Multicentre, randomised trial comparing acellular porcine collagen implant versus gluteus maximus myocutaneous flap for reconstruction of the pelvic floor after extended abdominoperineal excision of rectum: study protocol for the Nordic Extended Abdominoperineal Excision (NEAPE) study

INTRODUCTION

Different surgical techniques are used to cover the defect in the floor of the lesser pelvis after an 'extralevator' or 'extended' abdominoperineal excision for advanced rectal cancer. However, these operations are potentially mutilating, and the reconstruction method of the pelvic floor has been studied only sparsely. We aim to study whether a porcine-collagen implant is superior or equally beneficial to a gluteus maximus myocutaneous flap as a reconstruction method.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a multicentre non-blinded randomised controlled trial with the experimental arm using a porcine-collagen implant and the control arm using a gluteus maximus muscle and skin rotation flap. Considered for inclusion are patients with rectal cancer, who are operated on with a wide abdominoperineal rectal excision including most of the levator muscles and where the muscle remnants cannot be closed in the midline with sutures. Patients with a primary or recurrent rectal cancer with an estimated survival of more than a year are eligible. The randomisation is computer generated with a concealed sequence and stratified by participating hospital and preoperative radiotherapy regimen. The main outcome is physical performance 6 months after surgery measured with the timed-stands test. Secondary outcomes are perineal wound healing, surgical complications, quality of life, ability to sit and other outcomes measured at 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. To be able to state experimental arm non-inferiority with a 10% margin of the primary outcome with 90% statistical power and assuming 10% attrition, we aim to enrol 85 patients from May 2011 onwards.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by the Regional Ethical Review board at Umeå University (protocol no: NEAPE-2010-335-31M). The results will be disseminated through patient associations and conventional scientific channels.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01347697; Pre-results.

Preoperative physical therapy treatment did not influence postoperative pain and disability outcomes in patients undergoing shoulder arthroscopy: a prospective study

Background

There is limited literature investigating preoperative physical therapy (pre-op PT) treatment on pain intensity and disability after musculoskeletal surgery. The purposes of the present cohort study were to describe patient characteristics for those who had and did not have pre-op PT treatment and determine whether pre-op PT influenced the length of postoperative physical therapy (post-op PT) treatment (number of sessions) and 3-month and 6-month postsurgical outcomes, such as pain intensity and disability.

Patients and methods

A total of 124 patients (mean age =43 years, 81 males) with shoulder pain were observed before and after shoulder arthroscopic surgery. Demographic data, medical history, and validated self-report questionnaires were collected preoperatively and at 3 months and 6 months after surgery. Analysis of variance models were performed to identify differences across measures for patients who had pre-op PT treatment and those who did not and to examine outcome differences at 3 months and 6 months. Alpha was set at the 0.05 level for statistical significance.

Results

Males had less participation in pre-op PT than females (P=0.01). In contrast, age, pain intensity, disability, and pain-associated psychological factors did not differ between pre-op PT treatment groups (P>0.05). Subacromial bursectomies were more commonly performed in patients having pre-op PT treatment (P<0.05). Pre-op PT treatment did not influence length of post-op PT treatment and did not affect 3-month and 6-month pain intensity and disability outcomes. Differences in distribution of pre-op PT for males and females and subacromial bursectomy did not influence 3-month or 6-month postsurgical outcomes.

Conclusion

Receiving pre-op PT treatment did not influence post-op PT treatment or pain and disability outcomes at 3 months and 6 months. This prospective cohort study provides no evidence of benefit for pre-op PT on post-op PT treatment or postsurgical outcomes. Females or patients receiving certain surgical procedures are more likely to undergo pre-op PT treatment. However, these differences did not influence postoperative outcomes in this cohort.