Systematic review of the role of biomarkers in diagnosing anastomotic leakage following colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leakage (AL) following colorectal surgery can be difficult to diagnose owing to varying clinical presentations. This systematic review aimed to assess biomarkers as potential diagnostic tests for preclinical detection of AL. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. All published studies evaluating biomarkers, both systemic and peritoneal, in the context of AL following colorectal surgery were included. Studies were sought in three electronic databases (MEDLINE, PubMed and Embase) from January 1990 to June 2016. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies evaluated 51 different biomarkers in the context of AL after colorectal surgery. Biomarkers included markers of ischaemia and inflammation, and microbiological markers, and were measured in both peritoneal drain fluid and the systemic circulation. The most commonly evaluated peritoneal drain fluid biomarkers were interleukin (IL) 6, IL-10 and tumour necrosis factor. Significantly raised drain levels in the early postoperative period were reported to be associated with the development of AL. C-reactive protein, procalcitonin and leucocytes were the most commonly evaluated systemic biomarkers with significant negative and positive predictive values. Associated area under the curve values ranged from 0·508 to 0·960. CONCLUSION: Peritoneal drain fluid and systemic biomarkers are poor predictors of AL after colorectal surgery. Combinations of these biomarkers showed improvement in predictive accuracy.

Efficacy of patient-initiated follow-up clinics in secondary care: a systematic review.

Patient-initiated follow up (PIFU) is an initiative that allows patients to initiate hospital follow-up appointments on an 'as required' basis compared with the traditional 'physician-initiated' model. The main principle is to reduce inappropriate regular follow-up appointments. In this systematic review, we attempt to address its efficacy for outpatient secondary level care. Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines, an electronic literature search was performed independently by two authors using pre-defined search terms across EMBASE, Ovid MedLine, PubMed, PSYCINFO and the Cochrane Library databases. Articles were included if they specifically evaluated any aspect of PIFU. Studies evaluating non-outpatient-based, primary level-based and nurse-led clinic appointments were excluded. A total of 747 articles was reviewed, and six were finally included for the systematic review. Three studies analysed efficacy of PIFU with regards to rheumatological disease and found that there was no deleterious clinical effect and a trend towards increased satisfaction and quality of life including lower costs in the PIFU group. Two studies looked at PIFU and inflammatory bowel disease and identified some clinical benefit and lower costs and equivalent satisfaction and QoL with the PIFU group. A further study looked at PIFU in stage 1 breast cancer and did not find any significant differences in outcomes. There is evidence to suggest that PIFU systems result in fewer overall outpatient appointments in secondary care led services while maintaining equivalent if not better patient satisfaction, quality of life and clinical outcomes across a range of chronic conditions.