A systematic review of outcome and outcome-measure reporting in randomised trials evaluating surgical interventions for anterior-compartment vaginal prolapse: a call to action to develop a core outcome set

INTRODUCTION: We assessed outcome and outcome-measure reporting in randomised controlled trials evaluating surgical interventions for anterior-compartment vaginal prolapse and explored the relationships between outcome reporting quality with journal impact factor, year of publication, and methodological quality. METHODS: We searched the bibliographical databases from inception to October 2017. Two researchers independently selected studies and assessed study characteristics, methodological quality (Jadad criteria; range 1-5), and outcome reporting quality Management of Otitis Media with Effusion in Cleft Palate (MOMENT) criteria; range 1-6], and extracted relevant data. We used a multivariate linear regression to assess associations between outcome reporting quality and other variables. RESULTS: Eighty publications reporting data from 10,924 participants were included. Seventeen different surgical interventions were evaluated. One hundred different outcomes and 112 outcome measures were reported. Outcomes were inconsistently reported across trials; for example, 43 trials reported anatomical treatment success rates (12 outcome measures), 25 trials reported quality of life (15 outcome measures) and eight trials reported postoperative pain (seven outcome measures). Multivariate linear regression demonstrated a relationship between outcome reporting quality with methodological quality (β = 0.412; P = 0.018). No relationship was demonstrated between outcome reporting quality with impact factor (β = 0.078; P = 0.306), year of publication (β = 0.149; P = 0.295), study size (β = 0.008; P = 0.961) and commercial funding (β = -0.013; P = 0.918). CONCLUSIONS: Anterior-compartment vaginal prolapse trials report many different outcomes and outcome measures and often neglect to report important safety outcomes. Developing, disseminating and implementing a core outcome set will help address these issues

Analysing the eosinophil cationic protein - a clue to the function of the eosinophil granulocyte

Eosinophil granulocytes reside in respiratory mucosa including lungs, in the gastro-intestinal tract, and in lymphocyte associated organs, the thymus, lymph nodes and the spleen. In parasitic infections, atopic diseases such as atopic dermatitis and asthma, the numbers of the circulating eosinophils are frequently elevated. In conditions such as Hypereosinophilic Syndrome (HES) circulating eosinophil levels are even further raised. Although, eosinophils were identified more than hundred years ago, their roles in homeostasis and in disease still remain unclear. The most prominent feature of the eosinophils are their large secondary granules, each containing four basic proteins, the best known being the eosinophil cationic protein (ECP). This protein has been developed as a marker for eosinophilic disease and quantified in biological fluids including serum, bronchoalveolar lavage and nasal secretions. Elevated ECP levels are found in T helper lymphocyte type 2 (atopic) diseases such as allergic asthma and allergic rhinitis but also occasionally in other diseases such as bacterial sinusitis. ECP is a ribonuclease which has been attributed with cytotoxic, neurotoxic, fibrosis promoting and immune-regulatory functions. ECP regulates mucosal and immune cells and may directly act against helminth, bacterial and viral infections. The levels of ECP measured in disease in combination with the catalogue of known functions of the protein and its polymorphisms presented here will build a foundation for further speculations of the role of ECP, and ultimately the role of the eosinophil