Does melatonin administration reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium in adults? Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Postoperative delirium (POD) is common. It is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Many cases may be preventable and melatonin offers promise as a preventative agent. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review provides an up-to-date synthesis of the evidence on the effect of melatonin in preventing POD. DESIGN: A systematic search of randomised controlled trials of melatonin in POD was run across multiple databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO) and a clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.org) (1 January 1990 to 5 April 2022). Studies examining the effects of melatonin on POD incidence in adults are included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome is POD incidence. Secondary outcomes are POD duration and length of hospital stay. Data synthesis was undertaken using a random-effects meta-analysis and presented using forest plots. A summary of methodology and outcome measures in included studies is also presented. RESULTS: Eleven studies, with 1244 patients from a range of surgical specialties were included. Seven studies used melatonin, in variable doses, and four used ramelteon. Eight different diagnostic tools were used to diagnose POD. Time points for assessment also varied. Six studies were assessed as low risk of bias and five as some concern. The combined OR of developing POD in the melatonin groups versus control was 0.41 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.80, p=0.01). CONCLUSION: This review found that melatonin may reduce the incidence of POD in adults undergoing surgery. However, included studies displayed inconsistency in their methodology and outcome reporting. Further work to determine the optimum regime for melatonin administration, along with consensus of how best to evaluate results, would be beneficial. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021285019.

Melatonin for the prevention of postoperative delirium in older adults: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative delirium (POD) is a major cause of morbidity, particularly in elderly patients. Melatonin has been suggested as a low-risk pharmacological intervention to help prevent POD. A previous systematic review found limited high-quality evidence to support the use of melatonin in the prevention of POD. Several further randomised studies have since been published. This systematic review aims to synthesise the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effect of melatonin on the prevention of POD in older adults. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic search of RCTs of melatonin (any dose and formulation) in POD will be run across Embase, Medline, CINAHL and PsychInfo. RCTs published from January 1990 until the end of February 2022 and reporting outcomes for melatonin use to prevent POD in patients will be included. Screening of search results and data extraction from included articles will be performed by two independent reviewers. The primary outcome will be incidence of POD in older adults undergoing surgery. Secondary outcomes are delirium duration and length of hospital stay. The review will also describe the dosage, timing and administration regimes of melatonin therapy and as well as the scales and definitions used to describe POD. A registry review of ongoing trials will be also be performed. For the meta-analysis, data will be pooled using a random effects model to generate a forest plot and obtain an odds ratio (OR) for the incidence of POD. Results will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval is required. This review will be disseminated via peer-reviewed manuscript and conferences. The results will be used as the basis of work to optimise this intervention for future trials in surgical populations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: This review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021285019).

Implant-Based Reconstruction following Mastectomy in Patients Who Have Had a Previous Breast Augmentation: Lessons from the National Multicenter Implant Breast Reconstruction Evaluation Study.

BACKGROUND: Breast augmentation is the most commonly performed cosmetic procedure, and increasingly women in this group present with breast cancer or request risk-reducing surgery, but their optimal management is unclear. The authors explored the clinical and patient-reported outcomes of patients undergoing immediate implant-based breast reconstruction following previous augmentation and compared these with outcomes of patients who had not had cosmetic implants in the Implant Breast Reconstruction Evaluation (iBRA) Study. METHODS: Patients undergoing immediate implant-based breast reconstruction were prospectively recruited from breast and plastic surgical units across the United Kingdom. Demographic, operative, and oncologic data, and information regarding complications within 3 postoperative months were collected. Patient-reported outcomes at 18 months were assessed using the BREAST-Q. The clinical and patient-reported outcomes of patients undergoing immediate implant-based breast reconstruction with and without previous breast augmentation were compared. RESULTS: A total of 2108 women were included in the iBRA Study, of whom 49 had undergone a previous augmentation. Women in the augmentation group were younger (median age, 45 years versus 50 years; p = 0.01), had a lower body mass index (22.8 kg/m2 versus 24.9 kg/m2; p < 0.01), and had smaller tumors (15 mm versus 25 mm; p = 0.01) than patients without augmentation. No differences were seen in operative technique between the groups. Complications at 3 months were similar in both groups and there were no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes at 18 months. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical and patient-reported outcomes of patients undergoing immediate implant-based breast reconstruction following previous augmentation are consistent with those observed in the wider iBRA Study cohort, supporting the safety of this approach.

The Impact of Radiotherapy on Patient-reported Outcomes of Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction With and Without Mesh.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of PMRT on PROs of IBBR performed with and without mesh. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: PMRT is increasingly given to improve breast cancer outcomes but can adversely impact complications after IBBR.Little; however, is known about the impact of PMRT on the PROs of IBBR, especially when mesh is used. METHODS: The implant Breast Reconstruction evAluation prospective cohort study recruited consecutive women undergoing immediate IBBR from 81 UK breast and plastic surgical units. Demographic, operative, oncological, and 3-month complication data were collected, and patients consented to receive validated PRO questionnaires at 18-months. The association between IBBR, PMRT, and PROs were investigated using mixed-effects regression models adjusted for clinically-relevant confounders and including a random-effect to account for potential clustering by center. RESULTS: A total of 1163 women consented to receive 18-month questionnaires of whom 730 (63%) completed it. Patients undergoing PMRT (214 patients) reported worse PROs in 3 BREAST-Q domains: satisfaction with breasts [-6.27 points, P = 0.008, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-10.91, -1.63)], satisfaction with outcome [-7.53 points, P = 0.002, CI (-12.20, -2.85)] and physical well-being [-6.55 points, P < 0.001, CI (-9.43, -3.67)]. Overall satisfaction was worse in the PMRT group [OR 0.497, P = 0.002, CI (0.32, 0.77)]. These effects were not ameliorated by mesh use. CONCLUSIONS: PMRT may adversely affect PROs after IBBR irrespective of whether mesh is used. These findings should be discussed with all patients considering IBBR and when indications for PMRT are borderline to enable informed decision-making regarding oncological and reconstructive treatment options. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN37664281.

Biomarkers Associated with Stroke Risk in Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with an increased risk of cardioembolic stroke. The risk of cardioembolism is not adequately reduced with the administration of oral anticoagulants, since a number of patients continue to experience thromboembolic events despite receiving treatment. Therefore, identification of a circulating biomarker to identify these high-risk patients would be clinically beneficial. OBJECTIVE: In the present article, we aim to review the available data regarding use of biomarkers to predict cardioembolic stroke in patients with AF. METHODS: We performed a thorough search of the literature in order to analyze the biomarkers identified thus far and critically evaluate their clinical significance. RESULTS: A number of biomarkers have been proposed to predict cardioembolic stroke in patients with AF. Some of them are already used in the clinical practice, such as d-dimers, troponins and brain natriuretic peptide. Novel biomarkers, such as the inflammatory growth differentiation factor-15, appear to be promising, while the role of micro-RNAs and genetics appear to be useful as well. Even though these biomarkers are associated with an increased risk for thromboembolism, they cannot accurately predict future events. In light of this, the use of a scoring system, that would incorporate both circulating biomarkers and clinical factors, might be more useful. CONCLUSIONS: Recent research has disclosed several biomarkers as potential predictors of cardioembolic stroke in patients with AF. However, further research is required to establish a multifactorial scoring system that will identify patients at high-risk of thromboembolism, who would benefit from more intensive treatment and monitoring.

The impact of distractions and interruptions during Cesarean Sections: a prospective study in a London teaching hospital.

PURPOSE: During Cesarean Sections, distractions which interrupt task specific activities include auditory, equipment, theatre traffic, and irrelevant communication. Aims of this study were to investigate frequency and types of distractions and to assess impact on patient safety and theatre efficiency. METHODS: Prospective observational study in a London hospital in women undergoing elective and emergency Cesarean Sections. Distractions were recorded prospectively in primiparous women having uncomplicated elective and emergency Cesarean Sections over a 4 week period. Level of distraction is categorized as I: no noticeable impact on surgical team; II: ≥ 1 team member affected; and III: all members affected. Safety outcomes assessed included perioperative complications such as postpartum hemorrhage, organ injury, postsurgical pyrexia (first 48 h), return to theatre, readmissions, and postdelivery anemia < 7 g/dl. RESULTS: Data from 33 elective and 23 emergency cases were collected. Mean number of level II/III distractions/case was 13.20 (± 6.93) and number of level II/III distracting events was greater during elective compared to emergency cases (mean 14.91 vs 12.00, p = 0.04). In total, 17.89% of distractions occurred during crucial part of surgery between skin incision and delivery of baby, while delays resulting from level II/III distractions accounted for 11.25% of total operating time. There were no intra- or postoperative complications observed in the cohort of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Distractions did not culminate in perioperative complications, but disrupted surgeons' task activity, prolonging mean procedure duration by 26.8%. Recognising sources and effects of distractions will enable measures to be taken to improve theatre productivity and patient safety.