Search

Background Primary endocrine therapy may be an alternative treatment for less fit women with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. This study compared quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes in older women treated with surgery or primary endocrine therapy. Methods This was a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study of surgery or primary endocrine therapy in women aged over 70 years with operable breast cancer. QoL was assessed using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of cancer QoL questionnaires QLQ-C30, -BR23, and -ELD14, and the EuroQol Five Dimensions 5L score at baseline, 6 weeks, and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for baseline variation in health, fitness, and tumour stage. Results The study recruited 3416 women (median age 77 (range 69–102) years) from 56 breast units. Of these, 2979 (87.2 per cent) had ER-positive breast cancer; 2354 women had surgery and 500 received primary endocrine therapy (125 were excluded from analysis due to inadequate data or non-standard therapy). Median follow-up was 52 months. The primary endocrine therapy group was older and less fit. Baseline QoL differed between the groups; the mean(s.d.) QLQ-C30 global health status score was 66.2(21.1) in patients who received primary endocrine therapy versus 77.1(17.8) among those who had surgery plus endocrine therapy. In the unmatched analysis, changes in QoL between 6 weeks and baseline were noted in several domains, but by 24 months most scores had returned to baseline levels. In the matched analysis, major surgery (mastectomy or axillary clearance) had a more pronounced adverse impact than primary endocrine therapy in several domains. Conclusion Adverse effects on QoL are seen in the first few months after surgery, but by 24 months these have largely resolved. Women considering surgery should be informed of these effects.

Aim We aimed to elicit key factors that influence healthcare professional decision-making when deciding treatment for BLNPCP. Background Benign large non-pedunculated colonic polyps (BLNPCP) may harbour covert malignancy and opinions differ about the optimal treatment modality. There are several options available, including endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal resection, combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery and surgical resection. Despite widespread availability of endoscopic resection techniques, there are high rates of surgery in the UK. Methods Three focus groups of healthcare professionals, comprised of either consultant colorectal surgeons, nurse endoscopists and consultant gastroenterologists, were conducted virtually utilising the Nominal Group Technique. Meetings were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Themes were devolved using the framework approach for qualitative analysis. A priority-ranked list of factors influencing healthcare professional decision-making in this setting was generated. Results Five main themes were identified as influencing decision-making: Shared decision making (patient preference, informed consent); Patient factors (co-morbidity, age, life-expectancy); Polyp factors (Location, size, morphology, risk of cancer); Healthcare professionals (skill-set, personal preference); System factors (techniques availability locally, regional referral networks). Nominal Group Technique generated 55 items across the three focus groups. Nurses and gastroentologists ranked patient factors (particularly drug history and tolerance of procedure) and shared decision making (patient preference) more highly then surgeons. Surgeons placed greater emphasis on polyp factors particularly location and the risk of submucosal invasive carcinoma. Conclusion Decision making is complex and multifactorial. These results support the benefits of complex polyp MDTs and patient involvement in the decision-making. The complexity of decision-making may underpin wide variation in practice.

Aim Today women make up 56% of medical students, yet just 12% of surgical consultants, a number that has remained static since 2013. This qualitative study aimed to explore the barriers to female success in modern surgery. Method Semi-structured qualitative interviews were undertaken primarily with female surgical trainees to determine the barriers they face. Male trainees and Training Programme Directors were also interviewed for triangulation. Results Nineteen interviews were performed (15 female trainees, 3 male trainees and 1 TPD) between October 2019 and March 2020. Family pressures and becoming a mother were significant barriers for women training in surgery, a barrier that did not apply to male trainees who were fathers, often resulting in women choosing to train less than full time (LTFT). Unfortunately, LTFT training presents further obstacles for female trainees. The set-up of the National training programme in surgery provides many non-gender specific barriers, chiefly moving hospital every 6 months resulting in disrupted training and long commutes. Sexism and discrimination are still common, both from colleagues and patients. Many participants perceived inherent differences between genders in communication and methods for coping with stress. Conclusions Greater gender equality in surgery may be achieved by changes in the structure and organisation of training to reduce the tension between the professional role and the predominantly female-led role of raising children. Better equality and diversity training and awareness at all levels in surgery may help to mitigate some of the conscious and unconscious bias that still exists.

BackgroundBlast injury is uncommon, and remains poorly understood by most clinicians outside regions of active warfare. Primary blast injury (PBI) results from the interaction of the blast wave with the body, and typically affects gas-containing organs such as the ear, lungs and gastrointestinal tract. This review investigates the mechanisms and injuries sustained to the abdomen following blast exposure.MethodsMEDLINE was searched using the keywords ‘primary blast injury’, ‘abdominal blast’ and ‘abdominal blast injury’ to identify English language reports of abdominal PBI. Clinical reports providing sufficient data were used to calculate the incidence of abdominal PBI in hospitalized survivors of air blast, and in open- and enclosed-space detonations.ResultsSixty-one articles were identified that primarily reported clinical or experimental abdominal PBI. Nine clinical reports provided sufficient data to calculate an incidence of abdominal PBI; 31 (3·0 per cent) of 1040 hospitalized survivors of air blast suffered abdominal PBI, the incidence ranging from 1·3 to 33 per cent. The incidence for open- and enclosed-space detonations was 5·6 and 6·7 per cent respectively. The terminal ileum and caecum were the most commonly affected organs. Surgical management of abdominal PBI is similar to that of abdominal trauma of other causes.ConclusionAbdominal PBI is uncommon but has the potential for significant mortality and morbidity, which may present many days after blast exposure. It is commoner after blast in enclosed spaces and under water.