Evidence: What Is It,Where Do We Find It,and How Do We Use It?

The purpose of this paper is to review the history and rationale for evidence-based medicine (EBM). The development of EBM is briefly described, together with the pros and cons of evidence-based research, review techniques, and resources. The current status of EBM with regard to the treatment of overactive bladder (OAB) is also discussed. In short, EBM can be defined as the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence to make decisions about the care of individual patients. The four main steps are: (1) formulate a clear question from a patient’s problem, (2) search the literature for relevant clinical articles, (3) evaluate and critically appraise existing evidence for its validity and usefulness, and (4) implement useful findings in clinical practice. The power of the evidence-based approach can be enhanced by the development of techniques such as systematic review and meta-analysis. However, although EBM allows us to use current best evidence to make decisions about patient care, the evidence gained from systematic review and meta-analysis only applies to an “average patient” and is not readily adaptable to issues such as etiology, diagnosis and prognosis.     

Rebanding for Slippage After Gastric Banding: Should We Do It?

Background

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is a commonly performed bariatric procedure. LAGB is frequently complicated by slippage. Possible treatment for slippage is rebanding, but long-term effects are unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate whether rebanding after gastric band slippage is associated with weight loss failure.

Methods

This was a post hoc analysis of a prospectively collected database of 627 consecutive LAGB patients. Rebanding for slippage was performed in 81 patients. The effect of rebanding on weight loss was evaluated by three analyses: (1) in 81 rebanded patients, weight loss was compared before and after rebanding, separately for patients in whom primary LAGB was successful or unsuccessful; (2) 81 rebanded patients were matched to 81 patients without slippage for prognostic variables and compared for weight loss after rebanding; (3) multivariate logistic regression was performed whether rebanding was independently associated with weight loss failure.

Results

The chance of a fair result of rebanding for patients following primary successful (n?=?34) and unsuccessful LAGB (n?=?22) was 62 and 27 % after median follow-up of 113 and 97 months, respectively. There was no difference in weight loss failure between 81 rebanded patients and 81 matched patients: 54 vs 59 % (P?=?0.43). In multivariate analysis, rebanding was not significantly associated with weight loss failure: adjusted odds ratio 1.42; 95 % confidence interval 0.85–2.38; P?=?0.18.

Conclusion

In general, rebanding after LAGB has no negative effect on weight loss. However, patients in whom LAGB was unsuccessful prior to rebanding have poor long-term weight loss results.     

Early Closure of Defunctioning Loop Ileostomy: Is It Beneficial for the Patient? A Meta-analysis

World Journal of Surgery - To perform a meta-analysis to answer the question, whether early closure (EC) of defunctioning loop ileostomy may be beneficial for patient as compared with late closure...     

ASO Author Reflections: How Do Patients and Caregivers Select Hospitals for Complex Cancer Care?

Annals of Surgical Oncology -     

Screening for Anal Cancer in HIV Positive Patients: Should We Make It A Standard-of-care?

Anal cancer is biological similar to cervical cancer, and is preceded by anal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN). Screening for AIN and treatments to reduce the risk of anal cancer are not established as guidelines of care for HIV-infected patients. It is mainly because screening and treating of AIN is not yet proven to reduce the incidence of anal cancer. The present study preliminarily demonstrated that a successful screening program in preventing squamous cell anal cancer in HIV positive patients. The authors achieved their purpose of controlling the evolution of all abnormalities identified during the anal cancer screening, preventing AIN to progress towards anal cancer, and reversing any form of AIN by surgery, ablation or medical therapy. Randomized controlled multi-center trials with a large sample size should be carried out to validate the study results. It is wise for the physicians to actively screen and treat AIN in HIV-infected patients whenever possible unless the results of randomized controlled study demonstrate that doing so is inappropriate.     

Examination in the Time of COVID-19—MCh Plastic Surgery Examination: How Did We Do It?

Background Many aspects of life have been changed, after the starting of the pandemic. Modifications and improvisation in our day-to-day activities is now a new norm. During the pandemic period, continuation academic activities and conductance of examination is difficult but essential. We are sharing our experience of conductance of MCh examination during the pandemic and preparations made. This article also discussed the future of surgical assessment examination, use of technology in surgical assessment changing times. Methods Procedural flow of the examination, Logistics and arrangements were planned and checked. Reliability and validity of questions were maintained by providing a similar set of questions and stepwise objective assessment. Assessment and feedback by the examinees and examiners on the pattern and conductance of examination were assessed by a Likert scale. Results We found, 73% agreed examination patterns were able to test the knowledge fairly. While 80 % believed the pattern was the same for all the candidates. All the stakeholders agreed the examination conducted in a Safe and stress-free atmosphere and use of technology helpful. Fifty- three % agreed the case scenarios correctly simulate the clinical presentations. Lastly, 66 % felt the examination process is adequate for summative assessment. Conclusions It is vital to reflect regarding the need for a uniform module to handle changing scenarios keeping the integrity and quality of the examination. Interactive screen, mannequin, and 3D model will be useful in the examination. In future, standardized examination modules for the surgical trainees will be required to perform a comprehensive assessment.     

Introducing In Vivo Dissection Modules for Undergraduate Level Trainees: What Is the Actual Benefit and How Could We Make It More Efficient?

Essential Skills in the Management of Surgical Cases (ESMSC) is an international wet lab simulation course aimed at undergraduate students. It combines basic science workshops, case-based lectures and ex vivo skills modules, as well as in vivo dissections using a swine model. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of high-fidelity In Vivo Simulation-Based Learning for undergraduate level trainees. Also our goal was to compare the skill-based performance of final year students vs. more junior-level ones. Forty undergraduate delegates at clinical rotation level (male = 28, female = 12, mean age = 23.12, 22–24, SD = 0.69) attended this 2-day course in Athens. N = 1 (2.5 %) was year 3, N = 4 (10 %) were year 4, N = 23 (57.5 %) were year 5 and N = 12 (30 %) were year 6. N = 30 (75 %) came from Hellenic universities, N = 8 (20 %) from the UK and N = 2 (5 %) from Germany. N = 20 (50 %) attended the in vivo dissections module first, and then the ex vivo one (type A rotation), whereas N = 20 followed the reverse training sequence with the ex vivo dissection first, followed by the in vivo one (type B rotation). The mean global rating scores for type A rotation were better in both the in vivo by 0.10 (2.40 vs. 2.30) and ex vivo modules by 0.15 (2.85 vs. 2.70), though it did not reach statistical significance (p > 0.05). Furthermore, the mean improvement of performance, in the laparoscopic skills station for the type A rotation, was better compared to type B by 0.351 (2.00 vs. 1.65, p = 0.003). Year 6 students performed better in the laparoscopic station (2.00 vs. 1.75, p = 0.059), whereas years 3, 4 and 5 performed better in the in vivo (2.42 vs. 2.16, p = 0.157) as well as the ex vivo dissections (2.78 vs. 2.75, p = 0.832), though none of those comparisons reached statistical significance. Delegates seemed to appreciate and enjoy the in vivo dissections as reflected in the feedback (8.67/10, min = 6 and max = 10, SD = 1.79). Although medical students seem to appreciate in vivo dissections modules, currently, further evidence is needed to support their recommendation in the undergraduate level. Surgical skills should be part of the undergraduate curriculum to improve final year students’ performance in the theatre.