Background
Acute diverticulitis (AD) presents a unique diagnostic and therapeutic challenge for general surgeons. This collaborative project between EAES and SAGES aimed to summarize recent evidence and draw statements of recommendation to guide our members on comprehensive AD management.
Methods
Systematic reviews of the literature were conducted across six AD topics by an international steering group including experts from both societies. Topics encompassed the epidemiology, diagnosis, management of non-complicated and complicated AD as well as emergency and elective operative AD management. Consensus statements and recommendations were generated, and the quality of the evidence and recommendation strength rated with the GRADE system. Modified Delphi methodology was used to reach consensus among experts prior to surveying the EAES and SAGES membership on the recommendations and likelihood to impact their practice. Results were presented at both EAES and SAGES annual meetings with live re-voting carried out for recommendations with < 70% agreement.
Results
A total of 51 consensus statements and 41 recommendations across all six topics were agreed upon by the experts and submitted for members’ online voting. Based on 1004 complete surveys and over 300 live votes at the SAGES and EAES Diverticulitis Consensus Conference (DCC), consensus was achieved for 97.6% (40/41) of recommendations with 92% (38/41) agreement on the likelihood that these recommendations would change practice if not already applied. Areas of persistent disagreement included the selective use of imaging to guide AD diagnosis, recommendations against antibiotics in non-complicated AD, and routine colonic evaluation after resolution of non-complicated diverticulitis.
Conclusion
This joint EAES and SAGES consensus conference updates clinicians on the current evidence and provides a set of recommendations that can guide clinical AD management practice.
Electronic supplementary material
The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-019-06882-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Objective Examine if adding aerobic exercise to standard medical care (EX+SC) prior to bariatric surgery improves metabolic health in relation to surgical outcomes. Methods Fourteen bariatric patients (age: 42.3±2.5y, BMI: 45.1±2.5 kg/m 2) met inclusion criteria and were match-paired to pre-operative SC (n = 7) or EX+SC (n = 7; walking 30min/d, 5d/wk, 65-85% HR peak) for 30d. A 120min mixed meal tolerance test was performed pre-and postintervention (~2d prior to surgery) to assess insulin sensitivity (Matsuda Index) and metabolic flexibility (indirect calorimetry). Aerobic fitness (VO 2 peak), body composition (Bod-Pod), and adipokines (adiponectin, leptin) were also measured. Omental adipose tissue was collected during surgery to quantify gene expression of adiponectin and leptin, and operating time and length of hospital stay were recorded. ANOVA and Cohen's d effect size (ES) was used to test group differences. Results SC tended to increase percent body fat (P = 0.06) after the intervention compared to EX +SC. Although SC and EX+SC tended to raise insulin sensitivity (P = 0.11), EX+SC enhanced metabolic flexibility (P = 0.01, ES = 1.55), reduced total adiponectin (P = 0.01, ES = 1.54) with no change in HMW adiponectin and decreased the length of hospital stay (P = 0.05) compared to SC. Albeit not statistically significant, EX+SC increased VO 2 peak 2.9% compared to a 5.
Prophylactic ureteral stents independently increased AKI risk when placed prior to colorectal surgery. These data demonstrate increased morbidity and hospital costs related to usage of stents in colorectal surgery, indicating that placement should be limited to patients with highest potential benefit.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.