Patient Reported Outcome Measures Used to Assess Quality of Life in Aortic Dissection: a Systematic Scoping Review using COSMIN Methodology.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically identify all patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) (quality of life [QOL] instruments or other instrument/methodology) that have been used to date in aortic dissection (AD) and to explore how well these instruments evaluate QOL according to the Consensus based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology or guideline. DATA SOURCES: Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library were search on 1st July 2022. REVIEW METHODS: This scoping review was undertaken according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) and the COSMIN guidelines for performing systematic reviews of validated PROMs. Studies that reported on any aspect or domain of QOL using a PROM or other instrument or methodology on AD were included. Data synthesis, including psychometric property analysis and risk of bias assessment were performed according to COSMIN guidelines. RESULTS: Forty-five studies, published between 1994 and 2021 reporting on 5 874 patients (mean age 63 years, 70.6% male), were included. A total of 39 PROMs were used, and three studies used semi-structured interviews. The majority (69%) of studies were in patients with type A aortic dissection (TAAD). The most common PROM used was the SF-36 (51%). Six studies evaluated one or more psychometric properties of a PROM. Only one of these studies was specifically designed as a validation study. No study reported on content validity. Internal consistency was the most evaluated psychometric property. No study evaluated all the psychometric properties according to COSMIN methodology. The methodological quality used to assess these PROMs was judged to be adequate or very good. CONCLUSION: This review highlights the heterogeneity of PROMs or methods used to determine QOL in AD patients. The lack of research regarding a comprehensive evaluation of the psychometric properties of a PROM used in AD highlights the need for the development and validation of a dissection specific PROM. [PROSPERO registration no. CRD42022310477].

Improvements in Sperm Motility Following Low- or High-Intensity Dietary Interventions in Men With Obesity.

INTRODUCTION: Obesity increases risks of male infertility, but bariatric surgery does not improve semen quality. Recent uncontrolled studies suggest that a low-energy diet (LED) improves semen quality. Further evaluation within a randomized, controlled setting is warranted. METHODS: Men with obesity (18-60 years) with normal sperm concentration (normal count) (n = 24) or oligozoospermia (n = 43) were randomized 1:1 to either 800 kcal/day LED for 16 weeks or control, brief dietary intervention (BDI) with 16 weeks' observation. Semen parameters were compared at baseline and 16 weeks. RESULTS: Mean age of men with normal count was 39.4 ± 6.4 in BDI and 40.2 ± 9.6 years in the LED group. Mean age of men with oligozoospermia was 39.5 ± 7.5 in BDI and 37.7 ± 6.6 years in the LED group. LED caused more weight loss than BDI in men with normal count (14.4 vs 6.3 kg; P < .001) and men with oligozoospermia (17.6 vs 1.8 kg; P < .001). Compared with baseline, in men with normal count total motility (TM) increased 48 ± 17% to 60 ± 10% (P < .05) after LED, and 52 ± 8% to 61 ± 6% (P < .0001) after BDI; progressive motility (PM) increased 41 ± 16% to 53 ± 10% (P < .05) after LED, and 45 ± 8% to 54 ± 65% (P < .001) after BDI. In men with oligozoospermia compared with baseline, TM increased 35% [26] to 52% [16] (P < .05) after LED, and 43% [28] to 50% [23] (P = .0587) after BDI; PM increased 29% [23] to 46% [18] (P < .05) after LED, and 33% [25] to 44% [25] (P < .05) after BDI. No differences in postintervention TM or PM were observed between LED and BDI groups in men with normal count or oligozoospermia. CONCLUSION: LED or BDI may be sufficient to improve sperm motility in men with obesity. The effects of paternal dietary intervention on fertility outcomes requires investigation.