Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in oesophageal cancer : response, outcome and the role of surgery

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in oesophageal cancer : response, outcome and the role of surger

BHPR research: qualitative1. Complex reasoning determines patients' perception of outcome following foot surgery in rheumatoid arhtritis

Background: Foot surgery is common in patients with RA but research into surgical outcomes is limited and conceptually flawed as current outcome measures lack face validity: to date no one has asked patients what is important to them. This study aimed to determine which factors are important to patients when evaluating the success of foot surgery in RA Methods: Semi structured interviews of RA patients who had undergone foot surgery were conducted and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis of interviews was conducted to explore issues that were important to patients. Results: 11 RA patients (9 ♂, mean age 59, dis dur = 22yrs, mean of 3 yrs post op) with mixed experiences of foot surgery were interviewed. Patients interpreted outcome in respect to a multitude of factors, frequently positive change in one aspect contrasted with negative opinions about another. Overall, four major themes emerged. Function: Functional ability & participation in valued activities were very important to patients. Walking ability was a key concern but patients interpreted levels of activity in light of other aspects of their disease, reflecting on change in functional ability more than overall level. Positive feelings of improved mobility were often moderated by negative self perception ("I mean, I still walk like a waddling duck”). Appearance: Appearance was important to almost all patients but perhaps the most complex theme of all. Physical appearance, foot shape, and footwear were closely interlinked, yet patients saw these as distinct separate concepts. Patients need to legitimize these feelings was clear and they frequently entered into a defensive repertoire ("it's not cosmetic surgery; it's something that's more important than that, you know?”). Clinician opinion: Surgeons' post operative evaluation of the procedure was very influential. The impact of this appraisal continued to affect patients' lasting impression irrespective of how the outcome compared to their initial goals ("when he'd done it ... he said that hasn't worked as good as he'd wanted to ... but the pain has gone”). Pain: Whilst pain was important to almost all patients, it appeared to be less important than the other themes. Pain was predominately raised when it influenced other themes, such as function; many still felt the need to legitimize their foot pain in order for health professionals to take it seriously ("in the end I went to my GP because it had happened a few times and I went to an orthopaedic surgeon who was quite dismissive of it, it was like what are you complaining about”). Conclusions: Patients interpret the outcome of foot surgery using a multitude of interrelated factors, particularly functional ability, appearance and surgeons' appraisal of the procedure. While pain was often noted, this appeared less important than other factors in the overall outcome of the surgery. Future research into foot surgery should incorporate the complexity of how patients determine their outcome Disclosure statement: All authors have declared no conflicts of interes

Interns as teachers of medical students: a pilot programme.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, rising numbers of medical students and an increasingly demanding clinical workload has put pressures on the educational systems for medical students in the hospital. Bedside teaching remains central to education, but tutorial delivery by registrars, tutors and consultants has proven to be increasingly difficult with the greater numbers of students now in the undergraduate system. AIMS: We have performed a pilot study to determine the feasibility of developing a Junior Tutor Programme, to assist in the delivery of tutorials to undergraduate medical students. METHODS: This was designed and delivered by interns under the supervision of the academic staff in the Departments of Medicine and Surgery in Connolly Hospital. The programme was evaluated by a questionnaire filled in by the students anonymously. RESULTS: A supervised programme of tutorials delivered by interns is a potentially useful way to ensure delivery of clinical teaching to undergraduate medical students.</p

Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Active Surveillance Versus Standard Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis

Objective:To compare overall survival of patients with a cCR undergoing active surveillance versus standard esophagectomy.Summary of Background Data:One-third of patients with esophageal cancer have a pathologically complete response in the resection specimen after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Active surveillance may be of benefit in patients with cCR, determined with diagnostics during response evaluations after chemoradiotherapy.Methods:A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed comparing overall survival between patients with cCR after chemoradiotherapy undergoing active surveillance versus standard esophagectomy. Authors were contacted to supply individual patient data. Overall and progression-free survival were compared using random effects meta-analysis of randomized or propensity score matched data. Locoregional recurrence rate was assessed. The study-protocol was registered (PROSPERO: CRD42020167070).Results:Seven studies were identified comprising 788 patients, of which after randomization or propensity score matching yielded 196 active surveillance and 257 standard esophagectomy patients. All authors provided individual patient data. The risk of all-cause mortality for active surveillance was 1.08 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.62-1.87, P = 0.75] after intention-to-treat analysis and 0.93 (95% CI: 0.56-1.54, P = 0.75) after per-protocol analysis. The risk of progression or all-cause mortality for active surveillance was 1.14 (95% CI: 0.83-1.58, P = 0.36). Five-year locoregional recurrence rate during active surveillance was 40% (95% CI: 26%-59%). 95% of active surveillance patients undergoing postponed esophagectomy for locoregional recurrence had radical resection.Conclusions:Overall survival was comparable in patients with cCR after chemoradiotherapy undergoing active surveillance or standard esophagectomy. Diagnostic follow-up is mandatory in active surveillance and postponed esophagectomy should be offered to operable patients in case of locoregional recurrence

Chemoradiotherapy followed by Active Surveillance Versus Standard Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

OBJECTIVE: To compare overall survival of patients with a cCR undergoing active surveillance versus standard esophagectomy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: One-third of patients with esophageal cancer have a pathologically complete response in the resection specimen after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Active surveillance may be of benefit in patients with cCR, determined with diagnostics during response evaluations after chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed comparing overall survival between patients with cCR after chemoradiotherapy undergoing active surveillance versus standard esophagectomy. Authors were contacted to supply individual patient data. Overall and progression-free survival were compared using random effects meta-analysis of randomized or propensity score matched data. Locoregional recurrence rate was assessed. The study-protocol was registered (PROSPERO: CRD42020167070). RESULTS: Seven studies were identified comprising 788 patients, of which after randomization or propensity score matching yielded 196 active surveillance and 257 standard esophagectomy patients. All authors provided individual patient data. The risk of all-cause mortality for active surveillance was 1.08 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.62-1.87, P = 0.75] after intention-to-treat analysis and 0.93 (95% CI: 0.56-1.54, P = 0.75) after per-protocol analysis. The risk of progression or all-cause mortality for active surveillance was 1.14 (95% CI: 0.83-1.58, P = 0.36). Five-year locoregional recurrence rate during active surveillance was 40% (95% CI: 26%-59%). 95% of active surveillance patients undergoing postponed esophagectomy for locoregional recurrence had radical resection. CONCLUSIONS: Overall survival was comparable in patients with cCR after chemoradiotherapy undergoing active surveillance or standard esophagectomy. Diagnostic follow-up is mandatory in active surveillance and postponed esophagectomy should be offered to operable patients in case of locoregional recurrence