Assessment of perinatal outcome after sustained tocolysis in early labour (APOSTEL-II trial)

Contains fulltext : 80242.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Preterm labour is the main cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality in the Western world. At present, there is evidence that tocolysis for 48 hours is useful in women with threatened preterm labour at least before 32 weeks. This allows transfer of the patient to a perinatal centre, and maximizes the effect of corticosteroids for improved neonatal survival. It is questionable whether treatment with tocolytics should be maintained after 48 hours. METHODS/DESIGN: The APOSTEL II trial is a multicentre placebo-controlled study. Pregnant women admitted for threatened preterm labour who have been treated with 48 hours corticosteroids and tocolysis will be eligible to participate in the trial between 26+0 and 32+2 weeks gestational age. They will be randomly allocated to nifedipine (intervention) or placebo (control) for twelve days or until delivery, whatever comes first.Primary outcome is a composite of perinatal death, and severe neonatal morbidity up to evaluation at 6 months after birth. Secondary outcomes are gestational age at delivery, number of days in neonatal intensive care and total days of the first 6 months out of hospital. In addition a cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed. Analysis will be by intention to treat. The power calculation is based on an expected 11% difference in adverse neonatal outcome. This implies that 406 women have to be randomised (two sided test, beta 0.2 at alpha 0.05). DISCUSSION: This trial will provide evidence as to whether maintenance tocolysis reduces severe perinatal morbidity and mortality in women with threatened preterm labour before 32 weeks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registration: http://www.trialregister.nl, NTR 1336, date of registration: June 3rd 2008

Preoperative inspiratory muscle training to prevent postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing esophageal resection (PREPARE study) : study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Esophageal resection is associated with a high incidence of postoperative pneumonia. Respiratory complications account for almost half of the readmissions to the critical care unit. Postoperative complications can result in prolonged hospital stay and consequently increase healthcare costs. In cardiac surgery a preoperative inspiratory muscle training program has shown to prevent postoperative pneumonia and reduce length of hospital stay. While in some surgical centers inspiratory muscle training is already used in the preoperative phase in patients undergoing esophageal resection, the added value of this intervention on the reduction of pulmonary complications has not yet been investigated in large surgical populations other than cardiac surgery in a randomized and controlled study design. METHODS/DESIGN: The effect of a preoperative inspiratory muscle training program on the incidence of postoperative pneumonia in patients undergoing esophageal resection will be studied in a single blind multicenter randomized controlled trial (the PREPARE study). In total 248 patients (age >18 years) undergoing esophageal resection for esophageal cancer will be included in this study. They are randomized to either usual care or usual care with an additional inspiratory muscle training intervention according to a high-intensity protocol which is performed with a tapered flow resistive inspiratory loading device. Patients have to complete 30 dynamic inspiratory efforts twice daily for 7 days a week until surgery with a minimum of 2 weeks. The starting training load will be aimed to be 60% of maximal inspiratory pressure and will be increased based on the rate of perceived exertion.The main study endpoint is the incidence of postoperative pneumonia. Secondary objectives are to evaluate the effect of preoperative inspiratory muscle training on length of hospital stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, incidence of other postoperative (pulmonary) complications, quality of life, and on postoperative respiratory muscle function and lung function. DISCUSSION: The PREPARE study is the first multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate the hypothesis that preoperative inspiratory muscle training leads to decreased pulmonary complications in patients undergoing esophageal resection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01893008

Preoperative inspiratory muscle training to prevent postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing esophageal resection (PREPARE study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Esophageal resection is associated with a high incidence of postoperative pneumonia. Respiratory complications account for almost half of the readmissions to the critical care unit. Postoperative complications can result in prolonged hospital stay and consequently increase healthcare costs. In cardiac surgery a preoperative inspiratory muscle training program has shown to prevent postoperative pneumonia and reduce length of hospital stay. While in some surgical centers inspiratory muscle training is already used in the preoperative phase in patients undergoing esophageal resection, the added value of this intervention on the reduction of pulmonary complications has not yet been investigated in large surgical populations other than cardiac surgery in a randomized and controlled study design. METHODS/DESIGN: The effect of a preoperative inspiratory muscle training program on the incidence of postoperative pneumonia in patients undergoing esophageal resection will be studied in a single blind multicenter randomized controlled trial (the PREPARE study). In total 248 patients (age >18 years) undergoing esophageal resection for esophageal cancer will be included in this study. They are randomized to either usual care or usual care with an additional inspiratory muscle training intervention according to a high-intensity protocol which is performed with a tapered flow resistive inspiratory loading device. Patients have to complete 30 dynamic inspiratory efforts twice daily for 7 days a week until surgery with a minimum of 2 weeks. The starting training load will be aimed to be 60% of maximal inspiratory pressure and will be increased based on the rate of perceived exertion.The main study endpoint is the incidence of postoperative pneumonia. Secondary objectives are to evaluate the effect of preoperative inspiratory muscle training on length of hospital stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, incidence of other postoperative (pulmonary) complications, quality of life, and on postoperative respiratory muscle function and lung function. DISCUSSION: The PREPARE study is the first multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate the hypothesis that preoperative inspiratory muscle training leads to decreased pulmonary complications in patients undergoing esophageal resection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01893008.status: publishe

A nationwide comparison of laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy for benign and malignant disease

Background Cohort studies from expert centers suggest that laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is superior to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) regarding postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay. But the generalizability of these findings is unknown because nationwide data on LDP are lacking. Study Design Adults who had undergone distal pancreatectomy in 17 centers between 2005 and 2013 were analyzed retrospectively. First, all LDPs were compared with all ODPs. Second, groups were matched using a propensity score. Third, the attitudes of pancreatic surgeons toward LDP were surveyed. The primary outcome was major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III). Results Among 633 included patients, 64 patients (10%) had undergone LDP and 569 patients (90%) had undergone ODP. Baseline characteristics were comparable, except for previous abdominal surgery and mean tumor size. In the full cohort, LDP was associated with fewer major complications (16% vs 29%; p = 0.02) and a shorter median [interquartile range, IQR] hospital stay (8 days [7-12 days] vs 10 days [8-14 days]; p = 0.03). Of all LDPs, 33% were converted to ODP. Matching succeeded for 63 LDP patients. After matching, the differences in major complications (9 patients [14%] vs 19 patients [30%]; p = 0.06) and median [IQR] length of hospital stay (8 days [7-12 days] vs 10 days [8-14 days]; p = 0.48) were not statistically significant. The survey demonstrated that 85% of surgeons welcomed LDP training. Conclusions Despite nationwide underuse and an impact of selection bias, outcomes of LDP seemed to be at least noninferior to ODP. Specific training is welcomed and could improve both the use and outcomes of LDP

Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy (LEOPARD) : study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Observational cohort studies have suggested that minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is associated with better short-term outcomes compared with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP), such as less intraoperative blood loss, lower morbidity, shorter length of hospital stay, and reduced total costs. Confounding by indication has probably influenced these findings, given that case-matched studies failed to confirm the superiority of MIDP. This accentuates the need for multicenter randomized controlled trials, which are currently lacking. We hypothesize that time to functional recovery is shorter after MIDP compared with ODP even in an enhanced recovery setting. METHODS: LEOPARD is a randomized controlled, parallel-group, patient-blinded, multicenter, superiority trial in all 17 centers of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group. A total of 102 patients with symptomatic benign, premalignant or malignant disease will be randomly allocated to undergo MIDP or ODP in an enhanced recovery setting. The primary outcome is time (days) to functional recovery, defined as all of the following: independently mobile at the preoperative level, sufficient pain control with oral medication alone, ability to maintain sufficient (i.e. >50%) daily required caloric intake, no intravenous fluid administration and no signs of infection. Secondary outcomes are operative and postoperative outcomes, including clinically relevant complications, mortality, quality of life and costs. DISCUSSION: The LEOPARD trial is designed to investigate whether MIDP reduces the time to functional recovery compared with ODP in an enhanced recovery setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register, NTR5188 . Registered on 9 April 2015