Paraesophageal hernia

食管旁疝
  • 文章类型: Multicenter Study
    背景:食管旁疝手术后,不良事件(AE)和住院时间(LOS)的发生率差异很大。我们进行了加拿大多中心积极偏差(PD)研讨会,以审查各个中心和国家层面的数据,并建立整体的围手术期实践建议。
    方法:2021年10月举行了一次全国虚拟PD研讨会。最近的最佳证据集中在AE和LOS上。随后,匿名的中心级AE和LOS数据收集在2017年01月01日至2021年01月01日之间,提出了基于网络的数据库,跟踪术后结果。选择了关于这些指标的前两个执行中心,这些医院的外科医生讨论了他们的治疗途径中促成这些结果的要素。然后确定了共识建议,参与者对他们的协议水平进行了独立评级。
    结果:来自8个中心的28名外科医生参加了加拿大5个省的研讨会。在纳入的680名患者中,Clavien-DindoI级和II/III/IV/V级并发症发生在121/39/12/2患者中(17.8%/5.7%/1.8%/0.3%)。呼吸系统并发症最常见(积液12/680,1.7%,肺炎9/680,1.3%)。食管和胃穿孔分别发生在7和4/680(分别为1.0%和0.6%)。机构之间的LOS中位数差异很大(1天,范围1-3vs.7天,3-8,p<0.001)。10/12产生的协商一致声明达成了强有力的协议。
    结论:PD研讨会为中心提供了一个支持性论坛,以审查最佳证据和经验,并根据专家意见提出建议。正在进行进一步的研究,以确定这种方法是否有效地实现了这一目标。
    The incidence of adverse events (AEs) and length of stay (LOS) varies significantly following paraesophageal hernia surgery. We performed a Canadian multicenter positive deviance (PD) seminar to review individual center and national level data and establish holistic perioperative practice recommendations.
    A national virtual PD seminar was performed in October 2021. Recent best evidence focusing on AEs and LOS was presented. Subsequently, anonymized center-level AE and LOS data collected between 01/2017 and 01/2021 from a prospective, web-based database that tracks postoperative outcomes was presented. The top two performing centers with regards to these metrics were chosen and surgeons from these hospitals discussed elements of their treatment pathways that contributed to these outcomes. Consensus recommendations were then identified with participants independently rating their level of agreement.
    Twenty-eight surgeons form 8 centers took part in the seminar across 5 Canadian provinces. Of the 680 included patients included, Clavien-Dindo grade I and II/III/IV/V complications occurred in 121/39/12/2 patients (17.8%/5.7%/1.8%/0.3%). Respiratory complications were the most common (effusion 12/680, 1.7% and pneumonia 9/680, 1.3%). Esophageal and gastric perforation occurred in 7 and 4/680, (1.0% and 0.6% respectively). Median LOS varied significantly between institutions (1 day, range 1-3 vs. 7 days, 3-8, p < 0.001). A strong level of agreement was achieved for 10/12 of the consensus statements generated.
    PD seminars provide a supportive forum for centers to review best evidence and experience and generate recommendations based on expert opinion. Further research is ongoing to determine if this approach effectively accomplishes this objective.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:自从关于食道旁疝治疗的最新指南以来,出现了新的证据,指导方针开发方法已经发展起来。欧洲内镜手术协会的成员已优先考虑通过相关建议解决食道旁疝的管理。
    目的:制定关于食管旁疝的循证临床实践建议,通过跨学科利益相关者小组的证据综合和结构化的证据到决策框架。
    方法:我们进行了三次系统综述,我们使用等级方法对证据的确定性进行了总结和评估。一组普通和上消化道外科医生,胃肠病学家和患者倡导者讨论了益处和危害的背景下的证据,证据的确定性,可接受性,可行性,股本,资源的成本和使用,由指南国际网络认证的主指南开发人员和主席主持。我们在协商一致的会议上提出了这些建议,随后是修改后的德尔福调查。
    结果:专家组建议手术治疗无症状/症状轻微的食管旁疝(有条件推荐),并建议对虚弱患者的无症状/症状轻微的食管旁疝进行保守治疗,而不是手术治疗(强烈推荐)。Further,该小组建议在食管旁疝修补术中缝合缝合裂孔,胃底折叠术在选择性食管旁疝修补术中,心肺不稳定并需要紧急食管旁疝修补术的患者的胃底折叠术(有条件的推荐)。强烈建议意味着建议的行动方案适合绝大多数患者。有条件的建议意味着大多数患者会选择拟议的行动方案,需要外科医生和患者的共同决策。在使用建议时,应阅读随附的证据摘要和决定证据框架。该指南适用于中度至大型II至IV型食管旁疝的成年患者,其中至少50%的胃突出到胸腔。具有用户友好的决策辅助工具的完整指南可在https://app中获得。magicapp.org/#/guideline/j7q7Gn。
    结论:一个跨学科小组使用最高的方法学标准并遵循透明的过程,就食管旁疝的管理的关键主题提供建议。
    准备-2023CN018。
    New evidence has emerged since latest guidelines on the management of paraesophageal hernia, and guideline development methodology has evolved. Members of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery have prioritized the management of paraesophageal hernia to be addressed by pertinent recommendations.
    To develop evidence-informed clinical practice recommendations on paraesophageal hernias, through evidence synthesis and a structured evidence-to-decision framework by an interdisciplinary panel of stakeholders.
    We performed three systematic reviews, and we summarized and appraised the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE methodology. A panel of general and upper gastrointestinal surgeons, gastroenterologists and a patient advocate discussed the evidence in the context of benefits and harms, the certainty of the evidence, acceptability, feasibility, equity, cost and use of resources, moderated by a Guidelines International Network-certified master guideline developer and chair. We developed the recommendations in a consensus meeting, followed by a modified Delphi survey.
    The panel suggests surgery over conservative management for asymptomatic/minimally symptomatic paraesophageal hernias (conditional recommendation), and recommends conservative management over surgery for asymptomatic/minimally symptomatic paraesophageal hernias in frail patients (strong recommendation). Further, the panel suggests mesh over sutures for hiatal closure in paraesophageal hernia repair, fundoplication over gastropexy in elective paraesophageal hernia repair, and gastropexy over fundoplication in patients who have cardiopulmonary instability and require emergency paraesophageal hernia repair (conditional recommendation). A strong recommendation means that the proposed course of action is appropriate for the vast majority of patients. A conditional recommendation means that most patients would opt for the proposed course of action, and joint decision-making of the surgeon and the patient is required. Accompanying evidence summaries and evidence-to-decision frameworks should be read when using the recommendations. This guideline applies to adult patients with moderate to large paraesophageal hernias type II to IV with at least 50% of the stomach herniated to the thoracic cavity. The full guideline with user-friendly decision aids is available in https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/j7q7Gn .
    An interdisciplinary panel provides recommendations on key topics on the management of paraesophageal hernias using highest methodological standards and following a transparent process.
    PREPARE-2023CN018.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:关于食管裂孔旁疝(pHH)患者的最佳管理存在相当大的争议。这项调查旨在确定推荐的工作策略,手术治疗,术后随访采用德尔菲法。
    方法:我们进行了2轮,33个问题,基于网络的Delphi围手术期管理调查(术前检查,外科手术和随访)的非修订版,在具有上消化道专业知识的欧洲外科医生中选择pHH。在5点Likert量表上对反应进行评分,并使用描述性统计进行分析。如果参与者之间的正面或负面一致性>75%,则将问卷中的项目定义为“推荐”或“不鼓励”。一致性水平较低的物品被标记为“可接受”(既不建议也不鼓励)。
    结果:来自17个欧洲国家的72位中位(IQR)经验为23年(14-30年)的外科医生参加了(应答率60%)。年度中位数(IQR)个人和机构病例量为25(15-36)和40(28-60)pHH手术,分别。在Delphi第2轮之后,定义了术前检查(内窥镜检查)的“推荐”策略,手术指征(典型症状和/或慢性贫血),外科解剖(疝囊解剖和切除术,保护迷走神经,小腿筋膜和胸膜,心脏后脂肪瘤切除术)和重建(单针后路缝合术,食管下括约肌扩张术(尼森或Toupet),术后随访(造影)。此外,我们确定了术前检查的“不鼓励”策略(内窥镜检查),和外科重建(缝合缝合,仅使用网孔进行无张力裂孔修复)。相比之下,问卷中的许多项目,包括网格增强的大多数细节(适应症,材料,形状,placement,和固定技术)是“可接受的”。
    结论:这项跨国的欧洲德尔菲调查代表了第一个由专家主导的过程,以确定建议的pHH管理策略。我们的工作可能有助于临床实践指导诊断过程,提高程序的一致性和标准化,并促进合作研究。
    There is considerable controversy regarding optimal management of patients with paraesophageal hiatus hernia (pHH). This survey aims at identifying recommended strategies for work-up, surgical therapy, and postoperative follow-up using Delphi methodology.
    We conducted a 2-round, 33-question, web-based Delphi survey on perioperative management (preoperative work-up, surgical procedure and follow-up) of non-revisional, elective pHH among European surgeons with expertise in upper-GI. Responses were graded on a 5-point Likert scale and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Items from the questionnaire were defined as \"recommended\" or \"discouraged\" if positive or negative concordance among participants was > 75%. Items with lower concordance levels were labelled \"acceptable\" (neither recommended nor discouraged).
    Seventy-two surgeons with a median (IQR) experience of 23 (14-30) years from 17 European countries participated (response rate 60%). The annual median (IQR) individual and institutional caseload was 25 (15-36) and 40 (28-60) pHH-surgeries, respectively. After Delphi round 2, \"recommended\" strategies were defined for preoperative work-up (endoscopy), indication for surgery (typical symptoms and/or chronic anemia), surgical dissection (hernia sac dissection and resection, preservation of the vagal nerves, crural fascia and pleura, resection of retrocardial lipoma) and reconstruction (posterior crurorrhaphy with single stitches, lower esophageal sphincter augmentation (Nissen or Toupet), and postoperative follow-up (contrast radiography). In addition, we identified \"discouraged\" strategies for preoperative work-up (endosonography), and surgical reconstruction (crurorrhaphy with running sutures, tension-free hiatus repair with mesh only). In contrast, many items from the questionnaire including most details of mesh augmentation (indication, material, shape, placement, and fixation technique) were \"acceptable\".
    This multinational European Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process to identify recommended strategies for the management of pHH. Our work may be useful in clinical practice to guide the diagnostic process, increase procedural consistency and standardization, and to foster collaborative research.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号