Bias-Variation Dilemma Challenges Clinical Trials: Inherent Limitations of Randomized Controlled Trials and Meta-Analyses Comparing Hernia Therapies

Purpose: Evaluation of hernia therapies according to the current rules of Evidence Based Medicine is widely reduced to results of RCTs or meta-analyses. RCTs have been accepted as a most important tool to confirm a superior effect of an intervention. Unfortunately, in hernia surgery, comparisons of RCTs and correspondingly their use in meta-analyses, are not, surprisingly often, able to confirm any significant impact of a specific procedure due to intrinsic restrictions in a multi-causal\ud setting with its web of influences. Methods: Based on our own experiences of clinical studies in surgery, the present article outlines several situations, with their respective reasons, which argue the severe limitations of RCTs and meta-analysis to define an optimum treatment. Results: Metaanalyses accumulate the variations of each trial, which then may cover any clear causal relationship. RCTs usually are dealing with subgroups of standard patients thus excluding the majority of our patients. Low statistical power of current cohort sizes restricts the analysis of subgroups or of effects with low incidences. Simple comparisons of means frequently are hampered by nonlinear relationships to outcome. The relevance of a specific variable is difficult to separate from other influences. The limited surveillance period of studies ignores a delayed change in outcome. Randomization cannot guarantee a standardized patient’s condition. All the arguments have to be considered as a crucial and fundamental consequence of the bias-variance dilemma or principle of uncertainty in medicine, and underline the many limitations of RCTs to evaluate any specific impact of hernia therapies on e.g. infection, pain or recurrence. Conclusions: Many surgical issues\ud cannot be and should not be investigated by RCTs, in particular, if a marked patients’ heterogeneity\ud has to be considered or the low incidences of the outcome readout cannot be addressed with sufficient statistical power without getting lost in the variation mire. Registries with their non-restricted data-acquisition should be regarded as reliable alternatives for postoperative outcome quality surveillance studies

The Effect of Physical Aging on the Viscoelastoplastic Response of Glycol Modified Poly(ethylene terephthalate)

For most amorphous polymers, their long term viscoelastic behaviour is greatly affected by physical aging, referring to the transition of their non-equilibrium structure towards equilibrium. This, in turn, affects their thermomechanical properties. In this study, we successfully applied a constitutive model, originally developed for semi-crystalline polyesters to assess the impact of physical aging on stress relaxation and creep in two glycol modified poly(ethylene terephthalate) grades, (poly(ethylene-co-1,4-cyclohexylenedimethylene terephthalate) (PECT) and poly(ethylene-co-2,2,4,4-tetramethyl-1,3-cyclobutanediol terephthalate) (PETT). Both copolyesters are subject to annealing at Tg-20 °C for up to 504 h and subsequent uniaxial stress relaxation tests and, for PECT, creep tests. The results show that the annealing time has a significant influence on the viscoelastic behaviour increasing the resistance to creep and stress relaxation. The effect of physical aging on model parameters is described and analysed while it is found that the concentration of active polymer junctions decreases exponentially with annealing time. Generally, PETT and PECT showed almost identical viscoelastic behaviours at 30 °C, suggesting that the chemical structure of the glycol unit (2,2,4,4-tetramethyl-1,3-cyclobutanediol and 1,4-cyclohexylenedimethanol) does not have significant effect on their viscoelasticity. However, when stress relaxation is tested at increased temperatures, the structural effects are more apparent, demonstrating higher activation energies for PECT than those for PETT, describing the rate of the rearrangement of interchain interactions. Physical aging is also found to decrease these activation energies from 326.6 to 128.1 kJ mol−1 for PECT and from 262.7 to 78.5 kJ mol−1 for PETT.</p

Update of Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias (International Endohernia Society (IEHS)) : Part B

In 2014 the International Endohernia Society (IEHS) published the first international "Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias". Guidelines reflect the currently best available evidence in diagnostics and therapy and give recommendations to help surgeons to standardize their techniques and to improve their results. However, science is a dynamic field which is continuously developing. Therefore, guidelines require regular updates to keep pace with the evolving literature. Methods For the development of the original guidelines all relevant literature published up to year 2012 was analyzed using the ranking of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based-Medicine. For the present update all of the previous authors were asked to evaluate the literature published during the recent years from 2012 to 2017 and revise their statements and recommendations given in the initial guidelines accordingly. In two Consensus Conferences (October 2017 Beijing, March 2018 Cologne) the updates were presented, discussed, and confirmed. To avoid redundancy, only new statements or recommendations are included in this paper. Therefore, for full understanding both of the guidelines, the original and the current, must be read. In addition, the new developments in repair of abdominal wall hernias like surgical techniques within the abdominal wall, release operations (transversus muscle release, component separation), Botox application, and robot-assisted repair methods were included. Results Due to an increase of the number of patients and further development of surgical techniques, repair of primary and secondary abdominal wall hernias attracts increasing interests of many surgeons. Whereas up to three decades ago hernia-related publications did not exceed 20 per year, currently this number is about 10-fold higher. Recent years are characterized by the advent of new techniques-minimal invasive techniques using robotics and laparoscopy, totally extraperitoneal repairs, novel myofascial release techniques for optimal closure of large defects, and Botox for relaxing the abdominal wall. Furthermore, a concomitant rectus diastasis was recognized as a significant risk factor for recurrence. Despite still insufficient evidence with respect to these new techniques it seemed to us necessary to include them in the update to stimulate surgeons to do research in these fields. Conclusion Guidelines are recommendations based on best available evidence intended to help the surgeon to improve the quality of his daily work. However, science is a continuously evolving process, and as such guidelines should be updated about every 3 years. For a comprehensive reference, however, it is suggested to read both the initially guidelines published in 2014 together with the update. Moreover, the presented update includes also techniques which were not known 3 years before

SMART-1 Impact Ground-based campaign

Based on predictions of impact magnitude and cloud ejecta dynamics, we organized a SMART-1 ground-based observation campaign to perform coordinated measurements of the impact. Results from the coordinated multi-site campaign will be discussed

Update of guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias (International Endohernia Society (IEHS))-Part A

In 2014, the International Endohernia Society (IEHS) published the first international "Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias." Guidelines reflect the currently best available evidence in diagnostics and therapy and give recommendations to help surgeons to standardize their techniques and to improve their results. However, science is a dynamic field which is continuously developing. Therefore, guidelines require regular updates to keep pace with the evolving literature. Methods For the development of the original guidelines, all relevant literature published up to year 2012 was analyzed using the ranking of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. For the present update, all of the previous authors were asked to evaluate the literature published during the recent years from 2012 to 2017 and revise their statements and recommendations given in the initial guidelines accordingly. In two Consensus Conferences (October 2017 Beijing, March 2018 Cologne), the updates were presented, discussed, and confirmed. To avoid redundancy, only new statements or recommendations are included in this paper. Therefore, for full understanding both of the guidelines, the original and the current, must be read. In addition, the new developments in repair of abdominal wall hernias like surgical techniques within the abdominal wall, release operations (transversus muscle release, component separation), Botox application, and robot-assisted repair methods were included. Results Due to an increase of the number of patients and further development of surgical techniques, repair of primary and secondary abdominal wall hernias attracts increasing interests of many surgeons. Whereas up to three decades ago hernia-related publications did not exceed 20 per year, currently this number is about 10-fold higher. Recent years are characterized by the advent of new techniques-minimal invasive techniques using robotics and laparoscopy, totally extraperitoneal repairs, novel myofascial release techniques for optimal closure of large defects, and Botox for relaxing the abdominal wall. Furthermore, a concomitant rectus diastasis was recognized as a significant risk factor for recurrence. Despite insufficient evidence with respect to these new techniques, it seemed to us necessary to include them in the update to stimulate surgeons to do research in these fields. Conclusion Guidelines are recommendations based on best available evidence intended to help the surgeon to improve the quality of his daily work. However, science is a continuously evolving process, and as such guidelines should be updated about every 3 years. For a comprehensive reference, however, it is suggested to read both the initial guidelines published in 2014 together with the update. Moreover, the presented update includes also techniques which were not known 3 years before