Efficacy of the Gelstix nucleus augmentation device for the treatment of chronic discogenic low back pain: protocol for a randomised, sham-controlled, double-blind, multicentre trial.

INTRODUCTION Discogenic pain is the cause of pain in 26%-40% of patients with for low back pain. Consensus about treatment of chronic discogenic low back pain is lacking and most treatment alternatives are supported by limited evidence. The percutaneous implantation of hydrogels into the nucleus pulposus represents a promising regenerative intradiscal therapy. The hydrogel 'GelStix' is composed primarily of hydrolyzed polyacrylonitrile and acts as a reservoir of hydration, producing increased pressure and improved pH balance, potentially leading to disc preservation. We hypothesise that treatment with GelStix will lead to greater reduction in pain intensity at 6 months post-treatment compared with patients receiving sham treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS This is a parallel group, randomised sham-controlled double-blind, multicentre trial to assess whether the GelStix device is superior to sham in reducing pain intensity in patients with chronic discogenic low back pain. The study will be conducted in two regional hospitals in Europe. Seventy-two participants will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome will be the change in pain intensity between preoperative baseline and at 6 months postintervention. Secondary outcomes were disability, quality of life, the patient's global impression of change scale, the use of pain medication and the disc degeneration process assessed by means of MRI. For change in pain intensity, disability, health-related quality of life and disc height, mean values will be compared between groups using linear regression analysis, adjusted for treatment centre. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Canton Ticino, Switzerland (CE2982) and by the Medical Ethical Committee Arnhem-Nijmegen, the Netherlands (2016-2944). All patients that agree to participate will be asked to sign an informed consent form. Results will be disseminated through international publications in peer-reviewed journals, in addition to international conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT02763956. PROTOCOL VERSION 7.1, 18 November 2020

International multicenter observational study on assessment of ventilatory management during general anaesthesia for robotic surgery and its effects on postoperative pulmonary complication (AVATaR) : study protocol and statistical analysis plan

Introduction: Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has emerged as an alternative minimally invasive surgical option. Despite its growing applicability, the frequent need for pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg position could significantly affect respiratory mechanics during RAS. AVATaR is an international multicenter observational study aiming to assess the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC), to characterise current practices of mechanical ventilation (MV) and to evaluate a possible association between ventilatory parameters and PPC in patients undergoing RAS. Methods and analysis: AVATaR is an observational study of surgical patients undergoing MV for general anaesthesia for RAS. The primary outcome is the incidence of PPC during the first five postoperative days. Secondary outcomes include practice of MV, effect of surgical positioning on MV, effect of MV on clinical outcome and intraoperative complications. Ethics and dissemination: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein. The study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated at international conferences. Trial registration number: NCT02989415; Pre-results

Protocol for a prospective, international cohort study on the Management and Outcomes of Perioperative Care among European Diabetic Patients (MOPED)

Introduction Diabetes is common (about 20 million patients in Europe) and patients with diabetes have more surgical interventions than the general population. There are plausible pathophysiological and clinical mechanisms suggesting that patients with diabetes are at an increased risk of postoperative complications. When postoperative complications occur in the general population, they increase major adverse events and subsequently increase 1-year mortality. This is likely to be worse in patients with diabetes. There is variation in practice guidelines in different countries in the perioperative management of patients with diabetes undergoing major surgery and whether this may affect postoperative outcome has not been investigated on a large scale. Neither is it known whether different strata of preoperative glycaemic control affects outcome. Methods and analysis A prospective, observational, international, multicentre cohort study, recruiting 5000 patients with diabetes undergoing elective or emergency surgery in at least n=50 centres. Inclusion criteria are any patient with diabetes undergoing surgery under any substantive anaesthetic technique. Exclusion criteria are not being a confirmed diabetic patient and patients with diabetes undergoing procedures under monitored sedation or local anaesthetic infiltration only. Follow-up duration is 30 days after surgery. Primary outcome is days at home at 30 days. Secondary outcomes are Comprehensive Complications Index, Quality of Recovery (QoR-15) score on Day 1 postoperatively, 30-day mortality, length of hospital stay and incidence of specific major adverse events (Myocardial Infarction (MI), Myocardial Injury after Non-cardiac Surgery (MINS), Acute Kidney Injury (AKI), Postoperative Pulmonary Complications (PPC), Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA), Pulmonary Embolism (PE), DVT, surgical site infection, postoperative pulmonary infection). Tertiary outcomes include time to resumption of normal diabetes therapy, incidence of diabetic ketoacidosis or hypoglycaemia, incidence and duration of use of intravenous insulin infusion therapy and change in diabetic management at 30 days. Ethics and dissemination This study will adhere to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (amendment 2013) by the World Medical Association and the ICH-Good Clinical Practice (GCP) Guidelines E6(R2). Specific national and local regulatory authority requirements will be followed as applicable. Ethical approval has been granted by the Institutional Review Board of the Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland (Reference: 1/378/2167). As enrolment for this study is ongoing, ethical approval from additional centres is being added continuously. The main results of Management and Outcomes of Perioperative Care among European Diabetic Patients and its substudies will be published in peer-reviewed international medical journals and presented at Euroanaesthesia congress and other international and national meetings. Trial registration number NCT04511312

Efficacy of the Gelstix nucleus augmentation device for the treatment of chronic discogenic low back pain: protocol for a randomised, sham-controlled, double-blind, multicentre trial

INTRODUCTION: Discogenic pain is the cause of pain in 26%-40% of patients with for low back pain. Consensus about treatment of chronic discogenic low back pain is lacking and most treatment alternatives are supported by limited evidence. The percutaneous implantation of hydrogels into the nucleus pulposus represents a promising regenerative intradiscal therapy. The hydrogel 'GelStix' is composed primarily of hydrolyzed polyacrylonitrile and acts as a reservoir of hydration, producing increased pressure and improved pH balance, potentially leading to disc preservation. We hypothesise that treatment with GelStix will lead to greater reduction in pain intensity at 6 months post-treatment compared with patients receiving sham treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a parallel group, randomised sham-controlled double-blind, multicentre trial to assess whether the GelStix device is superior to sham in reducing pain intensity in patients with chronic discogenic low back pain. The study will be conducted in two regional hospitals in Europe. Seventy-two participants will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome will be the change in pain intensity between preoperative baseline and at 6 months postintervention. Secondary outcomes were disability, quality of life, the patient's global impression of change scale, the use of pain medication and the disc degeneration process assessed by means of MRI. For change in pain intensity, disability, health-related quality of life and disc height, mean values will be compared between groups using linear regression analysis, adjusted for treatment centre. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Canton Ticino, Switzerland (CE2982) and by the Medical Ethical Committee Arnhem-Nijmegen, the Netherlands (2016-2944). All patients that agree to participate will be asked to sign an informed consent form. Results will be disseminated through international publications in peer-reviewed journals, in addition to international conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02763956. PROTOCOL VERSION: 7.1, 18 November 2020

International multicenter observational study on assessment of ventilatory management during general anaesthesia for robotic surgery and its effects on postoperative pulmonary complication (AVATaR): Study protocol and statistical analysis plan

Introduction Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has emerged as an alternative minimally invasive surgical option. Despite its growing applicability, the frequent need for pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg position could significantly affect respiratory mechanics during RAS. AVATaR is an international multicenter observational study aiming to assess the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC), to characterise current practices of mechanical ventilation (MV) and to evaluate a possible association between ventilatory parameters and PPC in patients undergoing RAS. Methods and analysis AVATaR is an observational study of surgical patients undergoing MV for general anaesthesia for RAS. The primary outcome is the incidence of PPC during the first five postoperative days. Secondary outcomes include practice of MV, effect of surgical positioning on MV, effect of MV on clinical outcome and intraoperative complications. Ethics and dissemination This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein. The study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated at international conferences. Trial registration number NCT02989415; Pre-results