Journal Article

Exploring and adjusting for potential learning effects in ROLARR: a randomised controlled trial comparing robotic-assisted vs. standard laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer resection

Copeland, Joanne, Jayne, David, Marshall, Helen, Croft, Julie, Brown, Julia, Corrigan, Neil

2018

Overview

Background Commonly in surgical randomised controlled trials (RCT) the experimental treatment is a relatively new technique which the surgeons may still be learning, while the control is a well-established standard. This can lead to biased comparisons between treatments. In this paper we discuss the implementation of approaches for addressing this issue in the ROLARR trial, and points of consideration for future surgical trials. Methods ROLARR was an international, randomised, parallel-group trial comparing robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. The primary endpoint was conversion to open surgery (binary). A surgeon inclusion criterion mandating a minimum level of experience in each technique was incorporated. Additionally, surgeon self-reported data were collected periodically throughout the trial to capture the level of experience of every participating surgeon. Multi-level logistic regression adjusting for operating surgeon as a random effect is used to estimate the odds ratio for conversion to open surgery between the treatment groups. We present and contrast the results from the primary analysis, which did not account for learning effects, and a sensitivity analysis which did. Results The primary analysis yields an estimated odds ratio (robotic/laparoscopic) of 0.614 (95% CI 0.311, 1.211; p  = 0.16), providing insufficient evidence to conclude superiority of robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic in terms of the risk of conversion to open. The sensitivity analysis reveals that while participating surgeons in ROLARR were expert at laparoscopic surgery, some, if not all, were still learning robotic surgery. The treatment-effect odds ratio decreases by a factor of 0.341 (95% CI 0.121, 0.960; p  = 0.042) per unit increase in log-number of previous robotic operations performed by the operating surgeon. The odds ratio for a patient whose operating surgeon has the mean experience level in ROLARR – 152.46 previous laparoscopic, 67.93 previous robotic operations – is 0.40 (95% CI 0.168, 0.953; p  = 0.039). Conclusions In this paper we have demonstrated the implementation of approaches for accounting for learning in a practical example of a surgery RCT analysis. The results demonstrate the value of implementing such approaches, since we have shown that without them the ROLARR analysis would indeed have been confounded by the learning effects. Trial registration International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry, ID: ISRCTN80500123. Registered on 27 May 2010.

• Publisher: BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd,Springer Nature B.V,BMC
• Subject: Analysis / Biomedicine / Care and treatment / Clinical Competence / Clinical trials / Colorectal cancer / Comparative analysis / Conversion to Open Surgery / Diagnosis / Digestive System Surgical Procedures - adverse effects / Digestive System Surgical Procedures - methods / Female / Health Sciences / Humans / Laparoscopy / Laparoscopy - adverse effects / Learning Curve / Learning effects / Male / Medicine / Medicine & Public Health / Missing data / Postoperative Complications - etiology / Randomised controlled trials / Rectal Neoplasms - pathology / Rectal Neoplasms - surgery / Risk Factors / Robotic surgery / Robotic Surgical Procedures - adverse effects / Statistics for Life Sciences / Surgeons / Surgery / Time Factors / Treatment Outcome