HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Ani C. Anyanwu Tom Treasure Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Anyanwu, A. C. Articles by Treasure, T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Anyanwu, A. C. Articles by Treasure, T. Related Collections Cardiac - other Professional affairs

Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2004;25:299-303
© 2004 Elsevier Science NL

Surgical research revisited: clinical trials in the cardiothoracic surgical literature

^a Cardiothoracic Unit, Harefield Hospital, London, UK
^b Cardiothoracic Unit, Guy's Hospital, London SE1 9RT, UK

Received 23 July 2003; received in revised form 5 November 2003; accepted 2 December 2003.

^* Corresponding author. Tel.: +44-20-8725-3288
e-mail: tom.treasure{at}ukgateway.net

Objective: Surgeons have been criticised for not undertaking high-quality research. This study examines the quality of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the cardiothoracic surgical literature with a view to revisiting the role of RCTs in surgical research. Methods: All RCTs published in 1998 and 1999 in three major international cardiothoracic journals were analysed for basic components of trial design and presentation. Results: We found 119 papers presented as RCTs. The median size of treatment arms per RCT was 20 (interquartile range 14–40). Of 20 dimensions of trial quality examined, 12 or more were deficient (not described or performed inadequately) in half of the studies. Key information was frequently missing. Additionally, most trials relied on ‘soft’ endpoints, using surrogate (72, 61%) rather than clinical, and numerical (102, 86%) rather than categorical outcomes suggesting lack of power to detect clinically relevant differences. Although most trials reported positive results (73, 63%), only in 18 (15%) did authors make recommendations for practice change. Conclusions: Many RCTs in surgery by virtue of their design, sample size, and insufficient power are incapable of answering the questions researchers seek to address. Surgical trials often may not exclude bias because of lack of blinding and variations in surgical technique and performance. It is arguable that for most study questions in clinical surgery, comparative analysis of large case series and databases will provide more robust evidence.

Key Words: Randomised controlled trial • Surgical research • Surgical journals

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. J. Karanicolas, M. Bhandari, B. Taromi, E. A. Akl, D. Bassler, P. Alonso-Coello, D. Rigau, D. Bryant, S. E. Smith, S. D. Walter, et al. Blinding of Outcomes in Trials of Orthopaedic Trauma: An Opportunity to Enhance the Validity of Clinical Trials J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., May 1, 2008; 90(5): 1026 - 1033. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Boutron, D. Moher, D. G. Altman, K. F. Schulz, P. Ravaud, and for the CONSORT Group Extending the CONSORT Statement to Randomized Trials of Nonpharmacologic Treatment: Explanation and Elaboration Ann Intern Med, February 19, 2008; 148(4): 295 - 309. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Boutron, D. Moher, D. G. Altman, K. F. Schulz, P. Ravaud, and for the CONSORT Group Methods and Processes of the CONSORT Group: Example of an Extension for Trials Assessing Nonpharmacologic Treatments Ann Intern Med, February 19, 2008; 148(4): W-60 - W-66. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Boutron, P. Ravaud, and R. Nizard The design and assessment of prospective randomised, controlled trials in orthopaedic surgery J Bone Joint Surg Br, July 1, 2007; 89-B(7): 858 - 863. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. D. Rubens and H. Nathan Lessons learned on the path to a healthier brain: dispelling the myths and challenging the hypotheses Perfusion, May 1, 2007; 22(3): 153 - 160. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. Treasure The evidence on which to base practice: different tools for different times Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., December 1, 2006; 30(6): 819 - 824. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. M. Sade "Surgical research or comic opera" redux. Ann. Thorac. Surg., October 1, 2006; 82(4): 1173 - 1174. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Tiruvoipati, S. P. Balasubramanian, G. Atturu, G. J. Peek, and D. Elbourne Improving the quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery: The way forward. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., August 1, 2006; 132(2): 233 - 240. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. M. Sade Reports of clinical trials: Ethical aspects. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., August 1, 2006; 132(2): 245 - 246. [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Caus, Y. Seree, P. Marin, M. Khairi, A. Bakkali, J. C. Guillen, J. L. Bonnet, and D. Metras Off-pump coronary surgery in selected patients: better early outcome but more recurrence of angina? Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, August 1, 2005; 4(4): 322 - 326. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. Alphonso, C. Tan, M. Utley, R. Cameron, J. Dussek, L. Lang-Lazdunski, and T. Treasure A prospective randomized controlled trial of suction versus non-suction to the under-water seal drains following lung resection Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., March 1, 2005; 27(3): 391 - 394. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]