Search

Background and Aims: Despite recent advancements in medical and surgical techniques in patients suffering from Crohn`s disease [CD], postoperative morbidity remains relevant due to a long-standing, non-curable disease burden. As demonstrated for oncological patients, perioperative enhanced recovery concepts provide great potential to improve postoperative outcome. However, robust evidence about the effect of perioperative enhanced recovery concepts in the specific cohort of CD patients is lacking., Methods: In a prospective, single-centre study, all patients receiving ileocaecal resection due to CD between 2020 and 2023 were included. A specific, perioperative, enhanced recovery concept [ERC] was implemented and patients were divided into two groups [before and after implementation]. The primary outcome focused on postoperative complications as measured by the Comprehensive Complication Index [CCI], secondary endpoints were severe complications, length of hospital stay, and rates of re-admission., Results: Of 83 patients analysed, 33 patients participated in the enhanced recovery programme [post-ERC]. Whereas patient characteristics were comparable between both groups, ERC resulted in significantly decreased rates of overall and severe postoperative complications [CCI: 21.4 versus 8.4, p = 0.0036; Clavien Dindo > 2: 38% versus 3.1%, p = 0.0002]. Additionally, post-ERC-patients were ready earlier for discharge [5 days versus 6.5 days, p = 0.001] and rates of re-admission were significantly lower [3.1% versus 20%, p = 0.03]. In a multivariate analysis, the recovery concept was identified as independent factor to reduce severe postoperative complications [p = 0.019]., Conclusion: A specific, perioperative, enhanced recovery concept significantly improves the postoperative outcome of patients suffering from Crohn`s disease., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

In this paper, we discuss the Bile Acid Comparison and Harmonisation project, a sub-study of the Trial of URsodeoxycholic acid vs RIFampicin in early-onset severe Intrahepatic Cholestasis of pregnancy, giving an overview of the current state of affairs for total bile acid measurements., Competing Interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2024.)

In this computer simulation study, we examine four different statistical approaches of linearity assessment, including two variants of deviation from linearity (individual (IDL) and averaged (AD)), along with detection capabilities of residuals of linear regression (individual and averaged). From the results of the simulation, the following broad suggestions are provided to laboratory practitioners when performing linearity assessment. A high imprecision can challenge linearity investigations by producing a high false positive rate or low power of detection. Therefore, the imprecision of the measurement procedure should be considered when interpreting linearity assessment results. In the presence of high imprecision, the results of linearity assessment should be interpreted with caution. Different linearity assessment approaches examined in this study performed well under different analytical scenarios. For optimal outcomes, a considered and tailored study design should be implemented. With the exception of specific scenarios, both ADL and IDL methods were suboptimal for the assessment of linearity compared. When imprecision is low (3 %), averaged residual of linear regression with triplicate measurements and a non-linearity acceptance limit of 5 % produces <5 % false positive rates and a high power for detection of non-linearity of >70 % across different types and degrees of non-linearity. Detection of departures from linearity are difficult to identify in practice and enhanced methods of detection need development., (© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.)

Background: Pheochromocytoma is a rare but severe disease of the adrenal glands. The aim of this study is to present and discuss recent developments in the diagnosis and treatment of pheochromocytoma., Material and Methods: A narrative review article based on the most recent literature is presented., Results and Discussion: The proportion of pheochromocytomas as tumors of adrenal origin is about 5% of incidentally discovered adrenal tumors. The classical symptomatic triad of headaches, sweating, and palpitations occurs in only about 20% of patients, while almost all patients show at least 1 of these symptoms. To diagnose pheochromocytoma, levels of free plasma metanephrines or alternatively, fractionated metanephrines in a 24‑h urine collection is required in a first step. In the second step an imaging procedure, computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), is performed to localize the adrenal tumor. Functional imaging is also recommended to preoperatively detect potential metastases. Genetic testing should always be offered during the course of treatment as 30-40% of pheochromocytomas are associated with genetic mutations. The dogma of preoperative alpha blockade is increasingly being questioned and has been controversially discussed in recent years. Minimally invasive removal of the adrenal tumor is the standard surgical procedure to cure patients with pheochromocytoma. The transabdominal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic approaches are considered equivalent. The choice of the minimally invasive procedure depends on the expertise and experience of the surgeon and should be tailored accordingly. Individualized and regular follow-up care is important after surgery., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Reporting a measurement procedure and its analytical performance following method evaluation in a peer-reviewed journal is an important means for clinical laboratory practitioners to share their findings. It also represents an important source of evidence base to help others make informed decisions about their practice. At present, there are significant variations in the information reported in laboratory medicine journal publications describing the analytical performance of measurement procedures. These variations also challenge authors, readers, reviewers, and editors in deciding the quality of a submitted manuscript. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group on Method Evaluation Protocols (IFCC WG-MEP) developed a checklist and recommends its adoption to enable a consistent approach to reporting method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics of measurement procedures in laboratory medicine journals. It is envisioned that the LEAP checklist will improve the standardisation of journal publications describing method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics, improving the quality of the evidence base that is relied upon by practitioners., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (©2024PublishedbyElsevierB.V.)

Objectives: An increase in analytical imprecision and/or the introduction of bias can affect the interpretation of quantitative laboratory results. In this study, we explore the impact of varying assay imprecision and bias introduction on the classification of patients based on fixed thresholds., Methods: Simple spreadsheets (Microsoft Excel) were constructed to simulate conditions of assay deterioration, expressed as coefficient of variation and bias (in percentages). The impact on patient classification was explored based on fixed interpretative limits. A combined matrix of imprecision and bias of 0%, 2%, 4%, 6%, 8%, and 10% (tool 1) as well as 0%, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20% (tool 2) was simulated, respectively. The percentage of patients who were reclassified following the addition of simulated imprecision and bias was summarized and presented in tables and graphs., Results: The percentage of patients who were reclassified increased with increasing/decreasing magnitude of imprecision and bias. The impact of imprecision lessens with increasing bias such that at high biases, the bias becomes the dominant cause for reclassification., Conclusions: The spreadsheet tools, available as Supplemental Material, allow laboratories to visualize the impact of additional analytical imprecision and bias on the classification of their patients when applied to locally extracted historical results., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pathology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Reporting a measurement procedure and its analytical performance following method evaluation in a peer-reviewed journal is an important means for clinical laboratory practitioners to share their findings. It also represents an important source of evidence base to help others make informed decisions about their practice. At present, there are significant variations in the information reported in laboratory medicine journal publications describing the analytical performance of measurement procedures. These variations also challenge authors, readers, reviewers and editors in deciding the quality of a submitted manuscript. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group on Method Evaluation Protocols (IFCC WG-MEP) developed a checklist and recommends its adoption to enable a consistent approach to reporting method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics of measurement procedures in laboratory medicine journals. It is envisioned that the LEAP checklist will improve the standardisation of journal publications describing method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics, improving the quality of the evidence base that is relied upon by practitioners., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: All authors are full members of the IFCC WG-MEP.