Search

Introduction The empty pelvis syndrome is a significant source of morbidity following pelvic exenteration surgery. It remains poorly defined with research in this field being heterogeneous and of low quality. Furthermore, there has been minimal engagement with patient representatives following pelvic exenteration with respect to the empty pelvic syndrome. ‘PelvEx—Beating the empty pelvis syndrome’ aims to engage both patient representatives and healthcare professionals to achieve an international consensus on a core outcome set, pathophysiology and mitigation of the empty pelvis syndrome.Methods and analysis A modified-Delphi approach will be followed with a three-stage study design. First, statements will be longlisted using a recent systematic review, healthcare professional event, patient and public engagement, and Delphi piloting. Second, statements will be shortlisted using up to three rounds of online modified Delphi. Third, statements will be confirmed and instruments for measurable statements selected using a virtual patient-representative consensus meeting, and finally a face-to-face healthcare professional consensus meeting.Ethics and dissemination The University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine ethics committee has approved this protocol, which is registered as a study with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative. Publication of this study will increase the potential for comparative research to further understanding and prevent the empty pelvis syndrome.Trial registration number NCT05683795.

Introduction: There is variation in the investigation, management, and surgical technique of acutely symptomatic umbilical hernias and optimal strategies remain to be established. This survey aimed to identify key variables influencing decision-making and preferred surgical techniques in emergency umbilical hernia care to help inform trial design and understand potential challenges to trial delivery., Methods: A survey was distributed to surgeons through social media, personal contacts, and ASGBI lists. It comprised five sections: (i) performer of repair, (ii) repair preferences, (iii) important outcomes, (iv) perioperative antibiotic use, and (v) potential future trial design., Results: There were 105 respondents, of which 49 (46.6%) were consultants. The median largest defect surgeons would attempt to repair with sutures alone was 2 cm (IQR 2-4 cm). In the acute setting, the most common mesh preferences are preperitoneal plane placement (n = 61, 58.1%), with synthetic non-absorbable mesh (n = 72, 68.6%), in clean (n = 41, 39.0%) or clean-contaminated (n = 52, 49.5%) wounds. Respondents believed suture repair to be associated with better short-term outcomes, and mesh repair with better long-term outcomes. Pre-/intra-operative antibiotics were very frequently given (n = 48, 45.7%) whilst post-operative antibiotics were rarely (n = 41, 39%) or very rarely (n = 28, 26.7%) given. The trial design felt to most likely influence practice is comparing mesh and suture repair, and post-operative antibiotics versus no post-operative antibiotics. Respondents indicated that to change their practice, the median difference in surgical site infection rate and recurrence rate would both need to be 5%., Conclusion: This survey provides insight into surgical preferences in emergency umbilical hernia management, offering guidance for the design of future trials., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Importance: Artificial intelligence (AI) has permeated academia, especially OpenAI Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT), a large language model. However, little has been reported on its use in medical research., Objective: To assess a chatbot's capability to generate and grade medical research abstracts., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, ChatGPT versions 3.5 and 4.0 (referred to as chatbot 1 and chatbot 2) were coached to generate 10 abstracts by providing background literature, prompts, analyzed data for each topic, and 10 previously presented, unassociated abstracts to serve as models. The study was conducted between August 2023 and February 2024 (including data analysis)., Exposure: Abstract versions utilizing the same topic and data were written by a surgical trainee or a senior physician or generated by chatbot 1 and chatbot 2 for comparison. The 10 training abstracts were written by 8 surgical residents or fellows, edited by the same senior surgeon, at a high-volume hospital in the Southeastern US with an emphasis on outcomes-based research. Abstract comparison was then based on 10 abstracts written by 5 surgical trainees within the first 6 months of their research year, edited by the same senior author., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measurements were the abstract grades using 10- and 20-point scales and ranks (first to fourth). Abstract versions by chatbot 1, chatbot 2, junior residents, and the senior author were compared and judged by blinded surgeon-reviewers as well as both chatbot models. Five academic attending surgeons from Denmark, the UK, and the US, with extensive experience in surgical organizations, research, and abstract evaluation served as reviewers., Results: Surgeon-reviewers were unable to differentiate between abstract versions. Each reviewer ranked an AI-generated version first at least once. Abstracts demonstrated no difference in their median (IQR) 10-point scores (resident, 7.0 [6.0-8.0]; senior author, 7.0 [6.0-8.0]; chatbot 1, 7.0 [6.0-8.0]; chatbot 2, 7.0 [6.0-8.0]; P = .61), 20-point scores (resident, 14.0 [12.0-7.0]; senior author, 15.0 [13.0-17.0]; chatbot 1, 14.0 [12.0-16.0]; chatbot 2, 14.0 [13.0-16.0]; P = .50), or rank (resident, 3.0 [1.0-4.0]; senior author, 2.0 [1.0-4.0]; chatbot 1, 3.0 [2.0-4.0]; chatbot 2, 2.0 [1.0-3.0]; P = .14). The abstract grades given by chatbot 1 were comparable to the surgeon-reviewers' grades. However, chatbot 2 graded more favorably than the surgeon-reviewers and chatbot 1. Median (IQR) chatbot 2-reviewer grades were higher than surgeon-reviewer grades of all 4 abstract versions (resident, 14.0 [12.0-17.0] vs 16.9 [16.0-17.5]; P = .02; senior author, 15.0 [13.0-17.0] vs 17.0 [16.5-18.0]; P = .03; chatbot 1, 14.0 [12.0-16.0] vs 17.8 [17.5-18.5]; P = .002; chatbot 2, 14.0 [13.0-16.0] vs 16.8 [14.5-18.0]; P = .04). When comparing the grades of the 2 chatbots, chatbot 2 gave higher median (IQR) grades for abstracts than chatbot 1 (resident, 14.0 [13.0-15.0] vs 16.9 [16.0-17.5]; P = .003; senior author, 13.5 [13.0-15.5] vs 17.0 [16.5-18.0]; P = .004; chatbot 1, 14.5 [13.0-15.0] vs 17.8 [17.5-18.5]; P = .003; chatbot 2, 14.0 [13.0-15.0] vs 16.8 [14.5-18.0]; P = .01)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, trained chatbots generated convincing medical abstracts, undifferentiable from resident or senior author drafts. Chatbot 1 graded abstracts similarly to surgeon-reviewers, while chatbot 2 was less stringent. These findings may assist surgeon-scientists in successfully implementing AI in medical research.

Background: Umbilical hernias, while frequently asymptomatic, may become acutely symptomatic, strangulated or obstructed, and require emergency treatment. Robust evidence is required for high-quality care in this field. This scoping review aims to elucidate evidence gaps regarding emergency care of umbilical hernias., Methods: EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases were searched using a predefined strategy until November 2023. Primary research studies reporting on any aspect of emergency umbilical hernia care and published in the English language were eligible for inclusion. Studies were excluded where emergency umbilical hernia care was not the primary focus and subsets of relevant data were unable to be extracted. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and full texts, resolving disagreements by consensus or a third reviewer. Data were charted according to core concepts addressed by each study and a narrative synthesis was performed., Results: Searches generated 534 abstracts, from which 32 full texts were assessed and 14 included in the final review. This encompassed 52 042 patients undergoing emergency umbilical hernia care. Most were retrospective cohort designs (11/14), split between single (6/14) and multicentre (8/14) with only one randomized trial. Most multicentre studies were from national databases (7/8). Themes arising included risk assessment (n = 4), timing of surgery (n = 4), investigations (n = 1), repair method (n = 8, four mesh versus suture; four laparoscopic versus open) and operative outcomes (n = 11). The most commonly reported outcomes were mortality (n = 9) and morbidity (n = 7) rates and length of hospital stay (n = 5). No studies included patient-reported outcomes specific to emergency umbilical hernia repair., Conclusion: This scoping review demonstrates the paucity of high-quality data for this condition. There is a need for randomized trials addressing all aspects of emergency umbilical hernia repair, with patient-reported outcomes., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Foundation Ltd.)

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., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: High output is a common complication after stoma formation. Although the management of high output is described in the literature, there is a lack of consensus on definitions and treatment. Our aim was to review and summarise the current best evidence., Methods: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, BNI, CINAHL, EMBASE, EMCARE, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from 1 Jan 2000 to 31 Dec 2021 for relevant articles on adult patients with a high-output stoma. Patients with enteroatmospheric fistulas and case series/reports were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB2 and MINORS. The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021226621)., Results: The search strategy identified 1095 articles, of which 32 studies with 768 patients met the inclusion criteria. These studies comprised 15 randomised controlled trials, 13 non-randomised prospective trials, and 4 retrospective cohort studies. Eighteen different interventions were assessed. In the meta-analysis, there was no difference in stoma output between controls and somatostatin analogues (g - 1.72, 95% CI - 4.09 to 0.65, p = 0.11, I 2 = 88%, t 2 = 3.09), loperamide (g - 0.34, 95% CI - 0.69 to 0.01, p = 0.05, I 2 = 0%, t 2 = 0) and omeprazole (g - 0.31, 95% CI  - 2.46 to 1.84, p = 0.32, I 2 = 0%, t 2 = 0). Thirteen randomised trials showed high concern of bias, one some concern, and one low concern. The non-randomised/retrospective trials had a median MINORS score of 12 out of 24 (range 7-17)., Conclusion: There is limited high-quality evidence favouring any specific widely used drug over the others in the management of high-output stoma. Evidence, however, is weak due to inconsistent definitions, risk of bias and poor methodology in the existing studies. We recommend the development of validated core descriptor and outcomes sets, as well as patient-reported outcome measures., (© 2023. Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Background: Growing evidence on the use of mesh as a prophylactic measure to prevent parastomal hernia and advances in guideline development methods prompted an update of a previous guideline on parastomal hernia prevention. Objective: To develop evidence-based, trustworthy recommendations, informed by an interdisciplinary panel of stakeholders. Methods: We updated a previous systematic review on the use of a prophylactic mesh for end colostomy, and we synthesized evidence using pairwise meta-analysis. A European panel of surgeons, stoma care nurses, and patients developed an evidence-to-decision framework in line with GRADE and Guidelines International Network standards, moderated by a certified guideline methodologist. The framework considered benefits and harms, the certainty of the evidence, patients' preferences and values, cost and resources considerations, acceptability, equity and feasibility. Results: The certainty of the evidence was moderate for parastomal hernia and low for major morbidity, surgery for parastomal hernia, and quality of life. There was unanimous consensus among panel members for a conditional recommendation for the use of a prophylactic mesh in patients with an end colostomy and fair life expectancy, and a strong recommendation for the use of a prophylactic mesh in patients at high risk to develop a parastomal hernia. Conclusion: This rapid guideline provides evidence-informed, interdisciplinary recommendations on the use of prophylactic mesh in patients with an end colostomy. Further, it identifies research gaps, and discusses implications for stakeholders, including overcoming barriers to implementation and specific considerations regarding validity., Competing Interests: FM declared consultancy fees from Medtronic, Dynamesh, BD, and Gore. NS declared speakers fees on parastomal hernia prevention with mesh prophylaxis from Medtronic, WL Gore. All other panel members declared no financial conflict of interest. SA and FM were part of the guideline development group of the EHS Guidelines on Parastomal Hernias. ML, H-TB, and CO are authors of randomized trials and meta-analyses related to the content of this topic. Conflicts of interest were documented and managed as per Guidelines International Network Standards. Detailed conflict of interest statements of all contributors can be found in https://osf.io/k4sh8/. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Stabilini, Muysoms, Tzanis, Rossi, Koutsiouroumpa, Mavridis, Adamina, Bracale, Brandsma, Breukink, López Cano, Cole, Doré, Jensen, Krogsgaard, Smart, Odensten, Tielemans and Antoniou.)

Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of prophylactic mesh for the prevention of parastomal hernia in end colostomy, with the ultimate objective to summarize the evidence for an interdisciplinary, European rapid guideline. Methods: We updated a previous systematic review with de novo evidence search of PubMed from inception up to June 2022. Primary outcome was quality of life (QoL). Secondary outcomes were clinical diagnosis of parastomal hernia, surgery for parastomal hernia, and 30 day or in-hospital complications Clavien-Dindo ≥3. We utilised the revised Cochrane Tool for randomised trials (RoB 2 tool) for risk of bias assessment in the included studies. Minimally important differences were set a priori through voting of the panel members. We appraised the evidence using GRADE and we developed GRADE evidence tables. Results: We included 12 randomized trials. Meta-analysis suggested no difference in QoL between prophylactic mesh and no mesh for primary stoma construction (SMD = 0.03, 95% CI [-0.14 to 0.2], I 2 = 0%, low certainty of evidence). With regard to parastomal hernia, the use of prophylactic synthetic mesh resulted in a significant risk reduction of the incidence of the event, according to data from all available randomized trials, irrespective of the follow-up period (OR = 0.33, 95% CI [0.18-0.62], I 2 = 74%, moderate certainty of evidence). Sensitivity analyses according to follow-up period were in line with the primary analysis. Little to no difference in surgery for parastomal hernia was encountered after pooled analysis of 10 randomised trials (OR = 0.52, 95% CI [0.25-1.09], I 2 = 14%). Finally, no significant difference was found in Clavien-Dindo grade 3 and 4 adverse events after surgery with or without the use of a prophylactic mesh (OR = 0.77, 95% CI [0.45-1.30], I 2 = 0%, low certainty of evidence). Conclusion: Prophylactic synthetic mesh placement at the time of permanent end colostomy construction is likely associated with a reduced risk for parastomal hernia and may confer similar risk of peri-operative major morbidity compared to no mesh placement. There may be no difference in quality of life and surgical repair of parastomal hernia with the use of either approach., Competing Interests: FM declared consultancy fees from Medtronic, Dynamesh, BD, and Gore. NS declared speakers fees on parastomal hernia prevention with mesh prophylaxis from Medtronic, WL Gore. All other panel members declared no financial conflict of interest. SA and FM were part of the guideline development group of the EHS Guidelines on Parastomal Hernias. ML, H-TB, and CO are authors of randomized trials and meta-analyses related to the content of this topic. Conflicts of interest were documented and managed as per Guidelines International Network Standards. Detailed conflict of interest statements of all contributors can be found in https://osf.io/k4sh8/. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Tzanis, Stabilini, Muysoms, Rossi, Koutsiouroumpa, Mavridis, Adamina, Bracale, Brandsma, Breukink, López Cano, Cole, Doré, Jensen, Krogsgaard, Smart, Odensten, Tielemans and Antoniou.)

Introduction: Emergency laparotomy for either trauma or non-trauma indications is common and management is varied. Use of the open abdomen technique allowing for planned re-look is an option; however, performing delayed definitive fascial closure (DFC) following this can be a challenge. The use of botulinum toxin-A (BTX) infiltration into the lateral abdominal wall has been well documented within the elective setting; its use within the emergency setting is undecided. This systematic review assesses the efficacy and safety of BTX injection into the lateral abdominal wall muscles in the emergency setting. The primary outcome is DFC rate., Methods: Systematic review was performed according to the PROSPERO registered protocol (CRD42020205130). Papers were dual screened for eligibility, and included if they met pre-stated criteria where the primary outcome was DFC. Articles reporting fewer than five cases were excluded. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias and Joanna Brigg's appraisal tools., Findings: Fourteen studies were screened for eligibility, twelve full texts were reviewed and two studies were included. Both studies showed evidence of bias due to confounding factors and lack of reporting. Both studies suggested significantly higher rates of DFC than reported in the literature against standard technique (90.7% vs 66%); however, these data are difficult to interpret due to strict study inclusion criteria or lack of a control population., Conclusion: The use of BTX is deemed safe and its effects in the emergency situation may have great potential. Unfortunately, to date, there is insufficient evidence to facilitate opinion.

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., (© 2022 Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Objectives: There is emerging use of artificial intelligence (AI) models to aid diagnostic imaging. This review examined and critically appraised the application of AI models to identify surgical pathology from radiological images of the abdominopelvic cavity, to identify current limitations and inform future research., Design: Systematic review., Data Sources: Systematic database searches (Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were performed. Date limitations (January 2012 to July 2021) were applied., Eligibility Criteria: Primary research studies were considered for eligibility using the PIRT (participants, index test(s), reference standard and target condition) framework. Only publications in the English language were eligible for inclusion in the review., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Study characteristics, descriptions of AI models and outcomes assessing diagnostic performance were extracted by independent reviewers. A narrative synthesis was performed in accordance with the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis guidelines. Risk of bias was assessed (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2))., Results: Fifteen retrospective studies were included. Studies were diverse in surgical specialty, the intention of the AI applications and the models used. AI training and test sets comprised a median of 130 (range: 5-2440) and 37 (range: 10-1045) patients, respectively. Diagnostic performance of models varied (range: 70%-95% sensitivity, 53%-98% specificity). Only four studies compared the AI model with human performance. Reporting of studies was unstandardised and often lacking in detail. Most studies (n=14) were judged as having overall high risk of bias with concerns regarding applicability., Conclusions: AI application in this field is diverse. Adherence to reporting guidelines is warranted. With finite healthcare resources, future endeavours may benefit from targeting areas where radiological expertise is in high demand to provide greater efficiency in clinical care. Translation to clinical practice and adoption of a multidisciplinary approach should be of high priority., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42021237249., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: There is limited high-quality evidence to guide the management of acute hernia presentation. The aim of this study was to survey surgeons to assess current trends in assessment, treatment strategy and operative decisions in the management of acutely symptomatic hernia., Methods: A survey was developed with reference to current guidelines, and reported according to Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys guidelines. Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Sheffield (UREC:034047). The survey explored practice in groin, umbilical/paraumbilical and incisional hernia presenting acutely. It captured respondent demographics, and preferences for investigations, treatment strategies and repair techniques for each hernia type, using a five-point Likert scale., Results: Some 145 responses were received, of which 39 declared a specialist hernia practice. Essential investigations included urea and electrolytes (58.6%) and inflammatory markers (55.6%). Computed tomography scan of the abdomen was essential for assessment of incisional hernia (90.9%), but not for other hernia types. Bowel compromise drives early surgery, and increasing American Society of Anesthesiology score pushes towards non-operative management. Type of repair was driven by hernia contents, with increasing contamination associated with increased rates of suture repair. Where mesh was proposed in contaminated settings, biological types were preferred. There was variation in the potential use of laparoscopy for groin hernia., Conclusions: This survey provides a snapshot of current trends in the management of acutely symptomatic hernia. It demonstrates variation across aspects of assessment and repair technique. Additional data are required to inform practice in these areas.

Introduction: Acutely symptomatic abdominal wall and groin hernias (ASH) are a common acute surgical presentation. There are limited data to guide decisions related to surgical repair technique and use of antibiotics, which can be driven by increased risk of surgical site infection (SSI) in this group. This study aims to report rates of SSI following ASH repair and explore the use of patient-reported outcome measure reporting in this setting., Methods: An 18-week, UK-based, multicentre prospective cohort study (NCT04197271) recruited adults with ASH. This study reports operatively managed patients. Data on patient characteristics, inpatient management, quality of life, complications, and wound healing (Bluebelle score) were collected. Descriptive analyses were performed to estimate event rates of SSI and regression analysis explored the relationship between Bluebelle scores and SSI. The 30 and 90-day follow-up visits assessed complications and quality of life., Results: The MASH study recruited 273 patients, of whom 218 were eligible for this study, 87.2 per cent who underwent open repair. Mesh was used in 123 patients (50.8 per cent). Pre- and postoperative antibiotics were given in 163 (67.4 per cent) and 28 (11.5 per cent) patients respectively. There were 26 reported SSIs (11.9 per cent). Increased BMI, incisional, femoral, and umbilical hernia were associated with higher rates of SSI (P = 0.006). In 238 patients, there was a difference in healthy utility values at 90 days between patients with and without SSI (P = 0.025). Also, when analysing 191 patients with Bluebelle scores, those who developed an SSI had higher Bluebelle values (P < 0.001)., Conclusion: SSI is frequent in repair of acutely symptomatic hernia and correlates with BMI and site of hernia., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.)

Introduction: Colorectal operations such as an extra-levator abdominoperineal (elAPE) excision for locally advanced or recurrent cancer create a significant perineal tissue deficit. Options for perineal reconstruction include bilateral pedicled gracilis muscle flaps (BPGMF). Fashioning the gracili into a 'weave' creates a muscular sling that supports pelvic contents and is a novel technique. Our series reports the outcomes of the BPGMF in 50 patients undergoing surgery for pelvic cancer., Method: This is a retrospective, single-centre study of patients undergoing reconstruction of perineal defects using BPGMF. All surgeries took place between January 2008 and February 2021. The primary outcome measured was perineal wound healing. The secondary outcomes measured were complications of surgical sites and length of hospital stay (short term), flap integrity on follow-up imaging and functional outcomes (long term)., Results: Fifty patients underwent perineal reconstruction using BPGMF (26 males). The median age was 62 years. The 30-day mortality was 2% (n = 1). The average follow-up period was 2 years. Complete perineal wound healing was 86% (42/49) at outpatient follow-up. Complication rates for the donor site and reconstructed site were 14% and 22%, respectively. Complications included infection (2% donor site, 12% perineum), haematoma (4% donor site), dehiscence (2% donor site, 4% perineum) and seroma (3% donor site, 2% perineum)., Conclusion: BPGMF offers a reliable and technically simple muscle flap to reconstruct large perineal defects. The muscle flap integrity appears maintained on follow-up imaging despite a lack of flap monitoring tools. This cohort had minimal functional impairment following BPGMF., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

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., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Colorectal cancer management may require an ostomy formation; however, a stoma may negatively impact health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aimed to compare generic and stoma-specific HRQoL in patients with a permanent colostomy after rectal cancer across different countries., Method: A cross-sectional cohorts of patients with a colostomy after rectal cancer in Denmark, Sweden, Spain, the Netherlands, China, Portugal, Australia, Lithuania, Egypt, and Israel were invited to complete questionnaires regarding demographic and socioeconomic factors along with the Colostomy Impact (CI) score, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and five anchor questions assessing colostomy impact on HRQoL. The background characteristics of the cohorts from each country were compared and generic HRQoL was measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 presented for the total cohort. Results were compared with normative data of reference European populations. The predictors of reduced HRQoL were investigated by multivariable logistic regression, including demographic and socioeconomic factors and stoma-related problems., Results: A total of 2557 patients were included. Response rates varied between 51-93 per cent. Mean time from stoma creation was 2.5-6.2 (range 1.1-39.2) years. A total of 25.8 per cent of patients reported that their colostomy impairs their HRQoL 'some'/'a lot'. This group had significantly unfavourable scores across all EORTC subscales compared with patients reporting 'no'/'a little' impaired HRQoL. Generic HRQoL differed significantly between countries, but resembled the HRQoL of reference populations. Multivariable logistic regression showed that stoma dysfunction, including high CI score (OR 3.32), financial burden from the stoma (OR 1.98), unemployment (OR 2.74), being single/widowed (OR 1.35) and young age (OR 1.01 per year) predicted reduced stoma-related HRQoL., Conclusion: Overall HRQoL is preserved in patients with a colostomy after rectal cancer, but a quarter of the patients interviewed reported impaired HRQoL. Differences among several countries were reported and socioeconomic factors correlated with reduced quality of life., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.)

Background: Laparoscopic surgery has almost replaced open surgery in many areas of Gastro-Intestinal (GI) surgery. There is currently no published expert consensus statement on the principles of laparoscopic GI surgery. This may have affected the training of new surgeons. This exercise aimed to achieve an expert consensus on important principles of laparoscopic GI surgery., Methods: A committee of 38 international experts in laparoscopic GI surgery proposed and voted on 149 statements in two rounds following a strict modified Delphi protocol., Results: A consensus was achieved on 133 statements after two rounds of voting. All experts agreed on tailoring the first port site to the patient, whereas 84.2% advised avoiding the umbilical area for pneumoperitoneum in patients who had a prior midline laparotomy. Moreover, 86.8% agreed on closing all 15 mm ports irrespective of the patient's body mass index. There was a 100% consensus on using cartridges of appropriate height for stapling, checking the doughnuts after using circular staplers, and keeping the vibrating blade of the ultrasonic energy device in view and away from vascular structures. An 84.2% advised avoiding drain insertion through a ≥10 mm port site as it increases the risk of port-site hernia. There was 94.7% consensus on adding laparoscopic retrieval bags to the operating count and ensuring any surgical specimen left inside for later removal is added to the operating count., Conclusion: Thirty-eight experts achieved a consensus on 133 statements concerning various aspects of laparoscopic GI Surgery. Increased awareness of these could facilitate training and improve patient outcomes., (Crown Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Acutely symptomatic abdominal wall and groin hernias are a common reason for acute surgical hospital admissions. There are limited data to guide the treatment of these patients. This study aimed to assess outcomes of emergency hernia surgery and identify common management strategies, to improve care for these high-risk patients., Methods: A 20-week, national multicentre, collaborative, prospective cohort study (NCT04197271) recruited adults with acutely symptomatic abdominal wall and groin hernias across the UK. Data on patient characteristics, inpatient management, quality of life, complications, and wound healing were collected. Follow-up telephone calls at 30 and 90 days were used to assessed complications and quality of life. Descriptive analyses were undertaken to describe the population and outcomes., Results: Twenty-three hospitals recruited 272 eligible patients. Inguinal (37.8 per cent) and umbilical (37.1 per cent) hernias were the most common. Some 13.9 per cent were awaiting elective surgery and 12.8 per cent had previously declined intervention. CT was performed in 47.1 per cent and 81.3 per cent underwent surgical management. Open repairs were carried out in 93.5 per cent, and 92.5 per cent of these were performed under general anaesthesia. Four of 13 laparoscopic procedures were converted to open surgery. Mesh was used in 55.1 per cent of repairs, typically synthetic non-absorbable (87.4 per cent). Complications were infrequent; surgical-site infection (9.4 per cent), delirium (3.2 per cent), and pneumonia (2.3 per cent) were the most common. The 90-day mortality rate was 4.9 per cent. Immediate surgical management was associated with a significant improvement in quality of life at 30 days (median score 0.73-0.82)., Conclusion: There is variation in the investigation, management, and surgical technique used to treat acutely symptomatic abdominal wall and groin hernias in the UK. The optimal management strategy for specific acute presentations remains to be established. Presented to the Association of Surgeons in Training Conference, Birmingham, UK, March 2021, the Association of Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland Congress, May 2021, the World Society of Emergency Surgery, Edinburgh, UK, September 2021, and the European Hernia Society Congress, Copenhagen, Denmark, October 2021., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: There are no universally agreed guidelines regarding which types of physical activity are safe and/or recommended in the perioperative period for patients undergoing ventral hernia repair or abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR). This study is intended to identify and summarise the literature on this topic., Methods: Database searches of PubMed, CINAHL, Allied & Complementary medicine database, PEDro and Web of Science were performed followed by a snowballing search using two papers identified by the database search and four hand-selected papers of the authors' choosing. Inclusion-cohort studies, randomized controlled trials, prospective or retrospective. Studies concerning complex incisional hernia repairs and AWRs including a "prehabilitation" and/or "rehabilitation" program targeting the abdominal wall muscles in which the interventions were of a physical exercise nature. RoB2 and Robins-I were used to assess risk of bias. Prospero CRD42021236745. No external funding. Data from the included studies were extracted using a table based on the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group's data extraction template., Results: The database search yielded 5423 records. After screening two titles were selected for inclusion in our study. The snowballing search identified 49 records. After screening one title was selected for inclusion in our study. Three total papers were included-two randomised studies and one cohort study (combined 423 patients). All three studies subjected their patients to varying types of physical activity preoperatively, one study also prescribed these activities postoperatively. The outcomes differed between the studies therefore meta-analysis was impossible-two studies measured hernia recurrence, one measured peak torque. All three studies showed improved outcomes in their study groups compared to controls however significant methodological flaws and confounding factors existed in all three studies. No adverse events were reported., Conclusions: The literature supporting the advice given to patients regarding recommended physical activity levels in the perioperative period for AWR patients is sparse. Further research is urgently required on this subject., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Abdominal wall hernia repair is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures worldwide, yet despite this, there remains a lack of high-quality evidence to support best management. The aim of the study was to use a modified Delphi process to determine future research priorities in this field., Methods: Stakeholders were invited by email, using British Hernia Society membership details or Twitter, to submit individual research questions via an online survey. In addition, questions obtained from a patient focus group (PFG) were collated to form Phase I. Two rounds of prioritization by stakeholders (phases II and III) were then completed to determine a final list of research questions. All questions were analyzed on an anonymized basis., Results: A total of 266 questions, 19 from the PFG, were submitted by 113 stakeholders in Phase I. Of these, 64 questions were taken forward for prioritization in Phase II, which was completed by 107 stakeholders. Following Phase II analysis, 97 stakeholders prioritized 36 questions in Phase III. This resulted in a final list of 14 research questions, 3 of which were from the PFG. Stakeholders included patients and healthcare professionals (consultant surgeons, trainee surgeons and other multidisciplinary members) from over 27 countries during the 3 phases., Conclusion: The study has identified 14 key research priorities pertaining to abdominal wall hernia surgery. Uniquely, these priorities have been determined from participation by both healthcare professionals and patients. These priorities should now be addressed by well-designed, high-quality international collaborative research., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Competing Interests: N.J.S declares honoraria (speaker fees) from Medtronic, Gore, and MSD, and APP declares no conflict of interest.

Background: There is a lack of information regarding the provision of parental leave for surgical careers. This survey study aims to evaluate the experience of maternity/paternity leave and views on work-life balance globally., Methods: A 55-item online survey in 24 languages was distributed via social media as per CHERRIES guideline from February to March 2020. It explored parental leave entitlements, attitude towards leave taking, financial impact, time spent with children and compatibility of parenthood with surgical career., Results: Of the 1393 (male : female, 514 : 829) respondents from 65 countries, there were 479 medical students, 349 surgical trainees and 513 consultants. Consultants had less than the recommended duration of maternity leave (43.8 versus 29.1 per cent), no paid maternity (8.3 versus 3.2 per cent) or paternity leave (19.3 versus 11.0 per cent) compared with trainees. Females were less likely to have children than males (36.8 versus 45.6 per cent, P = 0.010) and were more often told surgery is incompatible with parenthood (80.2 versus 59.5 per cent, P < 0.001). Males spent less than 20 per cent of their salary on childcare and fewer than 30 hours/week with their children. More than half (59.2 per cent) of medical students did not believe a surgical career allowed work-life balance., Conclusion: Surgeons across the globe had inadequate parental leave. Significant gender disparity was seen in multiple aspects., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Low rectal cancers could be treated using restorative (anterior resection, AR) or non-restorative procedures with an end/permanent stoma (Hartmann's, HE; or abdominoperineal excision, APE). Although the surgical choice is determined by tumour and patient factors, quality of life (QoL) will also influence the patient's future beyond cancer. This systematic review of the literature compared postoperative QoL between the restorative and non-restorative techniques using validated measurement tools., Methods: The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020131492). Embase and MEDLINE, along with grey literature and trials websites, were searched comprehensively for papers published since 2012. Inclusion criteria were original research in an adult population with rectal cancer that reported QoL using a validated tool, including the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-CR30, QLQ-CR29, and QLQ-CR38. Studies were included if they compared AR with APE (or HE), independent of study design. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Outcomes of interest were: QoL, pain, gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms (stool frequency, flatulence, diarrhoea and constipation), and body image., Results: Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 6453 patients; all papers were observational and just four included preoperative evaluations. There was no identifiable difference in global QoL and pain between the two surgical techniques. Reported results regarding GI symptoms and body image documented similar findings. The ROBINS-I tool highlighted a significant risk of bias across the studies., Conclusion: Currently, it is not possible to draw a firm conclusion on postoperative QoL, pain, GI symptoms, and body image following restorative or non-restorative surgery. The included studies were generally of poor quality, lacked preoperative evaluations, and showed considerable bias in the data., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.)

Aim: Parastomal hernia (PSH) is a common complication following stoma creation. Previous reviews found mesh reinforcement during initial stoma creation beneficial in reducing PSH incidence. Since then, several multicentre randomised controlled trials (RCTs) produced widely ranging results rendering previous findings debatable. This current review assessed whether combining the latest larger multicentre RCTs would alter the previous findings., Methods: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and Embase were searched from the respective dates of inception until 15 January 2021. RCTs were included if they compared mesh with no mesh during initial stoma creation in adult patients to prevent PSH. Included RCTs were summarised narratively and meta-analysed to estimate the relative risk (RR) of PSH incidence (primary analysis), peristomal complications and PSH repair (secondary analyses). Several subgroup analyses were performed, including mesh type (synthetic/biologic), surgical technique (open/laparoscopic) and mesh position (sublay/intraperitoneal)., Results: Thirteen RCTs were included in the primary meta-analysis (1070 patients); PSH incidence was reduced in patients with mesh compared with patients without mesh at maximal follow-up (RR = 0.54; 95% CI 0.39-0.77; I 2  = 67%; P < 0.01). The number of PSH repairs was fewer in patients who had mesh (RR = 0.63; 0.35-1.14; I 2  = 6%; P = 0.39), with no difference in peristomal complications (RR = 0.96; 0.55-1.70; I 2  = 0%; P = 0.71), comparing with no mesh. Subgroup analyses suggested that placing synthetic mesh using an open sublay technique might be more beneficial., Conclusions: Prophylactic mesh reinforcement during initial stoma creation reduces PSH incidence and potentially its repair, without an increase in peristomal complications. However, substantial heterogeneity among included RCTs limits confidence in the results., (© 2021 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Aim: Parastomal hernia (PSH) is a common problem following colostomy. Using prophylactic mesh during end colostomy creation may reduce PSH incidence, but concerns exist regarding the optimal type of mesh, potential long-term complications, and cost-effectiveness of its use. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of mesh prophylaxis to prevent PSH in patients undergoing end colostomy creation for rectal cancer., Methods: We developed a decision-analytical model, stratified by rectal cancer stages I-IV, to estimate the lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and net monetary benefits (NMBs) of synthetic, biologic and no mesh from a UK NHS perspective. We pooled the mesh-related relative risks of PSH from 13 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and superimposed these on the baseline (no mesh) risk from a population-based cohort. Uncertainty was assessed in sensitivity analyses., Results: Synthetic mesh was less costly and more effective than biologic and no mesh to prevent PSH for all rectal cancer stages. At the willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000/QALY, the incremental NMBs (95% CI) ranged between £1,706 (£1,692 to £1,720) (stage I) and £684 (£678 to £690) (stage IV) for synthetic versus no mesh, and £2,038 (£1,997 to £2,079) (stage I) and £1,671 (£1,653 to £1,689) (stage IV) for synthetic versus biologic mesh. Synthetic mesh was more cost-effective than no mesh unless the relative risk of PSH was ≥0.95 for stages I-III and ≥0.93 for stage IV. [Correction added on 05 October 2021 after first online publication: The estimation of health outcomes (QALYs) for all three interventions evaluated (synthetic mesh; biologic mesh; no mesh) have been corrected in this version.] CONCLUSIONS: Synthetic mesh was the most cost-effective strategy to prevent the formation of PSH in patients after end colostomy for any rectal cancer stage; however, conclusions are dependent on which subset of RCTs are considered to provide the most robust evidence., (© 2021 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Introduction: The application of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies as a diagnostic aid in healthcare is increasing. Benefits include applications to improve health systems, such as rapid and accurate interpretation of medical images. This may improve the performance of diagnostic, prognostic and management decisions. While a large amount of work has been undertaken discussing the role of AI little is understood regarding the performance of such applications in the clinical setting. This systematic review aims to critically appraise the diagnostic performance of AI algorithms to identify disease from cross-sectional radiological images of the abdominopelvic cavity, to identify current limitations and inform future research., Methods and Analysis: A systematic search will be conducted on Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify relevant studies. Primary studies where AI-based technologies have been used as a diagnostic aid in cross-sectional radiological images of the abdominopelvic cavity will be included. Diagnostic accuracy of AI models, including reported sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve will be examined and compared with standard practice. Risk of bias of included studies will be assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Findings will be reported according to the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis guidelines., Ethics and Dissemination: No ethical approval is required as primary data will not be collected. The results will inform further research studies in this field. Findings will be disseminated at relevant conferences, on social media and published in a peer-reviewed journal., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42021237249., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose . The primary aim of the study was to review the existing literature about patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in colorectal cancer and IBD. The secondary aim was to present a road map to develop a core outcome set via opinion gathering using social media. Method . This study is the first step of a three-step project aimed at constructing simple, applicable PROMs in colorectal surgery. This article was written in a collaborative manner with authors invited both through Twitter via the #OpenSourceResearch hashtag. The 5 most used PROMs were presented and discussed as slides/images on Twitter. Inputs from a wide spectrum of participants including researchers, surgeons, physicians, nurses, patients, and patients' organizations were collected and analyzed. The final draft was emailed to all contributors and 6 patients' representatives for proofreading and approval. Results . Five PROM sets were identified and discussed: EORTC QLQ-CR29, IBDQ short health questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-C30, ED-Q5-5L, and Short Form-36. There were 315 tweets posted by 50 tweeters with 1458 retweets. Awareness about PROMs was generally limited. The general psycho-physical well-being score (GPP) was suggested and discussed, and then a survey was conducted in which more than 2/3 of voters agreed that GPP covers the most important aspects in PROMs. Conclusion . Despite the limitations of this exploratory study, it offered a new method to conduct clinical research with opportunity to engage patients. The general psycho-physical well-being score suggested as simple, applicable PROMs to be eventually combined procedure-specific, disease-specific, or symptom-specific PROMs if needed.

Importance: Image-based deep learning models (DLMs) have been used in other disciplines, but this method has yet to be used to predict surgical outcomes., Objective: To apply image-based deep learning to predict complexity, defined as need for component separation, and pulmonary and wound complications after abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR)., Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study was performed at an 874-bed hospital and tertiary hernia referral center from September 2019 to January 2020. A prospective database was queried for patients with ventral hernias who underwent open AWR by experienced surgeons and had preoperative computed tomography images containing the entire hernia defect. An 8-layer convolutional neural network was generated to analyze image characteristics. Images were batched into training (approximately 80%) or test sets (approximately 20%) to analyze model output. Test sets were blinded from the convolutional neural network until training was completed. For the surgical complexity model, a separate validation set of computed tomography images was evaluated by a blinded panel of 6 expert AWR surgeons and the surgical complexity DLM. Analysis started February 2020., Exposures: Image-based DLM., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was model performance as measured by area under the curve in the receiver operating curve (ROC) calculated for each model; accuracy with accompanying sensitivity and specificity were also calculated. Measures were DLM prediction of surgical complexity using need for component separation techniques as a surrogate and prediction of postoperative surgical site infection and pulmonary failure. The DLM for predicting surgical complexity was compared against the prediction of 6 expert AWR surgeons., Results: A total of 369 patients and 9303 computed tomography images were used. The mean (SD) age of patients was 57.9 (12.6) years, 232 (62.9%) were female, and 323 (87.5%) were White. The surgical complexity DLM performed well (ROC = 0.744; P < .001) and, when compared with surgeon prediction on the validation set, performed better with an accuracy of 81.3% compared with 65.0% (P < .001). Surgical site infection was predicted successfully with an ROC of 0.898 (P < .001). However, the DLM for predicting pulmonary failure was less effective with an ROC of 0.545 (P = .03)., Conclusions and Relevance: Image-based DLM using routine, preoperative computed tomography images was successful in predicting surgical complexity and more accurate than expert surgeon judgment. An additional DLM accurately predicted the development of surgical site infection.

Background: There is a lack of trustworthy evidence-informed guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis in elderly patients., Methods: We developed a rapid guideline in accordance with GRADE and AGREE II standards. The steering group consisted of general surgeons, members of the EAES Research Committee/Guidelines Subcommittee with expertise and experience in guideline development, advanced medical statistics and evidence synthesis, biostatisticians, and a guideline methodologist. The guideline panel consisted of three general surgeons, an intensive care physician, a geriatrician and a patient advocate. We conducted systematic reviews and the results of evidence synthesis were summarized in evidence tables. Recommendations were authored and published through an online authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp), with the guideline panel making use of an evidence-to-decision framework and a Delphi process to arrive at consensus., Results: This rapid guideline provides a weak recommendation against the use of clinical scoring systems to replace cross-sectional imaging in the diagnostic approach of suspected appendicitis in elderly patients. It provides a weak recommendation against the use of antibiotics alone over surgical treatment in patients who are deemed fit for surgery, and a weak recommendation for laparoscopic over open surgery. Furthermore, it provides a summary of surgery-associated risks in elderly patients. The guidelines, with recommendations, evidence summaries and decision aids in user-friendly formats can also be accessed in MAGICapp: https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/4494 ., Conclusions: This rapid guideline provides evidence-informed trustworthy recommendations on the diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis in elderly patients.

Aim: Abdominal surgery sometimes necessitates the creation of a stoma, which can cause future complications including parastomal hernia (PSH), an incisional hernia adjacent to and related to the stoma. PSH affects approximately 40% of patients within 2 years of stoma formation. Complications of PSH reduce a patient's quality of life and can be severe (e.g. bowel obstruction). PSHs are difficult to manage and can recur after surgical repair. Therefore, it is very important to prevent a PSH. Surgeons create stomas in different ways and both patient and surgical factors are believed to influence the development of PSH. The aim of the CIPHER study is to investigate the influence of different surgical techniques on the development of PSH., Method: The UK cohort study to investigate the prevention of parastomal hernia (the CIPHER study) aims to recruit 4000 patients undergoing elective or expedited surgery with the intention of forming an ileostomy or colostomy, irrespective of the primary indication for the planned surgery. For each patient, surgeons will describe their methods of trephine formation, mesh reinforcement of the stoma trephine, use of the stoma as a specimen extraction site and wound closure. The primary outcome will be incident PSH during follow-up, defined as symptoms of PSH (custom-designed questionnaire) and anatomical PSH, ascertained by independent reading of usual care CT scans. Secondary outcomes will include surgical site infection, the Comprehensive Complication Index, quality of life (EQ-5D-5L and SF-12), PSH repair and use of NHS resources., Results: Results of the study will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. All publications relating to the results of CIPHER will use a corporate authorship, 'The CIPHER Study Investigators' with named writing committee members., Conclusion: The CIPHER study will be the first to investigate detailed surgical methods of stoma formation in a large, representative cohort of patients with a range of primary indications, both cancer and noncancer., (© 2021 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Aim: Optimal oncological resection in cancers of the lower rectum often requires a permanent colostomy. However, in some patients a colostomy may have a negative impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The Colostomy Impact (CI) score is a simple questionnaire that identifies patients with stoma dysfunction that impairs HRQoL by dividing patients into 'minor' and 'major' CI groups. This aim of this study is to evaluate construct and discriminative validity, sensitivity, specificity and reliability of the CI score internationally, making it applicable for screening and identification of patients with stoma-related impaired HRQoL., Method: The CI score was translated in agreement with WHO recommendations. Cross-sectional cohorts of rectal cancer survivors with a colostomy in Australia, China, Denmark, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Sweden were asked to complete the CI score, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life 30-item core questionnaire, the stoma-specific items of the EORTC quality of life 29-item colorectal-specific questionnaire and five anchor questions assessing the impact of colostomy on HRQoL., Results: A total of 2470 patients participated (response rate 51%-93%). CI scores were significantly higher in patients reporting reduced HRQoL due to their colostomy than in patients reporting no reduction. Differences in EORTC scale scores between patients with minor and major CI were significant and clinically relevant. Sensitivity was high regarding dissatisfaction with a colostomy. Regarding evaluation of discriminative validity, the CI score relevantly identified groups with differences in HRQoL. The CI score proved reliable, with equal CI scores between test and retest and an intraclass correlation coefficient in the moderate to excellent range., Conclusion: The CI score is internationally valid and reliable. We encourage its use in clinical practice to identify patients with stoma dysfunction who require further attention., (© 2021 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Introduction: Morbidity following open inguinal hernia repair is mainly related to chronic pain. ProGrip™ is a self-gripping mesh which aims to reduce rates of chronic pain. The aim of this study is to perform an update meta-analysis to consolidate the non-superiority hypothesis in terms of postoperative pain and recurrence and perform a trial sequential analysis., Methods: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) method. The primary outcome measure was postoperative pain and secondary outcomes were recurrence, operative time, wound complications, length of stay, re-operation rate, and cost. Trial sequential analysis was performed., Results: There were 14 studies included in the quantitative analysis with 3180 patients randomised to self-gripping mesh (1585) or standard mesh (1595). At all follow-up time points, there was no significant difference in the rates of chronic pain between the self-gripping and standard mesh (risk ratio, RR 1.10, 95% confidence interval, CI 0.83-1.46). There were no significant differences in recurrence rates (RR 1.13, CI 0.84-2.04). The mean operating time was significantly shorted in the ProGrip™ mesh group (MD - 7.32 min, CI - 10.21 to - 4.44). Trial sequential analysis suggests findings are conclusive., Conclusion: This meta-analysis has confirmed no benefit of a ProGrip™ mesh when compared to a standard sutured mesh for open inguinal hernia repair in terms of chronic pain or recurrence. No further trials are required to address this clinical question.

Background: Achieving stable closure of complex or contaminated abdominal wall incisions remains challenging. This study aimed to characterise the stage of innovation for bioabsorbable mesh devices used during both midline closure prophylaxis and complex abdominal wall reconstruction and to evaluate the quality of current evidence., Methods: A systematic review of published and ongoing studies was performed until 31st December 2019. Inclusion criteria were studies where bioabsorbable mesh was used to support fascial closure either prophylactically after midline laparotomy or for repair of incisional hernia with midline incision. Exclusion criteria were: (1) study design was a systematic review, meta-analysis, letter, review, comment, or conference abstract; (2) included less than p patients; (3) only evaluated biological, synthetic or composite meshes. The primary outcome measure was the IDEAL framework stage of innovation. The key secondary outcome measure was the risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) criteria for study quality., Results: Twelve studies including 1287 patients were included. Three studies considered mesh prophylaxis and nine studies considered hernia repair. There were only two published studies of IDEAL 2B. The remainder was IDEAL 2A studies. The quality of the evidence was categorised as having a risk of bias of a moderate, serious or critical level in nine of the twelve included studies using the ROBINS-I tool., Conclusion: The evidence base for bioabsorbable mesh is limited. Better reporting and quality control of surgical techniques are needed. Although new trial results over the next decade will improve the evidence base, more trials in emergency and contaminated settings are required to establish the limits of indication.

Purpose: The management of a recurrent (symptomatic) parastomal hernia (PSH) presents a dilemma. The aim of this study was to review the outcome of patients who underwent a recurrent PSH repair., Methods: Retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing recurrent PSH repairs at a single institution between 2010 and 2019. Primary outcome recorded was recurrence. Secondary outcomes recorded were 30-day post-operative complications, surgical site occurrence (SSO) incidence and to assess if EHS classification altered with each recurrence., Results: Thirty-eight patients underwent 59 recurrent PSH repairs during the study period. Median number of PSH repairs per patient from ostomy formation was 2 (2-8). Post-operative complications occurred following 52.5% of repairs. Recurrence rate for all recurrent PSH hernia repairs was 45.7%, with a median follow-up of 58 months (0-115). A trend was seen towards a shorter PSH recurrence-free survival in those who had at least two previous PSH repairs at the start of the study period when compared to those who had less. Recurrence was not associated with operative urgency, type of repair, mesh type or SSO occurrence. A significant decrease in recurrence was seen with retro-rectus mesh placement when compared to onlay (p = 0.003). EHS classification did not change between each recurrence in 70.8% of patients., Conclusion: Recurrence rates after recurrent PSH repair are high. The recurrence-free survival was worse after the second or more attempt at repair for recurrence. Further studies are warranted to explore prophylaxis, optimal repair method, and where re-recurrence occurs, the benefit of repeated surgical intervention.

Purpose: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway., Patients and Methods: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation)., Results: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76)., Conclusion: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks.

Aim: The aim of this work was to compare demographic factors, outcomes and prognosis for right-sided versus left-sided acute colonic diverticulitis., Method: We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Scopus and unpublished literature to identify all observational studies comparing demographic factors and outcomes of right-sided versus left-sided acute colonic diverticulitis (PROSPERO registration number CRD42020180075). We used the QUIPS tool to assess the risk of bias of included studies. Random effects modelling was applied to calculate pooled outcome data., Results: Analysis of 2933 patients from nine studies suggests that right-sided diverticulitis affects younger patients [mean difference (MD)  -14.16 (-17.19, -11.14), P < 0.00001] and more male patients [odds ratio (OR) 1.33 (1.04, 1.71), P = 0.02] compared with left-sided diverticulitis. Smoking [OR 2.23 (1.50, 3.32), P < 0.0001], alcohol consumption [OR 1.85 (1.26, 2.71), P = 0.002] and comorbidity [OR 0.21 (0.15, 0.30), P < 0.00001] were more common in patients with right-sided diverticulitis. The risk of complicated diverticulitis was lower in the right-sided group [OR 0.21 (0.08, 0.55), P = 0.001]. More patients in the right-sided diverticulitis group had modified Hinchey Stage I disease [OR 10.21 (3.34, 31.22), P < 0.0001] while more patients in the left-sided group had Stage II [OR 0.19 (0.10, 0.38), P < 0.00001], Stage III [OR 0.08 (0.01, 0.54), P = 0.009] or Stage IV disease [OR 0.02 (0.00, 0.08), P < 0.00001]. Right-sided diverticulitis was associated with a lower risk of recurrence [OR 0.49 (0.25, 0.98), P = 0.04], failure of conservative management [OR 0.14 (0.04, 0.43), P = 0.0006], the need for emergency surgery [OR 0.13 (0.05, 0.36), P < 0.00001] and a shorter length of hospital stay [MD -1.70 (-3.08, -0.33), P = 0.02]., Conclusion: Right-sided acute diverticulitis predominantly affects younger male patients compared with left-sided disease and is associated with favourable outcomes as indicated by the lower risk of complications, failure of conservative management, need for emergency surgery, recurrence and shorter length of hospital stay. More studies are required to compare the postoperative outcomes in patients with right-sided and left-sided diverticulitis undergoing emergency surgery., (© 2020 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Introduction: Evidence suggests that midline incisions should be closed with the small-bite technique to reduce IH formation. No recommendations exist for the closure of transverse incisions used in hepatobiliary surgery. This work systematically summarises rates of IH formation and associated technical factors for these transverse incisions., Methods: A systematic search was undertaken. Studies describing the incidence of IH were included. Incisions were classified as transverse (two incision types) or hybrid (transverse with midline extension, comprising five incision types). The primary outcome measure was the pooled proportion of IH. Subgroup analysis based on minimum follow-up of two years and a priori definition of IH with clinical and radiological diagnosis was undertaken., Findings: Thirteen studies were identified and included 5,427 patients; 1,427 patients (26.3%) underwent surgery for benign conditions, 3,465 (63.8%) for malignancy and 535 (9.9%) for conditions that were not stated or classified as 'other'. The pooled incidence of IH was 6.0% (2.0-10.0%) at a weighted mean follow-up of 17.5 months in the transverse group, compared with 15.0% (11.0-19.0%) at a weighted mean follow-up of 42.0 months in the hybrid group ( p = 0.045). Subgroup analysis did not demonstrate a statistical difference in IH formation between the hybrid versus transverse groups., Conclusion: Owing to the limitations in study design and heterogeneity, there is limited evidence to guide incision choice and methods of closure in hepatopancreatobiliary surgery. There is an urgent need for a high-quality prospective cohort study to understand the techniques used and their outcomes, to inform future research.

Surgery is an invasive procedure evoking acute inflammatory and immune responses that can influence risk for postoperative complications including cognitive dysfunction and delirium. Although the specific mechanisms driving these responses have not been well-characterized, they are hypothesized to involve the epigenetic regulation of gene expression. We quantified genome-wide levels of DNA methylation in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) longitudinally collected from a cohort of elderly patients undergoing major surgery, comparing samples collected at baseline to those collected immediately post-operatively and at discharge from hospital. We identified acute changes in measured DNA methylation at sites annotated to immune system genes, paralleling changes in serum-levels of markers including C-reactive protein (CRP) and Interleukin 6 (IL-6) measured in the same individuals. Many of the observed changes in measured DNA methylation were consistent across different types of major surgery, although there was notable heterogeneity between surgery types at certain loci. The acute changes in measured DNA methylation induced by surgery are relatively stable in the post-operative period, generally persisting until discharge from hospital. Our results highlight the dramatic alterations in gene regulation induced by invasive surgery, primarily reflecting upregulation of the immune system in response to trauma, wound healing and anaesthesia.

Background: No standardized written or volumetric definition exists for 'loss of domain' (LOD). This limits the utility of LOD as a morphological descriptor and as a predictor of peri- and postoperative outcomes. Consequently, our aim was to establish definitions for LOD via consensus of expert abdominal wall surgeons., Methods: A Delphi study involving 20 internationally recognized abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) surgeons was performed. Four written and two volumetric definitions of LOD were identified via systematic review. Panelists completed a questionnaire that suggested these definitions as standardized definitions of LOD. Consensus on a preferred term was pre-defined as achieved when selected by ≥80% of panelists. Terms scoring <20% were removed., Results: Voting commenced August 2018 and was completed in January 2019. Written definition: During Round 1, two definitions were removed and seven new definitions were suggested, leaving nine definitions for consideration. For Round 2, panelists were asked to select all appealing definitions. Thereafter, common concepts were identified during analysis, from which the facilitators advanced a new written definition. This received 100% agreement in Round 3. Volumetric definition: Initially, panelists were evenly split, but consensus for the Sabbagh method was achieved. Panelists could not reach consensus regarding a threshold LOD value that would preclude surgery., Conclusions: Consensus for written and volumetric definitions of LOD was achieved from 20 internationally recognized AWR surgeons. Adoption of these definitions will help standardize the use of LOD for both clinical and academic activities.

Background: Nomenclature for mesh insertion during ventral hernia repair is inconsistent and confusing. Several terms, including 'inlay', 'sublay' and 'underlay', can refer to the same anatomical planes in the indexed literature. This frustrates comparisons of surgical practice and may invalidate meta-analyses comparing surgical outcomes. The aim of this study was to establish an international classification of abdominal wall planes., Methods: A Delphi study was conducted involving 20 internationally recognized abdominal wall surgeons. Different terms describing anterior abdominal wall planes were identified via literature review and expert consensus. The initial list comprised 59 possible terms. Panellists completed a questionnaire that suggested a list of options for individual abdominal wall planes. Consensus on a term was predefined as occurring if selected by at least 80 per cent of panellists. Terms scoring less than 20 per cent were removed., Results: Voting started August 2018 and was completed by January 2019. In round 1, 43 terms (73 per cent) were selected by less than 20 per cent of panellists and 37 new terms were suggested, leaving 53 terms for round 2. Four planes reached consensus in round 2, with the terms 'onlay', 'inlay', 'preperitoneal' and 'intraperitoneal'. Thirty-five terms (66 per cent) were selected by less than 20 per cent of panellists and were removed. After round 3, consensus was achieved for 'anterectus', 'interoblique', 'retro-oblique' and 'retromuscular'. Default consensus was achieved for the 'retrorectus' and 'transversalis fascial' planes., Conclusion: Consensus concerning abdominal wall planes was agreed by 20 internationally recognized surgeons. Adoption should improve communication and comparison among surgeons and research studies., (© 2019 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)