Spin in articles about minimally invasive transanal total mesorectal excision: an assessment of the current literature

Spin Reporting Is Common in Pilot Randomized Controlled Trials in Surgery: A Methodological Survey

INTRODUCTION

Spin reporting has been studied across a variety of study types and domains; however, it has yet to be studied in the context of pilot and feasibility trials. We designed this methodological survey to evaluate spin reporting in surgical pilot and feasibility trials.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2011, and January 1, 2021, to December 31, 2021. Studies were included if they were pilot or feasibility randomized trials evaluating a surgical intervention. The primary objective was to determine the proportion of pilot and feasibility trials utilizing spin reporting defined as primary focus on efficacy as opposed to feasibility, focus on statistically significant findings as opposed to feasibility, and/or presentation of results as feasible despite not actually being feasible. Secondary objectives included determining the type of spin reporting and exploring the association between study characteristics and spin reporting.

RESULTS

After screening 1991 citations, 38 studies from 2011 to 34 studies from 2021 were included. Overall, 59 of the included pilot and feasibility trials (81.9%: 59/72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 71.4-89.3%) utilized spin reporting. Fifty-eight trials (80.6%, 95% CI 69.8-88.2%) primarily focused on efficacy as opposed to feasibility, 34 trials (47.2%, 95% CI 36.1-58.6%) focused on statistically significant findings as opposed to feasibility, and four trials (5.6%, 95% CI 1.8-13.8%) suggested feasibility objectives were met when they were not. Spin was identified in 94.7% (95% CI 81.8-99.5%) and 67.6% (95% CI 50.7-81.0%) of studies published in 2011 and 2021, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Most pilot and feasibility trials in surgery inappropriately focus on clinical outcomes and statistical significance as opposed to feasibility outcomes for the main future trial. This practice is concerning given that pilot trials are not adequately powered and are intended to serve as exploratory study to increase the likelihood of a successful definitive trial.

Innovation in gastrointestinal surgery: the evolution of minimally invasive surgery-a narrative review

Background

Minimally invasive (MI) surgery has revolutionised surgery, becoming the standard of care in many countries around the globe. Observed benefits over traditional open surgery include reduced pain, shorter hospital stay, and decreased recovery time. Gastrointestinal surgery in particular was an early adaptor to both laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Within this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the evolution of minimally invasive gastrointestinal surgery and a critical outlook on the evidence surrounding its effectiveness and safety.

Methods

A literature review was conducted to identify relevant articles for the topic of this review. The literature search was performed using Medical Subject Heading terms on PubMed. The methodology for evidence synthesis was in line with the four steps for narrative reviews outlined in current literature. The key words used were minimally invasive, robotic, laparoscopic colorectal, colon, rectal surgery.

Conclusion

The introduction of minimally surgery has revolutionised patient care. Despite the evidence supporting this technique in gastrointestinal surgery, several controversies remain. Here we discuss some of them; the lack of high level evidence regarding the oncological outcomes of TaTME and lack of supporting evidence for robotic colorectalrectal surgery and upper GI surgery. These controversies open pathways for future research opportunities with RCTs focusing on comparing robotic to laparoscopic with different primary outcomes including ergonomics and surgeon comfort.

Evaluating spin in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on cannabis use disorder

BACKGROUND

Clinicians rely upon abstracts to provide them quick synopses of research findings that may apply to their practice. Spin can exist within these abstracts that distorts or misrepresents the findings. Our goal was to evaluate the level of spin within systematic reviews (SRs) focused on the treatment of cannabis use disorder (CUD). Methods: A systematic search was conducted in May 2020. To meet inclusion criteria, publications had to be either an SR or meta-analysis related to the treatment of cannabis use. Screening and data extraction was performed in a duplicate and masked fashion. Study quality was assessed using AMSTAR-2 Results: 16/24 SRs (66.7%) contained at least one form of spin in the abstract. The most common forms of spin identified were type 3-selective reporting of or overemphasis on efficacy outcomes or analysis favoring the beneficial effect of the experimental intervention (45.8%)-and type 8-the review's findings from a surrogate marker or a specific outcome to the global improvement of the disease (37.5%). No significant association between spin and intervention type, PRISMA requirements, or funding source was identified. Weak positive correlations were found between the presence of spin and abstract word count (r =.217) and between spin and AMSTAR-2 rating (r = 0.143). "Moderate" was the most common AMSTAR-2 rating (9/24, 37.5%), followed by "low" (7/24, 29.2%) and "critically low" (7/24, 29.2%). One systematic review received an AMSTAR-2 rating of "high" (1/24, 4.2%). Conclusions: Spin was common among abstracts from the SRs focused on the treatments for CUD. Higher quality studies may help reduce the overall rate as well as standardizing treatment outcomes. To facilitate this, we encourage all authors, peer-reviewers, and editors to be more aware of the various types of spin as they can help reduce the overall amount of spin seen within the literature.

Statistical, Clinical, Methodological Evaluation of Local Recurrence Following Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

A recent Norwegian moratorium challenged the status quo of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer by reporting increased early multifocal local recurrences.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the local recurrence rates following transanal total mesorectal excision as well as to assess statistical, clinical, and methodological bias in reports published to date.

DATA SOURCES

The PubMed and MEDLINE (via Ovid) databases were systematically searched.

STUDY SELECTION

Descriptive or comparative studies reporting rates of local recurrence at a median follow-up of 6 months (or more) after transanal total mesorectal excision were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients underwent transanal total mesorectal excision.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Local recurrence was any recurrence located in the pelvic surgery site. The untransformed proportion method of 1-arm meta-analysis was utilized. Untransformed percent proportion with 95% confidence interval was reported. Ad hoc meta-regression with the Omnibus test was utilized to assess risk factors for local recurrence. Among-study heterogeneity was evaluated: statistically by I2 and τ2, clinically by summary tables, and methodologically by a 33-item questionnaire.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies totaling 2906 patients were included. The pooled rate of local recurrence was 3.4% (2.7%-4.0%) at an average of 20.1 months with low statistical heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). Meta-regression yielded no correlation between complete total mesorectal excision quality (p = 0.855), circumferential resection margin (p = 0.268), distal margin (p = 0.886), and local recurrence rates. Clinical heterogeneity was substantial. Methodological heterogeneity was linked to the excitement of novelty, loss aversion, reactivity to criticism, indication for transanal total mesorectal excision, nonprobability sampling, circular reasoning, misclassification, inadequate follow-up, reporting bias, conflict of interest, and self-licensing.

LIMITATIONS

The studies included had an observational design and limited sample and follow-up.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review found a pooled rate of local recurrence of 3.4% at 20 months. However, given the substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity across the studies, the evidence for or against transanal total mesorectal excision is inconclusive at this time.

The SSSPIN study-spin in studies of spin: meta-research analysis

OBJECTIVES

To identify and calculate the prevalence of spin in studies of spin.

DESIGN

Meta-research analysis (research on research).

SETTING

35 studies of spin in the scientific literature.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Spin, categorised as: reporting practices that distort the presentation and interpretation of results, creating misleading conclusions; discordance between results and their interpretation, with presentation of favourable conclusions that are not supported by the data or results; attribution of causality when study design does not support it; and over-interpretation or inappropriate extrapolation of results.

RESULTS

Five (14%) of 35 spin studies contained spin categorised as reporting practices that distort the presentation and interpretation of results (n=2) or categorised as over-interpretation or inappropriate extrapolation of results (n=3).

CONCLUSION

Spin occurs in research on spin. Although researchers on this topic should be sensitive to spinning their findings, our study does not undermine the need for rigorous interventions to reduce spin across various research fields.

CONCLUSION WITH SPIN

Our hypothesis that spin will be less prevalent in spin studies than in studies on other topics has been proven. Spin scholars are less likely to spin their conclusions than other researchers, and they should receive substantial resources to launch and test interventions to reduce spin and research waste in reporting.

Transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer has been suspended in Norway

Background

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer has emerged as an alternative to the traditional abdominal approach. However, concerns have been raised about local recurrence. The aim of this study was to evaluate local recurrence after TaTME. Secondary aims included postoperative mortality, anastomotic leak and stoma rates.

Methods

Data on all patients who underwent TaTME were recorded and compared with those from national cohorts in the Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Registry (NCCR) and the Norwegian Registry for Gastrointestinal Surgery (NoRGast). Kaplan–Meier estimates were used to compare local recurrence.

Results

In Norway, 157 patients underwent TaTME for rectal cancer between October 2014 and October 2018. Three of seven hospitals abandoned TaTME after a total of five procedures. The local recurrence rate was 12 of 157 (7·6 per cent); eight local recurrences were multifocal or extensive. The estimated local recurrence rate at 2·4 years was 11·6 (95 per cent c.i. 6·6 to 19·9) per cent after TaTME compared with 2·4 (1·4 to 4·3) per cent in the NCCR (P < 0·001). The adjusted hazard ratio was 6·71 (95 per cent c.i. 2·94 to 15·32). Anastomotic leaks resulting in reoperation occurred in 8·4 per cent of patients in the TaTME cohort compared with 4·5 per cent in NoRGast (P = 0·047). Fifty-six patients (35·7 per cent) had a stoma at latest follow-up; 39 (24·8 per cent) were permanent.

Conclusion

Anastomotic leak rates after TaTME were higher than national rates; local recurrence rates and growth patterns were unfavourable.

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME): are we doing it for the right indication? An assessment of the external validity of published online video resources

BACKGROUND

The steep learning curve for safe introduction of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) highlights the need for mentored training reserved for surgeons with expertise in minimally invasive colorectal surgery and transanal surgery. Video-based education in minimally invasive surgery is considered by surgical trainers as a useful teaching aid to maximize learning. This study aims to systematically assess the availability and quality of online TaTME videos.

METHODS

TaTME videos were systematically searched on YouTube.com , Colorectal diseases video channel, WebSurg.com , and AIS channel. Data collected included video characteristics, presence of supplementary educational content, patient details, indication for surgery, different steps of TaTME presented, and surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

Forty-six videos were included with a median of 92 views per month. Nineteen videos (41.3%) reported the age of the participants and 29 patients were male (63%). Body mass index (BMI) was reported in 20 videos (43.5%) with a median of 27 and it indicated obesity (BMI ≥ 30) in 2 cases only. The use of neoadjuvant treatment was reported in 8 cases (17.4%). Eighteen videos (39.1%) reported the distance of the tumor from the anal verge, with a median of 6.4 cm and in 9 out of 18 cases, the tumor distance from the anal verge was 7 cm or higher. Pathological staging was reported in 17 videos (37.0%), with 1 T1, 3 T2, 10 T3, and 3 T4 tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable interest in TaTME videos. Lack of consensus on reporting of these videos limits the educational value of these resources, which are missing important patient details and postoperative outcomes.