSION: This document summarizes the latest evidence on bariatric surgery through state-of-the art guideline development, aiming to facilitate evidence-based clinical decisions.

The Role of Minimally Invasive and Endoscopic Technologies in Morbid Obesity Treatment: Review and Critical Appraisal of the Current Clinical Practice.

Bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for morbid obesity. Availability of different procedures with low complication rates, performed through a minimally invasive approach, have caused profound positive effect on patient's quality of life and has led to their worldwide, rapid expansion of the field. The laparoscopic revolution has introduced the concept of lowering more and more the treatments' invasiveness, leading to a change in the researchers' mentality. They are now constantly looking for reducing patients' discomfort through new methodologies and devices: aim of this review is to provide an in-depth analysis of the most promising, innovative procedures offering an alternative approach to "classic" laparoscopic procedures. They are described from their original development phases to the most recent experimental and clinical evidence. This review will discuss as well their future perspectives, and includes endoluminal techniques and/or procedures based on alternative concepts, all representing an appealing alternative to surgical approach. We conducted a MEDLINE for articles, clinical trials, and a patent search relating to the minimally invasive management of obesity, excluding intragastric balloons, SILS, and NOTES, and we selected 77 articles. Results are reported for each procedure/device, and discussed both in these paragraphs and in the final, general discussion. The concept of minimally invasive procedures continues to change and evolve over time with novel technologies emerging every year.