10 research outputs found

    A Multispecialty Evaluation of Thiel Cadavers for Surgical Training

    Get PDF
    Background: Changes in UK legislation allow for surgical procedures to be performed on cadavers. The aim of this study was to assess Thiel cadavers as high-fidelity simulators and to examine their suitability for surgical training. Methods: Surgeons from various specialties were invited to attend a 1 day dissection workshop using Thiel cadavers. The surgeons completed a baseline questionnaire on cadaveric simulation. At the end of the workshop, they completed a similar questionnaire based on their experience with Thiel cadavers. Comparing the answers in the pre- and post-workshop questionnaires assessed whether using Thiel cadavers had changed the surgeons’ opinions of cadaveric simulation. Results: According to the 27 participants, simulation is important for surgical training and a full-procedure model is beneficial for all levels of training. Currently, there is dissatisfaction with existing models and a need for high-fidelity alternatives. After the workshop, surgeons concluded that Thiel cadavers are suitable for surgical simulation (p = 0.015). Thiel were found to be realistic (p < 0.001) to have reduced odour (p = 0.002) and be more cost-effective (p = 0.003). Ethical constraints were considered to be small. Conclusion: Thiel cadavers are suitable for training in most surgical specialties

    Bibliometric analysis of academic journal recommendations and requirements for surgical and anesthesiologic adverse events reporting.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND Standards for reporting surgical adverse events vary widely within the scientific literature. Failure to adequately capture adverse events hinders efforts to measure the safety of healthcare delivery and improve the quality of care. The aim of the present study is to assess the prevalence and typology of perioperative adverse event reporting guidelines among surgery and anesthesiology journals. MATERIALS AND METHODS In November 2021, three independent reviewers queried journal lists from the SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) portal (www.scimagojr.com), a bibliometric indicator database for surgery and anesthesiology academic journals. Journal characteristics were summarized using SCImago, a bibliometric indicator database extracted from Scopus journal data. Quartile 1 (Q1) was considered the top quartile and Q4 bottom quartile based on the journal impact factor. Journal author guidelines were collected to determine whether adverse event reporting recommendations were included and, if so, the preferred reporting procedures. RESULTS Of 1,409 journals queried, 655 (46.5%) recommended surgical adverse event reporting. Journals most likely to recommend adverse event reporting were: 1) by category surgery (59.1%), urology (53.3%), and anesthesia (52.3%); 2) in top SJR quartiles (i.e. more influential); 3) by region, based in Western Europe (49.8%), North America (49.3%), and the Middle East (48.3%). CONCLUSIONS Surgery and anesthesiology journals do not consistently require or provide recommendations on perioperative adverse event reporting. Journal guidelines regarding adverse event reporting should be standardized and are needed to improve the quality of surgical adverse event reporting with the ultimate goal of improving patient morbidity and mortality

    Bibliometric Analysis of Academic Journal Recommendations and Requirements for Surgical and Anesthesiologic Adverse Events Reporting

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Standards for reporting surgical adverse events (AEs) vary widely within the scientific literature. Failure to adequately capture AEs hinders efforts to measure the safety of healthcare delivery and improve the quality of care. The aim of the present study is to assess the prevalence and typology of perioperative AE reporting guidelines among surgery and anesthesiology journals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In November 2021, three independent reviewers queried journal lists from the SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) portal (www.scimagojr.com), a bibliometric indicator database for surgery and anesthesiology academic journals. Journal characteristics were summarized using SCImago, a bibliometric indicator database extracted from Scopus journal data. Quartile 1 (Q1) was considered the top quartile and Q4 bottom quartile based on the journal impact factor. Journal author guidelines were collected to determine whether AE reporting recommendations were included and, if so, the preferred reporting procedures. RESULTS: Of 1409 journals queried, 655 (46.5%) recommended surgical AE reporting. Journals most likely to recommend AE reporting were: by category surgery (59.1%), urology (53.3%), and anesthesia (52.3%); in top SJR quartiles (i.e. more influential); by region, based in Western Europe (49.8%), North America (49.3%), and the Middle East (48.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery and anesthesiology journals do not consistently require or provide recommendations on perioperative AE reporting. Journal guidelines regarding AE reporting should be standardized and are needed to improve the quality of surgical AE reporting with the ultimate goal of improving patient morbidity and mortality

    Multiple novel prostate cancer susceptibility signals identified by fine-mapping of known risk loci among Europeans

    Get PDF
    Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified numerous common prostate cancer (PrCa) susceptibility loci. We have fine-mapped 64 GWAS regions known at the conclusion of the iCOGS study using large-scale genotyping and imputation in 25 723 PrCa cases and 26 274 controls of European ancestry. We detected evidence for multiple independent signals at 16 regions, 12 of which contained additional newly identified significant associations. A single signal comprising a spectrum of correlated variation was observed at 39 regions; 35 of which are now described by a novel more significantly associated lead SNP, while the originally reported variant remained as the lead SNP only in 4 regions. We also confirmed two association signals in Europeans that had been previously reported only in East-Asian GWAS. Based on statistical evidence and linkage disequilibrium (LD) structure, we have curated and narrowed down the list of the most likely candidate causal variants for each region. Functional annotation using data from ENCODE filtered for PrCa cell lines and eQTL analysis demonstrated significant enrichment for overlap with bio-features within this set. By incorporating the novel risk variants identified here alongside the refined data for existing association signals, we estimate that these loci now explain ∼38.9% of the familial relative risk of PrCa, an 8.9% improvement over the previously reported GWAS tag SNPs. This suggests that a significant fraction of the heritability of PrCa may have been hidden during the discovery phase of GWAS, in particular due to the presence of multiple independent signals within the same regio

    An unusual presentation of non-small cell lung carcinoma

    No full text
    Lung cancer is the most common malignancy in the Western world and usually presents with respiratory symptoms. The diagnosis of lung cancer is normally made by chest radiography followed by histological confirmation with either radiological or endoscopically guided biopsies. Very rarely, imaging does not help with the initial diagnosis. Haematuria is a common presentation and generally requires urological follow-up with radiological and cystoscopic examination. The differential diagnosis includes urothelial and renal cancers. We present the case of a patient who initially presented to urologists with haematuria and was thought to have a urological malignancy. Contrast enhanced computerised tomography (CT) of both the chest and abdomen after initial endoscopic examination was non-diagnostic. It was only laparoscopic removal of enlarged para-aortic lymph nodes which ultimately provided the diagnosis of non-small cell lung carcinoma

    The Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) Global Surgical Collaboration Project: Development of Criteria for Reporting Adverse Events During Surgical Procedures and Evaluating Their Impact on the Postoperative Course

    No full text
    none45Background: Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) are surgical and anesthesiologic complications. Despite the availability of grading criteria, iAEs are infrequently reported in the surgical literature and in cases for which iAEs are reported, these events are described with significant heterogeneity. Objective: To develop Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) Global Surgical Collaboration criteria to standardize the assessment, reporting, and grading of iAEs. The ultimate aim is to improve our understanding of the nature and frequency of iAEs and our ability to counsel patients regarding surgical procedures. Design, setting, and participants: The present study involved the following steps: (1) collecting criteria for assessing, reporting, and grading of iAEs via a comprehensive umbrella review; (2) collecting additional criteria via a survey of a panel of experienced surgeons (first round of a modified Delphi survey); (3) creating a comprehensive list of reporting criteria; (4) combining criteria acquired in the first two steps; and (5) establishing a consensus on clinical and quality assessment utility as determined in the second round of the Delphi survey. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Panel inter-rater agreement and consistency were assessed as the overall percentage agreement and Cronbach's α. Results and limitations: The umbrella review led to nine common criteria for assessing, grading, and reporting iAEs, and review of iAE grading systems led to two additional criteria. In the first Delphi round, 35 surgeons responded and two criteria were added. In the second Delphi round, 13 common criteria met the threshold for final guideline inclusion. All 13 criteria achieved the consensus minimum of 70%, with agreement on the usefulness of the criteria for clinical and quality improvement ranging from 74% to 100%. The mean inter-rater agreement was 89.0% for clinical improvement and 88.6% for quality improvement. Conclusions: The ICARUS Global Collaboration criteria might aid in identifying important criteria when reporting iAEs, which will support all those involved in patient care and scientific publishing. Patient summary: We consulted a panel of experienced surgeons to develop a set of guidelines for academic surgeons to follow when publishing surgical studies. The surgeon panel proposed a list of 13 criteria that may improve global understanding of complications during specific procedures and thus improve the ability to counsel patients on surgical risk.noneCacciamani G.E.; Sholklapper T.; Dell'Oglio P.; Rocco B.; Annino F.; Antonelli A.; Amenta M.; Borghesi M.; Bove P.; Bozzini G.; Cafarelli A.; Celia A.; Leonardo C.; Ceruti C.; Cindolo L.; Crivellaro S.; Dalpiaz O.; Falabella R.; Falsaperla M.; Galfano A.; Gallo F.; Greco F.; Minervini A.; Parma P.; Chiara Sighinolfi M.; Pastore A.L.; Pini G.; Porreca A.; Pucci L.; Sciorio C.; Schiavina R.; Umari P.; Varca V.; Veneziano D.; Verze P.; Volpe A.; Zaramella S.; Lebastchi A.; Abreu A.; Mitropoulos D.; Shekhar Biyani C.; Sotelo R.; Desai M.; Artibani W.; Gill I.Cacciamani, G. E.; Sholklapper, T.; Dell'Oglio, P.; Rocco, B.; Annino, F.; Antonelli, A.; Amenta, M.; Borghesi, M.; Bove, P.; Bozzini, G.; Cafarelli, A.; Celia, A.; Leonardo, C.; Ceruti, C.; Cindolo, L.; Crivellaro, S.; Dalpiaz, O.; Falabella, R.; Falsaperla, M.; Galfano, A.; Gallo, F.; Greco, F.; Minervini, A.; Parma, P.; Chiara Sighinolfi, M.; Pastore, A. L.; Pini, G.; Porreca, A.; Pucci, L.; Sciorio, C.; Schiavina, R.; Umari, P.; Varca, V.; Veneziano, D.; Verze, P.; Volpe, A.; Zaramella, S.; Lebastchi, A.; Abreu, A.; Mitropoulos, D.; Shekhar Biyani, C.; Sotelo, R.; Desai, M.; Artibani, W.; Gill, I

    Multiple loci on 8q24 associated with prostate cancer susceptibility

    No full text
    Previous studies have identified multiple loci on 8q24 associated with prostate cancer risk. We performed a comprehensive analysis of SNP associations across 8q24 by genotyping tag SNPs in 5,504 prostate cancer cases and 5,834 controls. We confirmed associations at three previously reported loci and identified additional loci in two other linkage disequilibrium blocks (rs1006908: per-allele OR = 0.87, P = 7.9 x 10(-8); rs620861: OR = 0.90, P = 4.8 x 10(-8)). Eight SNPs in five linkage disequilibrium blocks were independently associated with prostate cancer susceptibility

    Elective surgical services need to start planning for summer pressures

    No full text

    Identification of seven new prostate cancer susceptibility loci through a genome-wide association study

    Get PDF
    Prostate cancer (PrCa) is the most frequently diagnosed male cancer in developed countries. To identify common PrCa susceptibility alleles, we have previously conducted a genome-wide association study in which 541, 129 SNPs were genotyped in 1,854 PrCa cases with clinically detected disease and 1,894 controls. We have now evaluated promising associations in a second stage, in which we genotyped 43,671 SNPs in 3,650 PrCa cases and 3,940 controls, and a third stage, involving an additional 16,229 cases and 14,821 controls from 21 studies. In addition to previously identified loci, we identified a further seven new prostate cancer susceptibility loci on chromosomes 2, 4, 8, 11, and 22 (P=1.6×10−8 to P=2.7×10−33)
    corecore