Guidelines are increasingly determining the decision process in day-to-day clinical work. Guidelines describe the current best possible standard in diagnostics and therapy. They should be developed by an international panel of experts, whereby alongside individual experience, above all, the results of comparative studies are decisive. According to the results of high-ranking scientific studies published in peer-reviewed journals, statements and recommendations are formulated, and these are graded strictly according to the criteria of evidence-based medicine. Guidelines can therefore be valuable in helping particularly the young surgeon in his or her day-to-day work to find the best decision for the patient when confronted with a wide and confusing range of options. However, even experienced surgeons benefit because by virtue of a heavy workload and commitment, they often find it difficult to keep up with the ever-increasing published literature. All guidelines require regular updating, usually every 3 years, in line with progress in the field. The current Guidelines focus on technique and perioperative management of laparoscopic ventral hernia repair and constitute the first comprehensive guidelines on this topic. In this issue of Surgical Endoscopy, the first part of the Guidelines is published including sections on basics, indication for surgery, perioperative management, and key points of technique. The next part (Part 2) of the Guidelines will address complications and comparisons between open and laparoscopic techniques. Part 3 will cover mesh technology, hernia prophylaxis, technique-related issues, new technologic developments, lumbar and other unusual hernias, and training/education.

Guidelines are increasingly determining the decision process in day-to-day clinical work. Guidelines describe the current best possible standard in diagnostics and therapy. They should be developed by an international panel of experts, whereby alongside individual experience, above all, the results of comparative studies are decisive. According to the results of high-ranking scientific studies published in peer-reviewed journals, statements and recommendations are formulated, and these are graded strictly according to the criteria of evidence-based medicine. Guidelines can therefore be valuable in helping particularly the young surgeon in his or her day-to-day work to find the best decision for the patient when confronted with a wide and confusing range of options. However, even experienced surgeons benefit because by virtue of a heavy workload and commitment, they often find it difficult to keep up with the ever-increasing published literature. All guidelines require regular updating, usually every 3 years, in line with progress in the field. The current Guidelines focus on technique and perioperative management of laparoscopic ventral hernia repair and constitute the first comprehensive guidelines on this topic. In this issue of Surgical Endoscopy, the first part of the Guidelines is published including sections on basics, indication for surgery, perioperative management, and key points of technique. The next part (Part 2) of the Guidelines will address complications and comparisons between open and laparoscopic techniques. Part 3 will cover mesh technology, hernia prophylaxis, technique-related issues, new technologic developments, lumbar and other unusual hernias, and training/education.

The alkaline comet assay, or single cell gel electrophoresis, is one of the most popular methods for assessing DNA damage in human population. One of the open issues concerning this assay is the identification of those factors that can explain the large inter-individual and inter-laboratory variation. International collaborative initiatives such as the hCOMET project - a COST Action launched in 2016 - represent a valuable tool to meet this challenge. The aims of hCOMET were to establish reference values for the level of DNA damage in humans, to investigate the effect of host factors, lifestyle and exposure to genotoxic agents, and to compare different sources of assay variability. A database of 19,320 subjects was generated, pooling data from 105 studies run by 44 laboratories in 26 countries between 1999 and 2019. A mixed random effect log-linear model, in parallel with a classic meta-analysis, was applied to take into account the extensive heterogeneity of data, due to descriptor, specimen and protocol variability. As a result of this analysis interquartile intervals of DNA strand breaks (which includes alkali-labile sites) were reported for tail intensity, tail length, and tail moment (comet assay descriptors). A small variation by age was reported in some datasets, suggesting higher DNA damage in oldest age-classes, while no effect could be shown for sex or smoking habit, although the lack of data on heavy smokers has still to be considered. Finally, highly significant differences in DNA damage were found for most exposures investigated in specific studies. In conclusion, these data, which confirm that DNA damage measured by the comet assay is an excellent biomarker of exposure in several conditions, may contribute to improving the quality of study design and to the standardization of results of the comet assay in human populations.