Literature DB >> 24366279

Development of a composite endpoint for randomized controlled trials in pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Marielle M E Coolsen1, Stefan H E M Clermonts, Ronald M van Dam, Bjorn Winkens, Massimo Malagó, Giuseppe K Fusai, Cornelis H C Dejong, Steven W M Olde Damink.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been performed in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). An important factor contributing to this is the large number of patients needed to adequately power RCTs for relevant clinical single endpoints. A PD-specific composite endpoint (CEP) could solve this problem. The aim of the present study was to develop a PD-specific CEP, consisting of complications related to PD, allowing reduction in sample sizes and improving the ability to compare outcomes.
METHODS: PD-specific CEP components were selected after a systematic review of the literature and consensus between 25 international pancreatic surgeons. Ultimately, prospective cohorts of patients who underwent PD in two high-volume HPB centers (London, UK, and Maastricht, NL) were used to assess the event rate and effect of implementing a PD-specific CEP.
RESULTS: From a total of 18 single-component endpoints, intra-abdominal abscess, sepsis, post-PD hemorrhage, bile leakage, gastrojejunostomy leakage, leakage of the pancreatic anastomosis, delayed gastric emptying, and operative mortality within 90 days were selected to be included the PD-specific CEP. All eight components had consensus definitions and a Dindo-Clavien classification of 3 or more. The incidence of the PD-specific CEP was 24.7 % in the Maastricht cohort and 23.3 % in the London cohort. These incidence rates led to a twofold reduction in the theoretical calculated sample size for an adequately powered RCT on PD using this CEP as a primary endpoint.
CONCLUSIONS: The proposed PD-specific CEP enables clinical investigators to adequately power RCTs on PD and increases the feasibility, comparability, and utility in meta-analysis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24366279     DOI: 10.1007/s00268-013-2421-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Surg        ISSN: 0364-2313            Impact factor:   3.352


  28 in total

1.  Composite outcomes in randomized trials: greater precision but with greater uncertainty?

Authors:  Nick Freemantle; Melanie Calvert; John Wood; Joanne Eastaugh; Carl Griffin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-05-21       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients.

Authors:  S Yusuf; P Sleight; J Pogue; J Bosch; R Davies; G Dagenais
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-01-20       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  1423 pancreaticoduodenectomies for pancreatic cancer: A single-institution experience.

Authors:  Jordan M Winter; John L Cameron; Kurtis A Campbell; Meghan A Arnold; David C Chang; Joann Coleman; Mary B Hodgin; Patricia K Sauter; Ralph H Hruban; Taylor S Riall; Richard D Schulick; Michael A Choti; Keith D Lillemoe; Charles J Yeo
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 4.  Analysis of randomized controlled trials on hepatopancreatic surgery.

Authors:  Toshimi Kaido
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 5.  The accordion severity grading system of surgical complications.

Authors:  Steven M Strasberg; David C Linehan; William G Hawkins
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Critical appraisal of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) consensus definition of postoperative hemorrhage after pancreatoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Thilo Welsch; Hanna Eisele; Stefanie Zschäbitz; Ulf Hinz; Markus W Büchler; Moritz N Wente
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2011-05-25       Impact factor: 3.445

7.  Assessment of complications after pancreatic surgery: A novel grading system applied to 633 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Michelle L DeOliveira; Jordan M Winter; Markus Schafer; Steven C Cunningham; John L Cameron; Charles J Yeo; Pierre-Alain Clavien
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Efficacy of stapler versus hand-sewn closure after distal pancreatectomy (DISPACT): a randomised, controlled multicentre trial.

Authors:  Markus K Diener; Christoph M Seiler; Inga Rossion; Jörg Kleeff; Matthias Glanemann; Giovanni Butturini; Ales Tomazic; Christiane J Bruns; Olivier R C Busch; Stefan Farkas; Orlin Belyaev; John P Neoptolemos; Christopher Halloran; Tobias Keck; Marco Niedergethmann; Klaus Gellert; Helmut Witzigmann; Otto Kollmar; Peter Langer; Ulrich Steger; Jens Neudecker; Frederik Berrevoet; Silke Ganzera; Markus M Heiss; Steffen P Luntz; Thomas Bruckner; Meinhard Kieser; Markus W Büchler
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2011-04-30       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Preoperative biliary drainage for cancer of the head of the pancreas.

Authors:  Niels A van der Gaag; Erik A J Rauws; Casper H J van Eijck; Marco J Bruno; Erwin van der Harst; Frank J G M Kubben; Josephus J G M Gerritsen; Jan Willem Greve; Michael F Gerhards; Ignace H J T de Hingh; Jean H Klinkenbijl; Chung Y Nio; Steve M M de Castro; Olivier R C Busch; Thomas M van Gulik; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Dirk J Gouma
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-01-14       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  OMERACT: an international initiative to improve outcome measurement in rheumatology.

Authors:  Peter Tugwell; Maarten Boers; Peter Brooks; Lee Simon; Vibeke Strand; Leanne Idzerda
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2007-11-26       Impact factor: 2.279

View more
  3 in total

1.  Low skeletal muscle radiation attenuation and visceral adiposity are associated with overall survival and surgical site infections in patients with pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  David P J van Dijk; Maikel J A M Bakens; Mariëlle M E Coolsen; Sander S Rensen; Ronald M van Dam; Martijn J L Bours; Matty P Weijenberg; Cornelis H C Dejong; Steven W M Olde Damink
Journal:  J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle       Date:  2016-10-26       Impact factor: 12.910

Review 2.  Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: An updated systematic review and involvement of low and middle income countries.

Authors:  Katherine Davis; Sarah L Gorst; Nicola Harman; Valerie Smith; Elizabeth Gargon; Douglas G Altman; Jane M Blazeby; Mike Clarke; Sean Tunis; Paula R Williamson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-13       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 3.  ERAS: Improving outcome in the cachectic HPB patient.

Authors:  David P J van Dijk; Victor van Woerden; Hamit Cakir; Marcel den Dulk; Steven W M Olde Damink; Cornelis H C Dejong
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 3.454

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.