Education Outcomes of Children Born Late Preterm: A Retrospective Whole-Population Cohort Study

Maternal and Child Health Journal - Early life exposures can have an impact on a child’s developmental trajectory and children born late preterm (34–36 weeks gestational age)...     

Differentiating poor validity from probable impairment on the medical symptom validity test: a cross-validation study

Aims: In neuropsychological evaluations, it is often difficult to ascertain whether poor performance on measures of validity is due to poor effort or malingering, or whether there is genuine cognitive impairment. Dunham and Denney created an algorithm to assess this question using the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT). We assessed the ability of their algorithm to detect poor validity versus probable impairment, and concordance of failure on the MSVT with other freestanding tests of performance validity.

Methods: Two previously published datasets (n?=?153 and n?=?641, respectively) from outpatient neuropsychological evaluations were used to test Dunham and Denney’s algorithm, and to assess concordance of failure rates with the Test of Memory Malingering and the forced choice measure of the California Verbal Learning Test, two commonly used performance validity tests.

Results: In both datasets, none of the four cutoff scores for failure on the MSVT (70%, 75%, 80%, or 85%) identified a poor validity group with proportionally aligned failure rates on other freestanding measures of performance validity. Additionally, the protocols with probable impairment did not differ from those with poor validity on cognitive measures.

Conclusions: Despite what appeared to be a promising approach to evaluating failure on the easy MSVT subtests when clinical data are unavailable (as recommended in the advanced interpretation program, or advanced interpretation [AI], of the MSVT), the current findings indicate the AI remains the gold standard for doing so. Future research should build on this effort to address shortcomings in measures of effort in neuropsychological evaluations.     

Prospective Randomized Comparison of Linear Endostaplers During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

Purpose

The development of Laparoscopic Linear Endostaplers (LLES) is crucial in minimally invasive approaches in bariatric surgery, but there have been very few published studies comparing 6-row LLES in Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG). The objective of this study was to compare two 6-row LLES in LSG.

Methods

A total of 60 patients were prospectively randomized to undergo LSG with either Medtronic Endo GIA? Tri-Staple technology (MTS) or AEON ? Endostapler(Lexington Medical) LLES. The measured parameters included patient demographics, comorbidity indices, LLES and specimen characteristics, postoperative symptoms, hospital stay, and total adverse events (AEs). Intraoperative bleeding was evaluated using five laparoscopic and corresponding endoscopic images of staple line before clip application, compared with a 1–5 Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), assessed by an independent bariatric surgeon who was blinded to the LLES used. Images of all cases were reviewed on the same day to increase test–retest reliability.

Results

Both groups were similar in patient demographics. Compared to MTS, AEON LLES group had significantly lower bleeding VAS scores in 4/5 laparoscopic images (pre-pyloric: 1.7?±?0.7 vs. 2.36?±?0.76, p?=?0.0007, mid-sleeve: 1.46?±?0.62 vs. 1.86?±?0.68, p?=?0.019, proximal sleeve: 1.6?±?0.77 vs. 2.0?±?0.83, p?=?0.038, gastro-esophageal junction: 1.43?±?0.67 vs. 1.86?±?0.77, p?=?0.014) and 3/5 endoscopic images (pre-pyloric: 1.56?±?0.56 vs. 2.36?±?0.76, p?=?0.006, incisura: 1.66?±?0.54 vs. 2.0?±?0.52, p?=?0.021, mid-sleeve: 1.63?±?0.49 vs. 2.0?±?0.45, p?=?0.005). There was no statistical difference in other parameters.

Conclusion

Both devices were equally safe and effective in terms of LLES and specimen characteristics, patient symptoms, hospital stay, and AEs. Bleeding VAS scores were significantly lower, favoring the AEON LLES.

Graphical abstract

     

Impact of overweight and obesity on US renal cell carcinoma incidence trends (1995-2018)

In the United States, renal cell carcinoma (RCC) incidence and the prevalence of obesity, an established risk factor for RCC, have been increasing for several decades. RCC is more common among older individuals. We sought to quantify the contribution of excess adiposity to the rising incidence of RCC among individuals 60 years or older. National Institutes of Health-American Association of Retired Persons Diet and Health Study data (n = 453 859 participants, enrolled in 1995-1996, age at enrollment 50-71 years) were used to estimate multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for RCC across body mass index categories and HRs associated with smoking. Population attributable fractions (PAFs) were calculated using estimated HRs and annual overweight/obesity prevalence from the National Health Interview Survey (1985-2008). PAF estimates were combined with RCC incidence from Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-13 to calculate annual percent changes in RCC incidence attributable (and unrelated) to overweight/obesity. We found that between 1995 and 2018, among individuals aged 60 years and older, PAF for overweight/obesity increased from 18% to 29% for all RCCs. In comparison, the PAF for smoking declined from 12% to 9%. RCC incidence increased 1.8% per year (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5%-2.1%) overall, while RCC incidence attributable to overweight/obesity increased 3.8% per year (95%CI 3.5%-4.2%) and RCC incidence unrelated to overweight/obesity increased 1.2% per year (95% CI 0.9%-1.4%). In conclusion, overweight/obesity appears to have contributed importantly to the rising incidence of RCC in the United States since the mid-1990s. Public health interventions focused on reducing overweight and obesity could help substantially in curbing this trend.