Search

In the context of a cancer diagnosis, fertility preservation interventions are used to mitigate the potential impact of gonadotoxic cancer treatment upon fertility. They provide patients with cancer the option to freeze their reproductive material to have their own biological child following treatment. The evidence suggests some clinicians are less likely to have fertility preservation discussions with patients who have an aggressive or metastatic cancer which has a poor prognosis. Although this is contrary to current policy recommendations, there is a lack of guidance relating to offering fertility preservation in the context of a poor prognosis to support clinicians. Controversy surrounds posthumous reproduction, and whether the wishes of the cancer patient, when living and deceased should take precedence over others' wellbeing. We consider the question of whether cancer patients with a poor prognosis should be offered FP from an ethics perspective. We structure the paper around key arguments to which multiple ethical principles might pertain, first establishing a central argument in favour of offering fertility preservation based on respect for autonomy, before exploring counterarguments. We conclude by proposing that a defeasible assumption should be adopted in favour of offering fertility preservation to all cancer patients who might benefit from it. It is important to recognise that patients could benefit from fertility preservation in many ways, and these are not limited to having a parenting experience. The burden of proof rests on the clinician in collaboration with their multi-disciplinary team, to show that there are good grounds for withholding the offer.

Aim: People living with ulcerative colitis (UC) have two broad treatment avenues, namely medical or surgical therapy. The choice between these can depend on patient preference as well as the receipt of relevant information. The aim of this study was to define the informational needs of patients with UC., Method: A postal survey was designed to capture respondent demographics, treatment experienced within the previous 12 months and informational preferences by rating a long list of items. It was delivered through two hospitals that provide tertiary inflammatory bowel disease services. Descriptive analyses were performed to describe demographics and experiences. Principal component analysis was carried out using a varimax rotation to investigate informational needs., Results: A total of 101 responses were returned (20.1% response rate). The median age of respondents was 45 years and the median time since diagnosis was 10 years. Control preferences skewed towards shared (42.6%) or patient-led but clinician-informed (35.6%). Decision regret was low for the population (median 12.5/100, range 0-100). Key informational needs related to medical therapy were benefits and risks of long-term therapy, burden of hospital attendance, reproductive health, need for steroid treatment and impact on personal life. For surgery, these were stoma information, effect on daily life, effect on sexual and reproductive health, risks and benefits and disruption of life due to surgery., Conclusion: This study has identified key areas for discussion when counselling patients about treatment decisions around medical therapy and surgery for UC., (© 2023 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Aim: Approximately 20%-30% of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) will undergo surgery during their disease course, the vast majority being elective due to chronic refractory disease. The risks of elective surgery are reported variably. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarize the outcomes after elective surgery for UC., Methods: A systematic review was conducted that analysed studies reporting outcomes for elective surgery in the modern era (>2002). It was prospectively registered on the PROSPERO database (ref: CRD42018115513). Searches were performed of Embase and MEDLINE on 15 January 2019. Outcomes were split by operation performed. Primary outcome was quality of life; secondary outcomes were early, late and functional outcomes after surgery. Outcomes reported in five or more studies underwent a meta-analysis of incidence using random effects. Heterogeneity is reported with I 2 , and publication bias was assessed using Doi plots and the Luis Furuya-Kanamori index., Results: A total of 34 studies were included (11 774 patients). Quality of life was reported in 12 studies, with variable and contrasting results. Thirteen outcomes (eight early surgical complications, five functional outcomes) were included in the formal meta-analysis, all of which were outcomes for ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA). A further 71 outcomes were reported (50 IPAA, 21 end ileostomy). Only 14 of 84 outcomes received formal definitions, with high inter-study variation of definitions., Conclusion: Outcomes after elective surgery for UC are variably defined. This systematic review and meta-analysis highlights the range of reported incidences and provides practical information that facilitates shared decision making in clinical practice., (© 2020 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Introduction: Approximately 20%-30% of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) require surgery, the majority of these being elective due to chronic symptoms refractory to medical treatment. The decision for surgery is difficult and dependent on patient preferences. Current resources for patients considering surgery have been found not to meet minimum international standards. The overall aim of the 'DISCUSS' study is to develop and evaluate a new patient decision aid (PtDA) for patients considering surgery for UC created in line with international minimum standards., Methods and Analysis: This is a prospective mixed-methods study of adults (18+ years) who are considering surgical intervention for UC across two regional centres in Yorkshire, UK. This study is in three stages. In stage 1 we will develop the PtDA and its content via systematic reviews and a patient questionnaire. In stage 2 we will assess the face validity of the PtDA using mixed-methods on key stakeholders using both semistructured interviews and questionnaires, following which the PtDA will be refined. In stage 3 we will assess the acceptability of using the PtDA in clinical practice. This will use a mixed-methods approach on clinicians and patients who are considering undergoing elective surgery. Questionnaires including the Preparation for Decision-Making Scale, a measure of anxiety and decisional conflict will be analysed at two timepoints using paired sample t-tests and CIs. Interviews with patients and clinicians will be analysed using thematic analysis., Ethics and Dissemination: Research ethics approval from North East-Tyne & Wear South Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 19/NE/0073) and Health Research Authority approval (Ref: 257044) have been granted. Results will be published in open access peer-reviewed journals, presented in conferences and distributed through the Crohn's and Colitis UK charity. External endorsement will be sought from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration inventory of PtDAs., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42018115513, CRD42019126186, CRD42019125193., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AJL is a consultant, advisory board member or received lecture fees for MSD, Janssen, Pfizer, Takeda Pharma, AbbVie, Dr Falk, Shield Pharmaceuticals and Vifor Pharma. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)