Humeral shaft fractures: a practical guide to assessment and management.

Fractures of the humeral shaft represent roughly 5% of all fractures. They occur in an approximate bimodal distribution, typically affecting young adults following trauma and older females after low energy falls in the presence of osteoporosis. Humeral shaft fractures are associated with pain, temporary disability and a reduced quality of life for the duration of treatment. Treatment goals are directed towards achieving and maintaining a fracture environment conducive to healing, pain relief and early restoration of function. While most humeral shaft fractures are conservatively managed, operative management is indicated in certain circumstances. This article provides an overview of these fractures, including their initial management approach and definitive treatment.

Assessing the compliance of systematic review articles published in leading dermatology journals with the PRISMA statement guidelines: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses is of critical importance in dermatology because of their key role in informing health care decisions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the compliance of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in leading dermatology journals with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement guidelines. METHODS: This review was carried out in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Included studies were reviews published across 6 years in the top 4 highest-impact-factor dermatology journals of 2017. Records and full texts were screened independently. Data analysis was conducted with univariate multivariable linear regression. The primary outcome was to assess the compliance of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in leading dermatology journals with the PRISMA statement. RESULTS: A total of 166 studies were included and mean PRISMA compliance across all articles was 73%. Compliance significantly improved over time (ß = .016; P = <.001). The worst reported checklist item was item 5 (reporting on protocol existence), with a compliance of 15% of articles. CONCLUSION: PRISMA compliance within leading dermatology journals could be improved; however, it is steadily improving.

STROCSS 2019 Guideline: Strengthening the reporting of cohort studies in surgery.

INTRODUCTION: The STROCSS guideline was developed in 2017 to improve the reporting quality of observational studies in surgery. Building on its impact and usefulness, we sought to update the guidelines two years after its publication. METHODS: A steering group was formed to review the existing guideline and propose amendments to the 17-item checklist. A Delphi consensus exercise was utilised to determine agreement across a list of proposed modifications to the STROCSS 2017 guideline. An expert panel of 46 surgeons were invited to assess the proposed updates via Google Forms. RESULTS: The response rate was 91% (n = 42/46). High agreement was reached across all the items and the guideline was finalised in the first round. The checklist maintained 17-items, with modifications primarily considered to improve content and readability. CONCLUSIONS: The STROCSS 2019 guideline is hereby presented as a considered update to improve reporting of cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies in surgery.

Analysis of the first 2645 registrations at the research registry®: A global repository for all study types involving human participants.

BACKGROUND: The Declaration of Helsinki has called for the registration of all research studies involving human participants. Despite this, prior registries did not allow registration certain study types, or retrospective registration. The Research Registry® (www.researchregistry.com) was established in 2015 to provide a venue of registration for any study involving human participants. METHODS: and analysis: This retrospective database analysis describes the first 3000 registrations received by the Research Registry®. Since the launch of the Registry in 2015, we have collected data on each registration and excluded inappropriate registrations through a weekly curation process. The characteristics of all studies registered is presented. Each registration was marked against a quality score by two researchers acting independently, and we describe how this has changed over time. No ethical approval was required for this data only study including no human participants. RESULTS: Of 3000 registrations, we included 2645 that were submitted to the registry between February 2015 and October 2017. The number of registrations increased year on year, and we now receive between 60 and 80 registrations per month. One fifth of registrations were from China (537 [20.3%]). Retrospective observational studies were most commonly registered (1125 [42.5%]), and studies included in excess of 20 million patients (median 80 [IQR:25-200]). The quality score of registrations improved over the time (Kruskal-Wallis p < 0.05), and the 'control/comparator' component of the quality score was most poorly completed (completed by 1199 [54%]). CONCLUSION: The Research Registry® has received registrations on over 2500 registrations, including in excess of 20 million patients, with the quality of registrations improving over time. Retrospective observational studies and case series are the most commonly registered.

Validated Outcomes in the Grafting of Autologous Fat to the Breast: The VOGUE Study. Development of a Core Outcome Set for Research and Audit.

BACKGROUND: Autologous fat grafting is an important part of the reconstructive surgeon's toolbox when treating women affected by breast cancer and subsequent tumor extirpation. The debate over safety and efficacy of autologous fat grafting continues within the literature. However, work performed by the authors' group has shown significant heterogeneity in outcome reporting. Core outcome sets have been shown to reduce heterogeneity in outcome reporting. The authors' goal was to develop a core outcome set for autologous fat grafting in breast reconstruction. METHODS: The authors published their protocol a priori. A Delphi consensus exercise among key stakeholders was conducted using a list of outcomes generated from their previous work. These outcomes were divided into six domains: oncologic, clinical, aesthetic and functional, patient-reported, process, and radiologic. RESULTS: In the first round, 55 of 78 participants (71 percent) completed the Delphi consensus exercise. Consensus was reached on nine of the 13 outcomes. The clarity of the results and lack of additional suggested outcomes deemed further rounds to be unnecessary. CONCLUSIONS: The VOGUE Study has led to the development of a much-needed core outcome set in the active research front and clinical area of autologous fat grafting. The authors hope that clinicians will use this core outcome set to audit their practice, and that researchers will implement these outcomes in their study design and reporting of autologous fat grafting outcomes. The authors encourage journals and surgical societies to endorse and encourage use of this core outcome set to help refine the scientific quality of the debate, the discourse, and the literature. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, V.

Use of autologous fat grafting in reconstruction following mastectomy and breast conserving surgery: An updated systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Use of autologous fat grafting (AFG) for breast reconstructive surgery is gaining acceptance, but concerns regarding its efficacy and safety remain. We present a protocol for a systematic review that aims to update the findings since our previous systematic review on a number of outcomes of AFG. METHODS: The systematic review has been registered a priori (UIN: reviewregistry308). All study designs, including randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-controlled studies and case reports/series, reporting original data, on women undergoing AFG for breast reconstruction following mastectomy or breast conserving surgery, will be included. Six categorical outcomes will be assessed: oncological; clinical; aesthetic/functional; patient-reported; process; and radiological.The search strategy will be devised to investigate 'fat grafting and breast reconstruction'. Electronic databases will be searched, 01 April 2014 to 21 August 2017: PubMed, MEDLINE®, EMBASE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, PsychINFO, SciELO, The Cochrane Library, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effect (DARE), the Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment Database, the NHS Economic Evaluation Databases and Cochrane Groups, ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials Database, the World Health Organisation (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, UpToDate.com, NHS Evidence and the York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Grey literature will be searched. Two trained, independent teams will screen all titles and abstracts, and relevant full texts, for eligibility. Data will be extracted under standardised extraction fields into a preformatted database. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at national and international meetings within fields of plastic, reconstructive and aesthetic surgery, and surgical oncology. The work will be disseminated electronically and in print. Brief reports of the review and findings will be disseminated to interested parties through email and direct communication. The review aims to guide healthcare practice and policy.