LAparoscopic Versus Abdominal hysterectomy (LAVA): protocol of a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: There is uncertainty about the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with abdominal hysterectomy, particularly the relative rate of complications of the two procedures. While uptake of laparoscopic hysterectomy has been slow, the situation is changing with greater familiarity, better training, better equipment and increased proficiency in the technique. Thus, a large, robust, multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) is needed to compare contemporary laparoscopic hysterectomy with abdominal hysterectomy to determine the safest and most cost-effective technique. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A parallel, open, non-inferiority, multicentre, randomised controlled, expertise-based surgery trial with integrated health economic evaluation and an internal pilot with an embedded qualitative process evaluation. A within trial-based economic evaluation will explore the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with open abdominal hysterectomy. We will aim to recruit 3250 women requiring a hysterectomy for a benign gynaecological condition and who were suitable for either laparoscopic or open techniques. The primary outcome is major complications up to six completed weeks postsurgery and the key secondary outcome is time from surgery to resumption of usual activities using the personalised Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function questionnaire. The principal outcome for the economic evaluation is to be cost per QALY at 12 months' postsurgery. A secondary analysis is to be undertaken to generate costs per major surgical complication avoided and costs per return to normal activities. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the West Midlands-Edgbaston Research Ethics Committee, 18 February 2021 (Ethics ref: 21/WM/0019). REC approval for the protocol version 2.0 dated 2 February 2021 was issued on 18 February 2021.We will present the findings in national and international conferences. We will also aim to publish the findings in high impact peer-reviewed journals. We will disseminate the completed paper to the Department of Health, the Scientific Advisory Committees of the RCOG, the Royal College of Nurses (RCN) and the BSGE. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN14566195.

Cognition/Psychological Burden and Resilience in Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma and Psoriasis Patients: Real-Life Data and Implications for the Treatment.

Background: Psoriasis and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) expose patients to chronic inflammation as well as physical and psychological disabilities, but the impact of such alterations on cognitive function is unknown. Objective: This study is aimed at determining if CTCL and psoriasis impact cognitive functioning in relation to psychological and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) status. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed in an outpatient dermatology clinic of a university teaching hospital. Thirty-nine subjects with CTCL (N = 20) or psoriasis (N = 19) who met eligibility criteria were included. The cognitive domains of memory, attention and processing speed, and executive function were assessed with standard neuropsychological tests. Subjects were assessed for depression, anxiety, and HR-QOL (using the SKINDEX-29 questionnaire). Results: Study participants were CTCL and psoriasis subjects; cognitive impairment was found in the domain of memory in 17.9% subjects with CTCL or psoriasis. Lower scores on executive function tests were predicted by higher (worse HR-QOL) SKINDEX-29 functioning scores (p = 0.01). A higher estimated baseline intellectual functioning predicted lower scores (better HR-QOL) on the symptoms and functioning domains of SKINDEX-29 (p = 0.01 and 0.02, respectively) and a statistical trend (p = 0.07) for the emotion domain. Memory and acute anxiety were adversely impacted by shorter disease duration (p = 0.01 for both). Conclusions: Memory impairment may be associated comorbidity in CTCL and psoriasis. Subjects with stronger cognitive resources appear to cope better with health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) challenges.

Fabrication and Validation of an Economical, Programmable, Dual-Channel, Electronic Cigarette Aerosol Generator.

Vaping (inhalation of electronic cigarette-generated aerosol) is a public health concern. Due to recent spikes in adolescent use of electronic cigarettes (ECIGs) and vaping-induced illnesses, demand for scientific inquiry into the physiological effects of electronic cigarette (ECIG) aerosol has increased. For such studies, standardized and consistent aerosol production is required. Many labs generate aerosol by manually activating peristaltic pumps and ECIG devices simultaneously in a predefined manner. The tedium involved with this process (large puff number over time) and risk of error in keeping with puff topography (puff number, duration, interval) are less than optimal. Furthermore, excess puffing on an ECIG device results in battery depletion, reducing aerosol production, and ultimately, its chemical and physical nature. While commercial vaping machines are available, the cost of these machines is prohibitive to many labs. For these reasons, an economical and programmable ECIG aerosol generator, capable of generating aerosol from two atomizers simultaneously, was fabricated, and subsequently validated. Validation determinants include measurements of atomizer temperatures (inside and outside), electrical parameters (current, resistance and power) of the circuitry, aerosol particle distribution (particle counts and mass concentrations) and aerosol delivery (indexed by nicotine recovery), all during stressed conditions of four puffs/minute for 75 min (i.e., 300 puffs). Validation results indicate that the ECIG aerosol generator is better suited for experiments involving ≤100 puffs. Over 100 puffs, the amount of variation in the parameters measured tends to increase. Variations between channels are generally higher than variations within a channel. Despite significant variations in temperatures, electrical parameters, and aerosol particle distributions, both within and between channels, aerosol delivery remains remarkably stable for up to 300 puffs, yielding over 25% nicotine recovery for both channels. In conclusion, this programmable, dual-channel ECIG aerosol generator is not only affordable, but also allows the user to control puff topography and eliminate battery drain of ECIG devices. Consequently, this aerosol generator is valid, reliable, economical, capable of using a variety of E-liquids and amenable for use in a vast number of studies investigating the effects of ECIG-generated aerosol while utilizing a multitude of puffing regimens in a standardized manner.

Extraction of Electronic Health Record Data using Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources for Automated Breast Cancer Risk Assessment.

Women at high risk for breast cancer may benefit from enhanced screening and risk-reduction strategies. However, limited time during clinical encounters is one barrier to routine breast cancer risk assessment. We evaluated if electronic health record (EHR) data downloaded using Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) is sufficient for breast cancer risk calculation in our decision support tools, RealRisks and BNAV. We accessed EHR data using FHIR for six patient advocates, and downloaded and parsed XML documents. We searched for relevant clinical variables, and evaluated if data was sufficient to calculate risk using validated models (Gail, Breast Cancer Screening Consortium [BCSC], BRCAPRO). While only one advocate had sufficient EHR data to calculate risk using the BCSC model only, we identified variables including age, race/ethnicity, mammographic density, and prior breast biopsy in most advocates. EHR data from FHIR could be incorporated into automated breast cancer risk calculation in clinical decision support tools.

Surgical interventions for uterine prolapse and for vault prolapse: the two VUE RCTs.

BACKGROUND: New surgical approaches for apical prolapse have gradually been introduced, with few prospective randomised controlled trial data to evaluate their safety and efficacy compared with traditional methods. OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical uterine preservation with vaginal hysterectomy in women with uterine prolapse and abdominal procedures with vaginal procedures in women with vault prolapse in terms of clinical effectiveness, adverse events, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. DESIGN: Two parallel randomised controlled trials (i.e. Uterine and Vault). Allocation was by remote web-based randomisation (1 : 1 ratio), minimised on the need for concomitant anterior and/or posterior procedure, concomitant incontinence procedure, age and surgeon. SETTING: UK hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Uterine trial - 563 out of 565 randomised women had uterine prolapse surgery. Vault trial - 208 out of 209 randomised women had vault prolapse surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Uterine trial - uterine preservation or vaginal hysterectomy. Vault trial - abdominal or vaginal vault suspension. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were women's prolapse symptoms (as measured using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score), prolapse-specific quality of life and cost-effectiveness (as assessed by incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year). RESULTS: Uterine trial - adjusting for baseline and minimisation covariates, the mean Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score at 12 months for uterine preservation was 4.2 (standard deviation 4.9) versus vaginal hysterectomy with a Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score of 4.2 (standard deviation 5.3) (mean difference -0.05, 95% confidence interval -0.91 to 0.81). Serious adverse event rates were similar between the groups (uterine preservation 5.4% vs. vaginal hysterectomy 5.9%; risk ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.38 to 1.75). There was no difference in overall prolapse stage. Significantly more women would recommend vaginal hysterectomy to a friend (odds ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.83). Uterine preservation was £235 (95% confidence interval £6 to £464) more expensive than vaginal hysterectomy and generated non-significantly fewer quality-adjusted life-years (mean difference -0.004, 95% confidence interval -0.026 to 0.019). Vault trial - adjusting for baseline and minimisation covariates, the mean Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score at 12 months for an abdominal procedure was 5.6 (standard deviation 5.4) versus vaginal procedure with a Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score of 5.9 (standard deviation 5.4) (mean difference -0.61, 95% confidence interval -2.08 to 0.86). The serious adverse event rates were similar between the groups (abdominal 5.9% vs. vaginal 6.0%; risk ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.27 to 3.44). The objective anterior prolapse stage 2b or more was higher in the vaginal group than in the abdominal group (odds ratio 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.79). There was no difference in the overall prolapse stage. An abdominal procedure was £570 (95% confidence interval £459 to £682) more expensive than a vaginal procedure and generated non-significantly more quality-adjusted life-years (mean difference 0.004, 95% confidence interval -0.031 to 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: Uterine trial - in terms of efficacy, quality of life or adverse events in the short term, no difference was identified between uterine preservation and vaginal hysterectomy. Vault trial - in terms of efficacy, quality of life or adverse events in the short term, no difference was identified between an abdominal and a vaginal approach. FUTURE WORK: Long-term follow-up for at least 6 years is ongoing to identify recurrence rates, need for further prolapse surgery, adverse events and cost-effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN86784244. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 13. See the National Institute for Health Research Journals Library website for further project information.

About 1 in 10 women has pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery, and around three of these women require a further operation. The aim of this study was to identify the most appropriate surgery for two different types of POP found in women: (1) when the uterus itself has come down ­ the Uterine trial ­ and (2) when a previous hysterectomy has resulted in the top of the vagina coming down ­ the Vault trial. In the Uterine trial, preserving the uterus was compared with removing it vaginally. In the Vault trial, uplifting and supporting the vault prolapse using an abdominal approach was compared with a vaginal approach. Women were asked about their prolapse and other symptoms affecting their quality of life (QoL). The majority of women reported that their prolapse symptoms and QoL improved after surgery. The women's prolapse was also measured by clinical examination before and 12 months after their operation. All of these results were compared between the different procedures. It was found that all the surgical procedures were successful within the 12-month review period. Abdominal surgery in the Vault trial as well as any that was required in the Uterine trial, was, however, slightly less cost-effective. Serious complications and the need for further prolapse surgery were similar in all groups. A small number of women did require additional surgery for prolapse recurrence or for small mesh exposure when additional or prolapse procedures had involved mesh. Women in both trials will be followed up for at least 6 years to determine longer-term costs and consequences.

Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy compared with second-generation endometrial ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding: the HEALTH RCT.

BACKGROUND: Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a common problem that affects many British women. When initial medical treatment is unsuccessful, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends surgical options such as endometrial ablation (EA) or hysterectomy. Although clinically and economically more effective than EA, total hysterectomy necessitates a longer hospital stay and is associated with slower recovery and a higher risk of complications. Improvements in endoscopic equipment and training have made laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy (LASH) accessible to most gynaecologists. This operation could preserve the advantages of total hysterectomy and reduce the risk of complications. OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of LASH with second-generation EA in women with HMB. DESIGN: A parallel-group, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Allocation was by remote web-based randomisation (1 : 1 ratio). Surgeons and participants were not blinded to the allocated procedure. SETTING: Thirty-one UK secondary and tertiary hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Women aged < 50 years with HMB. Exclusion criteria included plans to conceive; endometrial atypia; abnormal cytology; uterine cavity size > 11 cm; any fibroids > 3 cm; contraindications to laparoscopic surgery; previous EA; and inability to give informed consent or complete trial paperwork. INTERVENTIONS: LASH compared with second-generation EA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Co-primary clinical outcome measures were (1) patient satisfaction and (2) Menorrhagia Multi-Attribute Quality-of-Life Scale (MMAS) score at 15 months post randomisation. The primary economic outcome was incremental cost (NHS perspective) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: A total of 330 participants were randomised to each group (total n = 660). Women randomised to LASH were more likely to be satisfied with their treatment than those randomised to EA (97.1% vs. 87.1%) [adjusted difference in proportions 0.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 0.15; adjusted odds ratio (OR) from ordinal logistic regression (OLR) 2.53, 95% CI 1.83 to 3.48; p < 0.001]. Women randomised to LASH were also more likely to have the best possible MMAS score of 100 (68.7% vs. 54.5%) (adjusted difference in proportions 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.23; adjusted OR from OLR 1.87, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.67; p = 0.001). Serious adverse event rates were low and similar in both groups (4.5% vs. 3.6%). There was a significant difference in adjusted mean costs between LASH (£2886) and EA (£1282) at 15 months, but no significant difference in QALYs. Based on an extrapolation of expected differences in cost and QALYs out to 10 years, LASH cost an additional £1362 for an average QALY gain of 0.11, equating to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £12,314 per QALY. Probabilities of cost-effectiveness were 53%, 71% and 80% at cost-effectiveness thresholds of £13,000, £20,000 and £30,000 per QALY gained, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Follow-up data beyond 15 months post randomisation are not available to inform cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSION: LASH is superior to EA in terms of clinical effectiveness. EA is less costly in the short term, but expected higher retreatment rates mean that LASH could be considered cost-effective by 10 years post procedure. FUTURE WORK: Retreatment rates, satisfaction and quality-of-life scores at 10-year follow-up will help to inform long-term cost-effectiveness. TRIAI REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN49013893. 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. 23, No. 53. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Almost 1.5 million women in England and Wales suffer from heavy periods. Initial treatment involves tablets or a medicated coil inserted within the womb. Sometimes these treatments do not work and many women need an operation, either endometrial ablation (EA) (removing the lining of the womb) or a full hysterectomy (complete removal of the womb). Previous studies have shown that a full hysterectomy is better at relieving symptoms, but the risk of complications during surgery is higher and patients take longer to recover fully. A newer operation, laparoscopic (keyhole) supracervical hysterectomy, or 'LASH', removes only the part of the womb that causes periods and preserves the cervix or neck of the womb. Women who have LASH can expect fewer complications, earlier discharge from hospital and quicker recovery time. In this study, we compared EA with LASH by asking women who had either procedure how they felt about it 1 year after their operation. Regardless of which operation they had, most women were very satisfied and felt that their symptoms were better. However, the results were much better for those who had the LASH operation, although these women stayed in hospital for longer and took more time to recover. There was no difference in complications from either surgery, although nearly 1 in 20 women who had an EA returned within 1 year to have their wombs removed in a second operation. Although LASH led to a greater improvement in symptoms and levels of satisfaction, it was more expensive in terms of costs incurred by both the health service and society. Given that some women who had an EA are likely to need a second operation in the future, LASH surgery may provide better value for money in the long term.

Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy versus endometrial ablation for women with heavy menstrual bleeding (HEALTH): a parallel-group, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Heavy menstrual bleeding affects 25% of women in the UK, many of whom require surgery to treat it. Hysterectomy is effective but has more complications than endometrial ablation, which is less invasive but ultimately leads to hysterectomy in 20% of women. We compared laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy with endometrial ablation in women seeking surgical treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding. METHODS: In this parallel-group, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial in 31 hospitals in the UK, women younger than 50 years who were referred to a gynaecologist for surgical treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding and who were eligible for endometrial ablation were randomly allocated (1:1) to either laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy or second generation endometrial ablation. Women were randomly assigned by either an interactive voice response telephone system or an internet-based application with a minimisation algorithm based on centre and age group (<40 years vs ≥40 years). Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy involves laparoscopic (keyhole) surgery to remove the upper part of the uterus (the body) containing the endometrium. Endometrial ablation aims to treat heavy menstrual bleeding by destroying the endometrium, which is responsible for heavy periods. The co-primary clinical outcomes were patient satisfaction and condition-specific quality of life, measured with the menorrhagia multi-attribute quality of life scale (MMAS), assessed at 15 months after randomisation. Our analysis was based on the intention-to-treat principle. The trial was registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN49013893. FINDINGS: Between May 21, 2014, and March 28, 2017, we enrolled and randomly assigned 660 women (330 in each group). 616 (93%) of 660 women were operated on within the study period, 588 (95%) of whom received the allocated procedure and 28 (5%) of whom had an alternative surgery. At 15 months after randomisation, more women allocated to laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy were satisfied with their operation compared with those in the endometrial ablation group (270 [97%] of 278 women vs 244 [87%] of 280 women; adjusted percentage difference 9·8, 95% CI 5·1-14·5; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2·53, 95% CI 1·83-3·48; p<0·0001). Women randomly assigned to laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy were also more likely to have the best possible MMAS score of 100 than women assigned to endometrial ablation (180 [69%] of 262 women vs 146 [54%] of 268 women; adjusted percentage difference 13·3, 95% CI 3·8-22·8; adjusted OR 1·87, 95% CI 1·31-2·67; p=0·00058). 14 (5%) of 309 women in the laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy group and 11 (4%) of 307 women in the endometrial ablation group had at least one serious adverse event (adjusted OR 1·30, 95% CI 0·56-3·02; p=0·54). INTERPRETATION: Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy is superior to endometrial ablation in terms of clinical effectiveness and has a similar proportion of complications, but takes longer to perform and is associated with a longer recovery. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Meat Vulnerabilities to Economic Food Adulteration Require New Analytical Solutions.

Meat has been identified as one of the food categories at most risk of food fraud. Meat species substitution has been in the spotlight with the European horse meat scandal in 2013. Analysis of cases reported on the web shows that incidents of meat substitution are still recurring worldwide. Altogether these cases highlight significant weaknesses in the supply chain transparency and traceability of raw meat materials. This has triggered recent progress from the food industry to apply new software tools enabling the mapping of meat supply chains. Nevertheless, a meat vulnerability assessment showed that meat and derivatives are highly susceptible to many fraudulent malpractices. Therefore, more effective measures are needed to manage the risk and new analytical solutions are required to increase the deterrence of meat adulteration and rapid detection of fraud. DNA-based methods have evolved rapidly as shown with the application of the new LCD array and Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) in order to detect broad meat species adulteration. Moreover, new technologies such as NGS together with the Rapid Evaporative Ionization Mass Spectrometry (REIMS) are emerging as a really promising association of analytical approaches for rapid detection of several malpractices.

From the Medical Board of the National Psoriasis Foundation: Treatment targets for plaque psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: An urgent need exists in the United States to establish treatment goals in psoriasis. OBJECTIVE: We aim to establish defined treatment targets toward which clinicians and patients with psoriasis can strive to inform treatment decisions, reduce disease burden, and improve outcomes in practice. METHODS: The National Psoriasis Foundation conducted a consensus-building study among psoriasis experts using the Delphi method. The process consisted of: (1) literature review, (2) pre-Delphi question selection and input from general dermatologists and patients, and (3) 4 Delphi rounds. RESULTS: A total of 25 psoriasis experts participated in the Delphi process. The most preferred instrument was body surface area (BSA). The most preferred time for evaluating patient response after starting new therapies was at 3 months. The acceptable response at 3 months postinitiation was either BSA 3% or less or BSA improvement 75% or more from baseline. The target response at 3 months postinitiation was BSA 1% or less. During the maintenance period, evaluation every 6 months was most preferred. The target response at every 6 months maintenance evaluation is BSA 1% or less. LIMITATIONS: Although BSA is feasible in practice, it does not encompass health-related quality of life, costs, and risks of side effects. CONCLUSION: With defined treatment targets, clinicians and patients can regularly evaluate treatment responses and perform benefit-risk assessments of therapeutic options individualized to the patient.

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical options for the management of anterior and/or posterior vaginal wall prolapse: two randomised controlled trials within a comprehensive cohort study - results from the PROSPECT Study.

BACKGROUND: The use of mesh in prolapse surgery is controversial, leading to a number of enquiries into its safety and efficacy. OBJECTIVE: To compare synthetic non-absorbable mesh inlay, biological graft and mesh kit with a standard repair in terms of clinical effectiveness, adverse effects, quality of life (QoL), costs and cost-effectiveness. DESIGN: Two randomised controlled trials within a comprehensive cohort (CC) study. Allocation was by a remote web-based randomisation system in a 1 :1 : 1 ratio (Primary trial) or 1 : 1 : 2 ratio (Secondary trial), and was minimised on age, type of prolapse repair planned, need for a concomitant continence procedure, need for a concomitant upper vaginal prolapse procedure and surgeon. Participants and outcome assessors were blinded to randomisation; participants were unblinded if they requested the information. Surgeons were not blinded to allocated procedure. SETTING: Thirty-five UK hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Primary study: 2474 women in the analysis (including 1348 randomised) having primary anterior or posterior prolapse surgery. Secondary study: 398 in the analysis (including 154 randomised) having repeat anterior or posterior prolapse surgery. CC3: 215 women having either uterine or vault prolapse repair. INTERVENTIONS: Anterior or posterior repair alone, or with mesh inlay, biological graft or mesh kit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prolapse symptoms [Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score (POP-SS)]; prolapse-specific QoL; cost-effectiveness [incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY)]. RESULTS: Primary trials: adjusting for baseline and minimisation covariates, mean POP-SS was similar for each comparison {standard 5.4 [standard deviation (SD) 5.5] vs. mesh 5.5 (SD 5.1), mean difference (MD) 0.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.70 to 0.71; standard 5.5 (SD 5.6) vs. graft 5.6 (SD 5.6), MD -0.15, 95% CI -0.93 to 0.63}. Serious non-mesh adverse effects rates were similar between the groups in year 1 [standard 7.2% vs. mesh 7.8%, risk ratio (RR) 1.08, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.72; standard 6.3% vs. graft 9.8%, RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.59]. There were no statistically significant differences between groups in any other outcome measure. The cumulative mesh complication rates over 2 years were 2 of 430 (0.5%) for standard repair (trial 1), 46 of 435 (10.6%) for mesh inlay and 2 of 368 (0.5%) for biological graft. The CC findings were comparable. Incremental costs were £363 (95% CI -£32 to £758) and £565 (95% CI £180 to £950) for mesh and graft vs. standard, respectively. Incremental QALYs were 0.071 (95% CI -0.004 to 0.145) and 0.039 (95% CI -0.041 to 0.120) for mesh and graft vs. standard, respectively. A Markov decision model extrapolating trial results over 5 years showed standard repair had the highest probability of cost-effectiveness, but results were surrounded by considerable uncertainty. Secondary trials: there were no statistically significant differences between the randomised groups in any outcome measure, but the sample size was too small to be conclusive. The cumulative mesh complication rates over 2 years were 7 of 52 (13.5%) for mesh inlay and 4 of 46 (8.7%) for mesh kit, with no mesh exposures for standard repair. CONCLUSIONS: In women who were having primary repairs, there was evidence of no benefit from the use of mesh inlay or biological graft compared with standard repair in terms of efficacy, QoL or adverse effects (other than mesh complications) in the short term. The Secondary trials were too small to provide conclusive results. LIMITATIONS: Women in the Primary trials included some with a previous repair in another compartment. Follow-up is vital to identify any long-term potential benefits and serious adverse effects. FUTURE WORK: Long-term follow-up to at least 6 years after surgery is ongoing to identify recurrence rates, need for further prolapse surgery, adverse effects and cost-effectiveness. TRIAI REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN60695184. 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. 20, No. 95. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Guidelines of care for the management of atopic dermatitis: section 1. Diagnosis and assessment of atopic dermatitis.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, pruritic, inflammatory dermatosis that affects up to 25% of children and 2% to 3% of adults. This guideline addresses important clinical questions that arise in the management and care of AD, providing updated and expanded recommendations based on the available evidence. In this first of 4 sections, methods for the diagnosis and monitoring of disease, outcomes measures for assessment, and common clinical associations that affect patients with AD are discussed. Known risk factors for the development of disease are also reviewed.

A cost-utility analysis of microwave endometrial ablation versus thermal balloon endometrial ablation.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of microwave endometrial ablation (MEA) and thermal balloon endometrial ablation (TBALL) for heavy menstrual bleeding. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis performed alongside a pragmatic RCT in a single hospital within Scotland on women undergoing MEA and TBALL. Resource use data collected from all 314 trial participants were combined with study specific and published unit cost data to estimate a cost per patient. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were based on EQ-5D responses at baseline, 2 weeks, 6 and 12 months. The incremental cost per QALY of TBALL versus MEA was calculated and bootstrapping was performed to determine the likelihood that a treatment would be cost-effective at different threshold values for society's willingness to pay for a QALY. RESULTS: The mean cost of TBALL (10 years equipment life, 100 uses annually) of reusable equipment was pound181 (95% confidence interval [CI] pound70-434) greater than MEA. There were no statistically significant differences between the total nonhealth costs and health benefits of the two arms. On average, MEA provided more QALYs after adjusting for baseline EQ-5D score (0.017; 95% CI 0.017-0.051). In terms of mean incremental cost per QALY, MEA was, on average, dominant (less costly and at least as effective) and there was over a 90% chance that MEA would be considered cost-effective at a pound20,000 threshold of a cost per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: MEA is likely to be more cost-effective than TBALL at 1 year. Further longer-term follow-up is, however, needed.

Melanoma: prevention and early detection.

Exposure to ultraviolet radiation is the main modifiable risk factor for melanoma. Strong epidemiologic and molecular evidence links sun exposure to the development of melanoma. Given the ubiquitous abundance of ultraviolet radiation, prevention aimed at blocking sun exposure is recommended by the American Academy of Dermatology, the Skin Cancer Foundation, the American Cancer Society, the Centers for Disease Control, and the Environmental Protection Agency. However, in contrast to other forms of skin damage, controversial data regarding sunscreen use and increased melanoma risk, possibly secondary to more overall sun exposure in melanoma patients, requires clarification. Primary care physicians may not be as adept at identifying worrisome lesions, but they have more opportunity to make the diagnosis. False positive identification of lesions and biopsy does not lead to extreme morbidity. Counseling patients to perform self skin examinations also contributes to important early detection.

A randomised controlled trial of microwave endometrial ablation without endometrial preparation in the outpatient setting: patient acceptability, treatment outcome and costs.

OBJECTIVE: To compare outpatient microwave endometrial ablation (MEA) in the postmenstrual phase to standard MEA treatment after drug preparation in a day case theatre environment. DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial. SETTING: A large United Kingdom teaching hospital. POPULATION: Two hundred and ten women complaining of excessive menstrual loss. METHODS: Two hundred and ten women with excessive menstrual loss were randomised. Ninety-seven women were treated as outpatients in the immediate post-menstrual phase and 100 were treated in an operating theatre after hormonal preparation. All procedures were commenced under local anaesthesia with or without conscious sedation. Analysis was by modified intention to treat. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measures were satisfaction with treatment (measured at one year) and acceptability of treatment (measured at two weeks). Secondary outcome measures were menstrual outcome and financial cost. RESULTS: Significantly more women found treatment post-menses acceptable; 86 (89.5%) versus 76 (76.0%) [difference in proportions 13.6%, 95% CI (3.0%, 23.9%)]. Similar numbers in each arm were totally or generally satisfied with the treatment, 86 (92.5%) versus 84 (88.4%) [difference in proportions 4.1%, 95% CI (-4.7%, 12.9%)] while amenorrhoea rates at one year were comparable, 52 (55.9%) versus 60 (61.9%). [difference in proportions -5.9%, 95% CI (-19.8%, 7.6%)]. The mean health service costs were 124 pounds (95% CI 86-194 pounds) lower for the patients in the post-menses group. CONCLUSION: MEA performed under local anaesthesia (with or without conscious sedation) in the post-menstrual phase achieves high levels of satisfaction is very acceptable to patients and results in significantly reduced health service costs. Importantly menstrual outcomes are not affected by omission of drug preparation. There is now good evidence to support the use of MEA, without drug endometrial preparation, in the outpatient setting.

The sensitivity of Medicare data for identifying incident cases of invasive melanoma (United States).

BACKGROUND: The completeness of Medicare claims for identifying patients with melanoma for purposes of conducting population-based studies of melanoma is unknown. METHODS: Using a linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result (SEER) tumor registry-Medicare database, the sensitivity of Medicare claims for identifying 5372 patients age > or =65 years diagnosed with invasive melanoma between 1992 and 1996 was determined. Sensitivity was calculated as the proportion of incident cases of melanoma reported by SEER that was also captured by Medicare claim diagnostic codes. RESULTS: The overall sensitivity of combined Part A and Part B Medicare for incident cases of melanoma was 90.1%. Part B Medicare and Part A Medicare alone had 89.5% and 16.5% sensitivity respectively. Sensitivity was lower for patients with unrecorded Breslow depth and for patients with unstaged or distant stage melanoma. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare Part B claims have a high sensitivity for detecting melanoma incidence; Medicare Part A has low sensitivity. This sharply contrasts with published studies of other cancers, for whom Part A rather than Part B Medicare captures the predominant portion of incident cases. Medicare Part B or combined Part A and Part B administrative data is a potentially valuable resource for population-based melanoma research in the elderly. Further research characterizing the specificity and predictive value of Medicare data is needed to assess the potential implications of false positive melanoma diagnostic codes.

Geographic and patient variation in receipt of surveillance procedures after local excision of cutaneous melanoma.

Little is known about variation in surveillance practices following the diagnosis of invasive melanoma. The objective of this study was to characterize geographic, patient, and tumor variation in the use of follow-up surveillance testing in patients with local or regional stage melanoma. A cohort of Medicare beneficiaries > or =65 y diagnosed with invasive melanoma during 1992 to 1996 living in a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry area was studied. Outpatient and inpatient Medicare claims 3 mo following diagnosis were examined for up to 2 y for surveillance procedures of interest. Use of chest X-ray, chest computed tomography scan, abdominal and/or pelvic computed tomography scan, abdominal ultrasound, head computed tomography scan, head magnetic resonance imaging, laboratory testing, and skin examinations were compared between patient groups and geographic regions. A total of 3389 patients were identified for the analysis. Surveillance testing was relatively common, ranging from 13% for abdominal ultrasound to 80% for laboratory testing. Follow-up skin examinations were performed in 70% to 90% of patients. The use of most surveillance procedures was associated (p<0.01) with younger age, male gender, regional stage tumors, and geographical area, with up to 2-fold differences observed. In contrast, there was much less variability in the receipt of skin examinations. Further studies are needed to determine the etiology and impact of such disparities, and the influence of surveillance procedures on morbidity and mortality.

The cost of microwave endometrial ablation under different anaesthetic and clinical settings.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs of microwave endometrial ablation under local anaesthetic and general anaesthetic in an operating theatre and to estimate the cost of performing treatment under local anaesthetic in a dedicated clinic setting. DESIGN: The costing study was undertaken alongside a randomised controlled trial comparing the acceptability of microwave endometrial ablation using local versus general anaesthetic in a theatre setting. SETTING: Department of Gynaecology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Scotland. SAMPLES: One hundred and twenty-seven women undergoing microwave endometrial ablation who had been randomly allocated to general or local anaesthetic. METHODS: Health and non-health service resource use was recorded prospectively. Data on resource use were combined with unit costs estimated using standardised methods to determine the cost per patient for microwave endometrial ablation under local or general anaesthetic in theatre. A model was developed to estimate the health service cost of microwave endometrial ablation under local anaesthetic in a clinic setting. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Health and non-health service costs. RESULTS: There was little difference in cost when treatments were performed under local or general anaesthetic in theatre. The median health and non-health cost of microwave endometrial ablation was 440 pounds and 120 pounds, respectively, under general anaesthetic and 428 pounds and 125 pounds per women under local anaesthetic. The health service cost of microwave endometrial ablation using local anaesthetic in a clinic setting was estimated to be 432 pounds per treatment; however, this varied from 389 pounds to 491 pounds in the sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: There are minimal cost savings to the patient or health service from using local rather than general anaesthetic for microwave endometrial ablation in a theatre setting. Cost modelling suggests that in a clinic setting microwave endometrial ablation has a similar cost to theatre based treatment once re-admissions for treatment under general anaesthetic are considered. Sensitivity analysis indicated that these findings were sensitive to assumptions in the model.

Quantifying skin disease burden in mycosis fungoides-type cutaneous T-cell lymphomas: the severity-weighted assessment tool (SWAT).

OBJECTIVE: To develop a quantitative tool to assess severity of mycosis fungoides. DESIGN: Prospective analysis of a cohort. SETTING: University department of dermatology-based cutaneous lymphoma clinic. PATIENTS: From 1984 to 1995, 1186 visits from 323 referred patients seen in a multidisciplinary cutaneous lymphoma program. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Severity-weighted assessment tool (SWAT) scores were obtained for patients at each visit. This score represents the product of the percentage total body surface area (%TBSA) involvement of each lesion type (patch, plaque, and tumor or ulceration), multiplied by a weighting factor: SWAT = (patch %TBSA x 1) + (plaque %TBSA x 2) + (tumor or ulcer %TBSA x 3). In addition, the standard measurements of TBSA involvement and physician global assessments were recorded for comparison. RESULTS: The SWAT score correlated well with %TBSA (r = 0.95, P<.001), physician global assessment (r = 0.60, P<.001), and time to complete remission during psoralen-UV-A therapy (r = 0.80, P<.001), therefore indicating validity against standard measures. Analysis of individual and subsets of patients demonstrated that the SWAT score more accurately quantified changes in skin disease burden, including mixed responses to treatment, than did %TBSA alone. CONCLUSIONS: The SWAT score is a useful clinical measurement for mycosis fungoides. The SWAT score captures overall physician impressions of disease status on a continuous dimensionless numerical scale, therefore providing a defined, objective, and sensitive quantitative measure. This tool is suitable for individual patient assessment, clinical trials, and outcome comparisons.