Objective: To assess the adoption of recommendation from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and investigate factors favoring or preventing adoption.Background: RCT are considered to be the... Show moreObjective: To assess the adoption of recommendation from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and investigate factors favoring or preventing adoption.Background: RCT are considered to be the cornerstone of evidence-based medicine by representing the highest level of evidence. As such, we expect RCT's recommendations to be followed rigorously in daily surgical practice.Methods: We performed a structured search for RCTs published in the medical and surgical literature from 2009 to 2013, allowing a minimum of 5-year follow-up to convincingly test implementation. We focused on comparative technical or procedural RCTs trials addressing the domains of general, colorectal, hepatobiliary, upper gastrointestinal and vascular surgery. In a second step we composed a survey of 29 questions among ESA members as well as collaborators from their institutions to investigate the adoption of surgical RCTs recommendation.Results: The survey based on 36 RCTs (median 5-yr citation index 85 (24-474), from 21 different countries, published in 15 high-ranked journals with a median impact factor of 3.3 (1.23- 7.9) at the time of publication. Overall, less than half of the respondents (47%) appeared to adhere to the recommendations of a specific RCT within their field of expertise, even when included in formal guidelines. Adoption of a new surgical practice was favored by watching videos (46%) as well as assisting live operations (18%), while skepticism regarding the methodology of a surgical RCT (40%) appears to be the major reason to resist adoption.Conclusion: In conclusion, surgical RCTs appear to have moderate impact on daily surgical practice. While RCTs are still accepted to provide the highest level of evidence, alternative methods of evaluating surgical innovations should also be explored. Show less
Rijn, R. van; Berg, A.P. van den; Erdmann, J.I.; Heaton, N.; Hoek, B. van; Jonge, J. de; ... ; Porte, R.J. 2019
Donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation (LT) may imply a risk for decreased graft survival, caused by posttransplantation complications such as primary nonfunction or ischemic... Show moreDonation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation (LT) may imply a risk for decreased graft survival, caused by posttransplantation complications such as primary nonfunction or ischemic-type biliary lesions. However, similar survival rates for DCD and donation after brain death (DBD) LT have been reported. The objective of this study is to determine the longterm outcome of DCD LT in the Eurotransplant region corrected for the Eurotransplant donor risk index (ET-DRI). Transplants performed in Belgium and the Netherlands (January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2007) in adult recipients were included. Graft failure was defined as either the date of recipient death or retransplantation whichever occurred first (death-uncensored graft survival). Mean follow-up was 7.2 years. In total, 126 DCD and 1264 DBD LTs were performed. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses showed different graft survival for DBD and DCD at 1 year (77.7% versus 74.8%, respectively; P = 0.71), 5 years (65.6% versus 54.4%, respectively; P = 0.02), and 10 years (47.3% versus 44.2%, respectively; P = 0.55; log-rank P = 0.038). Although there was an overall significant difference, the survival curves almost reach each other after 10 years, which is most likely caused by other risk factors being less in DCD livers. Patient survival was not significantly different (P = 0.59). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed a hazard ratio of 1.7 (P < 0.001) for DCD (corrected for ET-DRI and recipient factors). First warm ischemia time (WIT), which is the time from the end of circulation until aortic cold perfusion, over 25 minutes was associated with a lower graft survival in univariate analysis of all DCD transplants (P = 0.002). In conclusion, DCD LT has an increased risk for diminished graft survival compared to DBD. There was no significant difference in patient survival. DCD allografts with a first WIT > 25 minutes have an increased risk for a decrease in graft survival. Liver Transplantation 22 1107-1114 2016 AASLD Show less
