Outcomes of Medical Therapy Plus PCI for Multivessel or Left Main CAD Ineligible for Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is increasingly used to revascularize patients ineligible for CABG, but few studies describe these patients and their outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to describe characteristics, utility of risk prediction, and outcomes of patients with left main or multivessel coronary artery disease ineligible for coronary bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS: Patients with complex coronary artery disease ineligible for CABG were enrolled in a prospective registry of medical therapy + PCI. Angiograms were evaluated by an independent core laboratory. Observed-to-expected 30-day mortality ratios were calculated using The Society for Thoracic Surgeons (STS) and EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) II scores, surgeon-estimated 30-day mortality, and the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) CathPCI model. Health status was assessed at baseline, 1 month, and 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 726 patients were enrolled from 22 programs. The mean SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score was 32.4 ± 12.2 before and 15.0 ± 11.7 after PCI. All-cause mortality was 5.6% at 30 days and 12.3% at 6 months. Observed-to-expected mortality ratios were 1.06 (95% CI: 0.71-1.36) with The Society for Thoracic Surgeons score, 0.99 (95% CI: 0.71-1.27) with the EuroSCORE II, 0.59 (95% CI: 0.42-0.77) using cardiac surgeons' estimates, and 4.46 (95% CI: 2.35-7.99) using the NCDR CathPCI score. Health status improved significantly from baseline to 6 months: SAQ summary score (65.9 ± 22.5 vs 86.5 ± 15.1; P < 0.0001), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire summary score (54.1 ± 27.2 vs 82.6 ± 19.7; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients ineligible for CABG who undergo PCI have complex clinical profiles and high disease burden. Following PCI, short-term mortality is considerably lower than surgeons' estimates, similar to surgical risk model predictions but is over 4-fold higher than estimated by the NCDR CathPCI model. Patients' health status improved significantly through 6 months.

International Validation of the EORTC QLQ-ANL27, a Field Study to Test the Anal Cancer-Specific Health-Related Quality-of-Life Questionnaire.

PURPOSE: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) health-related quality of life questionnaire for anal cancer (QLQ-ANL27) supplements the EORTC cancer generic measure (QLQ-C30) to measure concerns specific to people with anal cancer treated with chemoradiotherapy. This study tested the psychometric properties and acceptability of the QLQ-ANL27. METHODS AND MATERIALS: People with anal cancer were recruited from 15 countries to complete the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-ANL27 and provide feedback on the QLQ-ANL27. Item responses, scale structure (multitrait scaling, factor analysis), reliability (internal consistency and reproducibility) and sensitivity (known group comparisons and responsiveness to change) of the QLQ-ANL27 were evaluated. RESULTS: Data from 382 people were included in the analyses. The EORTC QLQ-ANL27 was acceptable, comprehensive, and easy to complete, taking an average 8 minutes to complete. Psychometric analyses supported the EORTC QLQ-ANL27 items and reliability (Cronbach's α ranging from 0.71-0.93 and test-retest coefficients above 0.7) and validity of the scales (particularly nonstoma bowel symptoms and pain/discomfort). Most scales distinguished people according to treatment phase and performance status. Bowel (nonstoma), pain/discomfort, and vaginal symptoms were sensitive to deteriorations over time. The stoma-related scales remained untested because of low numbers of people with a stoma. Revisions to the scoring and question ordering of the sexual items were proposed. CONCLUSIONS: The QLQ-ANL27 has good psychometric properties and is available in 16 languages for people treated with chemoradiotherapy for anal cancer. It is used in clinical trials and has a potential role in clinical practice.

The Outcomes of Percutaneous RevascularizaTIon for Management of SUrgically Ineligible Patients With Multivessel or Left Main Coronary Artery Disease (OPTIMUM) Registry: Rationale and Design.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines endorse coronary artery bypass as the preferred revascularization strategy for patients with left main and/or multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). However, many patients are deemed excessively high risk for surgery after Heart Team evaluation. No prospective studies have examined contemporary treatment patterns, rationale for surgical decision-making, completeness of revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and outcomes in this high-risk population with advanced CAD. METHODS: We designed the Outcomes of Percutaneous RevascularizaTIon for Management of SUrgically Ineligible Patients with Multivessel or Left Main Coronary Artery Disease (OPTIMUM) registry, a prospective, multicenter study of patients with "surgical anatomy" determined to be at prohibitive risk for bypass surgery. The primary outcome is comparison of observed to predicted 30-day mortality, with secondary outcomes of patient-reported health status and the association between completeness of revascularization and clinical outcomes. Patient characteristics driving surgical risk determinations will be reported, and peri-operative risk will be assessed using validated scoring methods. Angiograms will be assessed by an independent core laboratory, and clinical events will be adjudicated. RESULTS: Clinical outcomes assessments will include 30-day and 1-year cardiovascular events, health status at 1, 6 and 12-months, and 5-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS: OPTIMUM is the first prospective, multicenter study to examine treatment strategies and outcomes among multivessel CAD patients deemed ineligible for surgical revascularization after Heart Team assessment. This registry will provide unique insights into the clinical decision-making, revascularization practices, safety, effectiveness, and health status outcomes in this high-risk population.

Sequential assessment of bowel function and anorectal physiology after anterior resection for cancer: a prospective cohort study.

AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate changes in bowel function and anorectal physiology (ARP) after anterior resection for colorectal cancer. METHOD: Patients were recruited from November 2006 to September 2008. Cleveland Clinic Incontinence (CCI) scores and stool frequency were determined by patient questionnaires before surgery (t0 ) and at three (t3 ), six (t6 ), nine (t9 ) and 12 (t12 ) months after restoration of intestinal continuity. ARP measurements were recorded at T0 , T3 and T12 . Endoanal ultrasound was performed at T0 and T12 . RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were included. CCI score increased postoperatively then normalized, whereas stool frequency did not change. Patients who had neoadjuvant radiotherapy or a lower anastomosis had increased incontinence and stool frequency in the postoperative period, whereas those with defunctioning stomas or open surgery had increased stool frequency alone. Maximum resting pressure, volume at first urge and maximum rectal tolerance were reduced throughout the postoperative period. Radiotherapy, lower anastomosis and defunctioning stoma (but not operative approach) altered manometric parameters postoperatively. Maximum rectal tolerance correlated with incontinence and first urge with stool frequency. The length of the anterior internal anal sphincter decreased postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Incontinence recovers in the first year after anterior resection. Radiotherapy, lower anastomosis, defunctioning stoma and open surgery have a negative influence on bowel function. ARP may be useful if bowel dysfunction persists beyond 12 months.

Sacral nerve stimulation versus the magnetic sphincter augmentation device for adult faecal incontinence: the SaFaRI RCT.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary studies using the FENIX™ (Torax Medical, Minneapolis, MN, USA) magnetic sphincter augmentation device suggest that it is safe to use for the treatment of adult faecal incontinence, but efficacy data are limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare FENIX with sacral nerve stimulation for the treatment of adult faecal incontinence in terms of safety, efficacy, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicentre, parallel-group, unblinded, randomised trial comparing FENIX with sacral nerve stimulation in participants suffering moderate to severe faecal incontinence. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised on an equal basis to either sacral nerve stimulation or FENIX. Follow-up occurred 2 weeks postoperatively and at 6, 12 and 18 months post randomisation. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: The primary outcome was success, defined as device in use and ≥ 50% improvement in Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score at 18 months post randomisation. Secondary outcomes included complication rates, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Between 30 October 2014 and 23 March 2017, 99 participants were randomised across 18 NHS sites (50 participants to FENIX vs. 49 participants to sacral nerve stimulation). The median time from randomisation to FENIX implantation was 57.0 days (range 4.0-416.0 days), and the median time from randomisation to permanent sacral nerve stimulation was 371.0 days (range 86.0-918.0 days). A total of 45 out of 50 participants underwent FENIX implantation and 29 out of 49 participants continued to permanent sacral nerve stimulation. The following results are reported, excluding participants for whom the corresponding outcome was not evaluable. Overall, there was success for 10 out of 80 (12.5%) participants, with no statistically significant difference between the two groups [FENIX 6/41 (14.6%) participants vs. sacral nerve stimulation 4/39 (10.3%) participants]. At least one postoperative complication was experienced by 33 out of 45 (73.3%) participants in the FENIX group and 9 out of 40 (22.5%) participants in the sacral nerve stimulation group. A total of 15 out of 50 (30%) participants in the FENIX group ultimately had to have their device explanted. Slightly higher costs and quality-adjusted life-years (incremental = £305.50 and 0.005, respectively) were observed in the FENIX group than in the sacral nerve stimulation group. This was reversed over the lifetime horizon (incremental = -£1306 and -0.23 for costs and quality-adjusted life-years, respectively), when sacral nerve stimulation was the optimal option (net monetary benefit = -£3283), with only a 45% chance of FENIX being cost-effective. LIMITATIONS: The SaFaRI study was terminated in 2017, having recruited 99 participants of the target sample size of 350 participants. The study is, therefore, substantially underpowered to detect differences between the treatment groups, with significant uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The SaFaRI study revealed inefficiencies in the treatment pathways for faecal incontinence, particularly for sacral nerve stimulation. The success of both FENIX and sacral nerve stimulation was much lower than previously reported, with high postoperative morbidity in the FENIX group. FUTURE WORK: Further research is needed to clarify the treatment pathways for sacral nerve stimulation and to determine its true clinical and cost-effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16077538. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Faecal incontinence is a distressing condition for patients, and surgery is recommended if symptoms are having an effect on quality of life. One of the treatments recommended for faecal incontinence by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence is sacral nerve stimulation, which aims to improve continence by stimulating the nerves to the back passage. A newer treatment involves surgery to implant a string of magnetic beads around the anal canal using the FENIX™ device (Torax Medical, Minneapolis, MN, USA). The aim of this study was to assess the benefits and risks of the FENIX device compared with sacral nerve stimulation. The SaFaRI study aimed to recruit 350 participants with faecal incontinence, but was stopped early because of the manufacturer withdrawing the FENIX device for strategic reasons. In total, we recruited 99 participants. Fifty participants were allocated to receive the FENIX device and 49 participants were allocated to receive sacral nerve stimulation. The observed success rates with both devices were low: at 18 months following their entry into the study, 6 out of 41 (14.6%) participants in the FENIX group and 4 out of 39 (10.3%) participants in the sacral nerve stimulation group had the device both in use and producing a benefit. A total of 5 out of 50 (10.0%) participants allocated to receive the FENIX device did not have a device implanted, and 15 out of 45 (33.3%) participants who did have the FENIX device implanted needed to have it removed because of complications during the 18-month follow-up period. A total of 21 out of 49 (42.9%) participants allocated to receive sacral nerve stimulation did not have a permanent sacral nerve stimulation device implanted, and 0 of the 28 who did have a permanent sacral nerve stimulation device implanted needed to have it removed during the 18-month follow-up period. The costs associated with the FENIX device were higher because of a greater number of participants experiencing complications, meaning that the FENIX device is unlikely to be cost-effective in the treatment of faecal incontinence compared with sacral nerve stimulation.

Management guidelines for low anterior resection syndrome - the MANUEL project.

AIM: Little is known about the pathophysiology of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), and evidence concerning the management of patients diagnosed with this condition is scarce. The aim of the LARS Expert Advisory Panel was to develop practical guidance for healthcare professionals dealing with LARS. METHOD: The 'Management guidelines for low anterior resection syndrome' (MANUEL) project was promoted by a team of eight experts in the assessment and management of patients with LARS. After a face-to-face meeting, a strategy was agreed to create a comprehensive, practical guide covering all aspects that were felt to be clinically relevant. Eight themes were decided upon and working groups established. Each working group generated a draft; these were collated by another collaborator into a manuscript, after a conference call. This was circulated among the collaborators, and it was revised following the comments received. A lay patient revised the manuscript, and contributed to a section containing a patient's perspective. The manuscript was again circulated and finalized. A final teleconference was held at the end of the project. RESULTS: The guidance covers all aspects of LARS management, from pathophysiology, to assessment and management. Given the lack of sound evidence and the often poor quality of the studies, most of the recommendations and conclusions are based on the opinions of the experts. CONCLUSIONS: The MANUEL project provides an up-to-date practical summary of the available evidence concerning LARS, with useful directions for healthcare professional and patients suffering from this debilitating condition.

Outcomes of retrograde chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention: A report from the OPEN-CTO registry.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess in-hospital and long-term outcomes of retrograde compared with antegrade-only percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic total occlusion (CTO PCI). BACKGROUND: Procedural and clinical outcomes following retrograde compared with antegrade-only CTO PCI remain unknown. METHODS: Using the core-lab adjudicated OPEN-CTO registry, we compared the outcomes of retrograde to antegrade-only CTO PCI. Primary endpoints included were in-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction [MI], emergency cardiac surgery, or clinically significant perforation) and MACCE at 1-year (all-cause death, MI, stroke, target lesion revascularization, or target vessel reocclusion). RESULTS: Among 885 single CTO procedures from the OPEN-CTO registry, 454 were retrograde and 431 were antegrade-only. Lesion complexity was higher (J-CTO score: 2.7 vs. 1.9; p < .001) and technical success lower (82.4 vs. 94.2%; p < .001) in retrograde compared with antegrade-only procedures. All-cause death was higher in the retrograde group in-hospital (2 vs. 0%; p = .003), but not at 1-year (4.9 vs. 3.3%; p = .29). Compared with antegrade-only procedures, in-hospital MACCE rates (composite of all-cause death, stroke, MI, emergency cardiac surgery, and clinically significant perforation) were higher in the retrograde group (10.8 vs. 3.3%; p < .001) and at 1-year (19.5 vs. 13.9%; p = .03). In sensitivity analyses landmarked at discharge, there was no difference in MACCE rates at 1 year following retrograde versus antegrade-only CTO PCI. Improvements in Seattle Angina Questionnaire Quality of Life scores at 1-year were similar between the retrograde and antegrade-only groups (29.9 vs 30.4; p = .58). CONCLUSIONS: In the OPEN-CTO registry, retrograde CTO procedures were associated with higher rates of in-hospital MACCE compared with antegrade-only; however, post-discharge outcomes, including quality of life improvements, were similar between technical modalities.

Ano-uro-genital mucosal melanoma UK national guidelines.

Ano-uro-genital (AUG) mucosal melanomas are rare cancers associated with poor outcomes and limited evidence-based management. The United Kingdom AUG mucosal melanoma guideline development group used an evidence-based systematic approach to make recommendations regarding the diagnosis, treatment and surveillance of patients diagnosed with AUG mucosal melanomas. The guidelines were sent for international peer review, and are accredited by The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). A summary of the key recommendations is presented. The full documents are available on the Melanoma Focus website.

Less is more: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the outcomes of radical versus conservative primary resection in anorectal melanoma.

INTRODUCTION: Anorectal melanoma (ARM) is a rare disease with a poor prognosis. There is no consensus as to the optimal primary surgical treatment for ARM, with advocates for both radical (abdominoperineal resection [APR]) and conservative strategies (wide local excision [WLE]). Here, we report a systematic review of studies comparing outcomes between these strategies. METHODS: Studies comparing APR with WLE in patients with ARM were included, and a systematic review using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was performed. Outcomes deemed critical included overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence and quality of life. RESULTS: Forty studies were identified, of which 27 were suitable for inclusion. Twenty-three studies compared overall survival between WLE and APR, with no difference in outcomes noted (risk ratio [RR]: 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60-1.07, p = 0.13). Seven studies compared disease-free survival, with no difference in outcomes noted (RR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.61-1.91, p = 0.79). A total of 19 studies compared local recurrence rates, with again no significant difference in outcomes noted (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.44-1.14, p = 0.16). None of the studies identified reported quality of life-related outcomes. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence to suggest that a radical primary surgical strategy improves outcomes in ARM. Therefore, given the well-documented morbidity associated with APR, WLE with regular surveillance for local recurrence should be the primary strategy in most patients.

Patient Characteristics Associated With Antianginal Medication Escalation and De-Escalation Following Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Background Prior research has shown that providers may infrequently adjust antianginal medications (AAMs) following chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Patient characteristics associated with AAM titration and the variation in postprocedure AAM management after CTO PCI across hospitals have not been reported. We sought to determine the frequency and potential correlates of AAM escalation and de-escalation after CTO PCI. Methods and Results Using the 12-center OPEN CTO registry (Outcomes, Patient Health Status, and Efficiency iN Chronic Total Occlusion Hybrid Procedures), we assessed AAM use at baseline and 6 months after CTO PCI. Escalation was defined as any addition of a new class of AAM or dose increase, whereas de-escalation was defined as a reduction in the number of AAMs or dose reduction. Angina was assessed 6 months after the index CTO PCI attempt using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire Angina Frequency domain. Potential correlates of AAM escalation (vs no change) or de-escalation (vs no change) were evaluated using multivariable modified Poisson regression models. Adjusted variation across sites was evaluated using median rate ratios. AAMs were escalated in 158 (17.5%), de-escalated in 351 (39.0%), and were unchanged at 6-month follow-up in 392 (43.5%). Patient characteristics associated with escalation included lung disease, ongoing angina, and periprocedural major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (periprocedural myocardial infarction, stroke, death, emergent cardiac surgery, or clinically significant perforation), whereas de-escalation was more frequent among patients taking more AAMs, those treated with complete revascularization, and after treatment of non-CTO lesions at the time of the index procedure. There was minimal variation in either escalation (median rate ratio, 1.11; P=0.36) or de-escalation (median rate ratio, 1.10; P=0.20) compared to no change of AAMs across sites. Conclusions Escalation or de-escalation of AAMs was less common than continuation following CTO PCI, with little variation across sites. Further research is needed to identify patients who may benefit from AAM titration after CTO PCI and develop strategies to adjust these medications in follow-up. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02026466.

Phase I-III development of the EORTC QLQ-ANL27, a health-related quality of life questionnaire for anal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There is currently no health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measure specific to anal cancer. Our objective was to develop an anal cancer HRQoL module to supplement the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire using EORTC Quality of Life Group Guidelines. MATERIALS AND METHOD: In order to generate a list of HRQoL issues facing anal cancer patients treated with chemoradiotherapy (CRT), we systematically reviewed the literature and conducted semi-structured interviews with patients and health care professionals (HCPs). Our list was then operationalised into questions using the EORTC Item Library. The provisional question list was pilot tested alongside the EORTC QLQ-C30 with patients from 11 centres across 8 countries. RESULTS: From our literature review and interviews with 43 patients, we generated a list of 197 issues. The list was then refined to 134 issues and reviewed by 34 HCPs and 10 patients. This review resulted in the retention of 65 issues which were used in the draft questionnaire tested by 100 patients. Our analyses led to the modification and removal of questions resulting in a 27 item questionnaire, the EORTC QLQ-ANL27. CONCLUSION: We have developed a 27 item questionnaire to supplement the EORTC QLQ-C30, for use with patients treated for anal cancer. This has been pilot tested and is now available upon request for use in clinical trials as well as clinical practice in 8 languages (http://groups.eortc.be/qol/).

The HubBLe Trial: haemorrhoidal artery ligation (HAL) versus rubber band ligation (RBL) for symptomatic second- and third-degree haemorrhoids: a multicentre randomised controlled trial and health-economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Optimal surgical intervention for low-grade haemorrhoids is unknown. Rubber band ligation (RBL) is probably the most common intervention. Haemorrhoidal artery ligation (HAL) is a novel alternative that may be more efficacious. OBJECTIVE: The comparison of HAL with RBL for the treatment of grade II/III haemorrhoids. DESIGN: A multicentre, parallel-group randomised controlled trial. PERSPECTIVE: UK NHS and Personal Social Services. SETTING: 17 NHS Trusts. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years presenting with grade II/III (second- and third-degree) haemorrhoids, including those who have undergone previous RBL. INTERVENTIONS: HAL with Doppler probe compared with RBL. OUTCOMES: Primary outcome - recurrence at 1 year post procedure; secondary outcomes - recurrence at 6 weeks; haemorrhoid severity score; European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, 5-level version (EQ-5D-5L); Vaizey incontinence score; pain assessment; complications; and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: A total of 370 participants entered the trial. At 1 year post procedure, 30% of the HAL group had evidence of recurrence compared with 49% after RBL [adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 2.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.42 to 3.51; p = 0.0005]. The main reason for the difference was the number of extra procedures required to achieve improvement/cure. If a single HAL is compared with multiple RBLs then only 37.5% recurred in the RBL arm (adjusted OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.15; p = 0.20). Persistence of significant symptoms at 6 weeks was lower in both arms than at 1 year (9% HAL and 29% RBL), suggesting significant deterioration in both groups over the year. Symptom score, EQ-5D-5L and Vaizey score improved in both groups compared with baseline, but there was no difference between interventions. Pain was less severe and of shorter duration in the RBL group; most of the HAL group who had pain had mild to moderate pain, resolving by 3 weeks. Complications were low frequency and not significantly different between groups. It appeared that HAL was not cost-effective compared with RBL. In the base-case analysis, the difference in mean total costs was £1027 higher for HAL. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were higher for HAL; however, the difference was very small (0.01) resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £104,427 per additional QALY. CONCLUSIONS: At 1 year, although HAL resulted in fewer recurrences, recurrence was similar to repeat RBL. Symptom scores, complications, EQ-5D-5L and continence score were no different, and patients had more pain in the early postoperative period after HAL. HAL is more expensive and unlikely to be cost-effective in terms of incremental cost per QALY. LIMITATIONS: Blinding of participants and site staff was not possible. FUTURE WORK: The incidence of recurrence may continue to increase with time. Further follow-up would add to the evidence regarding long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. The polysymptomatic nature of haemorrhoidal disease requires a validated scoring system, and the data from this trial will allow further assessment of validity of such a system. These data add to the literature regarding treatment of grade II/III haemorrhoids. The results dovetail with results from the eTHoS study [Watson AJM, Hudson J, Wood J, Kilonzo M, Brown SR, McDonald A, et al. Comparison of stapled haemorrhoidopexy with traditional excisional surgery for haemorrhoidal disease (eTHoS): a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2016, in press.] comparing stapled haemorrhoidectomy with excisional haemorrhoidectomy. Combined results will allow expansion of analysis, allowing surgeons to tailor their treatment options to individual patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN41394716. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 88. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Accuracy of integrated total pelvic floor ultrasound compared to defaecatory MRI in females with pelvic floor defaecatory dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: Defaecatory MRI allows multicompartmental assessment of defaecatory dysfunction but is often inaccessible. Integrated total pelvic floor ultrasound (transperineal, transvaginal, endoanal) may provide a cheap, portable alternative. The accuracy of total pelvic floor ultrasound for anatomical abnormalities when compared with defaecatory MRI was assessed. METHODS: The dynamic images from 68 females who had undergone integrated total pelvic floor ultrasound and defaecatory MRI between 2009 and 2015 were blindly reviewed. The following were recorded: rectocoele, enterocoele, intussusception and cystocoele. RESULTS: There were 26 rectocoeles on MRI (49 rectocoeles on ultrasound), 24 rectocoeles with intussusception on MRI (19 rectocoeles on ultrasound), 23 enterocoeles on MRI (24 enterocoeles on ultrasound) and 49 cystocoeles on MRI (35 cystocoeles on ultrasound). Sensitivity and specificity of total pelvic floor ultrasound were 81% and 33% for rectocoele, 60% and 91% for intussusception, 65% and 80% for enterocoele and 65% and 84% for cystocoele when compared with defaecatory MRI. This gave a negative-predictive value and positive-predictive value of 74% and 43% for rectocoele, 80% and 79% for intussusception, 82% and 63% for enterocoele and 48% and 91% for cystocoele. CONCLUSION: Integrated total pelvic floor ultrasound may serve as a screening tool for pelvic floor defaecatory dysfunction; when normal, defaecatory MRI can be avoided, as rectocoele, intussusception and enterocoele are unlikely to be present. Advances in knowledge: This is the first study to compare integrated total pelvic floor ultrasound with defaecatory MRI. The results support the use of integrated total pelvic floor ultrasound as a screening tool for defaecatory dysfunction.

Systematic review of the quality of life issues associated with anal cancer and its treatment with radiochemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Radiochemotherapy is the standard of care for the treatment of anal carcinoma achieving good loco-regional control and sphincter preservation. This approach is however associated with acute and late toxicities including haematological, skin, bowel function and genito-urinary complications. This paper systematically reviews studies addressing the quality of life (QoL) implications of anal cancer and radiochemotherapy. The paper also evaluates how QoL is assessed in anal cancer. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched for publications (1996-2014) reporting the effects on patients of anal cancer and radiochemotherapy. RESULTS: Of the 152 papers reporting treatment-related effects on patients, only 11 provided a formal assessment of QoL. In the absence of an anal cancer-specific measure, QoL was assessed using generic cancer instruments such as the core EORTC quality of life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) or colorectal cancer tools such as the EORTC QLQ-CR29. Bowel function, particularly diarrhoea, and sexual problems were the most commonly reported QoL concerns. The review of QoL issues of anal cancer patients treated with radiochemotherapy is limited by the QoL assessment measures used. It is argued that certain treatment-related toxicities, for example skin-induced radiation problems, are overlooked or inadequately represented in existing measures. CONCLUSIONS: This review emphasises the need to develop an anal cancer-specific QoL measure and to incorporate QoL as an outcome of future trials in anal cancer. The results of this review are informative to clinicians and patients in terms of treatment decision-making.

Long-acting recombinant factor IX Fc fusion protein (rFIXFc) for perioperative management of subjects with haemophilia B in the phase 3 B-LONG study.

In the phase 3 B-LONG (Recombinant Factor IX Fc Fusion Protein [rFIXFc] in Subjects With Haemophilia B) study, rFIXFc demonstrated a prolonged half-life compared with recombinant factor IX (rFIX), and safety and efficacy for prophylaxis and treatment of bleeding in subjects with moderately-severe to severe haemophilia B. In this B-LONG sub-analysis, rFIXFc was evaluated for efficacy in subjects requiring major surgery. Dosing was investigator-determined. Assessments included dosing, consumption, bleeding, transfusions and haemostatic response. A population pharmacokinetics model of rFIXFc was used to predict FIX activity. Twelve subjects underwent 14 major surgeries (including 11 orthopaedic surgeries); most subjects (11/12) received rFIXFc prophylaxis before surgery (range, ~2 weeks-12 months). Investigators/surgeons rated haemostatic responses as excellent (n = 13) or good (n = 1). In most surgeries (85·7%), haemostasis from the pre-surgical dose until the end of surgery was maintained with a single rFIXFc infusion. Blood loss was consistent with similar surgeries in subjects without haemophilia. The strong correlation (R(2) = 0·9586, P < 0·001) between observed and population pharmacokinetic model-predicted FIX activity suggests surgery did not impact rFIXFc pharmacokinetics. No unique safety concerns or inhibitors were observed. In conclusion, rFIXFc was safe and efficacious, with prolonged dosing intervals and low consumption, when used perioperatively in haemophilia B. Surgery did not appear to alter rFIXFc pharmacokinetics.

Appendicitis.

INTRODUCTION: Appendicitis is an inflammation of the appendix that may lead to an abscess, ileus, peritonitis, or death if untreated. Appendicitis is the most common abdominal surgical emergency. The current standard treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis is usually surgery, but there has been increasing evidence published on the use of antibiotics. METHODS AND OUTCOMES: We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of surgery compared with antibiotics for acute appendicitis? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to May 2014 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). RESULTS: We found four studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of surgery (including laparoscopic and open appendicectomy) compared with antibiotics.

The cost of anal cancer in England: retrospective hospital data analysis and Markov model.

BACKGROUND: Anal cancer requires a multidisciplinary approach to treatment with often complex interventions. Little is known regarding the associated costs and resource use. METHODS: Patient records were extracted from a national hospital database to estimate the number of patients treated for anal cancer in England. Identified resource use was linked to published UK cost estimates to quantify the reimbursement of treatment through the Payment by Results system. A mathematical model was developed simultaneously to validate findings and to calculate the average 10-year cost of treating a squamous cell anal carcinoma case from diagnosis. The model utilised data from the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland's anal cancer position statement. RESULTS: On average, 1,564 patients were admitted to hospital and 389 attended an outpatient facility per year. The average annual cost per inpatient and outpatient ranged from £4,562-£5,230 and £1,146-£1,335, respectively. Based on the model estimates, the inflated cost per case was between £16,470-£16,652. Results were most sensitive to the mode of admission for primary treatment and the costs of staging/diagnosis (inflated range: £14,309-£23,264). CONCLUSIONS: Despite limitations in the available data, these results indicate that the cost of treating anal cancer is significant. Further observational work is required in order to verify these findings.

Reduced parenteral nutrition requirements following anastomosis of a short residual colonic segment to a short jejunum.

A 22-year-old man suffered an acute small bowel infarct leading to extensive bowel resection, resulting in only 20 cm of jejunum to a jejunostomy, although he also had 50 cm of residual colon with a mucous fistula. The patient was out on long-term home parenteral nutrition (PN) but endured high stomal losses of 5-6 L per day and, despite all conventional measures, required 6.1 L of fluid (including PN) and 555 mmol sodium per day. Although body mass index was maintained, he suffered debilitating malaise and recurrent episodes of catheter-related sepsis and also developed persistently abnormal liver function tests. He was considered a potential intestinal transplant patient, but before taking that step, he opted for reanastomosis of his residual colon to his jejunum, ending in a colostomy. At surgery, only 30 cm of additional bowel lengthening could be achieved, but despite this, the patient's stomal losses reduced to 2.5 L per day, intravenous fluid requirements reduced to 4.1 L per day, and liver function normalized. The patient also gained 7.5 kg despite no change in PN caloric prescription, and his quality of life was dramatically enhanced. The case illustrates that even a small length of colon can grant significant improvements, probably via improvements in small bowel transit and adaptive changes, better sodium and water resorption with decreased hyperaldosteronism, and enhanced energy and nitrogen recovery. Reanastomosis of defunctioned colon should therefore always be considered a management option in short bowel syndrome.

Real-world lessons from the implementation of a depression screening protocol in acute myocardial infarction patients: implications for the American Heart Association depression screening advisory.

BACKGROUND: The American Heart Association (AHA) statement has recommended routine screening for depression in coronary artery disease with a 2-stage implementation of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ). Because there is little evidence on feasibility, accuracy, and impact of such a program on depression recognition in coronary patients, the AHA recommendation has met substantial debate and criticism. METHODS AND RESULTS: Before the AHA statement was released, the Mid America Heart and Vascular Institute (MAHVI) had implemented a depression screening protocol for patients with acute myocardial infarction that was virtually identical to the AHA recommendations. To (1) evaluate this MAHVI quality improvement initiative, (2) compare MAHVI depression recognition rates with those of other hospitals, and (3) examine health care providers' implementation feedback, we compared the results of the MAHVI screening program with data from a parallel prospective acute myocardial infarction registry and interviewed MAHVI providers. Depressive symptoms (PHQ-2, PHQ-9) were assessed among 503 MAHVI acute myocardial infarction patients and compared with concurrent depression assessments among 3533 patients at 23 US centers without a screening protocol. A qualitative summary of providers' suggestions for improvement was also generated. A total of 135 (26.8%) eligible MAHVI patients did not get screened. Among screened patients, 90.9% depressed (PHQ-9 ≥10) patients were recognized. The agreement between the screening and registry data using the full PHQ-9 was 61.5% for positive cases (PHQ-9 ≥10) but only 35.6% for the PHQ-2 alone. Although MAHVI had a slightly higher overall depression recognition rate (38.3%) than other centers not using a depression screening protocol (31.5%), the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.31). Staff feedback suggested that a single-stage screening protocol with continuous feedback could improve compliance. CONCLUSIONS: In this early effort to implement a depression screening protocol, a large proportion of patients did not get screened, and only a modest impact on depression recognition rates was realized. Simplifying the protocol by using the PHQ-9 alone and providing more support and feedback may improve the rates of depression detection and treatment.

Relationship between loneliness and proangiogenic cytokines in newly diagnosed tumors of colon and rectum.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association of serum levels of proangiogenic cytokines with different indices of social support and loneliness by measuring the levels of expression of two important proangiogenic cytokines, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and interleukin-6 in tumors of colon and rectum. Lack of social support has been prospectively associated with cancer progression. METHODS: Fifty-one newly diagnosed patients with colorectal tumors (mean age, 68.3 years) completed two measures of loneliness 1 to 2 days before their surgical treatment. The first was an explicit self-report questionnaire, which tapped into negative feelings as a result of low social support. The second was a standardized computer-based task, which measured loneliness implicitly. Immunohistochemical analyses were performed on tumor tissues post surgery to determine the expression of cytokines. RESULTS: Logistic regression showed that higher levels of implicit loneliness independently predicted stronger expression of VEGF, controlling for Dukes stage and explicit loneliness, both of which were nonsignificant predictors. No significant relationships were found between the loneliness measures and interleukin-6. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest VEGF to be an angiogenic mechanism through which loneliness may lead to worse cancer-related outcomes. Implications are discussed in terms of devising targeted psychosocial and immunotherapeutic interventions for cancer patients with low social support.