[Joint interpretation of 2017 edition of expert consensus on classification and clinical strategy of constipation and guide for surgical diagnosis and treatment of constipation (2017 edition)].

The was released in March 2018. This artide makes a joint interpretation of it with the (). The similarities and differences between the two mainly include: (1) The concept of constipation is basically the same, the main difference is that the consensus puts forward the association between constipation and mental disorders. (2) For constipation in terms of etiology, examination methods and evaluation, the consensus does not mention the etiology, but the examination methods are completely consistent. The reference standard of mental and psychological assessment is added in the consensus. (3) For the diagnosis of constipation, the diagnostic criteria and classification of constipation are specified in the guideline, and only the classification of constipation is mentioned briefly, while the consensus further develops the three different degrees of constipation. (4) For the treatment of constipation, the basic principles are the same. In the description of the specific treatment plan, the guideline divides the treatment methods of constipation into two categories: non-surgical treatment and surgical treatment, and then focuses on the suitability and specific operation of surgical treatment, while the consensus focuses more on coping strategies and treatment options for different degrees of constipation, including how to deal with the unavoidable mental and psychological disorders in the diagnosis and treatment of constipation questions. It can be seen that the consensus is a supplement and improvement of the guideline for surgical diagnosis and treatment of constipation. The consensus provides more targeted and applicable clinical reference ideas for clinical practice from different perspectives, especially the better auxiliary clinical decision-making after the quantification of the classification standard of constipation.