EAES Multidisciplinary Rapid Guideline: systematic review, meta-analysis, GRADE assessment and evidence-informed recommendations on the surgical management of paraesophageal hernias.

BACKGROUND: New evidence has emerged since latest guidelines on the management of paraesophageal hernia, and guideline development methodology has evolved. Members of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery have prioritized the management of paraesophageal hernia to be addressed by pertinent recommendations. OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-informed clinical practice recommendations on paraesophageal hernias, through evidence synthesis and a structured evidence-to-decision framework by an interdisciplinary panel of stakeholders. METHODS: We performed three systematic reviews, and we summarized and appraised the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE methodology. A panel of general and upper gastrointestinal surgeons, gastroenterologists and a patient advocate discussed the evidence in the context of benefits and harms, the certainty of the evidence, acceptability, feasibility, equity, cost and use of resources, moderated by a Guidelines International Network-certified master guideline developer and chair. We developed the recommendations in a consensus meeting, followed by a modified Delphi survey. RESULTS: The panel suggests surgery over conservative management for asymptomatic/minimally symptomatic paraesophageal hernias (conditional recommendation), and recommends conservative management over surgery for asymptomatic/minimally symptomatic paraesophageal hernias in frail patients (strong recommendation). Further, the panel suggests mesh over sutures for hiatal closure in paraesophageal hernia repair, fundoplication over gastropexy in elective paraesophageal hernia repair, and gastropexy over fundoplication in patients who have cardiopulmonary instability and require emergency paraesophageal hernia repair (conditional recommendation). A strong recommendation means that the proposed course of action is appropriate for the vast majority of patients. A conditional recommendation means that most patients would opt for the proposed course of action, and joint decision-making of the surgeon and the patient is required. Accompanying evidence summaries and evidence-to-decision frameworks should be read when using the recommendations. This guideline applies to adult patients with moderate to large paraesophageal hernias type II to IV with at least 50% of the stomach herniated to the thoracic cavity. The full guideline with user-friendly decision aids is available in https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/j7q7Gn . CONCLUSION: An interdisciplinary panel provides recommendations on key topics on the management of paraesophageal hernias using highest methodological standards and following a transparent process. GUIDELINE REGISTRATION NUMBER: PREPARE-2023CN018.

The role of artificial intelligence in the endoscopic diagnosis of esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Early detection of esophageal cancer is limited by accurate endoscopic diagnosis of subtle macroscopic lesions. Endoscopic interpretation is subject to expertise, diagnostic skill, and thus human error. Artificial intelligence (AI) in endoscopy is increasingly bridging this gap. This systematic review and meta-analysis consolidate the evidence on the use of AI in the endoscopic diagnosis of esophageal cancer. The systematic review was carried out using Pubmed, MEDLINE and Ovid EMBASE databases and articles on the role of AI in the endoscopic diagnosis of esophageal cancer management were included. A meta-analysis was also performed. Fourteen studies (1590 patients) assessed the use of AI in endoscopic diagnosis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma-the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 91.2% (84.3-95.2%) and 80% (64.3-89.9%). Nine studies (478 patients) assessed AI capabilities of diagnosing esophageal adenocarcinoma with the pooled sensitivity and specificity of 93.1% (86.8-96.4) and 86.9% (81.7-90.7). The remaining studies formed the qualitative summary. AI technology, as an adjunct to endoscopy, can assist in accurate, early detection of esophageal malignancy. It has shown superior results to endoscopists alone in identifying early cancer and assessing depth of tumor invasion, with the added benefit of not requiring a specialized skill set. Despite promising results, the application in real-time endoscopy is limited, and further multicenter trials are required to accurately assess its use in routine practice.

Research protocol for the Paraesophageal hernia symptom tool, a prospective multi-center cohort study to identify the need and threshold for surgery and assess the symptom response to surgery.

Large hiatus hernias with a significant paraesophageal component (types II-IV) have a range of insidious symptoms. Management of symptomatic hernias includes conservative treatment or surgery. Currently, there is no paraesophageal hernia disease-specific symptom questionnaire. As a result, many clinicians rely on the health-related quality of life questionnaires designed for gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GORD) to assess patients with hiatal hernias pre- and postoperatively. In view of this, a paraesophageal hernia symptom tool (POST) was designed. This POST questionnaire now requires validation and assessment of clinical utility. Twenty-one international sites will recruit patients with paraesophageal hernias to complete a series of questionnaires over a five-year period. There will be two cohorts of patients-patients with paraesophageal hernias undergoing surgery and patients managed conservatively. Patients are required to complete a validated GORD-HRQL, POST questionnaire, and satisfaction questionnaire preoperatively. Surgical cohorts will also complete questionnaires postoperatively at 4-6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, and then annually for a total of 5 years. Conservatively managed patients will repeat questionnaires at 1 year. The first set of results will be released after 1 year with complete data published after a 5-year follow-up. The main results of the study will be patient's acceptance of the POST tool, clinical utility of the tool, assessment of the threshold for surgery, and patient symptom response to surgery. The study will validate the POST questionnaire and identify the relevance of the questionnaire in routine management of paraesophageal hernias.

Performance of radiomics-based artificial intelligence systems in the diagnosis and prediction of treatment response and survival in esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.

Radiomics can interpret radiological images with more detail and in less time compared to the human eye. Some challenges in managing esophageal cancer can be addressed by incorporating radiomics into image interpretation, treatment planning, and predicting response and survival. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides a summary of the evidence of radiomics in esophageal cancer. The systematic review was carried out using Pubmed, MEDLINE, and Ovid EMBASE databases-articles describing radiomics in esophageal cancer were included. A meta-analysis was also performed; 50 studies were included. For the assessment of treatment response using 18F-FDG PET/computed tomography (CT) scans, seven studies (443 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 86.5% (81.1-90.6) and 87.1% (78.0-92.8). For the assessment of treatment response using CT scans, five studies (625 patients) were included in the meta-analysis, with a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 86.7% (81.4-90.7) and 76.1% (69.9-81.4). The remaining 37 studies formed the qualitative review, discussing radiomics in diagnosis, radiotherapy planning, and survival prediction. This review explores the wide-ranging possibilities of radiomics in esophageal cancer management. The sensitivities of 18F-FDG PET/CT scans and CT scans are comparable, but 18F-FDG PET/CT scans have improved specificity for AI-based prediction of treatment response. Models integrating clinical and radiomic features facilitate diagnosis and survival prediction. More research is required into comparing models and conducting large-scale studies to build a robust evidence base.

A local experience of non-operative management for an appendicitis cohort during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: During the first United Kingdom COVID-19 wave, the Royal Colleges of Surgeons initially recommended conservative management with antibiotics instead of surgery for appendicitis. This study compared local outcomes of appendicitis during this period with a pre-COVID-19 cohort. METHODS: An observational study was conducted in a district general hospital. All episodes of appendicitis were prospectively studied from 25th March 2020 until 26th May 2020 and compared with a retrospective pre-COVID cohort from 27th November 2019 until 29th January 2020. Primary outcome was 30-day treatment failure of simple appendicitis for conservatively managed cases during COVID-19 compared to surgically managed cases pre-pandemic. Treatment failure was defined as any unplanned radiological or surgical intervention. RESULTS: Over nine weeks, there were 39 cases of appendicitis during COVID-19 and 50 cases pre-COVID-19. Twenty-six and 50 cases underwent appendicectomy during and pre-COVID-19 respectively. There was no difference in 30-day postoperative complication rates and nor were there any peri-operative COVID-19 infections.Twelve cases of simple appendicitis underwent conservative management during COVID-19 and were compared with 23 operatively managed simple cases pre-pandemic. There was a higher failure rate in the conservative versus operative group (33.3 vs 0% OR = 24.88, 95% CI 1.21 to 512.9, p=0.0095). Length of stay was similar (1.5 vs 2.0 p=0.576). DISCUSSION: Locally, conservative management was more likely to fail than initial appendicectomy. We suggest that surgery should remain first line for appendicitis, with conservative management reserved for those with suspected or proven COVID-19 infection.