5 research outputs found
Mesothelial mesenteric cyst in patient with ascending colon cancer. Case report
Mesenteric cysts are rare cystic malformations of the mesentery. They are usually located at the iliac mesentery. Clinically most mesenteric cysts are asymptomatic, but sometimes they present with non-specific abdominal symptoms. Diagnosis can be aided using US, CT and MRI but careful interpretation of the images and high index of suspicion of this rare condition is essential for the correct diagnosis, which cannot always be preoperatively established. The therapeutic method of choice is complete surgical excision of the cyst which minimizes the possibility of recurrence. Histopathologically they are classified in six group.
We present a case of a mesothelial mesenteric cyst in patient with colon cancer. The cyst was misdiagnosed as urinary bladder diverticulum in the preoperative CT scan
Implementation of proteomic biomarkers: making it work
While large numbers of proteomic biomarkers have been described, they are generally not implemented in medical practice. We have investigated the reasons for this shortcoming, focusing on hurdles downstream of biomarker verification, and describe major obstacles and possible solutions to ease valid biomarker implementation. Some of the problems lie in suboptimal biomarker discovery and validation, especially lack of validated platforms with well-described performance characteristics to support biomarker qualification. These issues have been acknowledged and are being addressed, raising the hope that valid biomarkers may start accumulating in the foreseeable future. However, successful biomarker discovery and qualification alone does not suffice for successful implementation. Additional challenges include, among others, limited access to appropriate specimens and insufficient funding, the need to validate new biomarker utility in interventional trials, and large communication gaps between the parties involved in implementation. To address this problem, we propose an implementation roadmap. The implementation effort needs to involve a wide variety of stakeholders (clinicians, statisticians, health economists, and representatives of patient groups, health insurance, pharmaceutical companies, biobanks, and regulatory agencies). Knowledgeable panels with adequate representation of all these stakeholders may facilitate biomarker evaluation and guide implementation for the specific context of use. This approach may avoid unwarranted delays or failure to implement potentially useful biomarkers, and may expedite meaningful contributions of the biomarker community to healthcare
Implementation of proteomic biomarkers: making it work
Eur J Clin Invest 2012; 42 (9): 10271036 Abstract While large numbers of
proteomic biomarkers have been described, they are generally not
implemented in medical practice. We have investigated the reasons for
this shortcoming, focusing on hurdles downstream of biomarker
verification, and describe major obstacles and possible solutions to
ease valid biomarker implementation. Some of the problems lie in
suboptimal biomarker discovery and validation, especially lack of
validated platforms with well-described performance characteristics to
support biomarker qualification. These issues have been acknowledged and
are being addressed, raising the hope that valid biomarkers may start
accumulating in the foreseeable future. However, successful biomarker
discovery and qualification alone does not suffice for successful
implementation. Additional challenges include, among others, limited
access to appropriate specimens and insufficient funding, the need to
validate new biomarker utility in interventional trials, and large
communication gaps between the parties involved in implementation. To
address this problem, we propose an implementation roadmap. The
implementation effort needs to involve a wide variety of stakeholders
(clinicians, statisticians, health economists, and representatives of
patient groups, health insurance, pharmaceutical companies, biobanks,
and regulatory agencies). Knowledgeable panels with adequate
representation of all these stakeholders may facilitate biomarker
evaluation and guide implementation for the specific context of use.
This approach may avoid unwarranted delays or failure to implement
potentially useful biomarkers, and may expedite meaningful contributions
of the biomarker community to healthcare
Evaluation of a quality improvement intervention to reduce anastomotic leak following right colectomy (EAGLE): pragmatic, batched stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial in 64 countries
Background
Anastomotic leak affects 8 per cent of patients after right colectomy with a 10-fold increased risk of postoperative death. The EAGLE study aimed to develop and test whether an international, standardized quality improvement intervention could reduce anastomotic leaks.
Methods
The internationally intended protocol, iteratively co-developed by a multistage Delphi process, comprised an online educational module introducing risk stratification, an intraoperative checklist, and harmonized surgical techniques. Clusters (hospital teams) were randomized to one of three arms with varied sequences of intervention/data collection by a derived stepped-wedge batch design (at least 18 hospital teams per batch). Patients were blinded to the study allocation. Low- and middle-income country enrolment was encouraged. The primary outcome (assessed by intention to treat) was anastomotic leak rate, and subgroup analyses by module completion (at least 80 per cent of surgeons, high engagement; less than 50 per cent, low engagement) were preplanned.
Results
A total 355 hospital teams registered, with 332 from 64 countries (39.2 per cent low and middle income) included in the final analysis. The online modules were completed by half of the surgeons (2143 of 4411). The primary analysis included 3039 of the 3268 patients recruited (206 patients had no anastomosis and 23 were lost to follow-up), with anastomotic leaks arising before and after the intervention in 10.1 and 9.6 per cent respectively (adjusted OR 0.87, 95 per cent c.i. 0.59 to 1.30; P = 0.498). The proportion of surgeons completing the educational modules was an influence: the leak rate decreased from 12.2 per cent (61 of 500) before intervention to 5.1 per cent (24 of 473) after intervention in high-engagement centres (adjusted OR 0.36, 0.20 to 0.64; P < 0.001), but this was not observed in low-engagement hospitals (8.3 per cent (59 of 714) and 13.8 per cent (61 of 443) respectively; adjusted OR 2.09, 1.31 to 3.31).
Conclusion
Completion of globally available digital training by engaged teams can alter anastomotic leak rates. Registration number: NCT04270721 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)