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.

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 peritoneal dialysis access guideline update 2023.

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

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

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

Influence of a patient navigation program on timeliness of care in patients with esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patient navigation (P.N.) is designed to eliminate barriers to care. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of a novel P.N. program on timeliness of care in patients with esophageal cancer. METHODS: This retrospective study compared the timeliness of care for esophageal cancer patients before (January 2014-March 2018) and after the implementation of a novel P.N. program (April 2018-March 2020), called EDAP, at a tertiary care center. The primary outcome was time from biopsy to first treatment; secondary outcomes included time from biopsy to complete staging, biopsy to complete preoperative workup, and referral to the first point of contact. The outcomes were evaluated in the entire cohort and then in a subgroup of patients undergoing curative multimodality therapy. RESULTS: There were 96 patients in the pre-EDAP group and 98 patients in the post-EDAP group. There was no significant difference between pre- and post-EDAP in the time from biopsy to first treatment and time from biopsy to staging in the overall cohort. In the subgroup of patients undergoing curative multimodality therapy, there was a significant decrease in time from biopsy to first treatment postnavigation (60-51 days, p = 0.02), in addition to a significant decrease in time from biopsy to preoperative workup and time from biopsy to staging. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study demonstrating that a novel P.N. program for patients with esophageal cancer improved timeliness of care. The group of patients who benefited most were those undergoing curative multimodality therapy, likely given the extensive coordination of services required by this group.

Time to Surgery for Patients with Esophageal Cancer Undergoing Trimodal Therapy in Ontario: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study.

Patients with resectable esophageal cancer are recommended to undergo chemoradiotherapy before esophagectomy. A longer time to surgery (TTS) and/or time to consultation (TTC) may be associated with inferior cancer-related outcomes and heightened anxiety. Thoracic cancer surgery centers (TCSCs) oversee esophageal cancer management, but differences in TTC/TTS between centers have not yet been examined. This Ontario population-level study used linked administrative healthcare databases to investigate patients with esophageal cancer between 2013-2018, who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and then surgery. TTC and TTS were time from diagnosis to the first surgical consultation and then to surgery, respectively. Patients were assigned a TCSC based on the location of the surgery. Patient, disease, and diagnosing physician characteristics were investigated. Quantile regression was used to model TTS/TTC at the 50th and 90th percentiles and identify associated factors. The median TTS and TTC were 130 and 29 days, respectively. The adjusted differences between the TCSCs with the longest and shortest median TTS and TTC were 32 and 18 days, respectively. Increasing age was associated with a 16-day longer median TTS. Increasing material deprivation was associated with a 6-day longer median TTC. Significant geographic variability exists in TTS and TTC. Therefore, the investigation of TCSC characteristics is warranted. Shortening wait times may reduce patient anxiety and improve the control of esophageal cancer.

Incidence, Timing, and Outcomes of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Esophagogastric Cancer: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal surgery and chemotherapy are well-established risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer, but their specific contribution in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer is unclear. We aim to quantify the risk of VTE, identify risk factors associated with VTE, and determine the association between VTE and survival in patients undergoing surgery for esophageal or gastric cancer. METHODS: A retrospective, population-based cohort study was conducted using linked administrative healthcare databases. We used the Ontario Cancer Registry to identify patients with esophageal or gastric cancer between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2016 who underwent surgical resection. Incidence of first VTE event was identified using International Classification of Diseases 9 and 10 codes. VTE incidence was calculated at clinically relevant time points 180 days before and after surgery. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with VTE with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) reported. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate associations between covariates and survival. Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare overall (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) by VTE status. RESULTS: A total of 4894 patients had esophagectomy or gastrectomy, of which 8% (n = 383/4894) had VTE. VTE risk was 2.5% (n = 123/4894) 180 days before surgery, 2.8% (n = 138/4894) within 30 days of surgery, and 2.5% (n = 122/4894) from 31 to ≤ 180 days after surgery. Of the patients with VTE within 30 days of surgery, 34% (n = 47/138) were diagnosed after discharge from hospital. Receipt of preoperative chemotherapy was associated with VTE 180 days before surgery (odds ratio [OR] 3.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.41, 6.11). Increased hospital length of stay (LOS) was associated with VTE 30 days after surgery (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.02, 1.14, per week). Patients with VTE had inferior median OS and CSS (2.2 vs. 3.7 years; 2.3 vs. 4.4 years, respectively). In adjusted models VTE was associated with inferior OS (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.13, 1.63) and CSS (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.16, 1.75). CONCLUSIONS: The highest risk of VTE is within 30 days of surgery with one third of patients diagnosed after discharge from hospital. Longer hospital LOS and receipt of preoperative chemotherapy are associated with increased risk of VTE. VTE is an independent risk factor for inferior survival in patients with esophageal or gastric cancer.

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.

Time to treatment of esophageal cancer in Ontario: A population-level cross-sectional study.

Objective: Timely cancer treatment improves survival and anxiety for some sites. Patients with esophageal cancer require specific workup before treatment, which can prolong the time from diagnosis to treatment (treatment interval [TI]). The geographical variation of this interval remains uninvestigated in patients with esophageal cancer. Methods: This retrospective population-level study conducted in Ontario used linked administrative health care databases. Patients treated for esophageal cancer between 2013 and 2018 were included. The TI was time from diagnosis to treatment. Patients were assigned a geographical Local Health Integration Network on the basis of postal code. Covariates included patient, disease, and diagnosing physician characteristics. Quantile regression modeled TI length at the 50th and 90th percentile and identified associated factors. Results: Of 7509 patients, 78% were male and most were aged between 60 and 69 years. The 50th and 90th percentile TI was 36 (interquartile range, 22-55) and 77 days, respectively. The difference between the Local Health Integration Network with the longest and shortest TI at the 50th and 90th percentile was 18 and 25 days, respectively. Older age (P < .0001), greater comorbidity (P = .0005), greater material deprivation (P = .001), rurality (P = .03), histology (P = .02), and treatment group (P < .0001) were associated with a longer median TI. Older age (P = .03), greater comorbidity (P = .003), greater material deprivation (P = .005), rurality (P = .04), and treatment group (P < .0001) were associated with a longer 90th percentile TI. Conclusions: Geographic variability of time to treatment exists across Ontario. Investigation of facility-level differences is warranted. Patient and disease factors are associated with longer wait times. These results might inform future health care policy and resource allocation.