Concepts, utilization, and perspectives on the Dutch Nationwide Trauma registry: a position paper.

Over the last decades, the Dutch trauma care have seen major improvements. To assess the performance of the Dutch trauma system, in 2007, the Dutch Nationwide Trauma Registry (DNTR) was established, which developed into rich source of information for quality assessment, quality improvement of the trauma system, and for research purposes. The DNTR is one of the most comprehensive trauma registries in the world as it includes 100% of all trauma patients admitted to the hospital through the emergency department. This inclusive trauma registry has shown its benefit over less inclusive systems; however, it comes with a high workload for high-quality data collection and thus more expenses. The comprehensive prospectively collected data in the DNTR allows multiple types of studies to be performed. Recent changes in legislation allow the DNTR to include the citizen service numbers, which enables new possibilities and eases patient follow-up. However, in order to maximally exploit the possibilities of the DNTR, further development is required, for example, regarding data quality improvement and routine incorporation of health-related quality of life questionnaires. This would improve the quality assessment and scientific output from the DNTR. Finally, the DNTR and all other (European) trauma registries should strive to ensure that the trauma registries are eligible for comparisons between countries and healthcare systems, with the goal to improve trauma patient care worldwide.

Hospital utilisation and the costs associated with complications of ICD implantation in a contemporary primary prevention cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Implantation of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is standard care for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. However, ICD-related complications are increasing as the population of ICD recipients grows. METHODS: ICD-related complications in a national DO-IT Registry cohort of 1442 primary prevention ICD patients were assessed in terms of additional use of hospital care resources and costs. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 28.7 months (IQR 25.2-33.7) one or more complications occurred in 13.5% of patients. A complication resulted in a surgical intervention in 53% of cases and required on average 3.65 additional hospital days. The additional hospital costs were €6,876 per complication or €8,110 per patient, to which clinical re-interventions and additional hospital days contributed most. Per category of complications, infections required most hospital utilisation and were most expensive at an average of €22,892. The mean costs were €5,800 for lead-related complications, €2,291 for pocket-related complications and €5,619 for complications due to other causes. We estimate that the total yearly incidence-based costs in the Netherlands for hospital management of ICD-related complications following ICD implantation for primary prevention are €2.7 million. CONCLUSION: Complications following ICD implantation are related to a substantial additional need for hospital resources. When performing cost-effectiveness analyses of ICD implantation, including the costs associated with complications, one should be aware that real-world complication rates may deviate from trial data. Considering the economic implications, strategies to reduce the incidence of complications are encouraged.

Optimal postoperative pain management after VATS lung resection by thoracic epidural analgesia, continuous paravertebral block or single-shot intercostal nerve block (OPtriAL): study protocol of a three-arm multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Adequate pain control after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for lung resection is important to improve postoperative mobilisation, recovery, and to prevent pulmonary complications. So far, no consensus exists on optimal postoperative pain management after VATS anatomic lung resection. Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is the reference standard for postoperative pain management following VATS. Although the analgesic effect of TEA is clear, it is associated with patient immobilisation, bladder dysfunction and hypotension which may result in delayed recovery and longer hospitalisation. These disadvantages of TEA initiated the development of unilateral regional techniques for pain management. The most frequently used techniques are continuous paravertebral block (PVB) and single-shot intercostal nerve block (ICNB). We hypothesize that using either PVB or ICNB is non-inferior to TEA regarding postoperative pain and superior regarding quality of recovery (QoR). Signifying faster postoperative mobilisation, reduced morbidity and shorter hospitalisation, these techniques may therefore reduce health care costs and improve patient satisfaction. METHODS: This multi-centre randomised study is a three-arm clinical trial comparing PVB, ICNB and TEA in a 1:1:1 ratio for pain (non-inferiority) and QoR (superiority) in 450 adult patients undergoing VATS anatomic lung resection. Patients will not be eligible for inclusion in case of contraindications for TEA, PVB or ICNB, chronic opioid use or if the lung surgeon estimates a high probability that the operation will be performed by thoracotomy. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: (1) the proportion of pain scores ≥ 4 as assessed by the numerical rating scale (NRS) measured during postoperative days (POD) 0-2; and (2) the QoR measured with the QoR-15 questionnaire on POD 1 and 2. Secondary outcome measures are cumulative use of opioids and analgesics, postoperative complications, hospitalisation, patient satisfaction and degree of mobility. DISCUSSION: The results of this trial will impact international guidelines with respect to perioperative care optimization after anatomic lung resection performed through VATS, and will determine the most cost-effective pain strategy and may reduce variability in postoperative pain management. Trial registration The trial is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR) on February 1st, 2021 (NL9243). The NTR is no longer available since June 24th, 2022 and therefore a revised protocol has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on August 5th, 2022 (NCT05491239). PROTOCOL VERSION: version 3 (date 06-05-2022), ethical approval through an amendment (see ethical proof in the Study protocol proof).

Enhanced PeriOperative Care and Health protection programme for the prevention of surgical site infections after elective abdominal surgery (EPO2CH): statistical analysis plan of a randomised controlled multicentre superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSI) are frequent complications after elective abdominal surgery. We designed the Enhanced PeriOperative Care and Health Protection programme (EPO2CH) care bundle, comprising of intraoperative high fractional inspired oxygen; intraoperative goal-directed fluid therapy; active preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative warming; glucose control and treatment of hyperglycaemia (> 10 mmol L- 1) in diabetics as well as non-diabetics; and wound irrigation before closure using an aqueous antiseptic. We hypothesise that EPO2CH added to standard care reduces the incidence of SSI compared to standard care alone for elective abdominal surgery. METHODS: This trial is designed as an open label, pragmatic randomised controlled parallel-group multicentre superiority trial. The primary endpoint is the incidence of SSI, defined by the Centers for Disease Control and prevention, within 30 days after surgery. The incidence of SSI is assessed using the Dutch national complication register and medical chart review. Secondary endpoints include the SSI incidence within 90 days, incidence of anastomotic leakage at 30 and 90 days, the incidence of incisional hernia within 1 year, mortality within 1 year and 5 years, quality of life, health and disability, and cost-effectiveness. Primarily, an intention-to-treat analysis will be performed to estimate the relative risk using a log binomial model. If not feasible, a logistic regression will be used to estimate the odds ratio. A per-protocol analysis will also be performed. Furthermore, the attributive effect of the distinct interventions will be explored. DISCUSSION: The results of the EPO2CH trial will determine if the EPO2CH bundle is effective to prevent SSI incidence for patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery. Details of the statistical analysis are described in this Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP). TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration number: Dutch Trial Register Trial NL5572 . Registered on March 3, 2016. SAP version: V1.0, January 8, 2020. This SAP has been written based on study protocol V10.

Ten-Year Follow-Up of Patients Treated with Fecal Microbiota Transplantation for Recurrent Clostridioides difficile Infection from a Randomized Controlled Trial and Review of the Literature.

Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has become a well-established treatment for recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection (rCDI). While short-term outcomes and adverse events relating to FMT have been well documented, there still is a paucity of data with regard to long-term safety. In this report, we describe the long-term follow-up of the prospective cohort of the first randomized controlled trial of FMT for rCDI, and review the existing literature. A total of 34 patients were treated with FMT for rCDI. Seven patients were still alive after a follow-up of more than 10 years and three patients were lost to follow-up. None of the 34 patients had experienced a new-onset autoimmune, gastrointestinal, or malignant disorder during follow-up. We did not find any deterioration or amelioration of pre-existing medical conditions. Furthermore, no deaths directly attributable to FMT could be identified. These findings are in accordance with the data in available literature. In conclusion, no long-term adverse events or complications directly attributable to FMT were found in our prospective cohort. Review of the available literature does not point to long-term risks associated with FMT in this elderly population, provided that carefully screened fecal suspensions are being used. No firm conclusion on the long-term safety of FMT in younger patients could be drawn.

Cost-effectiveness of immediate total-body CT in patients with severe trauma (REACT-2 trial).

BACKGROUND: The effect of immediate total-body CT (iTBCT) on health economic aspects in patients with severe trauma is an underreported issue. This study determined the cost-effectiveness of iTBCT compared with conventional radiological imaging with selective CT (standard work-up (STWU)) during the initial trauma evaluation. METHODS: In this multicentre RCT, adult patients with a high suspicion of severe injury were randomized in-hospital to iTBCT or STWU. Hospital healthcare costs were determined for the first 6 months after the injury. The probability of iTBCT being cost-effective was calculated for various levels of willingness-to-pay per extra patient alive. RESULTS: A total of 928 Dutch patients with complete clinical follow-up were included. Mean costs of hospital care were €25 809 (95 per cent bias-corrected and accelerated (bca) c.i. €22 617 to €29 137) for the iTBCT group and €26 155 (€23 050 to €29 344) for the STWU group, a difference per patient in favour of iTBCT of €346 (€4987 to €4328) (P = 0.876). Proportions of patients alive at 6 months were not different. The proportion of patients alive without serious morbidity was 61.6 per cent in the iTBCT group versus 66.7 per cent in the STWU group (difference -5.1 per cent; P = 0.104). The probability of iTBCT being cost-effective in keeping patients alive remained below 0.56 for the whole group, but was higher in patients with multiple trauma (0.8-0.9) and in those with traumatic brain injury (more than 0.9). CONCLUSION: Economically, from a hospital healthcare provider perspective, iTBCT should be the diagnostic strategy of first choice in patients with multiple trauma or traumatic brain injury.

Prevention of hepatic encephalopathy by administration of rifaximin and lactulose in patients with liver cirrhosis undergoing placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS): a multicentre randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial (PEARL trial).

INTRODUCTION: Cirrhotic patients with portal hypertension can suffer from variceal bleeding or refractory ascites and can benefit from a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Post-TIPS hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a common (20%-54%) and often severe complication. A prophylactic strategy is lacking. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Prevention of hepatic Encephalopathy by Administration of Rifaximin and Lactulose in patients with liver cirrhosis undergoing placement of a TIPS (PEARL) trial, is a multicentre randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial. Patients undergoing covered TIPS placement are prescribed either rifaximin 550 mg two times per day and lactulose 25 mL two times per day (starting dose) or placebo 550 mg two times per day and lactulose 25 mL two times per day from 72 hours before and until 3 months after TIPS placement. Primary endpoint is the development of overt HE (OHE) within 3 months (according to West Haven criteria). Secondary endpoints include 90-day mortality; development of a second episode of OHE; time to development of episode(s) of OHE; development of minimal HE; molecular changes in peripheral and portal blood samples; quality of life and cost-effectiveness. The total sample size is 238 patients and recruitment period is 3 years in six hospitals in the Netherlands and one in Belgium. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study protocol was approved in the Netherlands by the Medical Research Ethics Committee of the Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam (2018-332), in Belgium by the Ethics Committee Research UZ/KU Leuven (S62577) and competent authorities. This study will be conducted in accordance with Good Clinical Practice guidelines and the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Study results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04073290) and EudraCT database (2018-004323-37).

Protocol of a randomized open label multicentre trial comparing continuous intrajejunal levodopa infusion with deep brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease - the INfusion VErsus STimulation (INVEST) study.

BACKGROUND: Both Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) and Continuous intrajejunal Levodopa Infusion (CLI) are effective therapies for the treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD). To our knowledge, no direct head-to-head comparison of DBS and CLI has been performed, whilst the costs probably differ significantly. In the INfusion VErsus STimulation (INVEST) study, costs and effectiveness of DBS and CLI are compared in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in patients with PD, to study whether higher costs of one of the therapies are justified by superiority of that treatment. METHODS: A prospective open label multicentre RCT is being performed, with ancillary patient preference observational arms. Patients with PD who, despite optimal pharmacological treatment, have severe response fluctuations, bradykinesia, dyskinesias, or painful dystonia are eligible for inclusion. A total of 66 patients will be randomized. There is no minimal inclusion in the patient preference arms. The primary health economic outcomes are costs per unit on the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 (PDQ-39) and costs per unit Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) at 12 months. The main clinical outcome is patient-reported quality of life measured with the PDQ-39 at 12 months. Patients will additionally be followed during 36 months after initiation of the study treatment. DISCUSSION: The INVEST trial directly compares the costs and effectiveness of the advanced therapies DBS and CLI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register identifier 4753, registered November 3rd, 2014; EudraCT number 2014-001501-32, Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02480803.

Early detection of severe injuries after major trauma by immediate total-body CT scouts.

INTRODUCTION: Evaluation of immediate total-body CT (iTBCT) scouts during primary trauma care could be clinically relevant for early detection and treatment of specific major injuries. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic usefulness of TBCT scouts in detecting life-threatening chest and pelvic injuries. METHODS: All patients who underwent an iTBCT during their primary trauma assessment in one trauma center between April 2011 and November 2014 were retrospectively included. Two experienced trauma surgeons and two emergency radiologists evaluated iTBCT scouts with structured questionnaires. Inter-observer agreement and diagnostic properties were calculated for endotracheal tube position and identification of pneumo- and/or hemothorax and pelvic fractures. Diagnostic properties of iTBCT scouts for indication for chest tube placement and pelvic binder application were calculated in comparison to decision based on iTBCT. RESULTS: In total 220 patients with a median age of 37 years (IQR 26-59) were selected with a median Injury Severity Score of 18 (IQR 9-27). There was moderate to substantial inter-observer agreement and low false positive rates for pneumo- and/or hemothorax and for severe pelvic fractures by iTBCT scouts. For 19.8%-22.5% of the endotracheal intubated patients trauma surgeons stated that repositioning of the tube was indicated. Positive predictive value and sensitivity were respectively 100% (95%CI 52%-100%) and 50% (95%CI 22%-78%) for decisions on chest tube placement by trauma surgeon 1 and 67% (95%CI 13%-98%) and 22% (95%CI 4%-60%) for decisions by trauma surgeon 2. Only in one of 14 patients the pelvic binder was applied after iTBCT acquisition. CONCLUSIONS: iTBCT scouts can be useful for early detection of pneumo- and/or hemothorax and severe pelvic fractures. Decision for chest tube placement based on iTBCT scouts alone is not recommended.

A randomized controlled trial of a skills training for oncologists and a communication aid for patients to stimulate shared decision making about palliative systemic treatment (CHOICE): study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Systemic treatment for advanced cancer offers uncertain and sometimes little benefit while the burden can be high. Hence, treatment decisions require Shared Decision Making (SDM). The CHOICE trial examines the separate and combined effect of oncologist training and a patient communication aid on SDM in consultations about palliative systemic treatment. METHODS: A RCT design with four parallel arms will be adopted. Patients with metastatic or irresectable cancer with a median life expectancy <12 months who meet with a medical oncologist to discuss the start or continuation of palliative systemic treatment are eligible. A total of 24 oncologists (in training) and 192 patients will be recruited. The oncologist training consists of a reader, two group sessions (3.5 h; including modelling videos and role play), a booster feedback session (1 h) and a consultation room tool. The patient communication aid consists of a home-sent question prompt list and a value clarification exercise to prepare patients for SDM in the consultation. The control condition consists of care as usual. The primary outcome is observed SDM in audio-recorded consultations. Secondary outcomes include patient and oncologist evaluation of communication and decision-making, the decision made, quality of life, potential adverse outcomes such as anxiety and hopelessness, and consultation duration. Patients fill out questionnaires at baseline (T0), before (T1) and after the consultation (T2) and at 3 and 6 months (T3 and T4). All oncologists participate in two standardized patient assessments (before-after training) prior to the start of patient inclusion. They will fill out a questionnaire before and after these assessments, as well as after each of the recorded consultations in clinical practice. DISCUSSION: The CHOICE trial will enable evidence-based choices regarding the investment in SDM interventions targeting either oncologists, patients or both in the advanced cancer setting. The trial takes into account the immediate effect of the interventions on observed communication, but also on more distal and potential adverse patient outcomes. Also, the trial provides evidence regarding the assumption that SDM about palliative cancer treatment results in less aggressive treatment and more quality of life in the final period of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry number NTR5489 (prospective; 15 Sep 2015).

Dutch outcome in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy (DO-IT): registry design and baseline characteristics of a prospective observational cohort study to predict appropriate indication for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are widely used for the prevention of sudden cardiac death. At present, both clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of ICD therapy in primary prevention patients are topics of discussion, as only a minority of these patients will eventually receive appropriate ICD therapy. METHODS/DESIGN: The DO-IT Registry is a nationwide prospective cohort with a target enrolment of 1,500 primary prevention ICD patients with reduced left ventricular function in a setting of structural heart disease. The primary outcome measures are death and appropriate ICD therapy for ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Secondary outcome measures are inappropriate ICD therapy, death of any cause, hospitalisation for ICD related complications and for cardiovascular reasons. As of December 2016, data on demographic, clinical, and ICD characteristics of 1,468 patients have been collected. Follow-up will continue up to 24 months after inclusion of the last patient. During follow-up, clinical and ICD data are collected based on the normal follow-up of these patients, assuming ICD interrogations take place every six months and clinical follow-up is once a year. At baseline, the mean age was 66 (standard deviation [SD] 10) years and 27% were women. CONCLUSION: The DO-IT Registry represents a real-world nationwide cohort of patients receiving ICDs for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death with reduced left ventricular function in a setting of structural heart disease. The registry investigates the efficacy of the current practice and aims to develop prediction rules to identify subgroups who will not (sufficiently) benefit from ICD implantation and to provide results regarding costs and budget impact of targeted supply of primary preventions ICDs.

Analysis of two treatment modalities for the prevention of vomiting after trauma: Orogastric tube or anti-emetics.

INTRODUCTION: Vomiting in the emergency department after trauma occurs frequently and might lead to aspiration of gastric content. An orogastric tube (OGT) is a way to prevent emesis. However, this is an inconvenient procedure and may actually trigger vomiting. Therefore, a change in policy was applied from preferably an OGT to the administration of anti-emetics in a selected population. The aim of this study was to analyse the prevention of vomiting in trauma patients after OGT or anti-emetics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study. Data of all trauma patients presented at the crash room of the emergency department between July 1st 2013 and July 1st 2014 were collected from the local trauma registry and electronic patient documentation system and comprising 6 months preceding and 6 months after change of policy. Vomiting and nausea after trauma were recorded. Furthermore, complications such as aspiration and cardiac arrhythmias were documented. RESULTS: A total of 1446 patients were presented after trauma. 230 patients were promptly intubated. An additional 763 patients were fully responsive and did not complain of nausea. The remaining 453 patients were further analysed. 44 patients received OGT placement procedure and 409 patients received anti-emetics. Significant difference was found in patients vomiting after OGT placement or anti-emetics (20.5% vs. 2.7%; P<0.001). Patients who received anti-emetics were not more at risk for cardiac arrhythmias. After matched control analysis, there was still a significant difference was found. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Administration of anti-emetics is suitable and effective for the prevention of vomiting after trauma in this selected population, without an increased risk for complications.

How to: Establish and run a stool bank.

BACKGROUND: Since 2013, several stool banks have been developed following publications reporting on clinical success of 'faecal microbiota transplantation' (FMT) for recurrent Clostridium difficile infections (CDI). However, protocols for donor screening, faecal suspension preparation, and transfer of the faecal suspension differ between countries and institutions. Moreover, no European consensus exists regarding the legislative aspects of the faecal suspension product. Internationally standardized recommendations about the above mentioned aspects have not yet been established. OBJECTIVE: In 2015, the Netherlands Donor Feces Bank (NDFB) was founded with the primary aim of providing a standardized product for the treatment of patients with recurrent CDI in the Netherlands. Standard operation procedures for donor recruitment, donor selection, donor screening, and production, storage, and distribution of frozen faecal suspensions for FMT were formulated. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Our experience summarized in this review addresses current donor recruitment and screening, preparation of the faecal suspension, transfer of the faecal microbiota suspension, and the experiences and follow-up of the patients treated with donor faeces from the NDFB.

Home visits as part of a new care pathway (iAID) to improve quality of care and quality of life in ostomy patients: a cluster-randomized stepped-wedge trial.

AIM: Morbidity in patients with an ostomy is high. A new care pathway, including perioperative home visits by enterostomal therapists, was studied to assess whether more elaborate education and closer guidance could reduce stoma-related complications and improve quality of life (QoL), at acceptable cost. METHOD: Patients requiring an ileostomy or colostomy, for any inflammatory or malignant bowel disease, were included in a 15-centre cluster-randomized 'stepped-wedge' study. Primary outcomes were stoma-related complications and QoL, measured using the Stoma-QOL, 3 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes included costs of care. RESULTS: The standard pathway (SP) was followed by 113 patients and the new pathway (NP) by 105 patients. Although the overall number of stoma-related complications was similar in both groups (SP 156, NP 150), the proportion of patients experiencing one or more stoma-related complications was significantly higher in the NP (72% vs 84%, risk difference 12%; 95% CI: 0.3-23.3%). Although in the NP more patients had stoma-related complications, QoL scores were significantly better (P < 0.001). In the SP more patients required extra care at home for their ostomy than in the NP (60.6% vs 33.7%, respectively; risk difference 26.9%, 95% CI: 13.5-40.4%). Stoma revision was done more often in the SP (n = 11) than in the NP (n = 2). Total costs in the SP did not differ significantly from the NP. CONCLUSION: The NP did not reduce the number of stoma-related complications but did lead to improved quality of care and life, against similar costs. Based on these results the NP, including perioperative home visits by an enterostomal therapist, can be recommended.

High rates of clinically relevant incidental findings by total-body CT scanning in trauma patients; results of the REACT-2 trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether there is a difference in frequency and clinical relevance of incidental findings detected by total-body computed tomography scanning (TBCT) compared to those by the standard work-up (STWU) with selective computed tomography (CT) scanning. METHODS: Trauma patients from five trauma centres were randomized between April 2011 and January 2014 to TBCT imaging or STWU consisting of conventional imaging with selective CT scanning. Incidental findings were divided into three categories: 1) major finding, may cause mortality; 2) moderate finding, may cause morbidity; and 3) minor finding, hardly relevant. Generalized estimating equations were applied to assess differences in incidental findings. RESULTS: In total, 1083 patients were enrolled, of which 541 patients (49.9 %) were randomized for TBCT and 542 patients (50.1 %) for STWU. Major findings were detected in 23 patients (4.3 %) in the TBCT group compared to 9 patients (1.7 %) in the STWU group (adjusted rate ratio 2.851; 95%CI 1.337-6.077; p < 0.007). Findings of moderate relevance were detected in 120 patients (22.2 %) in the TBCT group compared to 86 patients (15.9 %) in the STWU group (adjusted rate ratio 1.421; 95%CI 1.088-1.854; p < 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to selective CT scanning, more patients with clinically relevant incidental findings can be expected by TBCT scanning. KEY POINTS: • Total-body CT scanning in trauma results in 1.5 times more incidental findings. • Evaluation by TBCT in trauma results in more patients with incidental findings. • In every category of clinical relevance, TBCT detects more incidental findings.

Cost-effectiveness of same-admission versus interval cholecystectomy after mild gallstone pancreatitis in the PONCHO trial.

BACKGROUND: Same-admission cholecystectomy is indicated after gallstone pancreatitis to reduce the risk of recurrent disease or other gallstone-related complications, but its impact on overall costs is unclear. This study analysed the cost-effectiveness of same-admission versus interval cholecystectomy after mild gallstone pancreatitis. METHODS: In a multicentre RCT (Pancreatitis of biliary Origin: optimal timiNg of CHOlecystectomy; PONCHO) patients with mild gallstone pancreatitis were randomized before discharge to either cholecystectomy within 72 h (same-admission cholecystectomy) or cholecystectomy after 25-30 days (interval cholecystectomy). Healthcare use of all patients was recorded prospectively using clinical report forms. Unit costs of resources used were determined, and patients completed multiple Health and Labour Questionnaires to record pancreatitis-related absence from work. Cost-effectiveness analyses were performed from societal and healthcare perspectives, with the costs per readmission prevented as primary outcome with a time horizon of 6 months. RESULTS: All 264 trial participants were included in the present analysis, 128 randomized to same-admission cholecystectomy and 136 to interval cholecystectomy. Same-admission cholecystectomy reduced the risk of acute readmission for recurrent gallstone-related complications from 16·9 to 4·7 per cent (P = 0·002). Mean total costs from a societal perspective were €234 (95 per cent c.i. -1249 to 738) less per patient in the same-admission cholecystectomy group. Same-admission cholecystectomy was superior to interval cholecystectomy, with a societal incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of -€1918 to prevent one readmission for gallstone-related complications. CONCLUSION: In mild biliary pancreatitis, same-admission cholecystectomy was more effective and less costly than interval cholecystectomy.

A randomized controlled trial to compare a restrictive strategy to usual care for the effectiveness of cholecystectomy in patients with symptomatic gallstones (SECURE trial protocol).

BACKGROUND: Five to 22 % of the adult Western population has gallstones. Among them, 13 to 22 % become symptomatic during their lifetime. Cholecystectomy is the preferred treatment for symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Remarkably, cholecystectomy provides symptom relief in only 60-70 % of patients. The objective of this trial is to compare the effectiveness of usual (operative) care with a restrictive strategy using a standardized work-up with stepwise selection for cholecystectomy in patients with gallstones and abdominal complaints. DESIGN AND METHODS: The SECURE-trial is designed as a multicenter, randomized, parallel-arm, non-inferiority trial in patients with abdominal symptoms and ultrasound proven gallstones or sludge. If patients meet the inclusion criteria they will be randomized to either usual care or the restrictive strategy. Patients in the usual care group will be treated according to the physician's knowledge and preference. Patients in the restrictive care group will be treated with interval evaluation and stepwise selection for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In this stepwise selection, patients strictly meeting the preselected criteria for symptomatic cholecystolithiasis will be offered a cholecystectomy. Patients not meeting these criteria will be assessed for other diagnoses and re-evaluated at 3-monthly intervals. Follow-up consists of web-based questionnaires at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. The main end point of this trial is defined as the proportion of patients being pain-free at 12 months follow-up. Pain will be assessed with the Izbicki Pain Score and Gallstone Symptom Score. Secondary endpoints will be the proportion of patients with complications due to gallstones or cholecystectomy, the association between the patients' symptoms and treatment and work performance, and ultimately, cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: The SECURE trial is the first randomized controlled trial examining the effectiveness of usual care versus restrictive care in patients with symptomatic gallstones. The outcome of this trial will inform clinicians whether a more restrictive strategy can minimize persistent pain in post-operative patients at least as good as usual care does, but at a lower cholecystectomy rate. (The Netherlands National Trial Register NTR4022, 17th December 2012) TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Netherlands National Trial Register NTR4022 http://www.zonmw.nl/nl/projecten/project-detail/scrutinizing-inefficient-use-of-cholecystectomy-a-randomized-trial-concerning-variation-in-practi/samenvatting/.

A multi-centred randomised trial of radical surgery versus adjuvant chemoradiotherapy after local excision for early rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Rectal cancer surgery is accompanied with high morbidity and poor long term functional outcome. Screening programs have shown a shift towards more early staged cancers. Patients with early rectal cancer can potentially benefit significantly from rectal preserving therapy. For the earliest stage cancers, local excision is sufficient when the risk of lymph node disease and subsequent recurrence is below 5 %. However, the majority of early cancers are associated with an intermediate risk of lymph node involvement (5-20 %) suggesting that local excision alone is not sufficient, while completion radical surgery, which is currently standard of care, could be a substantial overtreatment for this group of patients. METHODS/STUDY DESIGN: In this multicentre randomised trial, patients with an intermediate risk T1-2 rectal cancer, that has been locally excised using an endoluminal technique, will be randomized between adjuvant chemo-radiotherapylimited to the mesorectum and standard completion total mesorectal excision (TME). To strictly monitor the risk of locoregional recurrence in the experimental arm and enable early salvage surgery, there will be additional follow up with frequent MRI and endoscopy. The primary outcome of the study is three-year local recurrence rate. Secondary outcomes are morbidity, disease free and overall survival, stoma rate, functional outcomes, health related quality of life and costs. The design is a non inferiority study with a total sample size of 302 patients. DISCUSSION: The results of the TESAR trial will potentially demonstrate that adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is an oncological safe treatment option in patients who are confronted with the difficult clinical dilemma of a radically removed intermediate risk early rectal cancer by polypectomy or transanal surgery that is conventionally treated with subsequent radical surgery. Preserving the rectum using adjuvant radiotherapy is expected to significantly improve morbidity, function and quality of life if compared to completion TME surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02371304 , registration date: February 2015.

Comparing the Effectiveness of Bevacizumab to Ranibizumab in Patients with Exudative Age-Related Macular Degeneration. The BRAMD Study.

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of bevacizumab and ranibizumab in the treatment of exudative age-related macular degeneration (AMD). DESIGN: Multicentre, randomized, controlled, double-masked clinical trial in 327 patients. The non-inferiority margin was 4 letters. PATIENTS: Patients ≥ 60 years of age with primary or recurrent sub- or juxtafoveal choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to AMD with a total area of CNV < 12 disc areas and a best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) score between 20 and 78 letters on an EDTRS like chart in the study eye. METHODS: Monthly intravitreal injections with 1.25 mg bevacizumab or 0.5 mg ranibizumab were given during one year. Intention to treat with last observation carried forward analysis was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was the change in BCVA in the study eye from baseline to 12 months. RESULTS: The mean gain in BCVA was 5.1 (±14.1) letters in the bevacizumab group (n = 161) and 6.4 (±12.2) letters in the ranibizumab group (n = 166) (p = 0.37). The lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of the difference in BCVA gain was 3.72. The response to bevacizumab was more varied; 24% of patients showed a gain of ≥15 letters, 11% a loss of ≥15 letters and 65% a gain or loss < 15 letters compared to 19%, 5% and 76% respectively for ranibizumab (p = 0.038). No significant differences in absolute CRT and CRT change (p = 0.13) or in the presence of subretinal or intraretinal fluid (p = 0.14 and 0.10, respectively) were observed. However, the presence of any fluid on SD-OCT (subretinal and/or intraretinal) differed significantly (p = 0.020), with definite fluid on SD-OCT in 45% of the patients for bevacizumab versus 31% for ranibizumab. The occurrence of serious adverse events and adverse events was similar, with 34 SAEs and 256 AEs in the bevacizumab group and 37 SAEs and 299 AEs in the ranibizumab group (p = 0.87 and p = 0.48, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Bevacizumab was not inferior to ranibizumab. The response to bevacizumab was more varied with higher percentages of both gainers and losers and more frequently observed retinal fluid on SD-OCT at 12 months when compared to the ranibizumab group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trialregister.nl NTR1704.