Ultrasound-guided breast-sparing surgery to improve cosmetic outcomes and quality of life. A prospective multicentre randomised controlled clinical trial comparing ultrasound-guided surgery to traditional palpation-guided surgery (COBALT trial)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer was developed as a method to preserve healthy breast tissue, thereby improving cosmetic outcomes. Thus far, the primary aim of breast-conserving surgery has been the achievement of tumour-free resection margins and prevention of local recurrence, whereas the cosmetic outcome has been considered less important. Large studies have reported poor cosmetic outcomes in 20-40% of patients after breast-conserving surgery, with the volume of the resected breast tissue being the major determinant. There is clear evidence for the efficacy of ultrasonography in the resection of nonpalpable tumours. Surgical resection of palpable breast cancer is performed with guidance by intra-operative palpation. These palpation-guided excisions often result in an unnecessarily wide resection of adjacent healthy breast tissue, while the rate of tumour-involved resection margins is still high. It is hypothesised that the use of intra-operative ultrasonography in the excision of palpable breast cancer will improve the ability to spare healthy breast tissue while maintaining or even improving the oncological margin status. The aim of this study is to compare ultrasound-guided surgery for palpable tumours with the standard palpation-guided surgery in terms of the extent of healthy breast tissue resection, the percentage of tumour-free margins, cosmetic outcomes and quality of life.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>In this prospective multicentre randomised controlled clinical trial, 120 women who have been diagnosed with palpable early-stage (T1-2N0-1) primary invasive breast cancer and deemed suitable for breast-conserving surgery will be randomised between ultrasound-guided surgery and palpation-guided surgery. With this sample size, an expected 20% reduction of resected breast tissue and an 18% difference in tumour-free margins can be detected with a power of 80%. Secondary endpoints include cosmetic outcomes and quality of life. The rationale, study design and planned analyses are described.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The COBALT trial is a prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled study to assess the efficacy of ultrasound-guided breast-conserving surgery in patients with palpable early-stage primary invasive breast cancer in terms of the sparing of breast tissue, oncological margin status, cosmetic outcomes and quality of life.</p> <p>Trial Registration Number</p> <p>Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): <a href="http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=2579">NTR2579</a></p

Raising awareness of carrier testing for hereditary haemoglobinopathies in high-risk ethnic groups in the Netherlands: a pilot study among the general public and primary care providers

0.05). 191 surveys were collected from general practitioners or midwives. Their attitude towards the education programme for high-risk ethnic groups was positive, yet they did not show strong intention to effectuate carrier testing of their patients on the basis of ethnicity. The main factor which explained their (lack of) intention was social norm, i.e. their perception of negative peer opinion (41% variance explained). The majority of primary health care providers felt that policy change was unnecessary. CONCLUSION: The "infotainment" programme may have a positive effect on people from high-risk groups, but informed general practitioners and midwives were reluctant to facilitate their patients' getting tested. Additional initiatives are needed to motivate primary care providers to facilitate haemoglobinopathy carrier testing for their patients from high-risk background

The Sigma-trial protocol: a prospective double-blind multi-centre comparison of laparoscopic versus open elective sigmoid resection in patients with symptomatic diverticulitis

BACKGROUND: Diverticulosis is a common disease in the western society with an incidence of 33-66%. 10-25% of these patients will develop diverticulitis. In order to prevent a high-risk acute operation it is advised to perform elective sigmoid resection after two episodes of diverticulitis in the elderly patient or after one episode in the younger ( 50 years or in case of progressive abdominal complaints due to strictures caused by a previous episode of diverticulits. The diagnosis is confirmed by CT-scan, barium enema and/or coloscopy.It is required that the participating surgeons have performed at least 15 laparoscopic and open sigmoid resections. Open resection is performed by median laparotomy, laparoscopic resection is approached by 4 or 5 cannula. Sigmoid and colon which contain serosal changes or induration are removed and a tension free anastomosis is created. After completion of either surgical procedure an opaque dressing will be used, covering from 10 cm above the umbilicus to the pubic bone. Surgery details will be kept separate from the patient's notes.Primary endpoints are the postoperative morbidity and mortality. We divided morbidity in minor (e.g. wound infection), major (e.g. anastomotic leakage) and late (e.g. incisional hernias) complications, data will be collected during hospital stay and after six weeks and six months postoperative. Secondary endpoints are the operative and the postoperative recovery data. Operative data include duration of the operation, blood loss and conversion to laparotomy. Post operative recovery consists of return to normal diet, pain, analgesics, general health (SF-36 questionnaire) and duration of hospital stay. DISCUSSION: The Sigma-trial is a prospective, multi-center, double-blind, randomized study to define the role of laparoscopic sigmoid resection in patients with symptomatic diverticuliti

Traditional invasive vs. minimally invasive esophagectomy: a multi-center, randomized trial (TIME-trial)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is a rise in incidence of esophageal carcinoma due to increasing incidence of adenocarcinoma. Probably the only curative option to date is the use of neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgical resection. Traditional open esophageal resection is associated with a high morbidity and mortality rate. Furthermore, this approach involves long intensive care unit stay, in-hospital stay and long recovery period. Minimally invasive esophagectomy could reduce the morbidity and accelerate the post-operative recovery.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>Comparison between traditional open and minimally invasive esophagectomy in a multi-center, randomized trial. Patients with a resectable intrathoracic esophageal carcinoma, including the gastro-esophageal junction tumors (Siewert I) are eligible for inclusion. Prior thoracic surgery and cervical esophageal carcinoma are indications for exclusion. The surgical technique involves a right thoracotomy with lung blockade and laparotomy either with a cervical or thoracic anastomosis for the traditional group. The minimally invasive procedure involves a right thoracoscopy in prone position with a single lumen tube and laparoscopy either with a cervical or thoracic anastomosis. All patients in both groups will undergo identical pre-operative and post-operative protocol. Primary endpoint of this study are post-operative respiratory complications within the first two post-operative weeks confirmed by clinical, radiological and sputum culture data. Secondary endpoints are the operative data, the post-operative data and oncological data such as quality of the specimen and survival. Operative data include duration of the operation, blood loss and conversion to open procedure. Post-operative data include morbidity (major and minor), quality of life tests and hospital stay.</p> <p>Based on current literature and the experience of all participating centers, an incidence of pulmonary complications for 57% in the traditional arm and 29% in the minimally invasive arm, it is estimated that per arm 48 patients are needed. This is based on a two-sided significance level (alpha) of 0.05 and a power of 0.80. Knowing that approximately 20% of the patients will be excluded, we will randomize 60 patients per arm.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The TIME-trial is a prospective, multi-center, randomized study to define the role of minimally invasive esophageal resection in patients with resectable intrathoracic and junction esophageal cancer.</p> <p>Trial registration (Netherlands Trial Register)</p> <p><a href="http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=2040">NTR2452</a></p