Effect of single versus multiple prophylactic antibiotic doses on prosthetic joint infections following primary total hip arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis at public and private hospitals in Denmark: protocol for a nationwide cross-over, cluster randomised, non-inferiority trial [The Pro-Hip-Quality Trial].

INTRODUCTION: A feared complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is prosthetic joint infection (PJI), associated with high morbidity and mortality. Prophylactic antibiotics can reduce the risk of PJI. However, there is no consensus on the dosages and current recommendations are based on a low evidence level. The objective is to compare the effect of a single versus multiple doses of prophylactic antibiotics administered within 24 hours on PJI. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is designed as a cross-over, cluster randomised, non-inferiority trial. All clinical centres use both antibiotic practices (1 year of each intervention). All Danish orthopaedic surgery departments will be involved: Based on quality databases, 2-year cohorts of approximately 20 000 primary THAs conducted at 39 public and private hospitals, will be included. INCLUSION CRITERIA: age ≥18 years, all indications for THA except patients operated due to acute or sequelae from proximal femoral or pelvic fractures or bone tumour or metastasis. The primary outcome is PJI within 90 days after primary THA. Secondary outcomes include (1) serious adverse events, (2) potential PJI, (3) length of hospitalisation stay, (4) cardiovascular events, (5) hospital-treated infections, (6) community-based antibiotic use, (7) opioid use and (8) use of acetaminophen and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. All outcome measures will be extracted from national databases. Analyses will be based on the intention-to-treat population. Non-inferiority will be shown if the upper limit of the two-sided 95% CI for the OR is less than 1.32 for the single dose as compared with multiple doses. The results will establish best practice on antibiotic prophylaxis dosages in the future. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by Committees on Health Research Ethics for The Capital Region of Denmark (21069108) and The Danish Medicines Agency (2021091723). All results will be presented in peer-reviewed medical journals and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05530551.

A Prognostic Model for Glioblastoma Patients Treated With Standard Therapy Based on a Prospective Cohort of Consecutive Non-Selected Patients From a Single Institution.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma patients administered standard therapies, comprising maximal surgical resection, radiation therapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide, have a variable prognosis with a median overall survival of 15-16 months and a 2-year overall survival of 30%. The aim of this study was to develop a prognostic nomogram for overall survival for glioblastoma patients treated with standard therapy outside clinical trials. METHODS: The study included 680 consecutive, non-selected glioblastoma patients administered standard therapy as primary treatment between the years 2005 and 2016 at Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. The prognostic model was generated employing multivariate Cox regression analysis modeling overall survival. RESULTS: The following poor prognostic factors were included in the final prognostic model for overall survival: Age (10-year increase: HR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.08-1.28, p < 0.001), ECOG performance status (PS) 1 vs. 0 (HR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.07-1.57, p = 0.007), PS 2 vs. 0 (HR = 2.99, 95% CI: 1.99-4.50, p < 0.001), corticosteroid use (HR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.18-1.70, p < 0.001), multifocal disease (HR = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.25-2.13, p < 0.001), biopsy vs. resection (HR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.04-1.72, p = 0.02), un-methylated promoter of the MGMT (O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase) gene (HR = 1.71, 95% CI: 1.42-2.04, p < 0.001). The model was validated internally and had a concordance index of 0.65. CONCLUSION: A nomogram for overall survival was established. This model can be used for risk stratification and treatment planning, as well as improve enrollment criteria for clinical trials.

DNA sequencing of cytopathologically inconclusive EUS-FNA from solid pancreatic lesions suspicious for malignancy confirms EUS diagnosis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: EUS-FNA is inconclusive in up to 10%-15% of patients with solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs). We aimed to investigate whether supplementary genetic analyses with whole-exome sequencing add diagnostic value in patients with SPLs suspicious of malignancy but inconclusive EUS-FNA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-nine patients, who underwent EUS-FNA of an SPL were retrospectively included. Three groups were defined: 16 (41.0%) had suspected malignancy on EUS confirmed by cytology (malignant), 13 (33.3%) had suspected malignancy on EUS but benign cytology (inconclusive), and 10 (25.6%) had benign EUS imaging and cytology (benign). Areas with the highest epithelial cell concentrations were macro-dissected from the FNA smears from each patient, and extracted DNA was used for whole-exome sequencing by next-generation sequencing of a selected gene panel including 19 genes commonly mutated in cancer. RESULTS: Pathogenic mutations in K-RAS, TP53, and PIK3CA differed significantly between the three groups (P < 0.001, P = 0.018, and P = 0.026, respectively). Pathogenic mutations in KRAS and TP53 were predominant in the inconclusive (54% and 31%, respectively) and malignant groups (81.3% and 50%, respectively) compared to the benign group (0%). Malignant and inconclusive diagnoses correlated strongly with poor overall survival (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Whole-exome sequencing of genes commonly mutated in pancreatic cancer may be an important adjunct in patients with SPLs suspicious for malignancy on EUS but with uncertain cytological diagnosis.

G-EYE colonoscopy is superior to standard colonoscopy for increasing adenoma detection rate: an international randomized controlled trial (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is largely preventable with routine screening and surveillance colonoscopy; however, interval cancers arising from precancerous lesions missed by standard colonoscopy still occur. An increased adenoma detection rate (ADR) has been found to be inversely associated with interval cancers. The G-EYE device includes a reusable balloon integrated at the distal tip of a standard colonoscope, which flattens haustral folds, centralizes the colonoscope's optics, and reduces bowel slippage. The insufflated balloon also aims to enhance visualization of the colon during withdrawal, thereby increasing the ADR. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled, international, multicenter study (11 centers), patients (aged ≥50 years) referred to colonoscopy for screening, surveillance, or changes in bowel habits were randomized to undergo either balloon-assisted colonoscopy by using an insufflated balloon during withdrawal or standard high-definition colonoscopy. The primary endpoint was the ADR. RESULTS: One thousand patients were enrolled between May 2014 and September 2016 to undergo colonoscopy by experienced endoscopists; 803 were finally analyzed (standard colonoscopy n = 396; balloon-assisted colonoscopy n = 407). Baseline parameters were similar in both groups. Balloon-assisted colonoscopy provided a 48.0% ADR compared with 37.5% in the standard colonoscopy group (28% increase; P = .0027). Additionally, balloon-assisted colonoscopy provided for a significant increase in detection of advanced (P = .0033) flat adenomas (P < .0001) and sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (P = .0026). CONCLUSION: Balloon-assisted colonoscopy yielded a higher ADR and increased the detection of advanced, flat, and sessile serrated adenomas/polyps when compared with standard colonoscopy. Improved detection by the G-EYE device could impact the quality of CRC screening by reducing miss rates and consequently reducing interval cancer incidence. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01917513.).