Postsurgical pain outcome of vertical and transverse abdominal incision: Design of a randomized controlled equivalence trial [ISRCTN60734227]

BACKGROUND: There are two ways to open the abdominal cavity in elective general surgery: vertically or transversely. Various clinical studies and a meta-analysis have postulated that the transverse approach is superior to other approaches as regards complications. However, in a recent survey it was shown that 90 % of all abdominal incisions in visceral surgery are still vertical incisions. This discrepancy between existing recommendations of clinical trials and clinical practice could be explained by the lack of acceptance of these results due to a number of deficits in the study design and analysis, subsequent low internal validity, and therefore limited external generalisability. The objective of this study is to address the issue from the patient's perspective. METHODS: This is an intraoperatively randomized controlled observer and patient-blinded two-group parallel equivalence trial. The study setting is the Department of General-, Visceral-, Trauma Surgery and Outpatient Clinic of the University of Heidelberg, Medical School. A total of 172 patients of both genders, aged over 18 years who are scheduled for an elective abdominal operation and are eligible for either a transverse or vertical incision. To show equivalence of the two approaches or the superiority of one of them from the perspective of the patient, a primary endpoint is defined: the pain experienced by the patient (VAS 0–100) on day two after surgery and the amount of analgesic required (piritramide [mg/h]). A confidence interval approach will be used for analysis. A global α-Level of 0.05 and a power of 0.8 is guaranteed, resulting in a size of 86 patients for each group. Secondary endpoints are: time interval to open and close the abdomen, early-onset complications (frequency of burst abdomen, postoperative pulmonary complications, and wound infection) and late complications (frequency of incisional hernias). Different outcome variables will be ranked by patients and surgeons to assess the relevance of possible endpoints from the patients' and surgeons' perspective. CONCLUSION: This is a randomized controlled observer and patient-blinded two-group parallel trial to answer the question if the transverse abdominal incision is equivalent to the vertical one due to the described endpoints

Consequences of Cold-Ischemia Time on Primary Nonfunction and Patient and Graft Survival in Liver Transplantation: A Meta-Analysis

Introduction: The ability to preserve organs prior to transplant is essential to the organ allocation process. Objective: The purpose of this study is to describe the functional relationship between cold-ischemia time (CIT) and primary nonfunction (PNF), patient and graft survival in liver transplant. Methods: To identify relevant articles Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane database, including the non-English literature identified in these databases, was searched from 1966 to April 2008. Two independent reviewers screened and extracted the data. CIT was analyzed both as a continuous variable and stratified by clinically relevant intervals. Nondichotomous variables were weighted by sample size. Percent variables were weighted by the inverse of the binomial variance. Results: Twenty-six studies met criteria. Functionally, PNF%=-6.678281+0.9134701*CIT Mean+0.1250879*(CIT Mean-9.89535) 2 - 0.0067663*(CIT Mean-9.89535) 3, r2=.625, p<.0001. Mean patient survival: 93 % (1 month), 88 % (3 months), 83 % (6 months) and 83 % (12 months). Mean graft survival: 85.9 % (1 month), 80.5 % (3 months), 78.1 % (6 months) and 76.8 % (12 months). Maximum patient and graft survival occurred with CITs between 7.5-12.5 hrs at each survival interval. PNF was also significantly correlated with ICU time, % first time grafts and % immunologic mismatches. Conclusion: The results of this work imply that CIT may be the most important pre-transplant information needed in the decision to accept an organ. © 2008 Stahl et al