PET/CT imaging of 3D printed devices in the gastrointestinal tract of rodents

Fused deposition modelling (FDM) 3D printing (3DP) is a revolutionary technology with the potential to transform drug product design in both the pre-clinical and clinical arena. The objective of this pilot study was to explore the intestinal behaviour of four different polymer-based devices fabricated using FDM 3DP technology in rats. Small capsular devices of 8.6 mm in length and 2.65 mm in diameter were printed from polyvinyl alcohol-polyethylene glycol graft-copolymer (PVA-PEG copolymer, Kollicoat IR), hydroxypropylcellulose (HPC, Klucel), ethylcellulose (EC, Aqualon N7) and hypromellose acetate succinate (HPMCAS, Aquasolve-LG). A smaller sized device, 3.2 mm in length and 2.65 mm in diameter, was also prepared with HPMCAS to evaluate the cut off size of gastric emptying of solid formulations in rats. The devices were radiolabelled with Fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) and small animal positron emission tomography/computed tomography (microPET/CT) was used to track the movement and disintegration of the fabricated devices in the rats. The PVA-PEG copolymer and HPC devices disintegrated after 60min following oral administration. The EC structures did not disintegrate in the gastrointestinal tracts of the rats, whereas the HPMCAS-based systems disintegrated after 420 min. Interestingly, it was noted that the devices which remained intact over the course of the study had not emptied from the stomach of the rats. This was also the case with the smaller sized device. In summary, we report for the first time, the use of a microPET/CT imaging technique to evaluate the in vivo behaviour of 3D printed formulations. The manipulation of the 3D printed device design could be used to fabricate dosage forms of varying sizes and geometries with better gastric emptying characteristics suitable for rodent administration. The increased understanding of the capabilities of 3DP in dosage form design could, henceforth, accelerate pre-clinical testing of new drug candidates in animal models

Cost-minimization analysis in a blind randomized trial on small-incision versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy from a societal perspective: sick leave outweighs efforts in hospital savings

Background: After its introduction, laparoscopic cholecystectomy rapidly expanded around the world and was accepted the procedure of choice by consensus. However, analysis of evidence shows no difference regarding primary outcome measures between laparoscopic and small-incision cholecystectomy. In absence of clear clinical benefit it may be interesting to focus on the resource use associated with the available techniques, a secondary outcome measure. This study focuses on a difference in costs between laparoscopic and small-incision cholecystectomy from a societal perspective with emphasis on internal validity and generalisability Methods: A blinded randomized single-centre trial was conducted in a general teaching hospital in The Netherlands. Patients with reasonable to good health diagnosed with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis scheduled for cholecystectomy were included. Patients were randomized between laparoscopic and small-incision cholecystectomy. Total costs were analyzed from a societal perspective. Results: Operative costs were higher in the laparoscopic group using reusable laparoscopic instruments (difference 203 euro; 95% confidence interval 147 to 259 euro). There were no significant differences in the other direct cost categories (outpatient clinic and admittance related costs), indirect costs, and total costs. More than 60% of costs in employed patients were caused by sick leave. Conclusion: Based on differences in costs, small-incision cholecystectomy seems to be the preferred operative technique over the laparoscopic technique both from a hospital and societal cost perspective. Sick leave associated with convalescence after cholecystectomy in employed patients results in considerable costs to society

Non-randomised patients in a cholecystectomy trial: characteristics, procedures, and outcomes

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is now considered the first option for gallbladder surgery. However, 20% to 30% of cholecystectomies are completed as open operations often on elderly and fragile patients. The external validity of randomised trials comparing mini-laparotomy cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy has not been studied. The aim of this study is to analyse characteristics, procedures, and outcomes for all patients who underwent cholecystectomy without being included in such a trial. METHODS: Characteristics (age, sex, co-morbidity, and ASA-score), operation time, hospital stay, and mortality were compared for patients who underwent cholecystectomy outside and within a randomised controlled trial comparing mini-laparotomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. RESULTS: During the inclusion period 1719 patients underwent cholecystectomy. 726 patients were randomised and 724 of them completed the trial; 993 patients underwent cholecystectomy outside the trial. The non-randomised patients were older – and had more complications from gallstone disease, higher co-morbidity, and higher ASA – score when compared with trial patients. They were also more likely to undergo acute surgery and they had a longer postoperative hospital stay, with a median 3 versus 2 days (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Standardised mortality ratio within 90 days of operation was 3.42 (mean) (95% CI 2.17 to 5.13) for non-randomised patients and 1.61 (mean) (95%CI 0.02 to 3.46) for trial patients. For non-randomised patients, operation time did not differ significantly between mini-laparotomy and open cholecystectomy in multivariate analysis. However, the operation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy lasted 20 minutes longer than open cholecystectomy. Hospital stay was significantly shorter for both mini-laparotomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared to open cholecystectomy. CONCLUSION: Non-randomised patients were older and more sick than trial patients. The assignment of healthier patients to trials comparing mini-laparotomy cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy limits the external validity of conclusions reached in such trials

The challenges faced in the design, conduct and analysis of surgical randomised controlled trials

Randomised evaluations of surgical interventions are rare; some interventions have been widely adopted without rigorous evaluation. Unlike other medical areas, the randomised controlled trial (RCT) design has not become the default study design for the evaluation of surgical interventions. Surgical trials are difficult to successfully undertake and pose particular practical and methodological challenges. However, RCTs have played a role in the assessment of surgical innovations and there is scope and need for greater use. This article will consider the design, conduct and analysis of an RCT of a surgical intervention. The issues will be reviewed under three headings: the timing of the evaluation, defining the research question and trial design issues. Recommendations on the conduct of future surgical RCTs are made. Collaboration between research and surgical communities is needed to address the distinct issues raised by the assessmentof surgical interventions and enable the conduct of appropriate and well-designed trials.The Health Services Research Unit is funded by the Scottish Government Health DirectoratesPeer reviewedPublisher PD

Hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic versus standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: HARP-trial

Contains fulltext : 88436.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Transplantation is the only treatment offering long-term benefit to patients with chronic kidney failure. Live donor nephrectomy is performed on healthy individuals who do not receive direct therapeutic benefit of the procedure themselves. In order to guarantee the donor's safety, it is important to optimise the surgical approach. Recently we demonstrated the benefit of laparoscopic nephrectomy experienced by the donor. However, this method is characterised by higher in hospital costs, longer operating times and it requires a well-trained surgeon. The hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic technique may be an alternative to a complete laparoscopic, transperitoneal approach. The peritoneum remains intact and the risk of visceral injuries is reduced. Hand-assistance results in a faster procedure and a significantly reduced operating time. The feasibility of this method has been demonstrated recently, but as to date there are no data available advocating the use of one technique above the other. METHODS/DESIGN: The HARP-trial is a multi-centre randomised controlled, single-blind trial. The study compares the hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic approach with standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The objective is to determine the best approach for live donor nephrectomy to optimise donor's safety and comfort while reducing donation related costs. DISCUSSION: This study will contribute to the evidence on any benefits of hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic versus standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register NTR1433

Laparoscopic versus open peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion, the LOCI-trial: a study protocol

Background: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an effective treatment for end-stage renal disease. It allows patients more freedom to perform daily activities compared to haemodialysis. Key to successful PD is the presence of a well-functioning dialysis catheter. Several complications, such as in- and outflow obstruction, peritonitis, exit-site infections, leakage and migration, can lead to catheter removal and loss of peritoneal access. Currently, different surgical techniques are in practice for PD-catheter placement. The type of insertion technique used may greatly influence the occurrence of complications. In the literature, up to 35% catheter failure has been described when using the open technique and only 13% for the laparoscopic technique. However, a

Improvement of primary care for patients with chronic heart failure: A study protocol for a cluster randomised trial comparing two strategies

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many patients with chronic heart failure (CHF), a common condition with high morbidity and mortality rates, receive treatment in primary care. To improve the management of CHF in primary care, we developed an implementation programme comprised of educational and organisational components, with support by a practice visitor and focus both on drug treatment and lifestyle advice, and on organisation of care within the practice and collaboration with other healthcare providers. Tailoring has been shown to improve the success of implementation programmes, but little is known about what would be best methods for tailoring, specifically with respect to CHF in primary care.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>We describe the study protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial to examine the effectiveness of tailoring a CHF implementation programme to general practices compared to a standardised way of delivering a programme. The study population will consist of 60 general practitioners (GPs) and the CHF patients they include. GPs are randomised in blocks of four, stratified according to practice size. With a tailored implementation programme GPs prioritise the issues that will form the bases of the support for the practice visits. These may comprise several issues, both educational and organizational.</p> <p>The primary outcome measures are patient's experience of receiving structured primary care for CHF (PACIC, a questionnaire related to the Chronic Care Model), patients' health-related utilities (EQ-5D), and drugs prescriptions using the guideline adherence index. Patients being clustered in practices, multilevel regression analyses will be used to explore the effect of practice size and type of intervention programme. In addition we will examine both changes within groups and differences at follow-up between groups with respect to drug dosages and advice on lifestyle issues. Furthermore, in interviews the feasibility of the programme and goal attainment, organisational changes in CHF care, and formalised cooperation with other disciplines will be assessed.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>In the tailoring of the programme we will present the GPs a list with barriers; GPs will assess relevance and possibility to solve these barriers. The list is rigorously developed and tested in various projects. The factors for ordering the barriers are related to the innovation, the healthcare professional, the patient, and the context.</p> <p>CHF patients do not form a homogeneous group. Subgroup analyses will be performed based on the distinction between systolic CHF and CHF with preserved left ventricular function (diastolic CHF).</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ISRCTN: <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN18812755">ISRCTN18812755</a></p

Liver Volumetry Plug and Play: Do It Yourself with ImageJ

AB - BACKGROUND: A small remnant liver volume is an important risk factor for posthepatectomy liver failure and can be predicted accurately by computed tomography (CT) volumetry using radiologic image analysis software. Unfortunately, this software is expensive and usually requires support by a radiologist. ImageJ is a freely downloadable image analysis software package developed by the National Institute of Health (NIH) and brings liver volumetry to the surgeon's desktop. We aimed to assess the accuracy of ImageJ for hepatic CT volumetry. METHODS: ImageJ was downloaded from http://www.rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/ . Preoperative CT scans of 15 patients who underwent liver resection for colorectal cancer liver metastases were retrospectively analyzed. Scans were opened in ImageJ; and the liver, all metastases, and the intended parenchymal transection line were manually outlined on each slice. The area of each selected region, metastasis, resection specimen, and remnant liver was multiplied by the slice thickness to calculate volume. Volumes of virtual liver resection specimens measured with ImageJ were compared with specimen weights and calculated volumes obtained during pathology examination after resection. RESULTS: There was an excellent correlation between the volumes calculated with ImageJ and the actual measured weights of the resection specimens (r(2) = 0.98, p < 0.0001). The weight/volume ratio amounted to 0.88 +/- 0.04 (standard error) and was in agreement with our earlier findings using CT-linked radiologic software. CONCLUSION: ImageJ can be used for accurate hepatic CT volumetry on a personal computer. This application brings CT volumetry to the surgeon's desktop at no expense and is particularly useful in cases of tertiary referred patients, who already have a proper CT scan on CD-ROM from the referring institution. Most likely the discrepancy between volume and weight results from exsanguination of the liver after resectio