Human cadaver model as a training tool for enzymatic burn debridement (Nexobrid®): A feasibility study

ObjectivesTo determine the feasibility of using human cadavers to demonstrate enzymatic burn debridement, as a training aid for clinical staff.Material and methodsA single, fresh-frozen human cadaver was used. Prior consent had been given. Burns were created by flame and scalding. Unburned control sites were also assessed. Nexobrid® enzymatic burn debridement paste was applied to all sites, in adherence to the local clinical protocol for treating burned patients. After removal of Nexobrid®, wounds were assessed to determine if the cadaveric tissue appeared similar to what would be expected in living burned patients and whether the technique could be viable for training of burn care staff.ResultsNexobrid® had a very similar effect upon burned cadaveric skin to what would have been expected in living burned skin. Burns of partial thickness burn depth and full thickness burn depth were debrided and could be clearly identified.ConclusionsFresh-frozen human cadaveric tissue is a valid means of provision of training in the technique of enzymatic burn debridement. This finding was unexpected and shows that our understanding of the mechanism of action of Nexobrid® is incomplete.     

Enzymatic debridement for circumferential deep burns: the role of surgical escharotomy

IntroductionCircumferential deep burns carry a high risk for a burn induced compartment syndrome. It was recently shown that an enzymatic bromelain-based debridement with Nexobrid® is a safe and efficient procedure to release pressure in deep circumferential extremity burns reducing the need for surgical escharotomy. We therefore herein aimed to analyze the conceptual relation between Nexobrid® and surgical escharotomy.Patients and methodsWe conducted a retrospective study on all patients with circumferential deep partial-thickness or full-thickness burns requiring immediate escharotomy that was either performed by surgical incision or Nexobrid®. Medical records of 792 patients that were treated at the burn center of the University Hospital Zurich between 2016 and 2021 were analyzed.ResultsOverall, 62 patients with circumferential deep partial-thickness or full-thickness burns who received preventive decompression either by Nexobrid® (N = 29) or surgical escharotomy (N = 33), were included. Whilst distribution of age, sex, BMI and type of injury showed no difference between the groups, the ABSI score, TBSA, percentage of third degree burns and mortality were significantly higher in patients who received a surgical escharotomy.ConclusionWhile the use of Nexobrid® to prevent burn induced compartment syndrome has steadily increased, surgical escharotomies were predominantly performed in severely burned patients with a high degree of full-thickness burns. Thus, higher mortality in this patient group needs to be considered with caution and is mainly attributed to the higher TBSA. Although evidence is lacking for the use of Nexobrid® for larger body areas exceeding 15%, escharotomy is also the more reliable and faster approach in such critically burned patients.     

EAU-ESMO Consensus Statements on the Management of Advanced and Variant Bladder Cancer—An International Collaborative Multistakeholder Effort2: Under the Auspices of the EAU-ESMO Guidelines Committees

BackgroundAlthough guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial.ObjectiveTo bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management.DesignA steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts prior to voting during a consensus conference.SettingOnline Delphi survey and consensus conference.ParticipantsThe European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisStatements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1–3 (disagree), 4–6 (equivocal), and 7–9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus).Results and limitationsOverall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these statements, 33 (28%) achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease, and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease.ConclusionsThese consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time when further evidence is available to guide our approach.Patient summaryThis report summarises findings from an international, multistakeholder project organised by the EAU and ESMO. In this project, a steering committee identified areas of bladder cancer management where there is currently no good-quality evidence to guide treatment decisions. From this, they developed a series of proposed statements, 71 of which achieved consensus by a large group of experts in the field of bladder cancer. It is anticipated that these statements will provide further guidance to health care professionals and could help improve patient outcomes until a time when good-quality evidence is available.     

American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery consensus statement on laparoscopic adjustable gastric band management

BackgroundLaparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) management continues to be an important part of many metabolic and bariatric surgery practices.ObjectivesTo replace the existing American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) LAGB adjustment credentialing guidelines for physician extenders with consensus statements that reflect the current state of LAGB management.SettingASMBS Integrated Health Clinical Issues Committee.MethodsA modified Delphi process using a 2-stage consensus approach was conducted on LAGB management. Thirty-four consensus statements were developed following a literature search on a wide range of LAGB topics. A 5-point Likert scale was implemented to measure consensus agreement with a Delphi panel of 39 expert participants who were invited and agreed to participate in 2 rounds of Delphi questionnaires. Consensus was set a priori at 75% agreement, defined as the proportion of participants responding with agreement (i.e., 4 or 5) or disagreement (i.e., 1 or 2) on the Likert scale.ResultsConsensus was reached on 74% (25 of 34) of the LAGB management statements. In Delphi round 1, 95% (37 of 39) of the participants responded to 34 consensus statements; 21 of the statements (62%) met the 75% criteria for consensus. Thirty-one participants (80%) responded in round 2, shifting the agreement on 4 more statements to the 75% threshold.ConclusionThe ASMBS consensus statement on LAGB management is intended to guide practice with current evidence-based knowledge and professional experience. The ASMBS is not a credentialing body and does not seek to guide credentialing with this document.     

Distal rectus femoris surgery in children with cerebral palsy: results of a Delphi consensus project

PurposeThe purpose of this study was for an international panel of experts to establish consensus indications for distal rectus femoris surgery in children with cerebral palsy (CP) using a modified Delphi method.MethodsThe panel used a five-level Likert scale to record agreement or disagreement with 33 statements regarding distal rectus femoris surgery. The panel responded to statements regarding general characteristics, clinical indications, computerized gait data, intraoperative techniques and outcome measures. Consensus was defined as at least 80% of responses being in the highest or lowest two of the five Likert ratings, and general agreement as 60% to 79% falling into the highest or lowest two ratings. There was no agreement if neither threshold was reached.ResultsConsensus or general agreement was reached for 17 of 33 statements (52%). There was general consensus that distal rectus femoris surgery is better for stiff knee gait than is proximal rectus femoris release. There was no consensus about whether the results of distal rectus femoris release were comparable to those following distal rectus femoris transfer. Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) level was an important factor for the panel, with the best outcomes expected in children functioning at GMFCS levels I and II. The panel also reached consensus that they do distal rectus femoris surgery less frequently than earlier in their careers, in large part reflecting the narrowing of indications for this surgery over the last decade.ConclusionThis study can help paediatric orthopaedic surgeons optimize decision-making for, and outcomes of, distal rectus femoris surgery in children with CP.Level of evidenceV     

External validation of the recommendations of the multidisciplinary consensus about inhaled therapies

The understanding of physicians and the skill of patients in the use of inhalers continues to be inadequate.ObjectiveThe external validation, by an expert panel, of practical clinical recommendations that had been developed in order to improve the knowledge and understanding of correct inhaled therapy use.MethodsAfter a bibliographic review about inhaled therapies, 40 clinical recommendations were proposed. A two-round modified Delphi consensus was used to compare the opinions of a panel of 59 experts about the recommendations, which were grouped into 8 areas: general aspects (4), inhaled drugs (9), pressurized metered-dose and spacer inhalers (6), powder inhalers (4), nebulizers (3), devices for mechanical ventilation (3), inhalers for children (5) and issues related with compliance and education (6).ResultsAfter the first round of the consensus panel, 35 of the 40 recommendations analyzed were accepted. At the end of round 2, agreement was reached in 39 (97.5%). In 8 (20%), the consensus was unanimous (100%). Item 14 was deleted from the recommendations as consensus was not reached.ConclusionsThe external validation by experts in inhaled therapy found a high level of agreement with the clinical recommendations proposed. This consensus provides a tool that could contribute to the improved use of inhalers in our country in the future.     

Enzymatic debridement in critically injured burn patients — Our experience in the intensive care setting and during burn resuscitation

BackgroundMuch of the recent literature on bromelain based enzymatic debridement of burn injury has focused on its use in smaller burn injury and specialist areas such as the hands or genitals (Krieger et al., 2012; Schulz et al., 2017a,b,c,d). This is despite the original papers describing its use in larger burn injury (Rosenberg et al., 2004, 2014).The current EMA license for Nexobrid? advises that it should not be used for burn injuries of more than 15% TBSA and should be used with caution in patients with pulmonary burn trauma and suspected pulmonary burn trauma. The original safety and efficacy trial of NexoBrid? limited its use to 15% TBSA aliquots with concern regarding the effect of bromelain on coagulation. In a European consensus paper of experienced burns clinicians, now on its second iteration, 100% of respondents agreed that “up to 30% BSA can be treated by enzymatic debridement based on individual decision” (Hirche et al., 2017). Hofmaenner et al.’s recent study on the safety of enzymatic debridement in extensive burns larger than 15% provides some further evidence that “bromelain based enzymatic debridement can be carried out safely in large-area burns” (Hofmaenner et al., 2020) but the literature is scant in these larger debridement areas.In our centre we have been using enzymatic debridement for resuscitation level burn injury since 2016. We have gained significant learning in this time; this article aims to describe our current protocol for enzymatic debridement in this patient population and highlight specific learning points that might aid other centres in using enzymatic debridement for larger burn injury.MethodWe performed a search of the IBID database to identify all adult patients who satisfied the inclusion criteria of resuscitation level burn injury (defined as total burn surface area (TBSA) ≥15% in patients aged >16 years), or level 3 admission following burn injury and who underwent Enzymatic Debridement. A case note review was completed, and details comprising patient demographics, TBSA, mechanism of burn, presence of inhalation injury, sequencing of debridement, length of ICU and hospital stay, blood product utilisation and the need for autografting were recorded. No ethical approval has been sought for this retrospective review.ResultsWe identified 29 patients satisfying the inclusion criteria (Table 1). Between June 2016 and June 2020 the average total burn size of patients who had at least some of their burn treated by enzymatic debridement increased from 21.4% in 2016/17 to 34.7% in 2019/20. In these patients the actual area treated by enzymatic debridement also increased from 11.9% TBSA to 20.3% TBSA. 19 patients (66%) had enzymatic debridement performed within 24 h of injury, a further 2 patients (7%) within 48 h after injury. Patients were more likely to have enzymatic debridement commenced in the first 24 h after injury if they had circumferential limb injury (39% vs 9%) or were planned for enzyme only debridement (78% vs 28%). Those who were planned for combination enzyme and surgical debridement were more likely to have enzymatic debridement commenced after the first 48 h (75%). We have performed enzymatic debridement overnight on one occasion, for a patient who presented with circumferential limb injury and was determined to undergo urgent debridement.ConclusionMuch of the literature has described the use of enzymatic debridement in smaller burns, and specialist areas. However, it is our opinion that the advantages of enzymatic debridement appear to be greater in larger burns with a facility for whole burn excision on the day of admission in the ICU cubicle. We have demonstrated significantly reduced blood loss, improved dermal preservation, reduced need for autografting, and a reduction in the number of trips to theatre. We would advocate that both the team and the patient need to be as prepared as they would be for a traditional surgical excision. The early part of our learning curve for enzymatic debridement in resuscitation level injuries was steep, and we were able to build on experience from managing smaller injuries. We recommend any team wishing to using enzymatic debridement gain experience in the same way and develop robust local pathways prior to attempting use in larger burn injuries.     

Eschar removal by bromelain based enzymatic debridement (Nexobrid®) in burns: European consensus guidelines update

IntroductionBromelain-based Enzymatic Debridement has been introduced as an additional concept to the burn surgeon's armamentarium and is best indicated for mid-to deep dermal burns with mixed patterns. Increasing evidence has been published focusing on special regions and settings as well as on limitations of Enzymatic Debridement to improve patient care. To better guide Enzymatic Debridement in view of the increasing experience, there is a need to update the formerly published consensus guidelines with user-orientated recommendations, which were last produced in 2017.MethodsA multi-professional expert panel of plastic surgeons and burn care specialists from twelve European centers was convened, to assist in developing current recommendations for best practices with use of Enzymatic Debridement. Consensus statements were based on peer-reviewed publications and clinical relevance, and topics for re-evaluation and refinement were derived from the formerly published European guidelines. For consensus agreement, the methodology employed was an agreement algorithm based on a modification of the Willy and Stellar method. For this study on Enzymatic Debridement, consensus was considered when there was at least 80 % agreement to each statement.ResultsThe updated consensus guidelines from 2019 refer to the clinical experience and practice patterns of 1232 summarized patient cases treated by the panelists with ED in Europe (2017: 500 cases), reflecting the impact of the published recommendations. Forty-three statements were formulated, addressing the following topics: indications, pain management and anesthesia, large surface treatment, timing of application for various indications, preparation and application, post-interventional wound management, skin grafting, outcome, scar and revision management, cost-effectiveness, patient´s perspective, logistic aspects and training strategies. The degree of consensus was remarkably high, with consensus in 42 out of 43 statements (97.7%). A classification with regard to timing of application for Enzymatic Debridement was introduced, discriminating immediate/very early (≤12 h), early (12−72 h) or delayed (>72 h) treatment. All further recommendations are addressed in the publication.ConclusionsThe updated guidelines in this publication represent further refinement of the recommended indication, application and post-interventional management for the use of ED. The published statements contain detailed, user-orientated recommendations aiming to align current and future users and prevent pitfalls, e.g. for the successful implementation of ED in further countries like the USA. The significance of this work is reflected by the magnitude of patient experience behind it, larger than the total number of patients treated in all published ED clinical trials.     

External Assessment of the GEMA2009 Recommendations by a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel on Asthma

ObjectivesTo assess the level of agreement on the GEMA 2009 clinical recommendations by a Spanish expert panel on asthma.Materials and methodsThe study was divided into four stages: 1) establishment of a 9 member scientific committee (GEMA authors) for selection of GEMA recommendations to use in the survey; 2) formation of a panel of 74 professionals with expertise in this field (pulmonologists, allergists, family doctors, ear, nose and throat and paediatric specialists); 3) Delphi survey in two rounds, sent by mail, with intermediate processing of opinions and a report to the panel members; and 4) analysis and discussion of results for the Scientific Committee.ResultsSeventy four participants completed the two rounds of survey. During the first round, a consensus was reached in 49 out of 56 questions analysed. Following discussion by the panel, the consensus was increased to a total of 53 items in the survey. With respect to the remaining questions, Insufficient consensus was obtained on the rest of the questions, due to differing views between sub-specialists, or lack of criteria by most of the experts.ConclusionsThe external analysis by asthma experts from different specialities showed a high level of professional agreement with the GEMA 2009 recommendations in Spain (96.5 %). The disagreement shown in three recommendations reflect the lack of a high level evidence. These issues represent areas of interest for future research.     

Management of penile cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: An eUROGEN accelerated Delphi consensus study

ObjectivesTo develop an international consensus on managing penile cancer patients during the COVID-19 acute waves. A major concern for patients with penile cancer during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is how the enforced safety measures will affect their disease management. Delays in diagnosis and treatment initiation may have an impact on the extent of the primary lesion as well as the cancer-specific survival because of the development and progression of inguinal lymph node metastases.Materials and methodsA review of the COVID-19 literature was conducted in conjunction with analysis of current international guidelines on the management of penile cancer. Results were presented to an international panel of experts on penile cancer and infection control by a virtual accelerated Delphi process using 4 survey rounds. Consensus opinion was defined as an agreement of ≥80%, which was used to reconfigure management pathways for penile cancer.ResultsLimited evidence is available for delaying penile cancer management. The consensus rate of agreement was 100% that penile cancer pathways should be reconfigured, and measures should be developed to prevent perioperative nosocomial transmission of COVID-19. The panel also reached a consensus on several statements aimed at reconfiguring the management of penile cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.ConclusionsThe international consensus panel proposed a framework for the diagnostic and invasive therapeutic procedures for penile cancer within a low-risk environment for COVID-19.     

Diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis. EAES consensus development conference 2015

Unequivocal international guidelines regarding the diagnosis and management of patients with acute appendicitis are lacking. The aim of the consensus meeting 2015 of the EAES was to generate a European guideline based on best available evidence and expert opinions of a panel of EAES members. After a systematic review of the literature by an international group of surgical research fellows, an expert panel with extensive clinical experience in the management of appendicitis discussed statements and recommendations. Statements and recommendations with more than 70 % agreement by the experts were selected for a web survey and the consensus meeting of the EAES in Bucharest in June 2015. EAES members and attendees at the EAES meeting in Bucharest could vote on these statements and recommendations. In the case of more than 70 % agreement, the statement or recommendation was defined as supported by the scientific community. Results from both the web survey and the consensus meeting in Bucharest are presented as percentages. In total, 46 statements and recommendations were selected for the web survey and consensus meeting. More than 232 members and attendees voted on them. In 41 of 46 statements and recommendations, more than 70 % agreement was reached. All 46 statements and recommendations are presented in this paper. They comprise topics regarding the diagnostic work-up, treatment indications, procedural aspects and post-operative care. The consensus meeting produced 46 statements and recommendations on the diagnostic work-up and management of appendicitis. The majority of the EAES members supported these statements. These consensus proceedings provide additional guidance to surgeons and surgical residents providing care to patients with appendicitis.     

Guidelines on the early management of infants diagnosed with cystic fibrosis following newborn screening

BackgroundSuccessful implementation of newborn screening (NBS) for cystic fibrosis (CF) depends on robust protocols, good communication and appropriate management of recognised infants. In response to current varied practice, the ECFS Neonatal Screening Working Group developed a consensus on the early management of these infants using the Delphi methodology.MethodsFollowing detailed literature review, statements were generated by a core group of experts and then assessed by a larger group using modified Delphi methodology.ResultsForty-one statements were written by the core group. Eighty-six CF specialists contributed to the modified Delphi process. During three rounds, extra statements were added and consensus achieved on 44 (one statement did not achieve consensus).ConclusionsThese statements will provide a framework for the management of screened infants in the first year of life. This process highlights the paucity of evidence on which to base management of these infants. To improve this situation, it is important that each infant with CF identified through NBS has opportunity to be included in a randomised controlled trial.     

Selection of Candidates for Lung Transplantation: The First Italian Consensus Statement

Lung transplantation is a well-established treatment for selected patients with advanced chronic respiratory insufficiency. Recognizing those patients with end-stage lung disease who might benefit from lung transplantation is a crucial task. Considering the presence of inadequate evidence-based practice, international and national scientific societies provided consensus opinions regarding the appropriate timing of listing. The Study Group for Thoracic Organs Transplantation (branch of the Italian Society for Organs Transplantation) promoted and realized a Delphi conference among the Italian lung transplantation centers to provide guidance to clinical practice based on international recommendations. The experts from the nine Italian centers completed two rounds of standardized questionnaires (answer rate, 100%): 42 statements received a consensus ≥80%. The selected statements presented in this article are intended to assist Italian clinicians in selecting patients for lung transplantation.     

The utility of the delphi method in defining anastomotic leak following colorectal surgery

BackgroundAlmost a decade after international guidelines defining anastomotic leak (AL) were published, the definition of AL remains inconsistent.MethodsA 3-round modified Delphi study was conducted among a national panel of 8 surgeon experts to assess consensus related to the definition of AL following colorectal resection. Consensus was defined when a scenario was rated as very important or absolutely essential by at least 85% of the experts in round 3.ResultsSeven of fifteen (47%) clinical and radiological scenarios of AL achieved consensus. 80% of clinical scenarios reached consensus. 30% of radiological scenarios reached consensus including CT demonstrating air bubbles around the anastomosis. No consensus was achieved in 70% of radiological scenarios.ConclusionsConsensus on the definition of AL is difficult to reach, in relation to international guidelines; which implies that further refinement of the definition of AL is needed to compare patient outcomes.     

Choosing wisely in burn care

BackgroundThe Choosing Wisely Campaign was launched in 2012 and has been applied to a broad spectrum of disciplines in almost thirty countries, with the objective of reducing unnecessary or potentially harmful investigations and procedures, thus limiting costs and improving outcomes. In Canada, patients with burn injuries are usually initially assessed by primary care and emergency providers, while plastic or general surgeons provide ongoing management. We sought to develop a series of Choosing Wisely statements for burn care to guide these practitioners and inform suitable, cost-effective investigations and treatment choices.MethodsThe Choosing Wisely Canada list for Burns was developed by members of the Canadian Special Interest Group of the American Burn Association. Eleven recommendations were generated from an initial list of 29 statements using a modified Delphi process and SurveyMonkey?.ResultsRecommendations included statements on avoidance of prophylactic antibiotics, restriction of blood products, use of adjunctive analgesic medications, monitoring and titration of opioid analgesics, and minimizing ‘routine’ bloodwork, microbiology or radiological investigations.ConclusionsThe Choosing Wisely recommendations aim to encourage greater discussion between those involved in burn care, other health care professionals, and their patients, with a view to reduce the cost and adverse effects associated with unnecessary therapeutic and diagnostic procedures, while still maintaining high standards of evidence-based burn care.     

Developing an instrument to assess physician knowledge of initial care for burn patients

IntroductionBurns are associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality, especially in low- and middle-income countries, such as Brazil, because there are no routine prevention programs, a lack of adequate legislation and supervision, and care quality in the acute phase is precarious. In most cases, initial care for burn patients is provided by emergency services without specialized personnel, which leaves the majority of cases to general practitioners who have no specific training in initial burn care, which can lead to worse prognoses and outcomes.ObjectiveTo develop an instrument to assess physician knowledge of initial care for burn patients.MethodsThis primary quantitative study used the Delphi technique, which involves consensus from a panel of expert panel, as a methodological reference. The instrument was based on information provided in the Ministry of Health’s booklet on emergency burn treatment, and an agreement index of 80% was required for item inclusion.ResultsAfter 3 Delphi phases, the instrument was approved by the panel with an agreement index of 100%.ConclusionAlthough the instrument was finalized, other psychometric properties must still be assessed to further determine its validity and reliability.     

Consensus statement for perioperative care in lumbar spinal fusion: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations

BackgroundEnhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) evidence-based protocols for perioperative care have led to improvements in outcomes in numerous surgical areas, through multimodal optimization of patient pathway, reduction of complications, improved patient experience and reduction in the length of stay. ERAS represent a relatively new paradigm in spine surgery.PurposeThis multidisciplinary consensus review summarizes the literature and proposes recommendations for the perioperative care of patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery with an ERAS program.Study DesignThis is a review article.MethodsUnder the impetus of the ERAS® society, a multidisciplinary guideline development group was constituted by bringing together international experts involved in the practice of ERAS and spine surgery. This group identified 22 ERAS items for lumbar fusion. A systematic search in the English language was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and cohort studies were included, and the evidence was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Consensus recommendation was reached by the group after a critical appraisal of the literature.ResultsTwo hundred fifty-six articles were included to develop the consensus statements for 22 ERAS items; one ERAS item (prehabilitation) was excluded from the final summary due to very poor quality and conflicting evidence in lumbar spinal fusion. From these remaining 21 ERAS items, 28 recommendations were included. All recommendations on ERAS protocol items are based on the best available evidence. These included nine preoperative, eleven intraoperative, and six postoperative recommendations. They span topics from preoperative patient education and nutritional evaluation, intraoperative anesthetic and surgical techniques, and postoperative multimodal analgesic strategies. The level of evidence for the use of each recommendation is presented.ConclusionBased on the best evidence available for each ERAS item within the multidisciplinary perioperative care pathways, the ERAS® Society presents this comprehensive consensus review for perioperative care in lumbar fusion.     

The American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS) 2022 Expert Consensus Document: The use of mechanical circulatory support in lung transplantation

ObjectiveThe use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in lung transplantation has been steadily increasing over the prior decade, with evolving strategies for incorporating support in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative settings. There is significant practice variability in the use of these techniques, however, and relatively limited data to help establish institutional protocols. The objective of the AATS Clinical Practice Standards Committee (CPSC) expert panel was to review the existing literature and establish recommendations about the use of MCS before, during, and after lung transplantation.MethodsThe AATS CPSC assembled an expert panel of 16 lung transplantation physicians who developed a consensus document of recommendations. The panel was broken into subgroups focused on preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative support, and each subgroup performed a focused literature review. These subgroups formulated recommendation statements for each subtopic, which were evaluated by the entire group. The statements were then developed via discussion among the panel and refined until consensus was achieved on each statement.ResultsThe expert panel achieved consensus on 36 recommendations for how and when to use MCS in lung transplantation. These recommendations included the use of veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as a bridging strategy in the preoperative setting, a preference for central veno-arterial ECMO over traditional cardiopulmonary bypass during the transplantation procedure, and the benefit of supporting selected patients with MCS postoperatively.ConclusionsAchieving optimal results in lung transplantation requires the use of a wide range of strategies. MCS provides an important mechanism for helping these critically ill patients through the peritransplantation period. Despite the complex nature of the decision making process in the treatment of these patients, the expert panel was able to achieve consensus on 36 recommendations. These recommendations should provide guidance for professionals involved in the care of end-stage lung disease patients considered for transplantation.     

The ERUS Curriculum for Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy: Structure Definition and Pilot Clinical Validation

BackgroundNo validated training program for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) exists.ObjectiveTo define the structure and provide a pilot clinical validation of a curriculum for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN).Design, setting, and participantsA modified Delphi consensus methodology involving 27 experts defined curriculum structure. One trainee completed the curriculum under the mentorship of an expert. A total of 40 patients treated with curriculum RAPN (cRAPN) were compared with 160 patients treated with standard of care (sRAPN).Outcome measurements and statistical analysisTo define curriculum structure, consensus was defined as ≥90% expert agreement. To investigate curriculum safety, perioperative morbidity, renal function, and pathologic outcomes were evaluated. To investigate curriculum efficacy, RAPN steps and modules attempted and completed by the trainee were evaluated. Propensity score matching identified comparable cRAPN and sRAPN cases. Mann–Whitney U test, chi-square test, and linear regression were used to investigate the impact of the curriculum on patient's outcome and the impact of trainee's experience on surgical independence.Results and limitationsConsensus-based key statements defined curriculum structure. No difference was recorded between cRAPN and sRAPN with respect to intraoperative or overall and grade-specific postoperative complications, blood loss, ischemia time, postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate, and positive surgical margins (all p > 0.05). Conversely, operative time was longer after cRAPN (p < 0.0001). The trainee completed all phases of the curriculum and the trainee's experience was associated with more steps attempted/completed and increasing complexity of module attempted/completed (all p < 0.0001). The limitations of the study are the enrolment of a single trainee at a single institution and the small sample size. Accordingly, the large confidence intervals observed cannot exclude inferior outcomes in case of cRAPN and further study is required to confirm safety.ConclusionsThe European Association of Urology (EAU) Robotic Urology Section (ERUS) curriculum for RAPN can protect patients from suboptimal outcome during the learning curve of the surgeon and can aid surgeons willing to start an RAPN program.Patient summaryPatients should be aware that structured training programs can reduce the risk of suboptimal outcome due to the learning curve of the surgeon.     

Management Guidelines for Infection After ACL Reconstruction: Expert Opinion Statement Based on the Modified Delphi Survey of Indian Arthroscopy Surgeons

AimInfection after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, though rare, is a potentially devastating complication and the evidence-based recommendation on the various topics in its management is limited. The purpose of this study was to develop recommendations for the prevention and management of infections in ACL reconstruction surgery by performing a structured expert consensus survey using Delphi methodology.Materials and Methods22 topics of relevance in the prevention and management of infection following ACL reconstruction were chosen from an extensive literature review. 30 panelists were requested to respond to a three-round survey, with feedback, to develop a consensus statement on the topics.ResultsConsensus statements could be prepared in eleven out of twenty-two topics including: the graft is retained at the first arthroscopic debridement, the graft is removed when repeated debridement are needed, and revision ACL reconstruction is needed only if the patient develops instability. Concurrence could be obtained in the topics including: longer duration of antibiotics is needed in immunocompromised patients, soaking graft in antibiotic solution reduces infection risk, and knee swelling without warmth does not suggest infection.ConclusionsA proper skin preparation, a longer course of antibiotics in immunocompromised patients, and soaking the graft in antibiotics reduces the risk of infection. In case of infection, a healthy-looking graft must be retained at the first debridement and if the graft must be removed, revision ACL reconstruction is advised only if the patient develops instability.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-021-00363-z.