Background: Degenerative spinal diseases are common in older adults with concurrent frailty. Preoperative frailty is a strong predictor of adverse clinical outcomes after surgery. This study aimed to investigate the association between health-related outcomes and frailty in patients undergoing spine surgery for degenerative spine diseases. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed by electronically searching Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL for eligible studies until July 16, 2022. We reviewed all studies, excluding spinal tumours, non-surgical procedures, and experimental studies that examined the association between preoperative frailty and related outcomes after spine surgery. A total of 1,075 articles were identified in the initial search and were reviewed by two reviewers, independently. Data were subjected to qualitative and quantitative syntheses by meta-analytic methods. Results: Thirty-eight articles on 474,651 patients who underwent degenerative spine surgeries were included and 17 papers were quantitatively synthesized. The health-related outcomes were divided into clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes; clinical outcomes were further divided into postoperative complications and supportive management procedures. Compared to the non-frail group, the frail group was significantly associated with a greater risk of high mortality, major complications, acute renal failure, myocardial infarction, non-home discharge, reintubation, and longer length of hospital stay. Regarding patient-reported outcomes, changes in scores between the preoperative and postoperative Oswestry Disability Index scores were not associated with preoperative frailty. Conclusions: In degenerative spinal diseases, frailty is a strong predictor of adverse clinical outcomes after spine surgery. The relationship between preoperative frailty and patient-reported outcomes is still inconclusive. Further research is needed to consolidate the evidence from patient-reported outcomes.

This study was undertaken to compare the diagnostic performance and biopsy reduction rate of combined shear-wave elastography (SWE) and B-mode ultrasonography (US) versus B-mode US alone for breast lesions and to determine the most discriminatory parameter in SWE. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. The resources for the study were obtained from MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed on August 17, 2018. The quality of the articles was evaluated using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) tool. Twenty-five articles with 5,147 breast lesions were selected. The meta-analysis showed pooled sensitivities of 0.94 and 0.97 (P=0.083), pooled specificities of 0.85 and 0.61 (P=0.009), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.96 and 0.96 (P=0.095) for combined SWE and B-mode US versus B-mode US alone. When SWE was combined with B-mode US, the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category changed from 4 to 3 in 71.3% of the tests, decreasing the frequency of unnecessary biopsies by 41.1%. All four parameters of SWE (the color grade of lesion stiffness, maximum elasticity, mean elasticity, and color grade of lesion stiffness/homogeneity of the lesion) improved the specificity when they were added to B-mode US. The AUC for each SWE parameter was 0.99, 0.96, 0.96, and 0.93, respectively. Adding SWE to B-mode US not only provides additional diagnostic information for differentiating between benign and malignant breast lesions, but also decreases the likelihood of unnecessary biopsies.

Personalized information is paramount to patient-centered communication and decision-making regarding risk management in hereditary cancer syndromes. This systematic review identified information needs of individuals from families harboring BRCA pathogenic variants and compared findings based on gender (women vs men) and clinical characteristics (patients with cancer vs previvors and BRCA heterozygotes vs untested relatives). We screened 8115 studies identified from databases and citation searching. The quality of selected studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Narrative synthesis was conducted based on content analysis. From 18 selected studies including 1063 individuals, we identified 9 categories of information needs. Risk of bias in the selected studies was moderate. Men, untested relatives, and racial and ethnic minorities were underrepresented. Frequently required information was personalized cancer risk and risk-reducing strategies, including decision-making, family implications of hereditary cancers, psychological issues, and cascade testing. Subgroup analyses showed that information needs depended on gender, personal cancer history, and cascade testing in relatives. We identified comprehensive and detailed informational needs of individuals from families harboring BRCA pathogenic variants and gaps in international guidelines. Needs for personalized information varied based on gender, health, and genetic testing status. Findings of this study have implications for genetic counseling, tailoring educational materials, and personalizing interventions.

This systematic review aims to identify factors associated with risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO), including the uptake rate and decision timing, among women at high risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). We found 4,935 relevant studies using MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO on July 6, 2020. Two authors screened the articles and extracted data. Twenty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. Quality assessment of articles was conducted using the Risk of Bias for Nonrandomized Studies tool. Five types of factors were identified (demographic factors, clinical factors, family history of cancer, psychological factors, and objective cancer risk). The specific significant factors were older age, having child(ren), being a BRCA1/2 carrier, mastectomy history, perceived risk for ovarian cancer, and perceived advantages of RRSO, whereas objective cancer risk was not significant. The uptake rate of RRSO was 23.4% to 87.2% (mean, 45.2%) among high-risk women for HBOC. The mean time to decide whether to undergo RRSO after BRCA testing was 4 to 34 months. RRSO decisions are affected by demographic, clinical, and psychological factors, rather than objective cancer risk. Nonetheless, women seeking RRSO should be offered information about objective cancer risk. Even though decision-making for RRSO is a complex and multifaceted process, the psychosocial factors that may influence decisions have not been comprehensively examined, including family attitudes toward RRSO, cultural norms, social values, and health care providers’ attitudes.

Park SY, et al. J Korean Acad Nurs Adm. 2018 Sep;24(4):339-351. https://doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2018.24.4.339