Surgical glue in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: An initial experience and cost-effectiveness analysis.
J Eval Clin Pract. 2017 Mar 21;:
Authors: Mercier G, Loureiro M, Georgescu V, Skalli EM, Nedelcu M, Ramadan M, Fabre JM, Lefebvre P, Nocca D
RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is one of the most common bariatric procedures. Gastric leaks and bleeding are the most frequent complications, associated with a high clinical and economic burden. The best method of staple line reinforcement in LSG is debated. Surgical glue is one of the options available. The aim of this study was to assess the safety, efficiency, and relative cost-effectiveness of surgical glue used to perform LSG in morbid obese adults as compared with standard stapling.
METHODS: A prospective, observational, and comparative before-after study was conducted. All consecutive patients undergoing LSG at Montpellier University Hospital in 2011 and 2012 were included and treated according to 2 groups: standard stapling (n = 99, group 1) and surgical glue reinforcement (n = 94, group 2). Clinical and economic outcomes were measured after 6 months.
RESULTS: The duration of intervention was significantly shorter in group 2 (68 vs 82 minutes, P = .001). There was no significant difference regarding complications, but leaks in group 1 were more severe. Group 2 was also associated with a reduced initial length of stay (4.8 vs 5.2 days, P = .01). Six-month readmissions and total length of stay were also shorter in group 2 (5.5 vs 6.1 days, P = .003). Surgical glue use was associated with a significant reduction in the initial inpatient cost (€5488 vs €6152, P = .005) and in the 6-month total inpatient cost, including readmissions (€6006 vs €6754, P = .005). The incremental cost of glue to avoid a severe complication was -€5446.33 (95 confidence interval, -8202.01 to -2690.66).
CONCLUSIONS: Surgical glue might be a safe and cost-effective intervention in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.
PMID: 28322488 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
Methodology for senior-proof guidelines: A practice example from the Netherlands.
J Eval Clin Pract. 2017 Mar 21;:
Authors: van Munster BC, Portielje JE, Maier AB, Arends AJ, de Beer JJ
RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Evidence-based guidelines constitute a foundation for medical decision making. It is often unclear whether recommendations in general guidelines also apply to older people. This study aimed to develop a methodology to increase the focus on older people in the development of guidelines.
METHODS: The methodology distinguishes 4 groups of older people: (1) relatively healthy older people; (2) older people with 1 additional specific (interfering) comorbid condition; (3) older people with multimorbidity; and (4) vulnerable older people.
RESULTS: The level of focus on older people required may be determined by the prevalence of the disease or condition, level of suffering, social relevance, and the expectation that a guideline may improve the quality of care. A specialist in geriatric medicine may be involved in the guideline process via participation, provision of feedback on drafts, or involvement in the analysis of problem areas. Regarding the patient perspective, it is advised to involve organisations for older people or informal carers in the inventory of problem areas, and additionally to perform literature research of patient values on the subject. If the guideline focuses on older people, then the relative importance of the various outcome measures for this target group needs to be explicitly stated. Search strategies for all the 4 groups are suggested. For clinical studies that focus on the treatment of diseases that frequently occur in older people, a check should be made regarding whether these studies produce the required evidence. This can be achieved by verifying if there is sufficient representation of older people in the studies and determining if there is a separate reporting of results applying to this age group.
PMID: 28322487 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]