Management of Modifiable Vascular Risk Factors Improves Late Survival following Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The main determinants of survival following abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair are preexisting risk factors rather than the method of repair chosen. The main aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the effect of modifiable risk factors on late survival following AAA repair. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched to identify all relevant articles reporting the influence of modifiable risk factors on long-term survival (≥1 year) following elective open aneurysm repair and endovascular aneurysm repair. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies which comprised 53,118 patients, published between 1989 and 2015, were included in the analysis. The use of statin, aspirin, beta-blockers, and a higher hemoglobin level was all significant predictors of improved survival following repair with a hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.75 (0.70-0.80), 0.81 (0.73-0.89), 0.75 (0.61-0.93), and 0.84 (0.74-0.96), respectively. Smoking history and uncorrected coronary disease were associated with a worse long-term survival of HR 1.27 (95% CI 1.07-1.51) and HR 2.59 (95% CI 1.14-5.88), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing cardiovascular risk factors in patients preoperatively improves long-term survival following AAA repair. Global strategies to improve risk factor modifications in these patients are warranted to optimize long-term outcomes.

Laparoscopic Lavage in the Management of Hinchey Grade III Diverticulitis: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of laparoscopic lavage and sigmoid resection in perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis. BACKGROUND: Peritonitis secondary to perforated diverticulitis has conventionally been managed by resection and stoma formation. Case series have suggested that patients can be safely managed with laparoscopic lavage, resulting in reduced mortality and stoma formation. Recently, 3 randomized controlled trials have published contradictory conclusions. METHODS: MEDLINE from 1946 to present, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane database of Registered clinical trials and EMBASE (all via OVID) were searched using the terms "laparoscopy" AND ("primary resection" OR "Hartmann procedure", OR "sigmoidectomy"), AND "Diverticulitis", AND "Peritonitis" AND "therapeutic irrigation" or "lavage" AND randomized controlled trial and any derivatives of those terms. We included all randomized controlled trials. Data were extracted from each study using a purpose-designed template. Statistical analysis was undertaken using Revman 5. RESULTS: Three randomized controlled trials were identified from 48 potential studies. The analysis included 307 patients of whom 159 underwent laparoscopic lavage. Overall, the rate of reintervention within 30 days postoperatively was 45/159 (28.3%) in the lavage group and 13/148 (8.8%) in the resection group (relative risk 3.01, 95% confidence interval 1.15-7.90). There was no significant difference in Intensive Care Unit admissions, 30 and 90-day mortality, or stoma rates at 12 months. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic lavage used in the management of Hinchey grade III diverticulitis leads to more reinterventions within 30 days postoperatively, but does not increase the 30 or 90-day mortality rates compared with sigmoid resection.

Follow-up strategies for patients treated for non-metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: It is common clinical practice to follow patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) for several years following their curative surgery or adjuvant therapy, or both. Despite this widespread practice, there is considerable controversy about how often patients should be seen, what tests should be performed, and whether these varying strategies have any significant impact on patient outcomes. This is the second update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2002 and first updated in 2007. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of intensive follow-up for patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer treated with curative intent. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched CENTRAL (2016, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1950 to May 20th, 2016), Embase (1974 to May 20th, 2016), CINAHL (1981 to May 20th, 2016), and Science Citation Index (1900 to May 20th, 2016). We also searched reference lists of articles, and handsearched the Proceedings of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (2011 to 2014). In addition, we searched the following trials registries (May 20th, 2016): ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We further contacted study authors. No language or publication restrictions were applied to the search strategies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised controlled trials comparing different follow-up strategies for participants with non-metastatic CRC treated with curative intent. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently determined trial eligibility, performed data extraction, and assessed methodological quality. MAIN RESULTS: We studied 5403 participants enrolled in 15 studies. (We included two new studies in this second update.) Although the studies varied in setting (general practitioner (GP)-led, nurse-led, or surgeon-led) and "intensity" of follow-up, there was very little inconsistency in the results.Overall survival: we found no evidence of a statistical effect with intensive follow-up (hazard ratio (HR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.02; I² = 4%; P = 0.41; high-quality evidence). There were 1098 deaths among 4786 participants enrolled in 12 studies.Colorectal cancer-specific survival: this did not differ with intensive follow-up (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.12; I² = 0%; P = 0.45; moderate-quality evidence). There were 432 colorectal cancer deaths among 3769 participants enrolled in seven studies.Relapse-free survival: we found no statistical evidence of effect with intensive follow-up (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.18; I² = 5%; P = 0.39; moderate-quality evidence). There were 1416 relapses among 5253 participants enrolled in 14 studies.Salvage surgery with curative intent: this was more frequent with intensive follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.98, 95% CI 1.53 to 2.56; I² = 31%; P = 0.14; high-quality evidence). There were 457 episodes of salvage surgery in 5157 participants enrolled in 13 studies.Interval (symptomatic) recurrences: these were less frequent with intensive follow-up (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.86; I² = 66%; P = 0.007; moderate-quality evidence). Three hundred and seventy-six interval recurrences were reported in 3933 participants enrolled in seven studies.Intensive follow-up did not appear to affect quality of life, anxiety, nor depression (reported in three studies).Harms from colonoscopies did not differ with intensive follow-up (RR 2.08, 95% CI 0.11 to 40.17; moderate-quality evidence). In two studies, there were seven colonoscopic complications in 2112 colonoscopies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results of our review suggest that there is no overall survival benefit for intensifying the follow-up of patients after curative surgery for colorectal cancer. Although more participants were treated with salvage surgery with curative intent in the intensive follow-up group, this was not associated with improved survival. Harms related to intensive follow-up and salvage therapy were not well reported.

Fraction size in radiation therapy for breast conservation in early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Shortening the duration of radiation therapy would benefit women with early breast cancer treated with breast conserving surgery. It may also improve access to radiation therapy by improving efficiency in radiation oncology departments globally. This can only happen if the shorter treatment is as effective and safe as conventional radiation therapy. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2008 and updated in 2009. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of altered radiation fraction size for women with early breast cancer who have had breast conserving surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Specialised Register (23 May 2015), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 4), MEDLINE (Jan 1996 to May 2015), EMBASE (Jan 1980 to May 2015), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal (June 2010 to May 2015) and ClinicalTrials.gov (16 April 2015), reference lists of articles and relevant conference proceedings. No language or publication constraints were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of altered fraction size versus conventional fractionation for radiation therapy in women with early breast cancer who had undergone breast conserving surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors performed data extraction independently, with disagreements resolved by discussion. We sought missing data from trial authors. MAIN RESULTS: We studied 8228 women in nine studies. Eight out of nine studies were at low or unclear risk of bias. Altered fraction size (delivering radiation therapy in larger amounts each day but over fewer days than with conventional fractionation) did not have a clinically meaningful effect on: local recurrence-free survival (Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.94, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.15, 7095 women, four studies, high-quality evidence), cosmetic outcome (Risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.01, 2103 women, four studies, high-quality evidence) or overall survival (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.03, 5685 women, three studies, high-quality evidence). Acute radiation skin toxicity (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.45, 357 women, two studies) was reduced with altered fraction size. Late radiation subcutaneous toxicity did not differ with altered fraction size (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.05, 5130 women, four studies, high-quality evidence). Breast cancer-specific survival (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06, 5685 women, three studies, high quality evidence) and relapse-free survival (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.05, 5685 women, three studies, moderate-quality evidence) did not differ with altered fraction size. We found no data for mastectomy rate. Altered fraction size was associated with less patient-reported (P < 0.001) and physician-reported (P = 0.009) fatigue at six months (287 women, one study). We found no difference in the issue of altered fractionation for patient-reported outcomes of: physical well-being (P = 0.46), functional well-being (P = 0.38), emotional well-being (P = 0.58), social well-being (P = 0.32), breast cancer concerns (P = 0.94; 287 women, one study). We found no data with respect to costs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found that using altered fraction size regimens (greater than 2 Gy per fraction) does not have a clinically meaningful effect on local recurrence, is associated with decreased acute toxicity and does not seem to affect breast appearance, late toxicity or patient-reported quality-of-life measures for selected women treated with breast conserving therapy. These are mostly women with node negative tumours smaller than 3 cm and negative pathological margins.

Does the diameter of abdominal aortic aneurysm influence late survival following abdominal aortic aneurysm repair? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies reporting the influence of preoperative abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter on late survival following abdominal aortic aneurysm repair have not been consistent. AIM: To report the influence of abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter on overall long-term survival following abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. METHODS: Embase, Medline and the Cochrane electronic databases were searched to identify articles reporting the influence of abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter on late survival following open aneurysm repair and endovascular aneurysm repair published up to April 2015. Data were extracted from multivariate analysis; estimated risks were expressed as hazard ratio. RESULTS: A total of 2167 titles/abstracts were retrieved, of which 76 studies were fully assessed; 19 studies reporting on 22,104 patients were included. Preoperative larger abdominal aortic aneurysm size was associated with a worse survival compared to smaller aneurysms with a pooled hazard ratio of 1.14 (95% CI: 1.09-1.18), per 1 cm increase in abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter. Subgroup analysis of the different types of repair was performed and the hazard ratio (95% CI), for open aneurysm repair and endovascular aneurysm repair were 1.08 (1.03-1.12) and 1.20 (1.15-1.25), respectively, per 1 cm increase. There was a significant difference between the groups p < 0.02. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that preoperative large abdominal aortic aneurysm independently influences overall late survival following abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, and this association was greater in abdominal aortic aneurysm repaired with endovascular aneurysm repair.

Including viral infection data supports an association between particulate pollution and respiratory admissions.

OBJECTIVE: To refine and revise previous air pollution, climate and health time series analysis in Christchurch, New Zealand, introducing viral identification data (positive identification count and outbreak, defined as two of more positive tests). METHOD: The effects on daily respiratory admissions for five years (1998-2002) of air pollution (PM(10) ), climate and virology (incorporating actual counts and outbreaks of influenza A and B (INF), para influenza virus type 3 (PIV) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) were examined using generalised additive models (GAMs), which are one of semiparametric models. Results were also compared with a model that included climate and air pollution parameters but without the inclusion of virology data. The data were analysed aggregately and then stratified by age group and season. RESULTS: Different virology data detected various association levels. The highest estimates were a 3.93% (CI: 2.69-5.17) and a 3.88% (CI: 2.65-5.12) rise in respiratory admissions for a rise of 10 µg/m(3) annual PM(10) with outbreak and actual counts of PIV respectively for 0-19 years old with a three-day lag. CONCLUSION: Refining a statistical model with the addition of virology data gives a similar estimation of the association between PM(10) levels and respiratory admissions to previous research. Use of the indicator of an outbreak of viral infection appears to be similar to actual count of viruses detected.

Fraction size in radiation treatment for breast conservation in early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Shortening the duration of radiation therapy would benefit women with early breast cancer treated with breast conserving surgery. It may also improve access to radiation therapy by improving efficiency in radiation oncology departments globally. This can only happen if the shorter treatment is as effective and safe as conventional radiation therapy. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 3, 2008. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of altered radiation fraction size on outcomes for women with early breast cancer who have undergone breast conserving surgery. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the WHO ICTRP search portal to June 2009, reference lists of articles and relevant conference proceedings. We applied no language constraints. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of unconventional versus conventional fractionation in women with early breast cancer who had undergone breast conserving surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The authors performed data extraction independently, with disagreements resolved by discussion. We sought missing data from trial authors. MAIN RESULTS: Four trials reported on 7095 women. The women were highly selected: tumours were node negative and 89.8% were smaller than 3 cm. Where the breast size was known, 87% had small or medium breasts. The studies were of low to medium quality. Unconventional fractionation (delivering radiation therapy in larger amounts each day but over fewer days than with conventional fractionation) did not affect: (1) local recurrence risk ratio (RR) 0.97 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.22, P = 0.78), (2) breast appearance RR 1.17 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.39, P = 0.09), (3) survival at five years RR 0.89 (95% CI 0.77 to 1.04, P = 0.16). Acute skin toxicity was decreased with unconventional fractionation: RR 0.21 (95% CI 0.07 to 0.64, P = 0.007). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Two new studies have been published since the last version of the review, altering our conclusions. We have evidence from four low to medium quality randomised trials that using unconventional fractionation regimens (greater than 2 Gy per fraction) does not affect local recurrence, is associated with decreased acute toxicity and does not seem to affect breast appearance or late toxicity for selected women treated with breast conserving therapy. These are mostly women with node negative tumours smaller than 3 cm and negative pathological margins. Long-term follow up (> 5 years) is available for a small proportion of the patients randomised. Longer follow up is required for a more complete assessment of the effect of altered fractionation.

Fraction size in radiation treatment for breast conservation in early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Shortening the duration of radiation therapy would benefit women with early breast cancer treated with breast conservation. It may also improve access to radiation therapy by improving efficiency in radiation oncology departments globally. This can only happen if the shorter treatment is as effective and safe as conventional radiation therapy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of altered fraction size on women with early breast cancer who have undergone breast conserving surgery. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Specialised Register (June 2006), MEDLINE (November 2006), EMBASE (November 2006), reference lists for articles, and relevant conference proceedings. No language constraints were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of unconventional versus conventional fractionation in women with early breast cancer who had undergone breast conserving surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data extraction was performed independently by the authors with disagreements resolved by discussion. Missing data was sought by contacting the authors concerned. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials were included and reported on 2644 women. The women were highly selected with node negative tumours smaller than 5 cm and negative pathological margins; 46% of the women had a cup separation size of less than 25 cm. The studies were of high quality. Data for local recurrence and breast appearance were not available in a form which could be combined. Unconventional fractionation (delivering radiation therapy in larger amounts each day but over fewer days than with conventional fractionation) did not appear to affect: (1) local-recurrence free survival (absolute difference 0.4%, 95% CI -1.5% to 2.4%), (2) breast appearance (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.17; P = 0.86), (3) survival at five years (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.19; P = 0.75), (4) late skin toxicity at five years (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.22; P = 0.98, or (5) late radiation toxicity in sub-cutaneous tissue (RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.28; P = 0.99). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We have evidence from two high quality randomised trials that the use of unconventional fractionation regimes (greater than 2 Gy per fraction) does not affect breast appearance or toxicity and does not seem to affect local recurrence for selected women treated with breast conserving therapy. These are women with node negative tumours smaller than 5 cm and negative pathological margins. Two new trials have been published in March 2008. Their results are consistent with our findings. The results of these trials will be incorporated in the next update of this review.