Lee J Middleton

Pulse oximetry screening for congenital heart defects in newborn infants (PulseOx): a test accuracy study

BACKGROUND Screening for congenital heart defects relies on antenatal ultrasonography and postnatal clinical examination; however, life-threatening defects often are not detected. We prospectively assessed the accuracy of pulse oximetry as a screening test for congenital heart defects. METHODS In six maternity units in the UK, asymptomatic newborn babies (gestation >34 weeks) were screened with pulse oximetry before discharge. Infants who did not achieve predetermined oxygen saturation thresholds underwent echocardiography. All other infants were followed up to 12 months of age by use of regional and national registries and clinical follow-up. The main outcome was the sensitivity and specificity of pulse oximetry for detection of critical congenital heart defects (causing death or requiring invasive intervention before 28 days) or major congenital heart disease (causing death or requiring invasive intervention within 12 months of age). FINDINGS 20,055 newborn babies were screened and 53 had major congenital heart disease (24 critical), a prevalence of 2·6 per 1000 livebirths. Analyses were done on all babies for whom a pulse oximetry reading was obtained. Sensitivity of pulse oximetry was 75·00% (95% CI 53·29-90·23) for critical cases and 49·06% (35·06-63·16) for all major congenital heart defects. In 35 cases, congenital heart defects were already suspected after antenatal ultrasonography, and exclusion of these reduced the sensitivity to 58·33% (27·67-84·83) for critical cases and 28·57% (14·64-46·30) for all cases of major congenital heart defects. False-positive results were noted for 169 (0·8%) babies (specificity 99·16%, 99·02-99·28), of which six cases were significant, but not major, congenital heart defects, and 40 were other illnesses that required urgent medical intervention. INTERPRETATION Pulse oximetry is a safe, feasible test that adds value to existing screening. It identifies cases of critical congenital heart defects that go undetected with antenatal ultrasonography. The early detection of other diseases is an additional advantage. FUNDING National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Percutaneous vesicoamniotic shunting versus conservative management for fetal lower urinary tract obstruction (PLUTO): a randomised trial.

Summary Background Fetal lower urinary tract obstruction (LUTO) is associated with high perinatal and long-term childhood mortality and morbidity. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of vesicoamniotic shunting for treatment of LUTO. Methods In a randomised trial in the UK, Ireland, and the Netherlands, women whose pregnancies with a male fetus were complicated by isolated LUTO were randomly assigned by a central telephone and web-based randomisation service to receive either the intervention (placement of vesicoamniotic shunt) or conservative management. Allocation could not be masked from clinicians or participants because of the invasive nature of the intervention. Diagnosis was by prenatal ultrasound. The primary outcome was survival of the baby to 28 days postnatally. All primary analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis, but these results were compared with those of an as-treated analysis to investigate the effect of a fairly large proportion of crossovers. We used Bayesian methods to estimate the posterior probability distribution of the effectiveness of vesicoamniotic shunting at 28 days. The study is registered with the ISRCTN Register, number ISRCTN53328556. Findings 31 women with singleton pregnancies complicated by LUTO were included in the trial and main analysis, with 16 allocated to the vesicoamniotic shunt group and 15 to the conservative management group. The study closed early because of poor recruitment. There were 12 livebirths in each group. In the vesicoamniotic shunt group one intrauterine death occurred and three pregnancies were terminated. In the conservative management group one intrauterine death occurred and two pregnancies were terminated. Of the 16 pregnancies randomly assigned to vesicoamniotic shunting, eight neonates survived to 28 days, compared with four from the 15 pregnancies assigned to conservative management (intention-to-treat relative risk [RR] 1·88, 95% CI 0·71–4·96; p=0·27). Analysis based on treatment received showed a larger effect (3·20, 1·06–9·62; p=0·03). All 12 deaths were caused by pulmonary hypoplasia in the early neonatal period. Sensitivity analysis in which non-treatment-related terminations of pregnancy were excluded made some slight changes to point estimates only. Bayesian analysis in which the trial data were combined with elicited priors from experts suggested an 86% probability that vesicoamniotic shunting increased survival at 28 days and a 25% probability that it had a large, clinically important effect (defined as a relative increase of 55% or more in the proportion of neonates who survived). There was substantial short-term and long-term morbidity in both groups, including poor renal function—only two babies (both in the shunt group) survived to 2 years with normal renal function. Seven complications occurred in six fetuses from the shunt group, including spontaneous ruptured membranes, shunt blockage, and dislodgement. These complications resulted in four pregnancy losses. Interpretation Survival seemed to be higher in the fetuses receiving vesicoamniotic shunting, but the size and direction of the effect remained uncertain, such that benefit could not be conclusively proven. Our results suggest that the chance of newborn babies surviving with normal renal function is very low irrespective of whether or not vesicoamniotic shunting is done. Funding UK National Institute of Health Research, Wellbeing of Women, Hannah Eliza Guy Charity (Birmingham Childrens Hospital Charity).

A randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in primary care against standard treatment for menorrhagia: the ECLIPSE trial.

BACKGROUND Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a common problem, yet evidence to inform decisions about initial medical treatment is limited. OBJECTIVES To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) (Mirena®, Bayer) compared with usual medical treatment, with exploration of womens perspectives on treatment. DESIGN A pragmatic, multicentre randomised trial with an economic evaluation and a longitudinal qualitative study. SETTING Women who presented in primary care. PARTICIPANTS A total of 571 women with HMB. A purposeful sample of 27 women who were randomised or ineligible owing to treatment preference participated in semistructured face-to-face interviews around 2 and 12 months after commencing treatment. INTERVENTIONS LNG-IUS or usual medical treatment (tranexamic acid, mefenamic acid, combined oestrogen-progestogen or progesterone alone). Women could subsequently swap or cease their allocated treatment. OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was the patient-reported score on the Menorrhagia Multi-Attribute Scale (MMAS) assessed over a 2-year period and then again at 5 years. Secondary outcomes included general quality of life (QoL), sexual activity, surgical intervention and safety. Data were analysed using iterative constant comparison. A state transition model-based cost-utility analysis was undertaken alongside the randomised trial. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were derived from the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) and the Short Form questionnaire-6 Dimensions (SF-6D). The intention-to-treat analyses were reported as cost per QALY gained. Uncertainty was explored by conducting both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS The MMAS total scores improved significantly in both groups at all time points, but were significantly greater for the LNG-IUS than for usual treatment [mean difference over 2 years was 13.4 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.9 to 16.9 points; p < 0.001]. However, this difference between groups was reduced and no longer significant by 5 years (mean difference in scores 3.9 points, 95% CI -0.6 to 8.3 points; p = 0.09). By 5 years, only 47% of women had a LNG-IUS in place and 15% were still taking usual medical treatment. Five-year surgery rates were low, at 20%, and were similar, irrespective of initial treatments. There were no significant differences in serious adverse events between groups. Using the EQ-5D, at 2 years, the relative cost-effectiveness of the LNG-IUS compared with usual medical treatment was £1600 per QALY, which by 5 years was reduced to £114 per QALY. Using the SF-6D, usual medical treatment dominates the LNG-IUS. The qualitative findings show that womens experiences and expectations of medical treatments for HMB vary considerably and change over time. Women had high expectations of a prompt effect from medical treatments. CONCLUSIONS The LNG-IUS, compared with usual medical therapies, resulted in greater improvement over 2 years in womens assessments of the effect of HMB on their daily routine, including work, social and family life, and psychological and physical well-being. At 5 years, the differences were no longer significant. A similar low proportion of women required surgical intervention in both groups. The LNG-IUS is cost-effective in both the short and medium term, using the method generally recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Using the alternative measures to value QoL will have a considerable impact on cost-effectiveness decisions. It will be important to explore the clinical and health-care trajectories of the ECLIPSE (clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in primary care against standard treatment for menorrhagia) trial participants to 10 years, by which time half of the cohort will have reached menopause. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN86566246. FUNDING This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 88. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Hysterectomy, endometrial destruction, and levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) for heavy menstrual bleeding: systematic review and meta-analysis of data from individual patients

Objective To evaluate the relative effectiveness of hysterectomy, endometrial destruction (both “first generation” hysteroscopic and “second generation” non-hysteroscopic techniques), and the levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding. Design Meta-analysis of data from individual patients, with direct and indirect comparisons made on the primary outcome measure of patients’ dissatisfaction. Data sources Data were sought from the 30 randomised controlled trials identified after a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, and CINAHL databases, reference lists, and contact with experts. Raw data were available from 2814 women randomised into 17 trials (seven trials including 1359 women for first v second generation endometrial destruction; six trials including 1042 women for hysterectomy v first generation endometrial destruction; one trial including 236 women for hysterectomy v Mirena; three trials including 177 women for second generation endometrial destruction v Mirena). Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised controlled trials comparing hysterectomy, first and second generation endometrial destruction, and Mirena for women with heavy menstrual bleeding unresponsive to other medical treatment. Results At around 12 months, more women were dissatisfied with outcome with first generation hysteroscopic techniques than with hysterectomy (13% v 5%; odds ratio 2.46, 95% confidence interval 1.54 to 3.9, P<0.001), but hospital stay (weighted mean difference 3.0 days, 2.9 to 3.1 days, P<0.001) and time to resumption of normal activities (5.2 days, 4.7 to 5.7 days, P<0.001) were longer for hysterectomy. Unsatisfactory outcomes were comparable with first and second generation techniques (odds ratio 1.2, 0.9 to 1.6, P=0.2), although second generation techniques were quicker (weighted mean difference 14.5 minutes, 13.7 to 15.3 minutes, P<0.001) and women recovered sooner (0.48 days, 0.20 to 0.75 days, P<0.001), with fewer procedural complications. Indirect comparison suggested more unsatisfactory outcomes with second generation techniques than with hysterectomy (11% v 5%; odds ratio 2.3, 1.3 to 4.2, P=0.006). Similar estimates were seen when Mirena was indirectly compared with hysterectomy (17% v 5%; odds ratio 2.2, 0.9 to 5.3, P=0.07), although this comparison lacked power because of the limited amount of data available for analysis. Conclusions More women are dissatisfied after endometrial destruction than after hysterectomy. Dissatisfaction rates are low after all treatments, and hysterectomy is associated with increased length of stay in hospital and a longer recovery period. Definitive evidence on effectiveness of Mirena compared with more invasive procedures is lacking.

PROSPER: a randomised comparison of surgical treatments for rectal prolapse

Rectal prolapse is a profoundly disabling condition, occurring mainly in elderly and parous women. There is no accepted standard surgical treatment, with previous studies limited in methodological quality and size. PROSPER aimed to address these deficiencies by comparing the relative merits of different procedures.

Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System versus Medical Therapy for Menorrhagia

BACKGROUND Menorrhagia is a common problem, yet evidence to inform decisions about therapy is limited. In a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized trial, we compared the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (levonorgestrel-IUS) with usual medical treatment in women with menorrhagia who presented to their primary care providers. METHODS We randomly assigned 571 women with menorrhagia to treatment with levonorgestrel-IUS or usual medical treatment (tranexamic acid, mefenamic acid, combined estrogen-progestogen, or progesterone alone). The primary outcome was the patient-reported score on the Menorrhagia Multi-Attribute Scale (MMAS) (ranging from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating greater severity), assessed over a 2-year period. Secondary outcomes included general quality-of-life and sexual-activity scores and surgical intervention. RESULTS MMAS scores improved from baseline to 6 months in both the levonorgestrel-IUS group and the usual-treatment group (mean increase, 32.7 and 21.4 points, respectively; P<0.001 for both comparisons). The improvements were maintained over a 2-year period but were significantly greater in the levonorgestrel-IUS group than in the usual-treatment group (mean between-group difference, 13.4 points; 95% confidence interval, 9.9 to 16.9; P<0.001). Improvements in all MMAS domains (practical difficulties, social life, family life, work and daily routine, psychological well-being, and physical health) were significantly greater in the levonorgestrel-IUS group than in the usual-treatment group, and this was also true for seven of the eight quality-of-life domains. At 2 years, more of the women were still using the levonorgestrel-IUS than were undergoing the usual medical treatment (64% vs. 38%, P<0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in the rates of surgical intervention or sexual-activity scores. There were no significant differences in serious adverse events between groups. CONCLUSIONS In women with menorrhagia who presented to primary care providers, the levonorgestrel-IUS was more effective than usual medical treatment in reducing the effect of heavy menstrual bleeding on quality of life. (Funded by the National Institute of Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme; ECLIPSE Controlled-Trials.com number, ISRCTN86566246.).

Calcineurin inhibitor sparing with mycophenolate in kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background. Limiting the exposure of kidney transplant recipients to calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) has potential merit, but there is no clear consensus on the utility of current strategies. In an attempt to aid clarification, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials that assessed CNI sparing (minimization or elimination) with mycophenolate as sole adjunctive immunosuppression. Methods. The search strategy identified trials where CNI sparing was accompanied by the continuation of, or conversion to, mycophenolate and compared with standard or higher dose CNI therapy. Two investigators independently examined each trial for eligibility, quality, and outcome measures. Additional subgroup analyses were assessed: (1) de novo CNI sparing; (2) elective CNI sparing beyond 2 months posttransplantation; and (3) CNI sparing for transplant dysfunction. Results. Nineteen randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria permitting analysis of 3312 renal transplant recipients with median follow-up of 12 months. CNI sparing significantly improved glomerular filtration rate (weighted mean difference 4.4 mL/min, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.9–5.9, P<0.001); with some evidence, albeit weak, of improved graft survival (odds ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.52–1.01, P=0.06). Acute rejection rates were only increased after elective CNI elimination (odds ratio 2.23, 95% CI 1.57–3.17, P<0.001). There were no significant differences in mortality, malignancy or incidence of infections. Conclusions. CNI sparing strategies with adjunctive mycophenolate may play an important role in kidney transplant recipients. Improvements in short-term graft function, and possibly graft survival, are achievable. Longer term studies are needed to substantiate the short-term benefits, and refining elective CNI elimination protocols may help to reduce the risk of rejection.

Hysterectomy, endometrial ablation, and levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) for treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding: cost effectiveness analysis

Objective To undertake a cost effectiveness analysis comparing first and second generation endometrial ablative techniques, hysterectomy, and the levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) for treating heavy menstrual bleeding. Design Model based economic evaluation with data from an individual patient data meta-analysis supplemented with cost and outcome data from published sources taking an NHS (National Health Service) perspective. A state transition (Markov) model was developed, the structure being informed by the reviews of the trials and clinical input. A subgroup analysis, one way sensitivity analysis, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were also carried out. Population Four hypothetical cohorts of women with heavy menstrual bleeding. Interventions One of four alternative strategies: Mirena, first or second generation endometrial ablation techniques, or hysterectomy. Main outcome measures Cost effectiveness based on incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY). Results Hysterectomy is the preferred strategy for the first intervention for heavy menstrual bleeding. Although hysterectomy is more expensive, it produces more QALYs relative to other remaining strategies and is likely to be considered cost effective. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio for hysterectomy compared with Mirena is £1440 (€1633,

Second generation endometrial ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding: network meta-analysis

2350) per additional QALY. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio for hysterectomy compared with second generation ablation is £970 per additional QALY. Conclusion In light of the acceptable thresholds used by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, hysterectomy would be considered the preferred strategy for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding. The results concur with those of other studies but are highly sensitive to utility values used in the analysis.

Hysterectomy, endometrial ablation and Mirena® for heavy menstrual bleeding: a systematic review of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analysis

Objective To determine the relative effectiveness of second generation ablation techniques in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding. Design Network meta-analysis on the primary outcome measures of amenorrhoea, heavy bleeding, and patients’ dissatisfaction with treatment. Data sources Nineteen randomised controlled trials (involving 3287 women) were identified through electronic searches of the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase and PsycINFO databases from inception to April 2011. The reference lists of known relevant articles were searched for further articles. Two reviewers independently selected articles without language restrictions. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised controlled trials involving second generation endometrial destruction techniques for women with heavy menstrual bleeding unresponsive to medical treatment. Results Of the three most commonly used techniques, network meta-analysis showed that bipolar radiofrequency and microwave ablation resulted in higher rates of amenorrhoea than thermal balloon ablation at around 12 months (odds ratio 2.51, 95% confidence interval 1.53 to 4.12, P<0.001; and 1.66, 1.01 to 2.71, P=0.05, respectively), but there was no evidence of a convincing difference between the three techniques in the number of women dissatisfied with treatment or still experiencing heavy bleeding. Compared with bipolar radio frequency and microwave devices, an increased number of women still experienced heavy bleeding after free fluid ablation (2.19, 1.07 to 4.50, P=0.03; and 2.91, 1.23 to 6.88, P=0.02, respectively). Compared with radio frequency ablation, free fluid ablation was associated with reduced rates of amenorrhoea (0.36, 0.19 to 0.67, P=0.004) and increased rates of dissatisfaction (4.79, 1.07 to 21.5, P=0.04). Of the less commonly used devices, endometrial laser intrauterine thermotherapy was associated with increased rates of amenorrhoea compared with all the other devices, while cryoablation led to a reduced rate compared with bipolar radio frequency and microwave. Conclusions Bipolar radio frequency and microwave ablative devices are more effective than thermal balloon and free fluid ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding with second generation endometrial ablation devices.