Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Study Group on the West Midlands Research Collaborative. Anastomotic leak following oesophagectomy: research priorities from an international Delphi consensus study

Navigating complexities and considerations for suspected anastomotic leakage in the upper gastrointestinal tract: A state of the art review

This state-of-the-art review explores the intricacies of anastomotic leaks following oesophagectomy and gastrectomy, crucial surgeries for globally increasing esophageal and gastric cancers. Despite advancements, anastomotic leaks occur in up to 30 % and 10 % of oesophagectomy and gastrectomy cases, respectively, leading to prolonged hospital stays, substantial impact upon short- and long-term health-related quality of life and greater mortality. Recognising factors contributing to leaks, including patient characteristics and surgical techniques, are vital for preoperative risk stratification. Diagnosis is challenging, involving clinical signs, biochemical markers, and various imaging modalities. Management strategies range from non-invasive approaches, including antibiotic therapy and nutritional support, to endoscopic interventions such as stent placement and emerging vacuum-assisted closure devices, and surgical interventions, necessitating timely recognition and tailored interventions. A step-up approach, beginning non-invasively and progressing based on treatment success, is more commonly advocated. This comprehensive review highlights the absence of standardised treatment algorithms, emphasizing the importance of individualised patient-specific management.

Management of anastomotic leakage after robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy with an intrathoracic anastomosis

Anastomotic leakage is a feared complication after esophagectomy and associated with increased post-operative morbidity and mrotality. The aim of this study was to evaluate the management of leakage after robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) with intrathoracic anastomosis. From a single center prospectively maintained database, all patients with anastomotic leakages defined by the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group between 2016 and 2021 were included. Contained leakage was defined as presence of air or fluid at level of the anastomosis without the involvement of the mediastinum or thorax. Non-contained leakage was defined as mediastinitis and/or mediastinal/pleural fluid collections. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality and the secondary outcome was successful recovery. In this study, 40 patients with anastomotic leakage were included. The 90-day mortality rate was 3% (n = 1). Leakage was considered contained in 29 patients (73%) and non-contained in 11 patients (27%). In the contained group, the majority of the patients were treated non-surgically (n = 27, 93%) and management was successful in 22 patients (76%). In the non-contained group, all patients required a reoperation with thoracic drainage and management was successful in seven patients (64%). Management failed in 11 patients (28%) of whom 7 developed an esophagobronchial fistula, 3 had a disconnection of the anastomosis and 1 died of a septic bleeding. In conclusion, this study demonstrates that the management anastomotic leakage in patients who underwent RAMIE with an intrathoracic anastomosis was successful in 73% of the patients with a 90-day mortality rate of 3%. A differentiated approach for the management of intrathoracic anastomotic leakage is proposed.

Risk Factors, Diagnosis and Management of Chyle Leak Following Esophagectomy for Cancers

This Delphi exercise aimed to gather consensus surrounding risk factors, diagnosis, and management of chyle leaks after esophagectomy and to develop recommendations for clinical practice.

Using Social Media to Engage Knowledge Users in Health Research Priority Setting: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

The need to include individuals with lived experience (ie, patients, family members, caregivers, researchers, and clinicians) in health research priority setting is becoming increasingly recognized. Social media-based methods represent a means to elicit and prioritize the research interests of such individuals, but there remains sparse methodological guidance on how best to conduct these social media efforts and assess their effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to identify social media strategies that enhance participation in priority-setting research, collate metrics assessing the effectiveness of social media campaigns, and summarize the benefits and limitations of social media-based research approaches, as well as recommendations for prospective campaigns.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science from database inception until September 2021. Two reviewers independently screened all titles and abstracts, as well as full texts for studies that implemented and evaluated social media strategies aimed at engaging knowledge users in research priority setting. We subsequently conducted a thematic analysis to aggregate study data by related codes and themes.

RESULTS

A total of 23 papers reporting on 22 unique studies were included. These studies used Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, websites, video-calling platforms, emails, blogs, e-newsletters, and web-based forums to engage with health research stakeholders. Priority-setting engagement strategies included paid platform-based advertisements, email-embedded survey links, and question-and-answer forums. Dissemination techniques for priority-setting surveys included snowball sampling and the circulation of participation opportunities via internal members' and external organizations' social media platforms. Social media campaign effectiveness was directly assessed as number of clicks and impressions on posts, frequency of viewed posts, volume of comments and replies, number of times individuals searched for a campaign page, and number of times a hashtag was used. Campaign effectiveness was indirectly assessed as numbers of priority-setting survey responses and visits to external survey administration sites. Recommendations to enhance engagement included the use of social media group moderators, opportunities for peer-to-peer interaction, and the establishment of a consistent tone and brand.

CONCLUSIONS

Social media may increase the speed and reach of priority-setting participation opportunities leading to the development of research agendas informed by patients, family caregivers, clinicians, and researchers. Perceived limitations of the approach include underrepresentation of certain demographic groups and addressing such limitations will enhance the inclusion of diverse research priority opinions in future research agendas.