Background During the last two decades, an increasing number of bariatric surgical procedures have been performed worldwide. There is no consensus regarding optimal perioperative care in bariatric surgery. This review aims to present such a consensus and to provide graded recommendations for elements in an evidence-based ''enhanced'' perioperative protocol. Methods The English-language literature between January 1966 and January 2015 was searched, with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and large prospective cohort studies. Selected studies were examined, reviewed and graded. After critical appraisal of these studies, the group of authors reached a consensus recommendation. Results Although for some elements, recommendations are extrapolated from non-bariatric settings (mainly colorectal), most recommendations are based on good-quality trials or meta-analyses of good-quality trials. Conclusions A comprehensive evidence-based consensus was reached and is presented in this review by the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) Society. The guidelines were endorsed by the International Association for Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition (IASMEN) and based on the evidence available in the literature for each of the elements of the multimodal perioperative care pathway for patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

Dexmedetomidine is a new generation highly selective α2-adrenergic receptor (α2-AR) agonist that is associated with sedative and analgesic sparing effects, reduced delirium and agitation, perioperative sympatholysis, cardiovascular stabilizing effects, and preservation of respiratory function. The aim of this review is to present the most recent topics regarding the advantages in using dexmedetomidine in clinical anesthesia and intensive care, while discussing the controversial issues of its harmful effects.

Background: Only a small proportion of patients with severe Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) undergo emergency surgery, the timing and nature of which is unclear. The aim of this study was to describe the operations performed and to identify factors predictive of death following emergency surgery for CDI.Methods: A systematic review of published literature was performed for studies comparing survivors and non-survivors of emergency surgery for CDI. Meta-analysis was carried out for 30-day and in-hospital mortality.Results: Overall 31 studies were included, which presented data on a total of 1433 patients undergoing emergency surgery for CDI. Some 1·1 per cent of all patients with CDI and 29·9 per cent with severe CDI underwent emergency surgery, although rates varied between studies (0·2-7·6 and 2·2-86 per cent respectively). The most commonly performed operation was total colectomy with end ileostomy (89·0 per cent, 1247 of 1401 detailed surgical procedures). When total colectomy with end ileostomy was not performed, reoperation to resect further bowel was needed in 15·9 per cent (20 of 126). Where described, the 30-day mortality rate was 41·3 per cent (160 of 387). Meta-analysis of highquality studies revealed that the strongest predictors of postoperative death were those relating to preoperative physiological status: preoperative intubation, acute renal failure, multiple organ failure and shock requiring vasopressors. Conclusion:This systematic review supports total colectomy with end ileostomy as the primary surgical treatment for patients with severe CDI; other surgical procedures are associated with high rates of reoperation and mortality. Less extensive surgery may have a role in selected patients with earlier-stage disease.

The safety of NAAP sedation compared favorably with AAP sedation in patients undergoing advanced endoscopic procedures. However, it came at the cost of decreased patient and endoscopist satisfaction.

Mesh reinforcement of laparotomy significantly reduced the rate of incisional hernia in high-risk patients. However, poor assessment of secondary outcomes limits applicability; routine placement in all patients cannot yet be recommended. More evidence regarding the rates of adverse events, cost-benefits and quality of life are needed.