Definitions for Loss of Domain: An International Delphi Consensus of Expert Surgeons.
Journal
World journal of surgery
ISSN: 1432-2323
Titre abrégé: World J Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7704052
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2020
04 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
19
12
2019
medline:
29
1
2021
entrez:
19
12
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
No standardized written or volumetric definition exists for 'loss of domain' (LOD). This limits the utility of LOD as a morphological descriptor and as a predictor of peri- and postoperative outcomes. Consequently, our aim was to establish definitions for LOD via consensus of expert abdominal wall surgeons. A Delphi study involving 20 internationally recognized abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) surgeons was performed. Four written and two volumetric definitions of LOD were identified via systematic review. Panelists completed a questionnaire that suggested these definitions as standardized definitions of LOD. Consensus on a preferred term was pre-defined as achieved when selected by ≥80% of panelists. Terms scoring <20% were removed. Voting commenced August 2018 and was completed in January 2019. Written definition: During Round 1, two definitions were removed and seven new definitions were suggested, leaving nine definitions for consideration. For Round 2, panelists were asked to select all appealing definitions. Thereafter, common concepts were identified during analysis, from which the facilitators advanced a new written definition. This received 100% agreement in Round 3. Volumetric definition: Initially, panelists were evenly split, but consensus for the Sabbagh method was achieved. Panelists could not reach consensus regarding a threshold LOD value that would preclude surgery. Consensus for written and volumetric definitions of LOD was achieved from 20 internationally recognized AWR surgeons. Adoption of these definitions will help standardize the use of LOD for both clinical and academic activities.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
No standardized written or volumetric definition exists for 'loss of domain' (LOD). This limits the utility of LOD as a morphological descriptor and as a predictor of peri- and postoperative outcomes. Consequently, our aim was to establish definitions for LOD via consensus of expert abdominal wall surgeons.
METHODS
A Delphi study involving 20 internationally recognized abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) surgeons was performed. Four written and two volumetric definitions of LOD were identified via systematic review. Panelists completed a questionnaire that suggested these definitions as standardized definitions of LOD. Consensus on a preferred term was pre-defined as achieved when selected by ≥80% of panelists. Terms scoring <20% were removed.
RESULTS
Voting commenced August 2018 and was completed in January 2019. Written definition: During Round 1, two definitions were removed and seven new definitions were suggested, leaving nine definitions for consideration. For Round 2, panelists were asked to select all appealing definitions. Thereafter, common concepts were identified during analysis, from which the facilitators advanced a new written definition. This received 100% agreement in Round 3. Volumetric definition: Initially, panelists were evenly split, but consensus for the Sabbagh method was achieved. Panelists could not reach consensus regarding a threshold LOD value that would preclude surgery.
CONCLUSIONS
Consensus for written and volumetric definitions of LOD was achieved from 20 internationally recognized AWR surgeons. Adoption of these definitions will help standardize the use of LOD for both clinical and academic activities.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31848677
doi: 10.1007/s00268-019-05317-z
pii: 10.1007/s00268-019-05317-z
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1070-1078Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : PB-PG-0816-20005
Pays : United Kingdom
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Références
JAMA Surg. 2018 Aug 1;153(8):728-737
pubmed: 29710234
Surgery. 2010 Sep;148(3):544-58
pubmed: 20304452
Hernia. 2017 Apr;21(2):261-269
pubmed: 27990572
Br J Surg. 2017 Jan;104(2):e65-e74
pubmed: 28121035
Am Surg. 2015 Jul;81(7):679-86
pubmed: 26140887
Hernia. 2016 Dec;20(6):805-810
pubmed: 27785629
Hernia. 2016 Feb;20(1):111-7
pubmed: 26342924
Hernia. 2009 Aug;13(4):407-14
pubmed: 19495920
J Am Coll Surg. 2012 Dec;215(6):787-93
pubmed: 22999328
J Am Coll Surg. 2013 Feb;216(2):217-28
pubmed: 23219350
Hernia. 2014 Feb;18(1):7-17
pubmed: 24150721
J Surg Res. 2016 Jun 1;203(1):56-63
pubmed: 27338535
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2015 Feb;16(1):36-40
pubmed: 25761078
Transpl Int. 2013 Dec;26(12):1184-90
pubmed: 24118196
Hernia. 2011 Oct;15(5):559-65
pubmed: 21584816
BMJ Open. 2016 May 24;6(5):e011780
pubmed: 27221129
Hernia. 2010 Feb;14(1):63-9
pubmed: 19756913
Hernia. 2006 Aug;10(4):322-5
pubmed: 16705360
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2015 Oct;49(10):887-97
pubmed: 26296368
PLoS One. 2011;6(6):e20476
pubmed: 21694759
Hernia. 2012 Apr;16(2):179-83
pubmed: 21904861
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2001 Feb;386(1):65-73
pubmed: 11405092
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2007;60(4):383-8
pubmed: 17349593
J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2017 May 16;16:21
pubmed: 28523252
Dis Colon Rectum. 2012 Apr;55(4):416-23
pubmed: 22426265
Colorectal Dis. 2014 Dec;16(12):965-70
pubmed: 25284641
J Am Coll Surg. 2013 Dec;217(6):974-82
pubmed: 24051068
Nature. 2008 Feb 7;451(7179):716-9
pubmed: 18204438
Lancet. 2017 Dec 16;390(10113):2627-2642
pubmed: 29029897