Survival after minimally invasive vs. open radical nephrectomy for stage I and II renal cell carcinoma

International Journal of Clinical Oncology - A recently reported phase III randomized trial comparing open and minimally invasive hysterectomy showed significantly higher rates of local recurrence...     

Non-response for health-related quality of life outcomes in ICU patients: A systematic review of the reporting in randomised trials

Background

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is frequently assessed in randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in the intensive care unit (ICU), but data are limited regarding the proportions of patients without responses or not surviving to HRQoL follow-up and the handling of this. We aimed to describe the extent and pattern of missing HRQoL data in intensive care trials and describe how these data and deaths were handled statistically.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following a published protocol. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Library for RCTs involving adult ICU patients reporting HRQoL as an outcome and excluded RCTs unobtainable in full text. We performed risk of bias assessment independently and in duplicate.

Results

We included 196 outcomes from 88 RCTs published in the years 2002–2022; the numbers of patients alive and eligible to respond HRQoL were reported in 76% of trials. At follow-up, median 27% (interquartile range 14%–39%) of patients had died, and median 20% (9%–38%) of survivors did not respond across outcomes. Analyses of 80% of outcomes were restricted to complete cases only. The handling of non-survivors in analyses were reported for 46% of outcomes, with 26% of all outcomes reported as including non-survivors (using the value zero or the worst possible score).

Conclusion

For HRQoL outcomes in ICU trials, we found that mortality at time of follow-up was high and non-response among survivors frequent. The reporting and statistical handling of these issues were insufficient, which may have biased results.     

Machine learning to predict myocardial injury and death after non-cardiac surgery

Myocardial injury due to ischaemia within 30 days of non-cardiac surgery is prognostically relevant. We aimed to determine the discrimination, calibration, accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of single-layer and multiple-layer neural networks for myocardial injury and death within 30 postoperative days. We analysed data from 24,589 participants in the Vascular Events in Non-cardiac Surgery Patients Cohort Evaluation study. Validation was performed on a randomly selected subset of the study population. Discrimination for myocardial injury by single-layer vs. multiple-layer models generated areas (95%CI) under the receiver operating characteristic curve of: 0.70 (0.69–0.72) vs. 0.71 (0.70–0.73) with variables available before surgical referral, p < 0.001; 0.73 (0.72–0.75) vs. 0.75 (0.74–0.76) with additional variables available on admission, but before surgery, p < 0.001; and 0.76 (0.75–0.77) vs. 0.77 (0.76–0.78) with the addition of subsequent variables, p < 0.001. Discrimination for death by single-layer vs. multiple-layer models generated areas (95%CI) under the receiver operating characteristic curve of: 0.71 (0.66–0.76) vs. 0.74 (0.71–0.77) with variables available before surgical referral, p = 0.04; 0.78 (0.73–0.82) vs. 0.83 (0.79–0.86) with additional variables available on admission but before surgery, p = 0.01; and 0.87 (0.83–0.89) vs. 0.87 (0.85–0.90) with the addition of subsequent variables, p = 0.52. The accuracy of the multiple-layer model for myocardial injury and death with all variables was 70% and 89%, respectively.     

Verbesserte Qualität gelagerter Erythrozytenkonzentrate durch maschinelle Autotransfusion

Die Anaesthesiologie - Die Transfusion von Erythrozytenkonzentraten (EK) ist mit verschiedenen Nebenwirkungen assoziiert, die u. a. durch Lagerungsschäden an Erythrozyten hervorgerufen...     

Defining minimum volume thresholds to increase quality of care: a new patient-oriented approach using mixed integer programming

A positive relationship between treatment volume and outcome quality has been demonstrated in the literature and is thus evident for a variety of procedures. Consequently, policy makers have tried to translate this so-called volume–outcome relationship into minimum volume regulation (MVR) to increase the quality of care—yet with limited success. Until today, the effect of strict MVR application remains unclear as outcome quality gains cannot be estimated adequately and restrictions to application such as patient travel time and utilization of remaining hospital capacity are not considered sufficiently. Accordingly, when defining MVR, its effectiveness cannot be assessed. Thus, we developed a mixed integer programming model to define minimum volume thresholds balancing utility in terms of outcome quality gain and feasibility in terms of restricted patient travel time and utilization of hospital capacity. We applied our model to the German hospital sector and to four surgical procedures. Results showed that effective MVR needs a minimum volume threshold of 125 treatments for cholecystectomy, of 45 and 25 treatments for colon and rectum resection, respectively, of 32 treatments for radical prostatectomy and of 60 treatments for total knee arthroplasty. Depending on procedure type and incidence as well as the procedure’s complication rate, outcome quality gain ranged between 287 (radical prostatectomy) and 977 (colon resection) avoidable complications (11.7% and 11.9% of all complications). Ultimately, policy makers can use our model to leverage MVR’s intended benefit: concentrating treatment delivery to improve the quality of care.

     

Influence of Classroom-Level Factors on Implementation Fidelity During Scale-up of Evidence-Based Interventions

Prevention Science - As evidence-based interventions (EBIs) become more widely disseminated, fidelity of implementation (FOI) often wanes. This study explores the association between FOI and...     

Timing of elective surgery and risk assessment after SARS-CoV-2 infection: an update

The impact of vaccination and new SARS-CoV-2 variants on peri-operative outcomes is unclear. We aimed to update previously published consensus recommendations on timing of elective surgery after SARS-CoV-2 infection to assist policymakers, administrative staff, clinicians and patients. The guidance remains that patients should avoid elective surgery within 7 weeks of infection, unless the benefits of doing so exceed the risk of waiting. We recommend individualised multidisciplinary risk assessment for patients requiring elective surgery within 7 weeks of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This should include baseline mortality risk calculation and assessment of risk modifiers (patient factors; SARS-CoV-2 infection; surgical factors). Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection with previous variants increased peri-operative mortality risk three-fold throughout the 6 weeks after infection, and assumptions that asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection does not add risk are currently unfounded. Patients with persistent symptoms and those with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 may require a longer delay than 7 weeks. Elective surgery should not take place within 10 days of diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, predominantly because the patient may be infectious, which is a risk to surgical pathways, staff and other patients. We now emphasise that timing of surgery should include the assessment of baseline and increased risk, optimising vaccination and functional status, and shared decision-making. While these recommendations focus on the omicron variant and current evidence, the principles may also be of relevance to future variants. As further data emerge, these recommendations may be revised.