Cargando…

Consensus on the definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage: A modified Delphi study

BACKGROUND: Despite the emerging knowledge about colorectal anastomotic leakage (CAL) through the increasing number of clinical and experimental studies, there is no generally accepted definition of CAL. Because of the wide variety of definitions used in literature, comparison of study outcomes and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Helsdingen, Claire PM, Jongen, Audrey CHM, de Jonge, Wouter J, Bouvy, Nicole D, Derikx, Joep PM
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7336323/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32684743
http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v26.i23.3293
_version_ 1783554296837570560
author van Helsdingen, Claire PM
Jongen, Audrey CHM
de Jonge, Wouter J
Bouvy, Nicole D
Derikx, Joep PM
author_facet van Helsdingen, Claire PM
Jongen, Audrey CHM
de Jonge, Wouter J
Bouvy, Nicole D
Derikx, Joep PM
author_sort van Helsdingen, Claire PM
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Despite the emerging knowledge about colorectal anastomotic leakage (CAL) through the increasing number of clinical and experimental studies, there is no generally accepted definition of CAL. Because of the wide variety of definitions used in literature, comparison of study outcomes and quality of care is complicated. AIM: To reach consensus on the definition of CAL using a modified Delphi method. METHODS: The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was used. The expert panel consisted of international colorectal surgeons and researchers who had published three or more articles about CAL. The consensus process consisted of two online distributed questionnaires and a third round with a recommendation. In the questionnaires participants were asked to rate the appropriateness of statements using a 1-9 Likert scale. Consensus was defined as a panel median between 1-3 or 7-9 without disagreement. In the final round a recommendation was formed regarding the definition of CAL and the expert panel was asked if they agreed or disagreed. RESULTS: Twenty-three authors participated in the first round and twenty-one finished the second round. After two rounds consensus was reached on 37 items (80%) in nine different categories. The International Study Group of Rectal Cancer definition is the most frequently advised general definition by our panel. Consensus was reached regarding the clinical symptoms of CAL, which serum markers contributes to the suspicion of CAL, which radiological and perioperative findings should be considered as CAL, which grading system is appropriate and if there should be a range of postoperative days in the definition. Eventually, 19 experts completed all three rounds of which 16 (84%) agreed with our final recommendations for the definition of CAL. CONCLUSION: A consensus-based recommendation for the definition of CAL was formed using our modified Delphi method that can be widely incorporated in the field.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7336323
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73363232020-07-16 Consensus on the definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage: A modified Delphi study van Helsdingen, Claire PM Jongen, Audrey CHM de Jonge, Wouter J Bouvy, Nicole D Derikx, Joep PM World J Gastroenterol Observational Study BACKGROUND: Despite the emerging knowledge about colorectal anastomotic leakage (CAL) through the increasing number of clinical and experimental studies, there is no generally accepted definition of CAL. Because of the wide variety of definitions used in literature, comparison of study outcomes and quality of care is complicated. AIM: To reach consensus on the definition of CAL using a modified Delphi method. METHODS: The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was used. The expert panel consisted of international colorectal surgeons and researchers who had published three or more articles about CAL. The consensus process consisted of two online distributed questionnaires and a third round with a recommendation. In the questionnaires participants were asked to rate the appropriateness of statements using a 1-9 Likert scale. Consensus was defined as a panel median between 1-3 or 7-9 without disagreement. In the final round a recommendation was formed regarding the definition of CAL and the expert panel was asked if they agreed or disagreed. RESULTS: Twenty-three authors participated in the first round and twenty-one finished the second round. After two rounds consensus was reached on 37 items (80%) in nine different categories. The International Study Group of Rectal Cancer definition is the most frequently advised general definition by our panel. Consensus was reached regarding the clinical symptoms of CAL, which serum markers contributes to the suspicion of CAL, which radiological and perioperative findings should be considered as CAL, which grading system is appropriate and if there should be a range of postoperative days in the definition. Eventually, 19 experts completed all three rounds of which 16 (84%) agreed with our final recommendations for the definition of CAL. CONCLUSION: A consensus-based recommendation for the definition of CAL was formed using our modified Delphi method that can be widely incorporated in the field. Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2020-06-21 2020-06-21 /pmc/articles/PMC7336323/ /pubmed/32684743 http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v26.i23.3293 Text en ©The Author(s) 2020. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.
spellingShingle Observational Study
van Helsdingen, Claire PM
Jongen, Audrey CHM
de Jonge, Wouter J
Bouvy, Nicole D
Derikx, Joep PM
Consensus on the definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage: A modified Delphi study
title Consensus on the definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage: A modified Delphi study
title_full Consensus on the definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage: A modified Delphi study
title_fullStr Consensus on the definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage: A modified Delphi study
title_full_unstemmed Consensus on the definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage: A modified Delphi study
title_short Consensus on the definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage: A modified Delphi study
title_sort consensus on the definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage: a modified delphi study
topic Observational Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7336323/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32684743
http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v26.i23.3293
work_keys_str_mv AT vanhelsdingenclairepm consensusonthedefinitionofcolorectalanastomoticleakageamodifieddelphistudy
AT jongenaudreychm consensusonthedefinitionofcolorectalanastomoticleakageamodifieddelphistudy
AT dejongewouterj consensusonthedefinitionofcolorectalanastomoticleakageamodifieddelphistudy
AT bouvynicoled consensusonthedefinitionofcolorectalanastomoticleakageamodifieddelphistudy
AT derikxjoeppm consensusonthedefinitionofcolorectalanastomoticleakageamodifieddelphistudy