Rates of severe complications in patients undergoing colorectal surgery for deep endometriosis-a retrospective multicenter observational study.

INTRODUCTION Surgical experience and hospital procedure volumes have been associated with the risk of severe complications in expert centers for endometriosis in France. However, little is known about other certified units in Central European countries. MATERIAL AND METHODS This retrospective observational study included 937 women who underwent surgery for colorectal endometriosis between January 2018 and January 2020 in 19 participating expert centers for endometriosis. All women underwent complete excision of colorectal endometriosis by rectal shaving, discoid or segmental resection. Postoperative severe complications were defined as grades III-IV of the Clavien-Dindo classification system including anastomotic leakage, fistula, pelvic abscess and hematoma. Surgical outcomes of centers performing less than 40 (group 1), 40-59 (group 2) and ≥60 procedures (group 3) over a period of 2 years were compared. RESULTS The overall complication rate of grade III and IV complications was 5.1% (48/937), with rates of anastomotic leakage, fistula formation, abscess and hemorrhage in segmental resection, discoid resection and rectal shaving, respectively, as follows: anastomotic leakage 3.6% (14/387), 1.4% (3/222), 0.6% (2/328); fistula formation 1.6% (6/387), 0.5% (1/222), 0.9%; (3/328); abscess 0.5% (2/387), 0% (0/222) and 0.6% (2/328); hemorrhage 2.1% (8/387), 0.9% (2/222) and 1.5% (5/328). Higher overall complication rates were observed for segmental resection (30/387, 7.8%) than for discoid (6/222, 2.7%, P = 0.015) or shaving procedures (12/328, 3.7%, P = 0.089). No significant correlation was observed between the number of procedures performed and overall complication rates (rSpearman  = -0.115; P = 0.639) with a high variability of complications in low-volume centers (group 1). However, an intergroup comparison revealed a significantly lower overall severe complication rate in group 3 than in group 2 (2.9% vs 6.9%; P = 0.017) without significant differences between other groups. CONCLUSIONS A high variability in complication rates does exist in centers with a low volume of activity. Major complications may decrease with an increase in the volume of activity but this effect cannot be generally applied to all institutions and settings

The #Enzian classification: A comprehensive non‐invasive and surgical description system for endometriosis

Advances in preoperative diagnostics as well as in surgical techniques for the treatment of endometriosis, especially for deep endometriosis, call for a classification system, that includes all aspects of the disease such as peritoneal endometriosis, ovarian endometriosis, deep endometriosis, and secondary adhesions. The widely accepted revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine classification (rASRM) has certain limitations because of its incomplete description of deep endometriosis. In contrast, the Enzian classification, which has been implemented in the last decade, has proved to be the most suitable tool for staging deep endometriosis, but does not include peritoneal or ovarian disease or adhesions. To overcome these limitations, a comprehensive classification system for complete mapping of endometriosis, including anatomical location, size of the lesions, adhesions and degree of involvement of the adjacent organs, that can be used with both diagnostic and surgical methods, has been created through a consensus process and will be described in detail-the #Enzian classification

The #Enzian classification: A comprehensive non-invasive and surgical description system for endometriosis.

Advances in preoperative diagnostics as well as in surgical techniques for the treatment of endometriosis, especially for deep endometriosis, call for a classification system, that includes all aspects of the disease such as peritoneal endometriosis, ovarian endometriosis, deep endometriosis, and secondary adhesions. The widely accepted revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine classification (rASRM) has certain limitations because of its incomplete description of deep endometriosis. In contrast, the Enzian classification, which has been implemented in the last decade, has proved to be the most suitable tool for staging deep endometriosis, but does not include peritoneal or ovarian disease or adhesions. To overcome these limitations, a comprehensive classification system for complete mapping of endometriosis, including anatomical location, size of the lesions, adhesions and degree of involvement of the adjacent organs, that can be used with both diagnostic and surgical methods, has been created through a consensus process and will be described in detail-the #Enzian classification

A systematic review and meta-analysis of digital application use in clinical research in pain medicine.

ImportancePain is a silent global epidemic impacting approximately a third of the population. Pharmacological and surgical interventions are primary modes of treatment. Cognitive/behavioural management approaches and interventional pain management strategies are approaches that have been used to assist with the management of chronic pain. Accurate data collection and reporting treatment outcomes are vital to addressing the challenges faced. In light of this, we conducted a systematic evaluation of the current digital application landscape within chronic pain medicine.ObjectiveThe primary objective was to consider the prevalence of digital application usage for chronic pain management. These digital applications included mobile apps, web apps, and chatbots.Data sourcesWe conducted searches on PubMed and ScienceDirect for studies that were published between 1st January 1990 and 1st January 2021.Study selectionOur review included studies that involved the use of digital applications for chronic pain conditions. There were no restrictions on the country in which the study was conducted. Only studies that were peer-reviewed and published in English were included. Four reviewers had assessed the eligibility of each study against the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Out of the 84 studies that were initially identified, 38 were included in the systematic review.Data extraction and synthesisThe AMSTAR guidelines were used to assess data quality. This assessment was carried out by 3 reviewers. The data were pooled using a random-effects model.Main outcomes and measuresBefore data collection began, the primary outcome was to report on the standard mean difference of digital application usage for chronic pain conditions. We also recorded the type of digital application studied (e.g., mobile application, web application) and, where the data was available, the standard mean difference of pain intensity, pain inferences, depression, anxiety, and fatigue.Results38 studies were included in the systematic review and 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The digital interventions were categorised to web and mobile applications and chatbots, with pooled standard mean difference of 0.22 (95% CI: -0.16, 0.60), 0.30 (95% CI: 0.00, 0.60) and -0.02 (95% CI: -0.47, 0.42) respectively. Pooled standard mean differences for symptomatologies of pain intensity, depression, and anxiety symptoms were 0.25 (95% CI: 0.03, 0.46), 0.30 (95% CI: 0.17, 0.43) and 0.37 (95% CI: 0.05, 0.69), respectively. A sub-group analysis was conducted on pain intensity due to the heterogeneity of the results (I 2 = 82.86%; p = 0.02). After stratifying by country, we found that digital applications were more likely to be effective in some countries (e.g., United States, China) than others (e.g., Ireland, Norway).Conclusions and relevanceThe use of digital applications in improving pain-related symptoms shows promise, but further clinical studies would be needed to develop more robust applications.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42021228343