A multi-national, video-based qualitative study to refine training guidelines for assigning an "unsafe" score in laparoscopic cholecystectomy critical view of safety.

BACKGROUND: The critical view of safety (CVS) was incorporated into a novel 6-item objective procedure-specific assessment for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC-CVS OPSA) to enhance focus on safe completion of surgical tasks and advance the American Board of Surgery's entrustable professional activities (EPAs) initiative. To enhance instrument development, a feasibility study was performed to elucidate expert surgeon perspectives regarding "safe" vs. "unsafe" practice. METHODS: A multi-national consortium of 11 expert LC surgeons were asked to apply the LC-CVS OPSA to ten LC videos of varying surgical difficulty using a "safe" vs. "unsafe" scale. Raters were asked to provide written rationale for all "unsafe" ratings and invited to provide additional feedback regarding instrument clarity. A qualitative analysis was performed on written responses to extract major themes. RESULTS: Of the 660 ratings, 238 were scored as "unsafe" with substantial variation in distribution across tasks and raters. Analysis of the comments revealed three major categories of "unsafe" ratings: (a) inability to achieve the critical view of safety (intended outcome), (b) safe task completion but less than optimal surgical technique, and (c) safe task completion but risk for potential future complication. Analysis of reviewer comments also identified the potential for safe surgical practice even when CVS was not achieved, either due to unusual anatomy or severe pathology preventing safe visualization. Based upon findings, modifications to the instructions to raters for the LC-CVS OPSA were incorporated to enhance instrument reliability. CONCLUSIONS: A safety-based LC-CVS OPSA has the potential to significantly improve surgical training by incorporating CVS formally into learner assessment. This study documents the perspectives of expert biliary tract surgeons regarding clear identification and documentation of unsafe surgical practice for LC-CVS and enables the development of training materials to improve instrument reliability. Learnings from the study have been incorporated into rater instructions to enhance instrument reliability.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy critical view of safety (LC-CVS): a multi-national validation study of an objective, procedure-specific assessment using video-based assessment (VBA).

BACKGROUND: A novel 6-item objective, procedure-specific assessment for laparoscopic cholecystectomy incorporating the critical view of safety (LC-CVS OPSA) was developed to support trainee formative and summative assessments. The LC-CVS OPSA included two retraction items (fundus and infundibulum retraction) and four CVS items (hepatocystic triangle visualization, gallbladder-liver separation, cystic artery identification, and cystic duct identification). The scoring rubric for retraction consisted of poor (frequently outside of defined range), adequate (minimally outside of defined range) and excellent (consistently inside defined range) and for CVS items were "poor-unsafe", "adequate-safe", or "excellent-safe". METHODS: A multi-national consortium of 12 expert LC surgeons applied the OPSA-LC CVS to 35 unique LC videos and one duplicate video. Primary outcome measure was inter-rater reliability as measured by Gwet's AC2, a weighted measure that adjusts for scales with high probability of random agreement. Analysis of the inter-rater reliability was conducted on a collapsed dichotomous scoring rubric of "poor-unsafe" vs. "adequate/excellent-safe". RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability was high for all six items ranging from 0.76 (hepatocystic triangle visualization) to 0.86 (cystic duct identification). Intra-rater reliability for the single duplicate video was substantially higher across the six items ranging from 0.91 to 1.00. CONCLUSIONS: The novel 6-item OPSA LC CVS demonstrated high inter-rater reliability when tested with a multi-national consortium of LC expert surgeons. This brief instrument focused on safe surgical practice was designed to support the implementation of entrustable professional activities into busy surgical training programs. Instrument use coupled with video-based assessments creates novel datasets with the potential for artificial intelligence development including computer vision to drive assessment automation.

RAWS4all project: validation of a new silicone model for robotic TAPP inguinal hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Trans-abdominal pre-peritoneal (TAPP) hernia repair is a complex procedure that presents several challenges. Even though, due to the high prevalence of inguinal hernia, TAPP technique is increasing in frequency and robotic Abdominal Wall Surgery (rAWS) is emerging as a valuable tool in this regard. Although inguinal TAPP procedure principles have been published and simulation is needed, the availability of validated models remains scarce. METHODS: A new low-cost model was developed to simulate inguinal rTAPP repair. For validity assessment, a new TAPP-specific fidelity questionnaire and assessment scale were developed to compare the performance of novices and experts in the simulated procedure. The models used were assessed at 60 min for execution and quality score. RESULTS: Twenty-five residents and specialists from all over the country participated in this study. Execution, quality, and global performance was higher in the seniors group compared to juniors (8.91 vs 6.36, p = 0.02; 8.09 vs 5.14, p < .001; and 17 vs. 11,5, p < .001, respectively). Overall fidelity was assessed as being very high [4.41 (3.5-5.0), α = .918] as well as face [4.31 (3.0-5.0), α = .867] and content validity [4.44 (3.2-5.0), α = .803]. Participants strongly agreed that the model is adequate to be used with the DaVinci® Robot [4.52 (3.5-5.0), α = .758]. CONCLUSION: This study shows face, content, and construct validity of the model for inguinal TAPP simulation, including for robotic surgery. Therefore, the model can be a valuable tool for learning, understanding, practicing, and mastering the TAPP technique prior to participating in the operating room.

An international Delphi consensus for surgical quality assessment of lymphadenectomy and anastomosis in minimally invasive total gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive total gastrectomy (MITG) is a mainstay for curative treatment of patients with gastric cancer. To define and standardize optimal surgical techniques and further improve clinical outcomes through the enhanced MITG surgical quality, there must be consensus on the key technical steps of lymphadenectomy and anastomosis creation, which is currently lacking. This study aimed to determine an expert consensus from an international panel regarding the technical aspects of the performance of MITG for oncological indications using the Delphi method. METHODS: A 100-point scoping survey was created based on the deconstruction of MITG into its key technical steps through local and international expert opinion and literature evidence. An international expert panel comprising upper gastrointestinal and general surgeons participated in multiple rounds of a Delphi consensus. The panelists voted on the issues concerning importance, difficulty, or agreement using an online questionnaire. A priori consensus standard was set at > 80% for agreement to a statement. Internal consistency and reliability were evaluated using Cronbach's α. RESULTS: Thirty expert upper gastrointestinal and general surgeons participated in three online Delphi rounds, generating a final consensus of 41 statements regarding MITG for gastric cancer. The consensus was gained from 22, 12, and 7 questions from Delphi rounds 1, 2, and 3, which were rephrased into the 41 statetments respectively. For lymphadenectomy and aspects of anastomosis creation, Cronbach's α for round 1 was 0.896 and 0.886, and for round 2 was 0.848 and 0.779, regarding difficulty or importance. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi consensus defined 41 steps as crucial for performing a high-quality MITG for oncological indications based on the standards of an international panel. The results of this consensus provide a platform for creating and validating surgical quality assessment tools designed to improve clinical outcomes and standardize surgical quality in MITG.

Full endoscopic minimally invasive extraperitoneal modified Sugarbaker approach for para-colostomy hernia repair: Technical aspects and 2-year follow-up results of a prospective cohort.

AIM: This study aimed to assess technical aspects and clinical results of a new minimally invasive technique in parastomal hernia (PSH) repair, full endoscopic retromuscular access, after 2 years of follow-up. METHODS: Data from consecutive patients requiring minimally invasive ventral PSH repair were collected from 2019 to 2022. The inclusion criteria were patients aged between 18 and 80 years old with symptomatic PSH. Demographics and perioperative and postoperative data were collected. Postoperative pain and functional recovery were compared with preoperative data. RESULTS: Twelve patients with symptomatic PSH were included. The mean PSH defect area was 16.2 cm2 and the mean midline defect was 8.7 cm2 . No intra-operative complications or conversion to open surgery were detected. One patient (8%) required postoperative readmission due to partial bowel obstruction symptoms that required catheterization of the stoma. Pain significantly worsened after the first postoperative day compared to preoperative data but improved after the first postoperative month compared to the first postoperative week and after the 90th postoperative day compared to the first postoperative month, with significant differences. Significant restriction improvement was identified when 30 days after surgery data were compared to preoperative data and when the 180th postoperative day results were compared to 30 days after surgery. The average follow-up was 29 months. During the follow-up no clinical or radiological recurrence was observed. CONCLUSION: This paper shows low rate of intra- and postoperative complications with significant improvement in terms of pain activities restriction compared to preoperatory. After 29 months follow-up, no recurrence was identified, confirming that this approach offers good mid-term results.

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.

Fluorescence-based sentinel lymph node mapping and lymphography evaluation: results from the IHU-IRCAD-EAES EURO-FIGS registry.

BACKGROUND: The identification of metastatic lymph nodes is one of the most important prognostic factors in gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. Near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging has been successfully used in GI tumors to detect the lymphatic pathway and the sentinel lymph node (SLN), facilitating fluorescence image-guided surgery (FIGS) with the purpose to achieve a correct nodal staging. The aim of this study was to analyze the current results of NIRF SLN navigation and lymphography through data collected in the EURO-FIGS registry. METHODS: Prospectively collected data regarding patients and ICG-guided lymphadenectomies were analyzed. Additional analyses were performed to identify predictors of metastatic SLN and determinants of fluorescence positivity and nodal metastases outside the boundaries of standard lymphadenectomies. RESULTS: Overall, 188 patients were included by 18 surgeons from 10 different centers. Colorectal cancer was the most reported pathology (77.7%), followed by gastric (19.1%) and esophageal tumors (3.2%). ICG was injected with higher doses (p < 0.001) via extraparietal side (63.3%), and with higher volumes (p < 0.001) via endoluminal side (36.7%). Overall, NIRF SLN navigation was positive in 75.5% of all cases and 95.5% of positive SLNs were retrieved, with a metastatic rate of 14.7%. NIRF identification of lymph nodes outside standard lymphatic stations occurred in 52.1% of all cases, 43.8% of which were positive for metastatic involvement. Positive NIRF SLN identification was an independent predictor of metastasis outside standard lymphatic stations (OR = 4.392, p = 0.029), while BMI independently predicted metastasis in retrieved SLNs (OR = 1.187, p = 0.013). Lower doses of ICG were protective against NIRF identification outside standard of care lymphadenectomy (OR = 0.596, p = 0.006), while higher volumes of ICG were predictive of metastatic involvement outside standard of care lymphadenectomy (OR = 1.597, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: SLN mapping helps identifying potentially metastatic lymph nodes outside the boundaries of standard lymphadenectomies. The EURO-FIGS registry is a valuable tool to share and analyze European surgeons' practices.

EAES, SAGES, and ESCP rapid guideline: bowel preparation for minimally invasive colorectal resection.

BACKGROUND: Variation exists in practice pertaining to bowel preparation before minimally invasive colorectal surgery. A survey of EAES members prioritized this topic to be addressed by a clinical practice guideline. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to develop evidence-informed clinical practice recommendations on the use of bowel preparation before minimally invasive colorectal surgery, through evidence synthesis and a structured evidence-to-decision framework by an interdisciplinary panel of stakeholders. METHODS: This is a collaborative project of EAES, SAGES, and ESCP. We updated a previous systematic review and performed a network meta-analysis of interventions. We appraised the certainty of the evidence for each comparison, using the GRADE and CINeMA methods. A panel of general and colorectal surgeons, infectious diseases specialists, an anesthetist, and a patient representative 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 GIN-certified master guideline developer and chair. We developed the recommendations in a consensus meeting, followed by a modified Delphi survey. RESULTS: The panel suggests either oral antibiotics alone prior to minimally invasive right colon resection or mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) plus oral antibiotics; MBP plus oral antibiotics prior to minimally invasive left colon and sigmoid resection, and prior to minimally invasive right colon resection when there is an intention to perform intracorporeal anastomosis; and MBP plus oral antibiotics plus enema prior to minimally invasive rectal surgery (conditional recommendations); and recommends MBP plus oral antibiotics prior to minimally invasive colorectal surgery, when there is an intention to localize the lesion intraoperatively (strong recommendation). The full guideline with user-friendly decision aids is available in https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/LwvKej . CONCLUSION: This guideline provides recommendations on bowel preparation prior to minimally invasive colorectal surgery for different procedures, using highest methodological standards, through a structured framework informed by key stakeholders. Guideline registration number PREPARE-2023CN045.

Classification of GIST and other benign gastric tumors based on minimally invasive surgical strategy.

PURPOSE: Gastrointestinal mesenchymal tumors (GMTs) include malignant, intermediate malignancy, and benign lesions. The aim is to propose a new surgical classification to guide the intraoperative minimally invasive surgical strategy in case of non-malignant GMTs less than 5 cm. METHODS: Primary endpoint is the creation of a classification regarding minimally invasive surgical technique for these tumors based on their gastric location. Secondary endpoint is to analyze the R0 rate and the postoperative morbidity and mortality rates. Tumors were classified in two groups based on their morphology (group A: exophytic, group B: transmural/intragastric). Each group is then divided based on the tumor location and consequently surgical technique used in subgroup: AI (whole stomach area) and AII (iuxta-cardial and pre-pyloric areas) both for the anterior and posterior gastric wall; BIa (greater curvature on the anterior and posterior wall), BIb (lesser curvature on the anterior wall); BII (iuxta-cardial and pre-pyloric area in the anterior and posterior wall, including the lesser curvature on the posterior wall). RESULTS: Forty-two patients were classified and allocated in each subgroup: 17 in AI, 2 in AII, 5 in BIa, 3 in BIb, and 15 in BII. Two postoperative Clavien-Dindo I complications (4.8%, subgroup BIa and BIb) occurred. One patient (2.4%, subgroup AI) underwent reintervention due to R0 resection. CONCLUSIONS: This classification proved to be able to classify gastric lesions based on their morphology, location, and surgical treatment, obtaining encouraging perioperative results. Further studies with wider sample of patients are required to draw definitive conclusions.

[Analysis of the broadcasting and perceived utility through the implementation of a virtual training platform during the pandemic]. / Análisis de la difusión y utilidad percibida a través de la implementación de una plataforma de formación virtual durante la pandemia por COVID-19.

Introduction: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has affected training opportunities for healthcare professionals partly because face to face courses were cancelled. This study analyzes the results of participation and satisfaction of the AEC Virtual Classroom sessions during the first year. Methods: The AEC Virtual Classroom includes a combined format of weekly Webinar broadcast live that can be viewed on a delayed basis in a virtual platform. In this study, the results in its first year are evaluated considering the number of live participants, the delayed views and the global reach; as well as the results of the satisfaction survey in each of the sessions (0-10). Results: From 16/04/2020 to 15/04/2021, 50 sessions of the Virtual Classroom AEC were held. The average scope of the sessions was 509 ± 288 views with a range between 196 and 149. At the times of highest incidence of cases during the pandemic, a decrease in live participants was observed 275 ± 135 vs. 391 ± 233 (p = 0.032). The mean score on the format was 8.46 ± 0.31/10. The best-scored sessions were those of the subject related to coloproctology with a statistically significant difference in the mean score 8.79 ± 0.42 vs. 8.39 ± 0.27 (p = 0.035). 90% of users considered the sessions useful. 97.2% of respondents believe that the sessions should be maintained after the pandemic. Conclusions: The AEC Virtual Classroom has a very good results in the first year, proving to be a useful surgical teaching tool that will foreseeably survive once the pandemic is over.

Primary closure of the midline abdominal wall defect during laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: analysis of risk factors for failure and outcomes at 5 years follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The primary aim of this prospective study is to report bulging and recurrence rates and to analyze the risk factors responsible for failure, after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) with primary closure of defect (PCD) using a running suture and intraperitoneal mesh placement, at 5-year follow-up. The secondary endpoint is to evaluate 30-day postoperative complications, seroma, and pain. METHODS: PCD failure was defined as the presence of postoperative bulging and/or recurrence. Pain was evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS). After surgery, fifty-eight patients underwent clinical examination and computed tomography scan to diagnose bulging, recurrence, and seroma (classified according to the Morales-Conde classification). RESULTS: At 60 months follow-up, recurrence was observed in five patients (8.6%), while bulging, not needing a surgical treatment, occurred in fifteen patients (25.9%). Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the only risk factor responsible for both outcomes together, bulging and recurrences (p = 0.029), while other considered risk factors as gender, age, body mass index, diabetes, smoke habits, primary or incisional hernia and the ratio defect width/transverse abdominal axis did not achieve the statistically significance. Clinical seroma was diagnosed at one month in eight patients (13.8%). Seromas were observed at one year of follow-up. During the follow-up, pain reduction occurred. CONCLUSION: LVHR has evolved toward more anatomical concepts, with the current trend being the abdominal wall anatomical reconstruction to improve its functionality, reducing seroma rates. Based on results obtained, PCD is a reliable technique with excellent recurrence rate at 5 years follow-up, even when the defect closure may generate tension at the midline. On the other hand, this tension could be related with high bulging rate at long-term, particular in case of patients with COPD.

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.

Establishing Peer Consensus About the Use of Long-Term Biosynthetic Absorbable Mesh for Hernia (Grades 2-3) as the Standard of Care.

BACKGROUND: Standard synthetic and biologic meshes, often used in hernia repair, have commonly been used and each have their strengths but associated drawbacks. Long-term biosynthetic absorbable (LTBA) mesh has been developed to combine the strengths of synthetic and biologic meshes without the associated weaknesses. As a newer type of mesh, the supporting evidence base is still growing, and their optimum use has yet to be defined. This consensus was initiated to provide insight into those situations where a LTBA might be considered the Standard of Care in ventral hernia repair grades 2-3 (original classification, 2010) of the Ventral Hernia Working Group. METHODS: A steering group of expert surgeons identified 35 statements, based around the evidence supporting LTBA, surgical technique, patients type most suitable for LTBA, risk-benefit of LTBA, patient and surgeon considerations, LTBA value. Surgeons involved in hernia repair received an online survey to assess consensus with these statements. Consensus was defined as high if ≥ 70% and very high if ≥ 90% of respondents agreed. Statements that had not achieved consensus agreement were revised and these were then issued for a subsequent round. Finally, 34 statements were included. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-five surgeons were involved. Fourteen statements (41%) achieved very high consensus, 24 achieved consensuses (≥ 70-< 90%), whilst one (3%) just failed to achieve consensus with an agreement score of 69%. CONCLUSIONS: Expert consensus opinion about the use of LTBA for hernia (Grades 2-3) as the Standard of Care was achieved. Based on the consensus scores, the steering group derived eleven keys.

Single/reduced port surgery vs. conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The aim is to compare single port surgery (SPS)/reduced port surgery (RPS) versus conventional laparoscopy (CL) for gastrectomy for gastric cancer in terms of intra- and postoperative outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: After a search in Pubmed and Embase, six articles were included. Pooled analysis was used to evaluate the statistically significance for each variable. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-three and 230 patients underwent SPS/RPS and CL, respectively. One hundred and eighty-eight patients and 45 patients underwent subtotal and total gastrectomy, respectively, using the SPS/RPS approach. One hundred and eighty-five patients and 45 patients underwent subtotal and total gastrectomy, respectively, by CL. In 85 patients, an extra trocar was systematically placed at the end of surgery. Statistically significant differences were not observed about preoperative staging. The pooled analysis regarding operative time, blood loss, postoperative complications, number of harvested lymph nodes and postoperative hospital stay showed that the only statistically significant difference between the two approaches is the shorter hospital stay in case of SPS/RPS. CONCLUSIONS: SPS/RPS total or subtotal gastrectomy shows a lower postoperative hospital stay, with comparable operative time, blood loss, early postoperative complication rate and number of harvested lymph nodes in comparison to CL, provided extensive experience in minimally invasive gastrectomy is present. Abbreviations: AGC: advanced gastric cancer; BMI: body mass index; CI: confidence interval; CL: conventional laparoscopy; LESS: laparoendoscopic single site; MD: mean difference; NOS: Newcastle-Ottawa Scale; OR: odds ratio; PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis; ROBIN-I: Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions; RPS: reduced port surgery; RR: risk ratio; SILS: single incision laparoscopic surgery; SPS: single port surgery; WMD: weighted mean differences.

International Delphi Expert Consensus on Safe Return to Surgical and Endoscopic Practice: From the Coronavirus Global Surgical Collaborative.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work is to formulate recommendations based on global expert consensus to guide the surgical community on the safe resumption of surgical and endoscopic activities. BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused marked disruptions in the delivery of surgical care worldwide. A thoughtful, structured approach to resuming surgical services is necessary as the impact of COVID-19 becomes better controlled. The Coronavirus Global Surgical Collaborative sought to formulate, through rigorous scientific methodology, consensus-based recommendations in collaboration with a multidisciplinary group of international experts and policymakers. METHODS: Recommendations were developed following a Delphi process. Domain topics were formulated and subsequently subdivided into questions pertinent to different aspects of surgical care in the COVID-19 crisis. Forty-four experts from 15 countries across 4 continents drafted statements based on the specific questions. Anonymous Delphi voting on the statements was performed in 2 rounds, as well as in a telepresence meeting. RESULTS: One hundred statements were formulated across 10 domains. The statements addressed terminology, impact on procedural services, patient/staff safety, managing a backlog of surgeries, methods to restart and sustain surgical services, education, and research. Eighty-three of the statements were approved during the first round of Delphi voting, and 11 during the second round. A final telepresence meeting and discussion yielded acceptance of 5 other statements. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi process resulted in 99 recommendations. These consensus statements provide expert guidance, based on scientific methodology, for the safe resumption of surgical activities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Insight into the methodology and uptake of EAES guidelines: a qualitative analysis and survey by the EAES Consensus & Guideline Subcommittee.

BACKGROUND: Over the past 25 years, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) has been issuing clinical guidance documents to aid surgical practice. We aimed to investigate the awareness and use of such documents among EAES members. Additionally, we conceptually appraised the methodology used in their development in order to propose a bundle of actions for quality improvement and increased penetration of clinical practice guidelines among EAES members. METHODS: We invited members of EAES to participate in a web-based survey on awareness and use of these documents. Post hoc analyses were performed to identify factors associated with poor awareness/use and the reported reasons for limited use. We further summarized and conceptually analyzed key methodological features of clinical guidance documents published by EAES. RESULTS: Three distinct consecutive phases of methodological evolvement of clinical guidance documents were evident: a "consensus phase," a "guideline phase," and a "transitional phase". Out of a total of 254 surgeons who completed the survey, 72% percent were aware of EAES guidelines and 47% reported occasional use. Young age and trainee status were associated with poor awareness and use. Restriction by colleagues was the primary reason for limited use in these subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The methodology of EAES clinical guidance documents is evolving. Awareness among EAES members is fair, but use is limited. Dissemination actions should be directed to junior surgeons and trainees.

Guideline Assessment Project II: statistical calibration informed the development of an AGREE II extension for surgical guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To inform the development of an AGREE II extension specifically tailored for surgical guidelines. AGREE II was designed to inform the development, reporting, and appraisal of clinical practice guidelines. Previous research has suggested substantial room for improvement of the quality of surgical guidelines. METHODS: A previously published search in MEDLINE for clinical practice guidelines published by surgical scientific organizations with an international scope between 2008 and 2017, resulted in a total of 67 guidelines. The quality of these guidelines was assessed using AGREE II. We performed a series of statistical analyses (reliability, correlation and Factor Analysis, Item Response Theory) with the objective to calibrate AGREE II for use specifically in surgical guidelines. RESULTS: Reliability/correlation/factor analysis and Item Response Theory produced similar results and suggested that a structure of 5 domains, instead of 6 domains of the original instrument, might be more appropriate. Furthermore, exclusion and re-arrangement of items to other domains was found to increase the reliability of AGREE II when applied in surgical guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest that statistical calibration of AGREE II might improve the development, reporting, and appraisal of surgical guidelines.

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.

Fluorescence-based bowel anastomosis perfusion evaluation: results from the IHU-IRCAD-EAES EURO-FIGS registry.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the dreaded complications following surgery in the digestive tract. Near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging is a means to intraoperatively visualize anastomotic perfusion, facilitating fluorescence image-guided surgery (FIGS) with the purpose to reduce the incidence of AL. The aim of this study was to analyze the current practices and results of NIRF imaging of the anastomosis in digestive tract surgery through the EURO-FIGS registry. METHODS: Analysis of data prospectively collected by the registry members provided patient and procedural data along with the ICG dose, timing, and consequences of NIRF imaging. Among the included upper-GI, colorectal, and bariatric surgeries, subgroup analysis was performed to identify risk factors associated with complications. RESULTS: A total of 1240 patients were included in the study. The included patients, 74.8% of whom were operated on for cancer, originated from 8 European countries and 30 hospitals. A total of 54 surgeons performed the procedures. In 83.8% of cases, a pre-anastomotic ICG dose was administered, and in 60.1% of cases, a post-anastomotic ICG dose was administered. A significant difference (p < 0.001) was found in the ICG dose given in the four pathology groups registered (range: 0.013-0.89 mg/kg) and a significant (p < 0.001) negative correlation was found between the ICG dose and BMI. In 27.3% of the procedures, the choice of the anastomotic level was guided by means of NIRF imaging which means that in these cases NIRF imaging changed the level of anastomosis which was first decided based on visual findings in conventional white light imaging. In 98.7% of the procedures, the use of ICG partly or strongly provided a sense of confidence about the anastomosis. A total of 133 complications occurred, without any statistical significance in the incidence of complications in the anastomoses, whether they were ICG-guided or not. CONCLUSION: The EURO-FIGS registry provides an insight into the current clinical practice across Europe with respect to NIRF imaging of anastomotic perfusion during digestive tract surgery.

Minimally invasive component separation technique for large ventral hernia: which is the best choice? A systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Aim of the present systematic review is to compare the postoperative outcomes after minimally invasive anterior and posterior component separation technique (CST), in terms of postoperative morbidity and recurrence rates. METHODS: Nine-hundred and fifty-nine articles were identified through Pubmed database. Of these, 444 were eliminated because were duplicates between the searches. Of the remaining 515 articles, 414 were excluded after screening title and abstract. One hundred and one articles were fully analysed, and 73 articles were further excluded, finally including 28 articles. Based on the surgical technique, three groups were created: Group A, endoscopic anterior CST and closure of the abdominal midline by laparotomy; Group B, endoscopic anterior CST and closure of the abdominal midline laparoscopically or robotically; Group C, laparoscopic or robotic posterior CST with transversus abdominal muscle release (TAR). RESULTS: In group A, B and C, 196, 120 and 236 patients were included, respectively. Surgical and medical complication rates for the three groups were 31.2% and 13.7% in group A, 15.8% and 4.1% in group B, and 17.8% and 25.4% in group C, while recurrence rate was 10.7%, 6.6% and 0.4%, respectively. Statistically significant differences were observed in terms of surgical postoperative complication rate between group A versus B (p = 0.0022) and between group A versus C (p = 0.0015) and of recurrence rate between group A versus C (p = < 0.0001) and B versus C (p = 0.0009). CONCLUSIONS: Anterior CST with midline closure by laparotomy showed the worst results in terms of postoperative surgical complications and recurrence in comparison to the pure minimally anterior and posterior CST. Posterior CST-TAR showed lowest hospital stay and recurrence rate, although the follow-up is short. However, due to the poor quality of most of the studies, further prospective studies and randomized control trials, with wider sample size and longer follow-up are required to demonstrate which is the best surgical option.