Literature DB >> 26095558

A Double-Blinded Randomized Trial to Compare the Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Procedures Using Patient-Reported Outcomes.

Juliane Bingener1, Pam Skaran2, Andrea McConico2, Paul Novotny3, Peter Wettstein4, David M Sletten5, Myung Park2, Philip Low5, Jeff Sloan3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Institute of Medicine has included the comparison of minimally invasive surgical techniques in its research agenda. This study seeks to evaluate a model for the comparison of minimally invasive procedures using patient-reported outcomes. STUDY
DESIGN: A double-blinded randomized controlled trial (NCT01489436) was conducted. Baseline data were obtained, standardized anesthesia was induced, and patients were randomized to single-port (SP) or 4-port (FP) laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Perioperative care was standardized. The outcomes were pain (Visual Analog Scale) on postoperative day 1 (primary) and quality of life (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures Information System and Linear Analog Self-Assessment), serum cytokines, and heart rate variability (secondary). Analysis was intention to treat. Using identical occlusive dressings, patients and the outcomes assessor remained blinded until postoperative day 2.
RESULTS: Fifty-five patients were randomized to each arm. There was no difference in demographics. Visual Analog Scale pain score on postoperative day 1 was significantly different from baseline in each group (SP: 1.6 ± 1.9 to 4.2 ± 2.4 vs FP: 1.8 ± 2.3 to 4.2 ± 2.2), but not different from each other (p = 0.83). Patients in the FP arm reported significantly less fatigue on postoperative day 7 than patients in the SP group (3.1 ± 2.1 vs 4.2 ± 2.2; p = 0.009). Fewer patients in the FP group required postoperative oral narcotics before discharge (40% vs 60%; p = 0.056). Cytokines levels and heart rate variability were similar between arms. In patients followed for >1 year, no difference in umbilical hernia rates was noted.
CONCLUSIONS: Early postoperative quality of life data captured differences in fatigue, indicating improved recovery after FP within a controlled trial. Physiologic measures were similar, suggesting that the differences between SP and FP are minimal.
Copyright © 2015 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26095558      PMCID: PMC4477204          DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.02.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Surg        ISSN: 1072-7515            Impact factor:   6.113


  21 in total

Review 1.  A procedure-specific systematic review and consensus recommendations for postoperative analgesia following laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  H Kehlet; A W Gray; F Bonnet; F Camu; H B J Fischer; R F McCloy; E A M Neugebauer; M M Puig; N Rawal; C J P Simanski
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-08-11       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes.

Authors:  Dennis Revicki; Ron D Hays; David Cella; Jeff Sloan
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2007-08-03       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Beyond the development of health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) measures: a checklist for evaluating HRQOL outcomes in cancer clinical trials--does HRQOL evaluation in prostate cancer research inform clinical decision making?

Authors:  Fabio Efficace; Andrew Bottomley; David Osoba; Carolyn Gotay; Henning Flechtner; Sven D'haese; Alfredo Zurlo
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-09-15       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Evaluating systemic stress response in single port vs. multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Colleen G C McGregor; Mikael H Sodergren; Alec Aslanyan; Victoria J Wright; Sanjay Purkayastha; Ara Darzi; Paraskevas Paraskeva
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-02-10       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  The PROMIS of better outcome assessment: responsiveness, floor and ceiling effects, and Internet administration.

Authors:  James Fries; Matthias Rose; Eswar Krishnan
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 4.666

6.  Power spectral analysis of heart rate variability during helium pneumoperitoneum: The mechanism of increased cardiac sympathetic activity and its clinical significance.

Authors:  A Bickel; E Kukuev; O Popov; S Ivry; N Roguin; M Yahalom; A Eitan
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-11-11       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed with mini-instruments.

Authors:  L Sarli; D Iusco; S Gobbi; C Porrini; M Ferro; L Roncoroni
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  Influence of acute epinephrine infusion on endotoxin-induced parameters of heart rate variability: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Badar U Jan; Susette M Coyle; Leo O Oikawa; Shou-En Lu; Steve E Calvano; Paul M Lehrer; Stephen F Lowry
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 9.  Avoidance of biliary injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Steven M Strasberg
Journal:  J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg       Date:  2002

10.  Evaluation of a single preoperative dose of pregabalin for attenuation of postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  A Agarwal; S Gautam; D Gupta; S Agarwal; P K Singh; U Singh
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2008-08-20       Impact factor: 9.166

View more
  9 in total

1.  Single-incision surgery trocar-site hernia: an updated systematic review meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis by the Minimally Invasive Surgery Synthesis of Interventions Outcomes Network (MISSION).

Authors:  Stavros A Antoniou; Josep M García-Alamino; Shahab Hajibandeh; Shahin Hajibandeh; Michael Weitzendorfer; Filip E Muysoms; Frank A Granderath; George E Chalkiadakis; Klaus Emmanuel; George A Antoniou; Meropi Gioumidou; Styliani Iliopoulou-Kosmadaki; Maria Mathioudaki; Kyriakos Souliotis
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is responsible for increased adverse events: results of a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  A Arezzo; R Passera; E Forcignanò; L Rapetti; R Cirocchi; M Morino
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Incidence of incisional hernias following single-incision versus traditional laparoscopic surgery: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  M B Connell; R Selvam; S V Patel
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2018-11-23       Impact factor: 4.739

4.  Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: systematic review.

Authors:  Conor Melly; Gearoid McGeehan; Niall O'Connor; Alison Johnston; Gary Bass; Shahin Mohseni; Claire Donohoe; Magda Bucholc; Michael Sugrue
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2022-05-02

Review 5.  A systematic review of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and quality of life reporting in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Prita Daliya; Elizabeth H Gemmill; Dileep N Lobo; Simon L Parsons
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 7.293

6.  SINGLE PORT LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY: TECHNICAL ASPECTS AND RESULTS.

Authors:  Murillo de Lima Favaro; Silvio Gabor; Ruy Francisco Pimentel Pedroso; Ligia Ribeiro; Otto Mauro Rosa; Marcelo Augusto Fontenelle Ribeiro-Junior
Journal:  Arq Bras Cir Dig       Date:  2018-08-16

7.  Is single port laparoscopic cholecystectomy superior to standard cholecystectomy in post-operative pain?

Authors:  Talal Mohammed Ali Alshahri; Sabry Abounozha; Rashid Ibrahim
Journal:  Ann Med Surg (Lond)       Date:  2021-01-30

8.  Systematic review of reporting benefits and harms of surgical interventions in randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  F E Stubenrouch; E S Cohen; P M M Bossuyt; M J W Koelemay; P C R van der Vet; D T Ubbink
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2020-01-07

9.  Identification and categorisation of relevant outcomes for symptomatic uncomplicated gallstone disease: in-depth analysis to inform the development of a core outcome set.

Authors:  Moira Cruickshank; Rumana Newlands; Jane Blazeby; Irfan Ahmed; Mohamed Bekheit; Miriam Brazzelli; Bernard Croal; Karen Innes; Craig Ramsay; Katie Gillies
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 2.692

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.