Clinical statistical analysis plan for the ACCURE trial: the effect of appendectomy on the clinical course of ulcerative colitis, a randomised international multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: The primary treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) is medical therapy using a standard step-up approach. An appendectomy might modulate the clinical course of UC, decreasing the incidence of relapses and reducing need for medication. The objective of the ACCURE trial is to assess the efficacy of laparoscopic appendectomy in addition to standard medical treatment in maintaining remission in UC patients. This article presents the statistical analysis plan to evaluate the outcomes of the ACCURE trial. DESIGN AND METHODS: The ACCURE trial was designed as a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. UC patients with a new diagnosis or a disease relapse within the past 12 months, treated with 5-ASA, corticosteroids, or immunomodulators until complete clinical and endoscopic remission (defined as total Mayo score < 3 with endoscopic subscore of 0 or 1), were counselled for inclusion. Also, patients previously treated with biologicals who had a washout period of at least 3 months were considered for inclusion. Patients were randomised (1:1) to laparoscopic appendectomy plus maintenance treatment or a control group (maintenance therapy only). The primary outcome is the 1-year UC relapse rate (defined as a total Mayo-score ≥ 5 with endoscopic subscore of 2 or 3, or clinically as an exacerbation of symptoms and rectal bleeding or FCP > 150 or intensified medical therapy other than 5-ASA therapy). Secondary outcomes include number of relapses per patient, time to first relapse, disease activity, number of colectomies, medication usage, and health-related quality of life. DISCUSSION: The ACCURE trial will provide comprehensive evidence whether adding an appendectomy to maintenance treatment is superior to maintenance treatment only in maintaining remission in UC patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register (NTR) NTR2883 . Registered May 3, 2011. ISRCTN, ISRCTN60945764 . Registered August 12, 2019.

A vascular multi-arm multi-stage trial to prevent groin wound surgical site infection: A feasibility survey.

Surgical site infection (SSI) is common following arterial surgery involving a groin incision. There is a lack of evidence regarding interventions to prevent groin wound SSI, therefore, a survey of vascular clinicians was undertaken to assess current opinion and practice, equipoise and feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT). Participants at the Vascular Society of Great Britain and Ireland 2021 Annual Scientific Meeting were surveyed regarding three separate interventions designed to prevent SSI in the groin; impregnated incise drapes, diakylcarbomoyl chloride dressings and antibiotic impregnated collagen sponges. Results were collated via an online survey using the Research Electronic Data Capture platform. Seventy-five participants completed the questionnaire, most were consultant vascular surgeons (50/75, 66.7%). The majority agree that groin wound SSI is a major problem (73/75, 97.3%), and would be content using either of the three interventions (51/61, 83.6%) and had clinical equipoise to randomise patients to any of the three interventions versus standard of care (70/75, 93.3%). There was some reluctance to not use impregnated incise drapes as may be considered "standard of care". Groin wound SSI is perceived as major problem in vascular surgery, and a multicentre RCT of three preventative interventions appears acceptable to vascular surgeons.

Protocol for the UK cohort study to investigate the prevention of parastomal hernia (the CIPHER study).

AIM: Abdominal surgery sometimes necessitates the creation of a stoma, which can cause future complications including parastomal hernia (PSH), an incisional hernia adjacent to and related to the stoma. PSH affects approximately 40% of patients within 2 years of stoma formation. Complications of PSH reduce a patient's quality of life and can be severe (e.g. bowel obstruction). PSHs are difficult to manage and can recur after surgical repair. Therefore, it is very important to prevent a PSH. Surgeons create stomas in different ways and both patient and surgical factors are believed to influence the development of PSH. The aim of the CIPHER study is to investigate the influence of different surgical techniques on the development of PSH. METHOD: The UK cohort study to investigate the prevention of parastomal hernia (the CIPHER study) aims to recruit 4000 patients undergoing elective or expedited surgery with the intention of forming an ileostomy or colostomy, irrespective of the primary indication for the planned surgery. For each patient, surgeons will describe their methods of trephine formation, mesh reinforcement of the stoma trephine, use of the stoma as a specimen extraction site and wound closure. The primary outcome will be incident PSH during follow-up, defined as symptoms of PSH (custom-designed questionnaire) and anatomical PSH, ascertained by independent reading of usual care CT scans. Secondary outcomes will include surgical site infection, the Comprehensive Complication Index, quality of life (EQ-5D-5L and SF-12), PSH repair and use of NHS resources. RESULTS: Results of the study will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. All publications relating to the results of CIPHER will use a corporate authorship, 'The CIPHER Study Investigators' with named writing committee members. CONCLUSION: The CIPHER study will be the first to investigate detailed surgical methods of stoma formation in a large, representative cohort of patients with a range of primary indications, both cancer and noncancer.

Three wound-dressing strategies to reduce surgical site infection after abdominal surgery: the Bluebelle feasibility study and pilot RCT.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) affects up to 20% of people with a primary closed wound after surgery. Wound dressings may reduce SSI. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of dressing types or no dressing to reduce SSI in primary surgical wounds. DESIGN: Phase A - semistructured interviews, outcome measure development, practice survey, literature reviews and value-of-information analysis. Phase B - pilot RCT with qualitative research and questionnaire validation. Patients and the public were involved. SETTING: Usual NHS care. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing elective/non-elective abdominal surgery, including caesarean section. INTERVENTIONS: Phase A - none. Phase B - simple dressing, glue-as-a-dressing (tissue adhesive) or 'no dressing'. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Phase A - pilot RCT design; SSI, patient experience and wound management questionnaires; dressing practices; and value-of-information of a RCT. Phase B - participants screened, proportions consented/randomised; acceptability of interventions; adherence; retention; validity and reliability of SSI measure; and cost drivers. DATA SOURCES: Phase A - interviews with patients and health-care professionals (HCPs), narrative data from published RCTs and data about dressing practices. Phase B - participants and HCPs in five hospitals. RESULTS: Phase A - we interviewed 102 participants. HCPs interpreted 'dressing' variably and reported using available products. HCPs suggested practical/clinical reasons for dressing use, acknowledged the weak evidence base and felt that a RCT including a 'no dressing' group was acceptable. A survey showed that 68% of 1769 wounds (727 participants) had simple dressings and 27% had glue-as-a-dressing. Dressings were used similarly in elective and non-elective surgery. The SSI questionnaire was developed from a content analysis of existing SSI tools and interviews, yielding 19 domains and 16 items. A main RCT would be valuable to the NHS at a willingness to pay of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Phase B - from 4 March 2016 to 30 November 2016, we approached 862 patients for the pilot RCT; 81.1% were eligible, 59.4% consented and 394 were randomised (simple, n = 133; glue, n = 129; no dressing, n = 132); non-adherence was 3 out of 133, 8 out of 129 and 20 out of 132, respectively. SSI occurred in 51 out of 281 participants. We interviewed 55 participants. All dressing strategies were acceptable to stakeholders, with no indication that adherence was problematic. Adherence aids and patients' understanding of their allocated dressing appeared to be key. The SSI questionnaire response rate overall was 67.2%. Items in the SSI questionnaire fitted a single scale, which had good reliability (test-retest and Cronbach's alpha of > 0.7) and diagnostic accuracy (c-statistic = 0.906). The key cost drivers were hospital appointments, dressings and redressings, use of new medicines and primary care appointments. LIMITATIONS: Multiple activities, often in parallel, were challenging to co-ordinate. An amendment took 4 months, restricting recruitment to the pilot RCT. Only 67% of participants completed the SSI questionnaire. We could not implement photography in theatres. CONCLUSIONS: A main RCT of dressing strategies is feasible and would be valuable to the NHS. The SSI questionnaire is sufficiently accurate to be used as the primary outcome. A main trial with three groups (as in the pilot) would be valuable to the NHS, using a primary outcome of SSI at discharge and patient-reported SSI symptoms at 4-8 weeks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Phase A - Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN06792113; Phase B - Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN49328913. 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. 39. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Funding was also provided by the Medical Research Council ConDuCT-II Hub (reference number MR/K025643/1).

Wound infections are common after surgery. Some are cured with simple treatment, but others may lead to serious problems. Reducing the risk of a wound infection is important. We do not know if the type of dressing, or not using a dressing, influences the risk of infection. A study that allocated patients to receive different dressings (or no dressing) would answer this question. We did preliminary research to explore whether or not such a study is possible. We interviewed doctors, nurses and patients about their views on dressings and a future study. We also described dressings currently being used in the NHS and found that simple dressings and tissue adhesive (glue) 'as-a-dressing' are used most frequently. We studied existing evidence and interviewed experts to develop a questionnaire, completed by patients, to identify wound infections after patients leave hospital and tested its accuracy. We also explored taking photographs of wounds. We investigated whether or not a major study would be worth the cost and designed a pilot study to test its feasibility. The pilot study recruited 394 patients undergoing abdominal operations in five NHS hospitals. These patients were allocated to have a simple dressing, glue-as-a-dressing or no dressing, and 92% received the allocated dressing method. Patients and their doctors and nurses found the dressing methods to be acceptable. We showed that the new patient questionnaire accurately identified infections. Patients or their carers also found it acceptable to photograph their wounds. Our research suggests that a future large study would be worth the investment and is possible.

A pilot observational study measuring acute sarcopenia in older colorectal surgery patients.

OBJECTIVE: To explore variability in acute changes in muscle mass and function in older patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery, as well as feasibility of measures, in order to refine study processes to inform the protocol for a larger study. RESULTS: Results are presented for seven participants recruited to this pilot study. It is possible to perform serial measurements of bilateral anterior thigh thickness (BATT) and handgrip strength prior to, within 24 h of surgery, and 1 week postoperatively. Gait speed can be reliably measured preoperatively and at 1 week postoperatively. In this pilot study, BATT and gait speed declined at 1 week postoperatively (median BATT 4.17 cm, 3.47 cm, p = 0.028; median gait speed 0.89 m/s, 0.83 m/s, p = 0.043). Baseline hsCRP correlated with change in BATT (τb = 0.73, p = 0.04) and baseline DHEA-S correlated with change in gait speed (τb = 0.87, p = 0.02). This pilot study has assisted to refine the protocol for our larger study, which will further characterise these changes.

Development of a single, practical measure of surgical site infection (SSI) for patient report or observer completion.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are the third most common hospital-associated infection and can lead to significant patient morbidity and healthcare costs. Identification of SSIs is key to surveillance and research but reliable assessment is challenging, particularly after hospital discharge when most SSIs present. Existing SSI measurement tools have limitations and their suitability for post-discharge surveillance is uncertain. AIMS: This study aimed to develop a single measure to identify SSI after hospital discharge, suitable for patient or observer completion. METHODS: A three-phase mixed methods study was undertaken: Phase 1, an analysis of existing tools and semi-structured interviews with patients and professionals to establish the content of the measure; Phase 2, development of questionnaire items suitable for patients and professionals; Phase 3, pre-testing the single measure to assess acceptability and understanding to both stakeholder groups. Interviews and pre-testing took place over 12 months in 2014-2015 with patients and professionals from five specialties recruited from two UK hospital Trusts. FINDINGS: Analyses of existing tools and interviews identified 19 important domains for assessing SSIs. Domains were developed into provisional questionnaire items. Pre-testing and iterative revision resulted in a final version with 16 items that were understood and easily completed by patients and observers (healthcare professionals). CONCLUSION: A single patient and observer measure for post-discharge SSI assessment has been developed. Further testing of the validity, reliability and accuracy of the measure is underway.

Adapting to ulcerative colitis to try to live a 'normal' life: a qualitative study of patients' experiences in the Midlands region of England.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a framework that is able to categorise whether patients are able to adapt to and lead a 'normal' life with ulcerative colitis (UC) and to detail the factors that influence this. DESIGN: Qualitative research study using in-depth semi-structured interviews. SETTING: Four clinical sites in the West and East Midlands regions of England. PARTICIPANTS: 28 adult patients diagnosed with UC for years between 1 and 22. RESULTS: Medication was rarely sufficient for patients to adapt to UC and live as 'normal' a life as possible. Virtually all patients tested and adopted non-medical adaptation methods to improve physical and psychological well-being, to help them carry on working and to prevent embarrassment. In addition, some patients benefited from outside support providing them with practical, emotional and/or financial help. In conjunction with adaptation strategies and the time to adapt, this meant that some patients with severe clinical disease were able to maintain a sense of normality in life. Patients reported that clinicians were not always receptive to discussion of the broader context of life with UC. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' experience of UC and their ability to adapt in order to maintain a sense of normality in life is a complex interplay of symptoms, adaptation strategies and outside support. Over time patients test out a variety of non-medical adaptation strategies. Awareness of this may help clinicians and researchers to understand patients' views on the role of medical and other therapies. Further research around the utility of this framework in clinical practice and research is now required. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN56523019, results.

A mixed-methods feasibility and external pilot study to inform a large pragmatic randomised controlled trial of the effects of surgical wound dressing strategies on surgical site infections (Bluebelle Phase B): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are common, occurring in up to 25% of > 4 million operations performed in England each year. Previous trials of the effect of wound dressings on the risk of developing a SSI are of poor quality and underpowered. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a feasibility and pilot trial to examine the feasibility of a full trial that will compare simple dressings, no dressing and tissue-glue as a dressing. It is examining the overall acceptability of trial participation, identifying opportunities for refinement, testing the feasibility of and validating new outcome tools to assess SSI, wound management issues and patients' wound symptom experiences. It is also exploring methods for avoiding performance bias and blinding outcome assessors by testing the feasibility of collecting wound photographs taken in theatre immediately after wound closure and, at 4-8 weeks after surgery, taken by participants themselves or their carers. Finally, it is identifying the main cost drivers for an economic evaluation of dressing types. Integrated qualitative research is exploring acceptability and reasons for non-adherence to allocation. Adults undergoing primary elective or unplanned abdominal general surgery or Caesarean section are eligible. The main exclusion criteria are abdominal or other major surgery less than three months before the index operation or contraindication to dressing allocation. The trial is scheduled to recruit for nine months. The findings will be used to inform the design of a main trial. DISCUSSION: This pilot trial is the first pragmatic study to randomise participants to no dressing or tissue-glue as a dressing versus a simple dressing. Early evidence from the ongoing pilot shows that recruitment is proceeding well and that the interventions are acceptable to participants. Combined with the qualitative findings, the findings will inform whether a main, large trial is feasible and, if so, how it should be designed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN49328913 . Registered on 20 October 2015.

Appendectomy and the Risk of Colectomy in Ulcerative Colitis: A National Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory disease usually responding well to anti-inflammatory drugs but many patients will still need colectomy. Appendectomy is associated with a lower risk of later developing UC. We aimed to assess the longitudinal relationship between appendectomy, appendicitis, and disease course in UC patients. METHODS: A national cohort of UC patients with a diagnosis in 1964-2010 was identified from the Swedish National Patient Register that also provided information regarding appendicitis and/or appendectomy before or after the UC diagnosis. The risk for colectomy and UC-related hospital admissions was evaluated. RESULTS: Among 63,711 UC patients, 2,143 had appendectomy and 7,690 underwent colectomy. Appendectomy for appendicitis before 20 years of age and for non-appendicitis at all ages before UC diagnosis was associated with a lower risk of colectomy (hazard ratio (HR) 0.44, 0.27-0.72 and HR 0.62, 0.43-0.90, respectively), and fewer hospital admissions (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64-0.73 and IRR 0.54, 0.47-0.63, respectively). Appendectomy for appendicitis after the UC diagnosis was associated with a higher risk of colectomy (HR 1.56, 1.20-2.03), whereas no such association was found for other pathology (HR 1.40, 0.79-2.47). CONCLUSIONS: Appendectomy early in life and before developing UC is associated with a lower risk of colectomy as well as UC-related hospital admissions. Appendectomy for appendicitis after established UC appears associated with a worse disease course, with an increased rate of subsequent colectomy.

The ACCURE-trial: the effect of appendectomy on the clinical course of ulcerative colitis, a randomised international multicenter trial (NTR2883) and the ACCURE-UK trial: a randomised external pilot trial (ISRCTN56523019).

BACKGROUND: Over the past 20 years evidence has accumulated confirming the immunomodulatory role of the appendix in ulcerative colitis (UC). This led to the idea that appendectomy might alter the clinical course of established UC. The objective of this body of research is to evaluate the short-term and medium-term efficacy of appendectomy to maintain remission in patients with UC, and to establish the acceptability and cost-effectiveness of the intervention compared to standard treatment. METHODS/DESIGN: These paired phase III multicenter prospective randomised studies will include patients over 18 years of age with an established diagnosis of ulcerative colitis and a disease relapse within 12 months prior to randomisation. Patients need to have been medically treated until complete clinical (Mayo score <3) and endoscopic (Mayo score 0 or 1) remission. Patients will then be randomised 1:1 to a control group (maintenance 5-ASA treatment, no appendectomy) or elective laparoscopic appendectomy plus maintenance treatment. The primary outcome measure is the one year cumulative UC relapse rate - defined both clinically and endoscopically as a total Mayo-score ≥5 with endoscopic subscore of 2 or 3. Secondary outcomes that will be assessed include the number of relapses per patient at 12 months, the time to first relapse, health related quality of life and treatment costs, and number of colectomies in each arm. DISCUSSION: The ACCURE and ACCURE-UK trials will provide evidence on the role and acceptability of appendectomy in the treatment of ulcerative colitis and the effects of appendectomy on the disease course. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR2883 ; ISRCTN56523019.

Rational centre selection for RCTs with a parallel economic evaluation--the next step towards increased generalisability?

The paper discusses the impact of centre selection on the generalisability of randomised controlled trial (RCT)-based economic evaluations and suggests a future research agenda. The first section briefly reviews the current methods for addressing generalisability. We argue that these methods make no verifiable assumptions about how representative the recruiting centres are to the population of centres in the jurisdiction. The second section uses data from a multicentre RCT to illustrate that cost-effectiveness estimates can be influenced by the sample of recruiting centres. Finally, we propose two concepts that may advance generalisability research. First, we distinguish between the 'research space' and the 'policy space' and argue that policy makers are interested in the latter, while current methods describe the former. Second, we propose a centre-specific generalisability index used at RCT design stage to address generalisability. We conclude that future research should focus on generalisability at RCT design stage rather than on post hoc analyses.

How to set up and manage a trainee-led research collaborative.

BACKGROUND: Ensuring that doctors in training acquire sufficient knowledge, experience and understanding of medical research is a universal and longstanding issue which has been brought into sharper focus by the growth of evidence based medicine. All healthcare systems preparing doctors in training for practice have to balance the acquisition of specific clinical attitudes, knowledge and skills with the wider need to ensure doctors are equipped to remain professionally competent as medical science advances. Most professional medical bodies acknowledge that this requires trainee doctors to experience some form of research education, not only in order to carry out original research, but to acquire sufficient academic skills to become accomplished research consumers in order to remain informed throughout their professional practice. There are many barriers to accomplishing this ambitious aim. DISCUSSION: This article briefly explains why research collaboratives are necessary, describes how to establish a collaborative, and recommends how to run one. It is based on the experiences of the pioneering West Midlands Research Collaborative and draws on the wider literature about the organisation and delivery of high quality research projects. Practical examples of collaborative projects are given to illustrate the potential of this form of research organisation. SUMMARY: The new trainee-led research collaboratives provide a supportive framework for planning, ownership and delivery of high quality multicentre research. This ensures clinical relevance, increases the chances of research findings being translated into changes in practice and should lead to improved patient outcomes. Research collaboratives also enhance the research skills and extend the scientific horizons of doctors in training.

The cost-effectiveness of wound-edge protection devices compared to standard care in reducing surgical site infection after laparotomy: an economic evaluation alongside the ROSSINI trial.

BACKGROUND: Wound-edge protection devices (WEPDs) have been used in surgery for more than 40 years to reduce surgical site infection (SSI). No economic evaluation of WEPDs against any comparator has ever been conducted. The aim of the paper was to assess whether WEPDs are cost-effective in reducing SSI compared to standard care alone in the United Kingdom. METHODS AND FINDINGS: An economic evaluation was conducted alongside the ROSSINI trial. The study perspective was that of the UK National Health Service and the time horizon was 30 days post-operatively. The study was conducted in 21 UK hospitals. 760 patients undergoing laparotomy were randomised to either WEPD or standard care and 735 were included in the primary analysis. The main economic outcome was cost-effectiveness based on incremental cost (£) per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Patients in the WEPD arm accessed health care worth £5,420 on average and gained 0.02131 QALYs, compared to £5,130 and 0.02133 QALYs gained in the standard care arm. The WEPD strategy was more costly and equally effective compared to standard care, but there was significant uncertainty around incremental costs and QALYs. The findings were robust to a range of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence to suggest that WEPDs can be considered a cost effective device to reduce SSI. Their continued use is a waste of limited health care resources.

The impact of timing of cholecystectomy following gallstone pancreatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Current guidelines for the management of acute gallstone pancreatitis recommend cholecystectomy as definitive treatment during primary admission or within 2 weeks of discharge, with the aim of preventing recurrent pancreatitis. However, cholecystectomy during the inflammatory phase may increase surgical complication rates. This study aimed to determine whether adherence to the guidelines prevents recurrent pancreatitis while minimising surgical complications. METHODS: Multi-centre review of seven UK hospitals, indentifying patients presenting with their first episode of gallstone pancreatitis between 2006 and 2008. RESULTS: A total of 523 patients with gallstone pancreatitis were identified, of which 363 (69%) underwent cholecystectomy (72 during the primary admission or within 2 weeks of discharge; 291 following this). Overall, 7% of patients had a complication related to cholecystectomy of which a greater proportion occurred when cholecystectomy was performed within guideline parameters (13% vs 6%; p = 0.07). 11% of patients were readmitted with recurrent pancreatitis prior to surgery, with those undergoing cholecystectomy outside guideline parameters being most at risk (p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: This study suggests cholecystectomy within guideline parameters significantly reduces recurrence of pancreatitis but may increase the risk of surgical complications. A prospective randomised study to assess the associated morbidity is required to inform future guidelines.

Impact of wound edge protection devices on surgical site infection after laparotomy: multicentre randomised controlled trial (ROSSINI Trial).

OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical effectiveness of wound edge protection devices in reducing surgical site infection after abdominal surgery. DESIGN: Multicentre observer blinded randomised controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing laparotomy at 21 UK hospitals. INTERVENTIONS: Standard care or the use of a wound edge protection device during surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Surgical site infection within 30 days of surgery, assessed by blinded clinicians at seven and 30 days and by patient's self report for the intervening period. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, duration of stay in hospital, and the effect of characteristics of the patient and operation on the efficacy of the device. RESULTS: 760 patients were enrolled with 382 patients assigned to the device group and 378 to the control group. Six patients in the device group and five in the control group did not undergo laparotomy. Fourteen patients, seven in each group, were lost to follow-up. A total of 184 patients experienced surgical site infection within 30 days of surgery, 91/369 (24.7%) in the device group and 93/366 (25.4%) in the control group (odds ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.69 to 1.36; P=0.85). This lack of benefit was consistent across wound assessments performed by clinicians and those reported by patients and across all secondary outcomes. In the secondary analyses no subgroup could be identified in which there was evidence of clinical benefit associated with use of the device. CONCLUSIONS: Wound edge protection devices do not reduce the rate of surgical site infection in patients undergoing laparotomy, and therefore their routine use for this role cannot be recommended. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 40402832.

A randomised controlled trial of the efficacy of ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Optimal analgesia following laparoscopic colorectal resection is yet to be determined; however, recent studies have questioned the role of postoperative epidural anaesthesia, suggesting other analgesic modalities may be preferable. The aim of this randomised controlled trial was to assess the effect of transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks on opioid requirements in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection. METHODS: After appropriate trial registration ( www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT 00830089) and local medical ethics review board approval (REC 09/H0407/10), all adult patients who were to undergo laparoscopic colorectal surgery at a single centre were randomised into the intervention group receiving bilateral TAP blocks or the control group (no TAP block). The blocks were administered prior to surgery after the induction of a standardised anaesthetic by an anaesthetist otherwise uninvolved with the case. The patient, theatre anaesthetist, surgeon, and ward staff were blinded to treatment allocation. All patients received postoperative analgesia of paracetamol and morphine as a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). Cumulative opioid consumption and pain scores were recorded at 2, 4, 6, and 24 h postoperatively and compared between the groups as were clinical outcomes and length of stay. RESULTS: The intervention (TAP block) group (n = 33) and the control group (n = 35) were comparable with respect to characteristics, specimen pathology, and type of procedure. The TAP block group's median cumulative morphine usage (40 mg [IQR = 25-63]) was significantly less than that of the control group (60 mg [IQR = 39-81]). Pain scores and median length of stay (LOS) were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Preoperative TAP blocks in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection reduced opioid use in the first postoperative day in this study.