Daniel Gero1, Olivier Gié1, Martin Hübner1, Nicolas Demartines1, Dieter Hahnloser2. 1. Department of Visceral Surgery, University Hospital CHUV, Rue du Bugnon 46, CH-1011, Lausanne, Switzerland. 2. Department of Visceral Surgery, University Hospital CHUV, Rue du Bugnon 46, CH-1011, Lausanne, Switzerland. dieter.hahnloser@chuv.ch.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Postoperative ileus (POI) is a frequent complication after abdominal surgery; nonetheless, it remains poorly defined. Our aim was to achieve an international consensus among leading colorectal surgeons on definition, prevention, and treatment of POI. METHODS: Thirty-five experts from five continents participated in a three-round Delphi process. Round 1 contained open-ended questions on POI and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Round 2 included closed-ended questions. Round 3 measured agreement on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined when items were rated as agree or strongly agree by at least 70 % of the experts. RESULTS: Experts reached following consensus: POI is a temporary inhibition (86 %) of gastrointestinal motility after surgical intervention due to non-mechanical causes (89 %) and prevents sufficient oral intake (96 %). Abdominal distension/tenderness are the most relevant clinical signs (71 %). Nasogastric tube placement is not mandatory (78 %) but can be removed without previous clamping (81 %)/gastrointestinal contrast study (100 %). Preventive measures are recommended to decrease the risk of POI (96 %): narcotic sparing analgesia (89 %) and fluid optimization (74 %). Treatment of POI should include stimulation of ambulation (96 %) and stop of opioids (74 %). Total parenteral nutrition is recommended from the 7th day without sufficient oral intake (81 %). There was no consensus on the ranking of POI's symptoms, on the imaging modality of choice for the diagnosis of POI, neither on the difference between POI and PONV. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi study achieved consensus on the definition, relevant clinical signs, prevention, treatment, and supportive care of POI. Areas of non-consensus were identified (necessity and modality of radiologic imaging to establish the diagnosis, difference between POI and PONV), giving opportunity for further research.
PURPOSE: Postoperative ileus (POI) is a frequent complication after abdominal surgery; nonetheless, it remains poorly defined. Our aim was to achieve an international consensus among leading colorectal surgeons on definition, prevention, and treatment of POI. METHODS: Thirty-five experts from five continents participated in a three-round Delphi process. Round 1 contained open-ended questions on POI and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Round 2 included closed-ended questions. Round 3 measured agreement on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined when items were rated as agree or strongly agree by at least 70 % of the experts. RESULTS: Experts reached following consensus: POI is a temporary inhibition (86 %) of gastrointestinal motility after surgical intervention due to non-mechanical causes (89 %) and prevents sufficient oral intake (96 %). Abdominal distension/tenderness are the most relevant clinical signs (71 %). Nasogastric tube placement is not mandatory (78 %) but can be removed without previous clamping (81 %)/gastrointestinal contrast study (100 %). Preventive measures are recommended to decrease the risk of POI (96 %): narcotic sparing analgesia (89 %) and fluid optimization (74 %). Treatment of POI should include stimulation of ambulation (96 %) and stop of opioids (74 %). Total parenteral nutrition is recommended from the 7th day without sufficient oral intake (81 %). There was no consensus on the ranking of POI's symptoms, on the imaging modality of choice for the diagnosis of POI, neither on the difference between POI and PONV. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi study achieved consensus on the definition, relevant clinical signs, prevention, treatment, and supportive care of POI. Areas of non-consensus were identified (necessity and modality of radiologic imaging to establish the diagnosis, difference between POI and PONV), giving opportunity for further research.
Authors: A M Wolthuis; G Bislenghi; S Fieuws; A de Buck van Overstraeten; G Boeckxstaens; A D'Hoore Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 3.788
Authors: Daniel M Pöpping; Nadia Elia; Hugo K Van Aken; Emmanuel Marret; Stephan A Schug; Peter Kranke; Manuel Wenk; Martin R Tramèr Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Sjoerd H W van Bree; Willem A Bemelman; Markus W Hollmann; Aeilko H Zwinderman; Gianluca Matteoli; Shaima El Temna; Frans O The; Malaika S Vlug; Roelof J Bennink; Guy E E Boeckxstaens Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: T C van den Heijkant; L M M Costes; D G C van der Lee; B Aerts; M Osinga-de Jong; H R M Rutten; K W E Hulsewé; W J de Jonge; W A Buurman; M D P Luyer Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2014-12-18 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: Gun-Soo Hong; Bogdan Pintea; Philipp Lingohr; Christoph Coch; Thomas Randau; Nico Schaefer; Sven Wehner; Joerg C Kalff; Dimitrios Pantelis Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2018-12-05 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Daniel Gero; Fadia Dib; Maurice Matter; Manuel Pascual; Jean-Pierre Venetz; Nicolas Demartines; Emmanuel Melloul Journal: World J Surg Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Wen Xie; Max A Levine; Shahid Aquil; Katharine Pacoli; Rafid Al-Ogaili; Patrick P Luke; Alp Sener Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Connor M Forbes; Ali Cyrus Chehroudi; Miles Mannas; Andrea Bisaillon; Tracey Hong; Alan I So; Kelly Mayson; Peter C Black Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 1.862