The British journal of surgery
-
Review Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Meta-analysis of patient-reported outcomes after laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair.
Inguinal hernia repair is a common low-risk intervention. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are being used increasingly as primary outcomes in clinical trials. The aim of this study was to review and meta-analyse the PROs in RCTs comparing laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair techniques in adult patients. ⋯ The data and analysis reported in this study reflect the most up-to-date evidence available for the surgeon to counsel patients. It was constrained by heterogeneity of reporting for several outcomes.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Costs and quality of life in a randomized trial comparing minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomy (LEOPARD trial).
Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy decreases time to functional recovery compared with open distal pancreatectomy, but the cost-effectiveness and impact on disease-specific quality of life have yet to be established. ⋯ Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was at least as cost-effective as open distal pancreatectomy in terms of time to functional recovery and quality-adjusted life-years. Cosmesis and quality of life were similar in the two groups 1 year after surgery.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Randomized clinical trial comparing total extraperitoneal with Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair (TEPLICH trial).
Chronic pain is reported after 10-35 per cent of inguinal hernia operations. The aim was to compare quality of life (QoL) after total extraperitoneal (TEP) and Lichtenstein hernia repairs in the setting of an RCT with operations performed by department-certified hernia surgeons. ⋯ In the medium term, both TEP and Lichtenstein hernia repair had similar outcomes after 1 year, with high rates of patient satisfaction and low rates of chronic pain and recurrence. There were short-term advantages for pain and recovery rate after TEP repair. Registration number: NCT00803985 ( www.clinicaltrials.gov).
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Baseline findings of the population-based, randomized, multifaceted Danish cardiovascular screening trial (DANCAVAS) of men aged 65-74 years.
The challenge of managing age-related diseases is increasing; routine checks by the general practitioner do not reduce cardiovascular mortality. The aim here was to reduce cardiovascular mortality by advanced population-based cardiovascular screening. The present article reports the organization of the study, the acceptability of the screening offer, and the relevance of multifaceted screening for prevention and management of cardiovascular disease. ⋯ Multifaceted cardiovascular screening is feasible and may optimize cardiovascular disease prevention in men aged 65-74 years. Uptake is lower than in aortic aneurysm screening.