Study protocol for VIdeo assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy versus conventional Open LobEcTomy for lung cancer, a UK multicentre randomised controlled trial with an internal pilot (the VIOLET study)

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer is a leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide and surgery remains the main treatment for early stage disease. Prior to the introduction of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), lung resection for cancer was undertaken through an open thoracotomy. To date, the evidence base supporting the different surgical approaches is based on non-randomised studies, small randomised trials and is focused mainly on short-term in-hospital outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The VIdeo assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy versus conventional Open LobEcTomy for lung cancer study is a UK multicentre parallel group randomised controlled trial (RCT) with blinding of outcome assessors and participants (to hospital discharge) comparing the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of VATS lobectomy versus open lobectomy for treatment of lung cancer. We will test the hypothesis that VATS lobectomy is superior to open lobectomy with respect to self-reported physical function 5 weeks after randomisation (approximately 1 month after surgery). Secondary outcomes include assessment of efficacy (hospital stay, pain, proportion and time to uptake of chemotherapy), measures of safety (adverse health events), oncological outcomes (proportion of patients upstaged to pathologic N2 (pN2) disease and disease-free survival), overall survival and health related quality of life to 1 year. The QuinteT Recruitment Intervention is integrated into the trial to optimise recruitment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial has been approved by the UK (Dulwich) National Research Ethics Service Committee London. Findings will be written-up as methodology papers for conference presentation, and publication in peer-reviewed journals. Many aspects of the feasibility work will inform surgical RCTs in general and these will be reported at methodology meetings. We will also link with lung cancer clinical studies groups. The patient and public involvement group that works with the Respiratory Biomedical Research Unit at the Brompton Hospital will help identify how we can best publicise the findings

Risk Prediction for Acute Kidney Injury in Acute Medical Admissions in the UK

Background Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) is associated with adverse outcomes; identifying patients who are at risk of developing AKI in hospital may lead to targeted prevention. This approach is advocated in national guidelines but is not well studied in acutely unwell medical patients. We therefore aimed to undertake a UK-wide study in acute medical units (AMUs) with the following aims: to define the proportion of acutely unwell medical patients who develop hospital-acquired AKI (hAKI); to determine risk factors associated with the development of hAKI; and to assess the feasibility of using these risk factors to develop an AKI risk prediction score. Methods In September 2016, a prospective multicentre cohort study across 72 UK AMUs was undertaken. Data were collected from all patients who presented over a 24-hour period. Chronic dialysis, community-acquired AKI (cAKI) and those with fewer than two creatinine measurements were subsequently excluded. The primary outcome was the development of h-AKI. Results 2,446 individuals were admitted to the AMUs of the 72 participating centres. 384 patients (16%) sustained AKI of whom 287 (75%) were cAKI and 97 (25%) were hAKI. After exclusions, 1,235 participants remained in whom chronic kidney disease (OR 3.08, 95% CI 1.96-4.83), diuretic prescription (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.5-3.65), a lower haemoglobin concentration and an elevated serum bilirubin were independently associated with development of hAKI. Multivariable model discrimination was moderate (c-statistic 0.75), and this did not support the development of a robust clinical risk prediction score. Mortality was higher in those with hAKI (adjusted OR 5.22; 95% CI 2.23-12.20). Conclusion AKI in AMUs is common and associated with worse outcomes, with the majority of cases community acquired. The smaller proportion of hAKI cases, only moderate discrimination of prognostic risk factor modelling and the resource implications of widespread application of an AKI clinical risk score across all AMU admissions suggests that this approach is not currently justified. More targeted risk assessment or automated methods of calculating individual risk may be more appropriate alternatives

Short and long-term outcome of patients with severe acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy.

The short- and long-term survival outcome of severe AKI requiring RRT remains poor. Among those who survive, a significant number either continue to require RRT or have residual renal impairment necessitating ongoing follow-up