Non-Inferiority Margins in Randomized Controlled Trials in Abdominal Surgery- a Systematic Review
Leonhardt, C.; Birrer, D.; Stauffer, M. F.; Toti, J. M. A.; Gallagher, I. J.; Skipworth, R. J. E.; Laird, B.; Kuemmerli, C.
Show abstract
Importance Non-inferiority trials are becoming increasingly popular in abdominal surgery. The non- inferiority margin is critical in the interpretation and conclusion of these trials. Objective This systematic review aims to assess the methodological and reporting quality of non- inferiority randomized controlled trials in abdominal surgery. Evidence Review Non-inferiority trials were systematically identified by searching Ovid Medline, Embase and the CENTRAL databases from 2006 until December 2025. Randomized controlled trials in adult patients with any type of abdominal surgical intervention in at least one trial arm and a sample size greater than or equal to 100 were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was the definition of the non- inferiority margin. Secondary outcomes were the reporting of the non-inferiority margin, the robustness of its estimation, the uncertainty of the point estimate and the adequacy of conclusions. Findings A total of 11 045 trials were identified, of which 101 were eligible, enrolling 44 370 patients. Most trials provided a rationale for the non-inferiority design, while six (5.9%) trials did not. Previous literature was commonly used (n=56; 55.4%), but the non-inferiority margin was most often based on a clinical fixed margin or on historical comparison of the treatment and the active comparator. Based on the margin, investigators tolerated substantially worse outcomes of the treatment compared to the comparator. Conclusions were appropriate based on the confidence interval and the predefined non- inferiority margin in 88 (87.1%) of trials. The clinical judgement of the conclusion was overall adequate. Confidence interval estimations were reported in 16 (15.8%) of trials. Simulation studies were limited by the reporting quality. Conclusions and Relevance Clinical fixed margins are commonly used in abdominal surgery non-inferiority randomized controlled trials, however, substantial shortcomings in reporting limit the interpretability and reproduction of study findings. Based on the findings of this study, guidance on surgical- specific non-inferiority margin definitions is needed.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Perioperative mortality in low-, middle-, and high-income countries: Protocol for a multi-level meta-regression analysis 95%
- Wound Complications Following Surgery to the Lymph Nodes: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis 93%
- Systematic Review Protocol of aetiology of mechanical bowel obstruction in Low-and-middle income countries: Has anything changed in the last two decades? 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Adverse events of iron and/or erythropoiesis-stimulating agent therapy in preoperatively anaemic elective surgery patients: a systematic review 91%
- Evidence-Based, Cost-Effective Interventions To Suppress The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review 90%
- Is artificial intelligence for medical professionals serving the patients? Protocol for a mixed method systematic review on patient-relevant benefits and harms of algorithmic decision-making 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- The effect of osteotomy technique (flat-cut vs wedge-cut Weil) on pain relief and complication incidence following surgical treatment for patients presenting with metatarsalgia in a private metropolitan clinic: Protocol for a randomised controlled trial 93%
- Trials that turn from retrospectively registered to prospectively registered: A cohort study of ‘retroactively prospective’ clinical trial registration using history data 90%
- Statistical Analysis Plan for the Stepped-wedge Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of Electronic Early Notification of Sepsis in Hospitalized Ward Patients (SCREEN): a study protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Hydrocortisone for the prevention of postoperative delirium in digestive surgery (HyPOD): Study protocol for a multicentre randomized, blind, placebo-controlled trial 93%
- The devil is in the details: Reporting and transparent research practices in sports medicine and orthopedic clinical trials 93%
- Feasibility study of a randomised controlled trial of pre and postoperative nutritional supplementation in major lung surgery 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.