Outcome selection, measurement and reporting for new surgical procedures and devices: a systematic review of IDEAL/IDEAL‐D studies to inform development of a core outcome set

Outcome selection, measurement and reporting for the evaluation of new surgical procedures and devices is inconsistent and lacks standardization. A core outcome set may promote the safe and transparent evaluation of surgical innovations. This systematic review examined outcome selection, measurement and reporting in studies conducted within the IDEAL (Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment and Long‐term monitoring) framework to examine current practice and inform the development of a core outcome set for early‐phase studies of surgical procedures/devices.

[1]  H. Gerullis,et al.  Transvaginal PVDF-mesh for cystocele repair: A cohort study. , 2017, International journal of surgery.

[2]  T G van Leeuwen,et al.  Optical Coherence Tomography as a Tool for In Vivo Staging and Grading of Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Study of Diagnostic Accuracy. , 2016, The Journal of urology.

[3]  A. Wöckel,et al.  Challenges of Longevity: Safety of Vaginal and Laparoscopic Urogynecological Procedures in Septuagenarians and Older Patients , 2016, BioMed research international.

[4]  L. Feldman,et al.  Evaluation and stages of surgical innovations , 2009, The Lancet.

[5]  P. V. van Diest,et al.  Radiofrequency-assisted intact specimen biopsy of breast tumors: critical evaluation according to the IDEAL recommendations , 2011, Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society.

[6]  C. Metcalfe,et al.  Demonstration of the IDEAL recommendations for evaluating and reporting surgical innovation in minimally invasive oesophagectomy , 2011, The British journal of surgery.

[7]  T. Brun,et al.  IDEAL 2a Phase II Study of Ultrafocal Brachytherapy for Low- and Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer. , 2018, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[8]  G. McCreery,et al.  Early Rescue from Acute Severe Clostridium Difficile: A Novel Treatment Strategy. , 2018, Surgical infections.

[9]  U. Jayarajah,et al.  Efficacy of irrigation tubes in the management of para rectal cavities associated with complex fistula-in-ano , 2018, BMC Surgery.

[10]  P. Dasgupta,et al.  Three‐dimensional printing in robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy ‐ an Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long‐term follow‐up (IDEAL) Phase 2a study , 2018, BJU international.

[11]  M. Menon,et al.  Ontogeny of a surgical technique: Robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia. , 2016, International journal of surgery.

[12]  G. Salomon,et al.  Multiparametric ultrasound: evaluation of greyscale, shear wave elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound for prostate cancer detection and localization in correlation to radical prostatectomy specimens , 2018, BMC Urology.

[13]  M. Tarnopolsky,et al.  Common data elements for clinical research in mitochondrial disease: a National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke project , 2017, Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease.

[14]  M. A. van den Bosch,et al.  Use of C-Arm Cone Beam CT During Hepatic Radioembolization: Protocol Optimization for Extrahepatic Shunting and Parenchymal Enhancement , 2015, CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology.

[15]  P. McCulloch,et al.  Evaluation of high‐intensity focused ultrasound ablation for uterine fibroids: an IDEAL prospective exploration study , 2018, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[16]  Paul A. Harris,et al.  The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners , 2019, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[17]  T. Ecke,et al.  Presentation of a method at the Exploration Stage according to IDEAL: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) under local infiltrative anesthesia is a feasible and effective method - retrospective analysis of 439 patients , 2017, International journal of medical sciences.

[18]  J. Blazeby,et al.  ‘Trial Exegesis’: Methods for Synthesizing Clinical and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Data in Trials to Inform Clinical Practice. A Systematic Review , 2016, PloS one.

[19]  Angus G K McNair,et al.  The COMET Handbook: version 1.0 , 2017, Trials.

[20]  M. Rovers,et al.  After Ulcerative Colitis and Familial Adenomatous Polyposis Stages and Evaluation of Surgical Innovation : A Clinical Example of the Ileo Neorectal Anastomosis , 2013 .

[21]  M. Robinson,et al.  Transoral robotic surgery for residual and recurrent oropharyngeal cancers: Exploratory study of surgical innovation using the IDEAL framework for early‐phase surgical studies , 2018, Head & neck.

[22]  T. Ecke,et al.  Transvesical Suprapubic Externalization of Ureteral Stents - Introduction of a Surgical Innovation at the Development Stage , 2017, Urologia Internationalis.

[23]  Jane M Blazeby,et al.  Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider , 2012, Trials.

[24]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  IDEAL framework for surgical innovation 1: the idea and development stages , 2013, BMJ.

[25]  Kemal Sarica,et al.  A new robot for flexible ureteroscopy: development and early clinical results (IDEAL stage 1-2b). , 2014, European urology.

[26]  F. Algaba,et al.  Correlation Between Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy (Cellvizio®) and Histological Grading of Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Step Forward for a Better Selection of Patients Suitable for Conservative Management. , 2017, European urology focus.

[27]  H. Verkooijen,et al.  Stereotactic Radiotherapy Followed by Surgical Stabilization Within 24 h for Unstable Spinal Metastases; A Stage I/IIa Study According to the IDEAL Framework , 2018, Front. Oncol..

[28]  H. Verkooijen,et al.  Real-Time 3D Fluoroscopy-Guided Large Core Needle Biopsy of Renal Masses: A Critical Early Evaluation According to the IDEAL Recommendations , 2012, CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology.

[29]  J. Barkun,et al.  Practical guide to the Idea, Development and Exploration stages of the IDEAL Framework and Recommendations , 2016, The British journal of surgery.

[30]  J. Bosch,et al.  Clinical efficacy of bipolar radiofrequency ablation of small renal masses , 2015, World Journal of Urology.

[31]  P. Williamson,et al.  A taxonomy has been developed for outcomes in medical research to help improve knowledge discovery , 2017, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[32]  M. A. van den Bosch,et al.  Sentinel lymph node localization with contrast-enhanced ultrasound and an I-125 seed: an ideal prospective development study. , 2015, International journal of surgery.

[33]  C. Rosman,et al.  Evolution of the surgical technique of minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: description according to the IDEAL framework. , 2018, Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus.

[34]  J. Baekelandt,et al.  Hysterectomy through the looking glass: iHysterectomy frugal by iPhone , 2017, BMJ Innovations.

[35]  R. Agha,et al.  How can we improve surgical research and innovation?: the IDEAL framework for action. , 2013, International journal of surgery.

[36]  Ian A. Donaldson,et al.  A prospective development study investigating focal irreversible electroporation in men with localised prostate cancer: Nanoknife Electroporation Ablation Trial (NEAT) , 2014, Contemporary clinical trials.

[37]  J. Kaouk,et al.  A novel robotic system for single-port urologic surgery: first clinical investigation. , 2014, European urology.

[38]  T. Sano,et al.  Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy combined with a novel self-assessment system and feedback discussion: a phase 1 surgical trial following the IDEAL guidelines , 2016, Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery.

[39]  D. D. de Bruin,et al.  Irreversible Electroporation for the Ablation of Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Prospective, Human, In Vivo Study Protocol (IDEAL Phase 2b) , 2017, JMIR research protocols.

[40]  S. Crouzet,et al.  Focal High Intensity Focused Ultrasound of Unilateral Localized Prostate Cancer: A Prospective Multicentric Hemiablation Study of 111 Patients. , 2017, European urology.

[41]  P. McCulloch,et al.  Appraising the uptake and use of the IDEAL Framework and Recommendations: A review of the literature. , 2018, International journal of surgery.

[42]  Jane M Blazeby,et al.  IDEAL framework for surgical innovation 3: randomised controlled trials in the assessment stage and evaluations in the long term study stage , 2013, BMJ.

[43]  Art Sedrakyan,et al.  Adapting the IDEAL Framework and Recommendations for medical device evaluation: A modified Delphi survey. , 2016, International journal of surgery.

[44]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2010, International journal of surgery.

[45]  C. D. Savci-Heijink,et al.  Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy and Optical Coherence Tomography for the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: A Needle-Based, In Vivo Feasibility Study Protocol (IDEAL Phase 2A) , 2018, JMIR research protocols.

[46]  M. Carini,et al.  Florence robotic intracorporeal neobladder (FloRIN): a new reconfiguration strategy developed following the IDEAL guidelines , 2018, BJU international.

[47]  Jane M Blazeby,et al.  Challenges in evaluating surgical innovation , 2009, The Lancet.

[48]  C. D. Savci-Heijink,et al.  Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy for the Diagnosis of Urothelial Carcinoma in the Bladder and the Upper Urinary Tract: Protocols for Two Prospective Explorative Studies , 2018, JMIR research protocols.

[49]  G. Haber,et al.  Partial Prostatectomy for Anterior Cancer: Short-term Oncologic and Functional Outcomes. , 2017, European urology.

[50]  Mahendra Bhandari,et al.  Application of the statistical process control method for prospective patient safety monitoring during the learning phase: robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia (IDEAL phase 2a-b). , 2014, European urology.

[51]  B. Goldacre,et al.  Transvaginal mesh failure: lessons for regulation of implantable devices , 2017, British Medical Journal.

[52]  K Subramonian,et al.  The ‘learning curve’ in surgery: what is it, how do we measure it and can we influence it? , 2004, BJU international.

[53]  F. Greco,et al.  Minilaparoendoscopic Single-site Pyeloplasty: The Best Compromise Between Surgeon's Ergonomy and Patient's Cosmesis (IDEAL Phase 2a). , 2016, European urology focus.

[54]  T. Ecke,et al.  Repair of a vesico-vaginal fistula with amniotic membrane – Step 1 of the IDEAL recommendations of surgical innovation , 2015, Central European journal of urology.

[55]  P. Kyzas,et al.  A new autologous block-bone prefabricated flap concept based on the supraclavicular artery island flap (SCAIF) for reconstruction of a neo-mandibular osteoradionecrosis (ORN) defect, IDEAL Stage 1 report , 2017 .

[56]  W. Rogers,et al.  No Surgical Innovation Without Evaluation: Evolution and Further Development of the IDEAL Framework and Recommendations , 2019, Annals of surgery.

[57]  P. McCulloch,et al.  The IDEAL prospective development study format for reporting surgical innovations. An illustrative case study of robotic oesophagectomy. , 2015, International journal of surgery.

[58]  S. Cousins,et al.  What is an invasive procedure? A definition to inform study design, evidence synthesis and research tracking , 2019, BMJ Open.

[59]  A. Weyland,et al.  Retrospective analysis of a surgical innovation using the IDEAL framework: radical cystectomy with epidural anaesthesia , 2017, The Journal of international medical research.

[60]  David W. Taggart,et al.  No surgical innovation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendations , 2009, The Lancet.

[61]  Bruce Campbell,et al.  IDEAL-D: a rational framework for evaluating and regulating the use of medical devices , 2016, British Medical Journal.

[62]  M. Menon,et al.  Robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia: evolution of a novel procedure utilizing the IDEAL guidelines (IDEAL phase 0 and 1). , 2014, European urology.

[63]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  IDEAL framework for surgical innovation 2: observational studies in the exploration and assessment stages , 2013, BMJ.

[64]  Deborah Cohen,et al.  How safe are metal-on-metal hip implants? , 2012, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[65]  T. Ecke,et al.  Successful evacuation of large perirenal hematoma after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) ‐ step 1 of the IDEAL recommendations of surgical innovation , 2017, Clinical case reports.

[66]  K. Yuen,et al.  Effect of pulsed magnetic stimulation on quality of life of female patients with stress urinary incontinence: an IDEAL-D stage 2b study , 2017, International Urogynecology Journal.

[67]  P. Fornara,et al.  New Hybrid Mini-laparoendoscopic Single-site Partial Nephrectomy With Early Unclamped Technique for Renal Tumors With Intermediate PADUA Score (IDEAL Phase 2a). , 2017, Urology.

[68]  F. Montorsi,et al.  Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site radical prostatectomy (R-LESS-RP) with daVinci Single-Site® platform. Concept and evolution of the technique following an IDEAL phase 1 , 2018, Journal of Robotic Surgery.

[69]  W. Jawaid,et al.  Enhancing safety of laparoscopic vascular control for neonatal sacrococcygeal teratoma. , 2011, Journal of pediatric surgery.

[70]  T. Ecke,et al.  Protocol for a Randomized Phase II Trial for Mesh Optimization by Autologous Plasma Coating in Prolapse Repair: IDEAL Stage 3 , 2017, Advances in Therapy.

[71]  J. Zahra,et al.  Development of reporting guidance and core outcome sets for seamless, standardised evaluation of innovative surgical procedures and devices: a study protocol for content generation and a Delphi consensus process (COHESIVE study) , 2019, BMJ Open.

[72]  F. Puppe,et al.  Registry of implants for the reconstruction of pelvic floor in males and females: A feasibility case series. , 2017, International journal of surgery.