Deep pelvic infiltrating endometriosis: MRI consensus lexicon and compartment-based approach from the ENDOVALIRM group

PurposeThe purpose of this consensus article was to develop guidelines by a focused panel of experts to elaborate a lexicon of image interpretation, and a standardized region-based reporting of deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).Materials and methodsEvidence-based data and expert opinion were combined using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method to attain consensus guidelines. Experts scoring of pelvic compartment delineation and reporting template were collected; responses were analyzed and classified as “RECOMMENDED” versus “NOT RECOMMENDED” (when ≥ 80% consensus among experts) or uncertain (when < 80% consensus among experts).ResultsConsensus regarding pelvic compartment delineation and DIE reporting was attained using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. The pelvis was divided in nine compartments and extrapelvic lesions were assigned to an additional (tenth) compartment. A consensus was also reached for each structure attributed to a compartment and each reporting template item among the experts. No consensus was reached for a normal aspect of uterosacral ligament, but a consensus was reached for an unequivocal involvement leading to a positive diagnosis and an equivocal involvement leading to uncertain diagnosis. Tailored MRI lexicon and standardized region-based report were proposed.ConclusionThese consensus recommendations should be used as a guide for DIE reporting and staging with MRI. Standardized MRI compartment-based structured reporting is recommended to enable consistent accuracy and help select the best therapeutic approach.     

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Part I: Intermediate-/High-risk and Locally Advanced Disease,Biochemical Relapse,and Side Effects of Hormonal Treatment: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022

BackgroundInnovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management.ObjectiveTo present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022.Design, setting, and participantsBefore the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members (“panellists”) who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1–3.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisConsensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement.Results and limitationsThe voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis.ConclusionsThese voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials.Patient summaryThe Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions.     

Can complex surgical interventions be standardized? Reaching international consensus on posterior sagittal anorectoplasty using a modified-Delphi method

Background/PurposeIn an effort to standardize educational experience, address future physician shortages, and improve quality of care to patients, many surgical specialties are discussing how to maximize exposure to index cases. One solution being explored is telementoring, which requires a well-developed educational curriculum with intraoperative objectives. The American College of Surgery Telementoring Task Force selected anorectal malformation and posterior sagittal anorectoplasty (PSARP) for the repair of imperforate anus as the initial educational focus for this pilot. The purpose of this study was to obtain international consensus on intraoperative learning objectives for a complex surgical procedure.MethodsA multidisciplinary team of medical educators and pediatric surgery experts created an outline of essential curricular content and intraoperative learning objectives for PSARP in three clinical scenarios. Twelve international subject matter experts were identified meeting strict inclusion criteria. Intraoperative checklists were revised using the modified-Delphi process.ResultsAfter five rounds of modifications to the intraoperative checklists, international consensus was achieved for three different clinical scenarios requiring a PSARP: perineal or vestibular fistula, low prostatic fistula, and bladder neck fistula.ConclusionsA modified-Delphi approach was successful in generating guidelines for surgical techniques that can be used to standardize intraoperative teaching and expectations for trainees.Type of studyDiagnostic studyLevel of evidenceLevel V (expert opinion)     

Structured and shared MRI staging lexicon and report of rectal cancer: A consensus proposal by the French Radiology Group (GRERCAR) and Surgical Group (GRECCAR) for rectal cancer

PurposeTo develop French guidelines by experts to standardize data acquisition, image interpretation, and reporting in rectal cancer staging with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).Materials and methodsEvidence-based data and opinions of experts of GRERCAR (Groupe de REcherche en Radiologie sur le CAncer du Rectum [i.e., Rectal Cancer Imaging Research Group]) and GRECCAR (Groupe de REcherche en Chirurgie sur le CAncer du Rectum [i.e., Rectal Cancer Surgery Research Group]) were combined using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method to attain consensus guidelines. Experts scoring of reporting template and protocol for data acquisition were collected; responses were analyzed and classified as “Recommended” versus “Not recommended” (when ≥ 80% consensus among experts) or uncertain (when < 80% consensus among experts).ResultsConsensus regarding patient preparation, MRI sequences, staging and reporting was attained using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. A consensus was reached for each reporting template item among the experts. Tailored MRI protocol and standardized report were proposed.ConclusionThese consensus recommendations should be used as a guide for rectal cancer staging with MRI.     

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.     

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     

The Uniform grading tooL for flexIble ureterorenoscoPes (TULIP-tool): a Delphi consensus project on standardised evaluation of flexible ureterorenoscopes

Objective

To develop a standardised tool to evaluate flexible ureterorenoscopes (fURS).

Materials and Methods

A three-stage consensus building approach based on the modified Delphi technique was performed under guidance of a steering group. First, scope- and user-related parameters used to evaluate fURS were identified through a systematic scoping review. Then, the main categories and subcategories were defined, and the expert panel was selected. Finally, a two-step modified Delphi consensus project was conducted to firstly obtain consensus on the relevance and exact definition of each (sub)category necessary to evaluate fURS, and secondly on the evaluation method (setting, used tools and unit of outcome) of those (sub)categories. Consensus was reached at a predefined threshold of 80% high agreement.

Results

The panel consisted of 30 experts in the field of endourology. The first step of the modified Delphi consensus project consisted of two questionnaires with a response rate of 97% (n = 29) for both. Consensus was reached for the relevance and definition of six main categories and 12 subcategories. The second step consisted of three questionnaires (response rate of 90%, 97% and 100%, respectively). Consensus was reached on the method of measurement for all (sub)categories.

Conclusion

This modified Delphi consensus project reached consensus on a standardised grading tool for the evaluation of fURS – The Uniform grading tooL for flexIble ureterorenoscoPes (TULIP) tool. This is a first step in creating uniformity in this field of research to facilitate future comparison of outcomes of the functionality and handling of fURS.     

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.     

A modified-delphi study establishing consensus in the therapeutic management of posttrauamtic elbow stiffness

Study Design: Web-based modified Delphi study.Background: Therapy is widely considered the first choice of treatment for posttraumatic stiffness of the elbow since loss of motion is a common sequela following traumatic elbow injuries. There is high variability in practice patterns for the management of the posttraumtic elbow.Purpose: The aim of this study is to identify the current therapeutic management of posttraumatic elbow stiffness using expert consensus.Methods: This study surveyed experts using a web-based 3 round modified Delphi method. Quantitative data and comments were collected during the first round. Questions with Likert scaling were used to identify consensus (defined as 75% agreement) with each statement and comment boxes enabled open-ended responses to gather expert opinion. Lack of consensus and data from comments guided the second-round of the survey. This process was repeated after Round 2 to develop the Round 3 survey. Consensus was achieved at Round 3 and no further rounds were needed.Results: Round 1 included 34 experts (response rate 20%), not all experts were able to continue through all rounds. Round 2 included 18 experts and Round 3 included 15 experts. Survey items were categorized as follows: examination procedures, therapeutic interventions, orthotic intervention considerations, contributing patient factors, and clinical decisions and rehabilitation challenges. Twenty-five percent of items achieved consensus after Round 1, 30% after Round 2 and 52% after Round 3. Although most participants agreed that orthotic intervention is critical to patient outcomes, there were conflicting thoughts about the orthotic design and wearing schedule.Conclusions: The findings of this web-based modified Delphi study helped to establish a current body of knowledge using expert consensus to guide practice and identify specific questions that can be studied in future clinical studies on posttraumatic elbow stiffness.     

Evaluation of reduction and fixation of calcaneal fractures: a Delphi consensus

Background

Postoperative radiological assessment of the quality of reduction and fixation of calcaneal fractures is essential when evaluating treatment success. However, a universally accepted radiological evaluation protocol is currently unavailable. The aim of this study was to obtain an expert-based consensus on the most important criteria for the radiological assessment of the quality of reduction and fixation of calcaneal fractures.

Methods

The Delphi method, consisting of three rounds, was used to obtain consensus. Each round focused on four main topics of calcaneal fracture evaluation: imaging technique (38 items), anatomical landmarks (21 items), fracture reduction (16 items) and position of the fixation material (9 items). We invited ten radiologists and 44 surgeons from the USA and Europe (all calcaneus experts) to complete online questionnaires. They were asked which aspects require evaluation to determine the quality of fracture reduction and fixation. Agreement was expressed as the percentage of respondents with identical answers. Consensus was defined as an agreement of at least 80 %.

Results

All experts were invited for the three Delphi rounds and 16, 18, and 15 specialists responded per round, respectively. Agreement was reached for 23/38 (60 %) items regarding imaging techniques, 20/21 (95 %) anatomical landmarks, 13/16 (81 %) items regarding fracture reduction and 8/9 items (89 %) regarding fracture fixation.

Conclusion

This Delphi consensus shows that more aspects require evaluation than currently used in radiological evaluation protocols. With this consensus, we provide the basis for a universal evaluation protocol to assess the radiological outcome of calcaneal fracture treatment.     

Competencies of specialised wound care nurses: a European Delphi study

Health care professionals responsible for patients with complex wounds need a particular level of expertise and education to ensure optimum wound care. However, uniform education for those working as wound care nurses is lacking. We aimed to reach consensus among experts from six European countries as to the competencies for specialised wound care nurses that meet international professional expectations and educational systems. Wound care experts including doctors, wound care nurses, lecturers, managers and head nurses were invited to contribute to an e‐Delphi study. They completed online questionnaires based on the Canadian Medical Education Directives for Specialists framework. Suggested competencies were rated on a 9‐point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as an agreement of at least 75% for each competence. Response rates ranged from 62% (round 1) to 86% (rounds 2 and 3). The experts reached consensus on 77 (80%) competences. Most competencies chosen belonged to the domain ‘scholar’ (n = 19), whereas few addressed those associated with being a ‘health advocate’ (n = 7). Competencies related to professional knowledge and expertise, ethical integrity and patient commitment were considered most important. This consensus on core competencies for specialised wound care nurses may help achieve a more uniform definition and education for specialised wound care nurses.     

Italian recommendations on enzymatic debridement in burn surgery

IntroductionNexobrid®, a bromelain-based type of enzymatic debridement, has become more prevalent in recent years. We present the recommendations on enzymatic debridement (Nexobrid®)’s role based on the practice knowledge of expert Italian users.MethodsThe Italian recommendations, endorsed by SIUST (Italian Society of Burn Surgery), on using enzymatic debridement to remove eschars for burn treatment were defined. The definition followed a process to evaluate the level of agreement (a measure of consensus) among selected experts, representing Italian burn centers, concerning defined clinical aspects of enzymatic debridement. The consensus involved a multi-phase process based on the Delphi method.ResultsThe consensus panel included experts from Italy with a combined experience of 1068 burn patients treated with enzymatic debridement. At the end of round 3 of the Delphi method, the panel reached 100% consensus on 26 out of 27 statements. The panel achieved full, strong consensus (all respondents strongly agreed on the statement) on 24 out of 27 statements.DiscussionThe statements provided by the Italian consensus panel represent a “ready to use” set of recommendations for enzymatic debridement in burn surgery that both draw from and complete the existing scientific literature on the topic. These recommendations are specific to the Italian experience and are neither static nor definitive. As such, they will be updated periodically as further quality evidence becomes available.     

Recomendaciones sobre el manejo de controversias en cáncer de próstata avanzado resistente a la castración

ContextControversies and uncertainties among integral management of advanced castration resistant prostate cancer continue to exist despite the number of evidence based clinical practice guidelines published with high international consensus.ObjectiveTo develop a document that reviews the management of controversies in advanced castration resistant prostate cancer, with recommendations from the definition, to the management in hormonal maneuvers, first-line treatment and second-line with new treatments as cabazitaxel or abirarerone and the multidisciplinary approach of the pathology with the goal of finding the most efficient, best time to act and safety.Evidence AcquisitionTwo meetings of a multidisciplinary group of experts involved in the management of this disease (Oncologist and Urologist) where pooled analysis of original literature and reached consensus document of recommendations on castration resistant prostate cancer, reviewing and attempting to address the current controversies of the disease.Evidence SynthesisThis document is endorsed by the corresponding Scientific Associations and Working Groups involved in the current management of Genitourinary Tumours: the Spanish Association of Urology (AEU) with the Uro-Oncoloy Group (GUO) and the Spanish Oncology of Genitourinary Group (SOGUG).ConclusionsWith the adaptation and implementation of this Document of Recommendations for clinical practice are available for the first time, a real road map for quality, efficiency and safety in the management of patients with CRPC.     

Management of Early-stage Esophageal Neoplasia (MESEN) Consensus

Background

Treatment of esophageal adenocarcinoma often involves surgical resection. Newer technologies in interventional endoscopy have led to a substantial paradigm shift in the management of early-stage neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus comprising high-grade dysplasia (HGD), intramucosal carcinoma, and, in some cases, submucosal carcinoma. However, there has been no consensus regarding the indications for esophageal preservation in these cases. In this work, consensus guidelines were established for the management of early-stage esophageal neoplasia considering clinically relevant aspects (age, comorbidities, and social environment) in each scenario.

Methods

Seventeen experts were invited to participate based on their background and clinical expertise at high-volume centers. A questionnaire was created that included four clinical scenarios covering a wide range of situations within HGD and/or early esophageal neoplasia, particularly where controversies are likely to exist. Each of the clinical scenarios was open to discussion subdivided by patient age (20, 50, and 80 s). For each clinical scenario an expert was chosen to defend that position. Each defense triggered a subsequent discussion during a consensus meeting. Conclusions of that discussion together with an accompanying literature analysis allowed experts to confirm or change their original choices and served as the basis for the recommendations stated in this article.

Results

There was 100 % consensus supporting esophageal preservation in patients with HGD, independent of patient age or Barrett’s length. In patients with T1a adenocarcinoma, consensus for preservation was not reached (65 %) for young and middle-aged individuals but was supported for elderly patients (100 %). For T1b adenocarcinoma, consensus was reached for surgical resection (90 %), leaving organ preservation for patients with very low risk of nodal invasion or poor surgical candidates.

Conclusion

Advances in endoscopic imaging and therapy allow for organ preservation in most settings of early-stage neoplasia of the esophagus, provided that the patient understands the implications of this decision.     

Antimicrobial resistance in cystic fibrosis: A Delphi approach to defining best practices

BackgroundAntimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) is a cornerstone of infection management in cystic fibrosis. However, there is little evidence that AST predicts the clinical outcome of CF antimicrobial treatment. It has been suggested there is a need for careful consideration of current AST use by the CF community.MethodsWe engaged a group of experts consisting of pulmonary (adult and pediatric) and infectious disease clinicians, microbiologists, and pharmacists representing a broad international experience. We conducted an iterative systematic survey (Delphi) to determine and quantify consensus regarding key questions facing CF clinicians in the use of respiratory culture results including what tests to order, when to obtain them, and how to act upon the results of the testing.ResultsConsensus was reached for many questions but there was not universal agreement to the questions that were addressed. There were some differences with respect to cultures obtained for surveillance compared to when there is clinical worsening. Areas of general consensus include when and how respiratory cultures should be performed, what information should be reported, and when AST should be performed. A key finding is that clinical response to treatment is used to guide treatment decisions rather than AST results.ConclusionsRecommendations are presented regarding questions related to microbiology testing for patients with CF. We have also offered recommendations for priority research questions.     

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.     

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.     

Consenso experto sobre la evidencia científica disponible acerca del uso de toxina botulínica en vejiga hiperactiva

ObjectivesOveractive bladder (OAB) is a pathology impairing patients’ quality of life and with a high percentage of patients who are refractory to medication. In this paper, technical opinion of an «expert panel» is assessed in order to gain the most reliable professional consensus on scientific evidence available on the criteria of use of Onabotulinumtoxin A (OnabotA) in OAB.Material and methodsaccording to DELPHI method, 42 panelists answered a survey of 93 items divided into four strategic areas including clinical criteria and recommendations in order to improve, at different levels, the current approach to patients with OAB. The recent advances in the field, areas of controversy and their real application possibilities in the different areas of our health care system were taken into consideration.ResultsTwo rounds of the questionnaire were completed by all experts. In the first round, a criteria consensus was reached for 64 of 93 (68.8%) questions analyzed; in the second round the consensus reached was for 83 items evaluated (89.25%). An agreement among panelist was reached for: 1) definition, classification, detection and differential diagnosis; 2) medical treatment; 3) surgical treatment; 4) role of OnabotA in the treatment of OAB.Conclusionsthe consensus is broadly in line with the latest scientific evidence on OAB. The panelists believe that it is necessary to propose a change in the current definition of OAB and that it seems necessary to improve the screening tools too. Medical treatment of OAB must be tailored to each patient, staged and progressive. The use of OnabotA (Botox^®) could imply therapeutic advantages with respect to other treatments, and positions itself as a safe and effective alternative to treat drug refractory OAB.     

International Sleeve Gastrectomy Expert Panel Consensus Statement: best practice guidelines based on experience of >12,000 cases

BackgroundLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is an emerging surgical approach, but 1 that has seen a surge in popularity because of its perceived technical simplicity, feasibility, and good outcomes. An international expert panel was convened in Coral Gables, Florida on March 25 and 26, 2011, with the purpose of providing best practice guidelines through consensus regarding the performance of LSG. The panel comprised 24 centers and represented 11 countries, spanning all major regions of the world and all 6 populated continents, with a collective experience of >12,000 cases. It was thought prudent to hold an expert consensus meeting of some of the surgeons across the globe who have performed the largest volume of cases to discuss and provide consensus on the indications, contraindications, and procedural aspects of LSG. The panel undertook this consensus effort to help the surgical community improve the efficacy, lower the complication rates, and move toward adoption of standardized techniques and measures. The meeting took place at on-site meeting facilities, Biltmore Hotel, Coral Gables, Florida.MethodsExpert panelists were invited to participate according to their publications, knowledge and experience, and identification as surgeons who had performed >500 cases. The topics for consensus encompassed patient selection, contraindications, surgical technique, and the prevention and management of complications. The responses were calculated and defined as achieving consensus (≥70% agreement) or no consensus (<70% agreement).ResultsFull consensus was obtained for the essential aspects of the indications and contraindications, surgical technique, management, and prevention of complications. Consensus was achieved for 69 key questions.ConclusionThe present consensus report represents the best practice guidelines for the performance of LSG, with recommendations in the 3 aforementioned areas. This report and its findings support a first effort toward the standardization of techniques and adoption of working recommendations formulated according to expert experience.