Randomised clinical trials in surgery: a look at the ethical and practical issues

Topical and subconjunctival anesthesia versus topical anesthesia alone in patients with senile cataracts undergoing phacoemulsification: a double-blind randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This study compared topical anesthesia to a combination of topical anesthesia and subconjunctival anesthesia for phacoemulsification.

METHODS

This double-blinded parallel placebo-controlled randomized trial involved senile cataract patients scheduled for phacoemulsification between May and December 2022. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either topical anesthesia with 0.5% tetracaine hydrochloride and subconjunctival balanced salt solution injection (Control group) or topical anesthesia and subconjunctival injection with 2% lidocaine (Lidocaine group). Baseline parameters, cataract grades, and various outcomes were recorded, including pain scores at specific time points, patient cooperation scores, requests for additional anesthesia, and complications. Statistical methods included Fisher's exact test, the t-test, ordinal logistic regression, and linear regression with robust standard errors.

RESULTS

In total, 176 patients were included in the study after excluding 33 patients. A significant reduction in immediate postoperative pain was achieved in the Lidocaine group (p < 0.001) and was maintained for 2 h (p = 0.011). Additionally, better cooperation was observed in this group (p = 0.038). However, patients in the Lidocaine group experienced more pain during the subconjunctival injection (p = 0.001) and a significant increase in subconjunctival hemorrhage related to the injection (p < 0.001). Despite this, the rates of surgical complications were comparable between the groups, and all phacoemulsification procedures were successfully completed using the assigned anesthetic technique.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of subconjunctival lidocaine injection to topical anesthesia reduced postoperative pain and improved patient cooperation during phacoemulsification. However, the lidocaine injection was painful, and it carried a higher risk of spontaneous-relief subconjunctival hemorrhage.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial Registration Number: TCTR20220804003, date of registration August 4, 2022, retrospectively registered.

Short-Term Outcomes of Phage-Antibiotic Combination Treatment in Adult Patients with Periprosthetic Hip Joint Infection

Implant-associated infections are the most costly problem in modern orthopedics due to the continued increase in the occurrence of antibiotic-resistant bacterial strains that requires the development of new effective antimicrobials. A non-randomized, prospective, open-label, with historical control study on the use of combined phage/antibiotic therapy of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) was carried out. Forty-five adult patients with deep PJI of the hip joint were involved in the study, with a 12-month follow-up after one-stage revision surgery. Patients from a prospective study group (SG, n = 23) were treated with specific phage preparation and etiotropic antibiotics, whereas patients from a retrospective comparator group (CG, n = 22) received antibiotics only. The rate of PJI relapses in the SG was eight times less than that in the CG: one case (4.5%) versus eight cases (36.4%), p = 0.021. The response rate to treatment was 95.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.7511-0.9976) in the SG and only 63.6% (95% CI = 0.4083-0.8198) in the CG. The odds ratio for PJI relapse in patients of the SG was 0.083 (95% CI = 0.009-0.742), which was almost 12 times lower than that in the CG. The obtained results support the efficacy of the combined phage-antibiotic treatment of PJI.

Reporting quality of surgical randomised controlled trials in head and neck cancer: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard for evaluating the efficacy of an intervention. However, previous research has shown that RCTs in several surgical specialities are poorly reported, making it difficult to ascertain if various biases have been appropriately minimised. This systematic review assesses the reporting quality of surgical head and neck cancer RCTs.

METHODS

A literature search of PubMed and Embase was performed. Papers were included if they reported RCTs which assessed a surgical technique used to treat or diagnose head and neck cancer published during or after 2011. The CONSORT 2010 checklist was used to evaluate the reporting quality of these trials.

RESULTS

41 papers were included. The mean CONSORT score was 16.5/25 (66% adherence) and the scores ranged from 7.5 (30%) to 25. The most common omissions were full trial protocol (found in 14.6%), participant recruitment method (22%) and effect size with a precision estimate for all outcome measures (29.3%). The full design and implementation of the randomisation methods were reported in 6 (14.6%). Papers published in journals which endorsed CONSORT had significantly higher scores (p = 0.02) and the journal impact factor was significantly correlated with CONSORT score (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

We have identified several pieces of information that are underreported in surgical head and neck cancer RCTs. These omissions make understanding and comparing the methodologies and conclusions of RCTs more difficult. The endorsement of CONSORT by journals improved adherence, suggesting that wider adoption of the checklist may improve reporting.

The ethical and legal status of neurosurgical guidelines: the neurosurgeon's golden fleece or Achilles' heel?

Neurosurgical guidelines are fundamental for evidence-based practice and have considerably increased both in number and content over the last decades. Yet, guidelines in neurosurgery are not without limitations, as they are overwhelmingly based on low-level evidence. Such recommendations have in the past been occasionally overturned by well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs), demonstrating the volatility of poorly underpinned evidence. Furthermore, even RCTs in surgery come with several limitations; most notably, interventions are often insufficiently standardized and assume a homogeneous patient population, which is not always applicable to neurosurgery. Lastly, guidelines are often outdated by the time they are published and smaller fields such as neurosurgery may lack a sufficient workforce to provide regular updates. These limitations raise the question of whether it is ethical to use low-level evidence for guideline recommendations, and if so, how strictly guidelines should be adhered to from an ethical and legal perspective. This article aims to offer a critical approach to the ethical and legal status of guidelines in neurosurgery. To this aim, the authors discuss: 1) the current state of neurosurgical guidelines and the evidence they are based on; 2) the degree of implementation of these guidelines; 3) the legal status of guidelines in medical disciplinary cases; and 4) the ethical balance between confident and critical use of guidelines. Ultimately, guidelines are neither laws that should always be followed nor purely academic efforts with little practical use. Every patient is unique, and tailored treatment defined by the surgeon will ensure optimal care; guidelines play an important role in creating a solid base that can be adhered to or deviated from, depending on the situation. From a research perspective, it is inevitable to rely on weaker evidence initially in order to generate more robust evidence later, and clinician-researchers have an ethical duty to contribute to generating and improving neurosurgical guidelines.

Big Data vs. Clinical Trials in HPB Surgery

Randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) are at the heart of "evidence-based" medicine. However, in surgical practice, RCTs remain uncommon. Conducting well-designed RCTs for surgical procedures is often challenged by inadequate recruitment accrual, blinding, or standardization of the surgical procedure, as well as lack of funding and evolution of the treatment strategy during the many years over which such trials are conducted. In addition, most clinical trials are performed in academic high-volume centers in highly selected patients, which may not necessarily reflect a "real-world" practice setting. Over the past decades, surgical outcomes research using nationwide administrative and registry databases has become increasingly common. Large databases provide easy and inexpensive access to data on a large and diverse patient population at a variety of treatment centers. Furthermore, large database studies provide the opportunity to answer questions that would be impossible or very arduous to answer using RCTs, including questions regarding health policy efficacy, trends in surgical practice, access to health care, impact of hospital volume, and adherence to practice guidelines, as well as research questions regarding rare disease, infrequent surgical outcomes, and specific subpopulation. Prospective data registries may also allow for quality benchmarking and auditing. This review outlines the role, advantages, and limitations of RCTs and large database studies in answering important research questions in surgery.

Writing an Evidence-based Article in Plastic Surgery: Translating Research into High-quality Care

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is a triad that integrates the physician's medical expertise and the patient's individual characteristics with the best available scientific evidence. As patients become more active in the clinical decision-making process, the application of evidence-based practice in the field of plastic surgery is more critical now than ever. As a field that is recognized by its innovation, plastic surgeons must understand the various aspects of EBM to enhance and keep the field at the top of medical discovery. Many initiatives have been implemented to guide researchers in the collection, analysis, and distribution of high-quality evidence. In particular, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery introduced a new EBM series to provide plastic surgeons with the appropriate resources to generate and integrate high-quality evidence into their practices. As a part of this initiative, this article will assist researchers in producing an evidence-based article that is well-written, relevant, and impactful to incorporate evidence-based practice into the specialty.

Effectiveness of computer-assisted virtual planning, cutting guides and pre-engineered plates on outcomes in mandible fibular free flap reconstructions: a systematic review protocol

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review is to synthesize the best available evidence on the outcomes of mandibular fibular free flap (MFFF) reconstructions using computer-assisted techniques versus traditional freehand techniques.

INTRODUCTION

Fibular free flaps are the most commonly used free flap for mandible reconstruction and are considered best practice for mandible reconstructions following resection of head and neck cancers. There are several reported advantages of computer-assisted MFFF reconstructions, including increased accuracy, decreased operation time, decreased ischemia time, decreased overall cost and improved patient outcomes. It is important to assess the advantages and potential harms of these techniques in a systematic review.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Eligible studies will consider patients of all ages undergoing MFFF reconstruction. Studies will compare computer-assisted techniques to traditional freehand techniques for the primary outcomes of flap failure, patient-reported outcomes and bony resection margin status. Studies published in English from 2008 will be included. Experimental, quasi-experimental, prospective and retrospective cohort, case-control and analytical cross-sectional studies will be considered.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched. Gray literature sources will include Google Scholar and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts, assess full-text papers against the inclusion criteria, evaluate methodological quality using standardized critical appraisal instruments and extract data using a customized form. If possible, data will be pooled for statistical meta-analysis, and a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Summary of Findings will be presented.