P1.031. Defining a Minimum Dataset for Anti-Reflux Surgery: The Result of Australia – New Zealand Collaborative Study

Topic Benign Disease: Gastro-Esophageal Reflux and Hiatal Hernia Background Outcome reporting following anti-reflux surgery (ARS) for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) remains highly heterogeneous, limiting meaningful benchmarking across centres. Standardisation through a minimum dataset and a unified definition of “textbook outcome” may improve comparability and quality improvement. This study aimed to establish a core ARS dataset and define key parameters of a textbook outcome using expert consensus. Methods A modified Delphi process was conducted with upper gastrointestinal surgeons from Australia and New Zealand. Proposed variables were derived from literature review and expert input. Participants completed two rounds of web-based voting, rating agreement on each variable using a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was predefined as ≥70% agreement. Experts were also asked to identify essential components and timing for assessing a standardised textbook outcome following ARS. Results Fourteen experts participated, with thirteen completing both Delphi rounds. A total of 112 variables were evaluated; 95 achieved consensus (94 accepted, 1 rejected). The agreed minimum dataset spans pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative domains. Consensus supported assessment of textbook outcome at 6–12 weeks post-surgery. Core parameters included improvement in primary reflux symptoms, reduction in proton pump inhibitor use, absence of Clavien–Dindo grade III-IV complications, length of hospital stay of 3 nights of fewer, acceptable adverse symptoms, and patient willingness to undergo surgery again. Agreement could not be reached on specific thresholds defining “acceptable” postoperative adverse symptoms. Conclusion This Delphi study establishes a consensus-derived minimum dataset for ARS and proposes a structured framework for textbook outcome assessment. Adoption of these standards may enable consistent reporting, facilitate benchmarking across centres, and support future quality improvement initiatives in GORD surgery.