A study of some infectious causes of reproductive disorders in cattle owned by resource-poor farmers in Gauteng Province, South Africa

Two hundred and thirty-nine cattle from Gauteng Province in South Africa were tested for various pathogens causing reproductive diseases including bovine viral diarrhoea/mucosal disease (BVD/MD) virus, infectious bovine rhinotracheitis/infectious pustular vulvovaginitis (IBR/IPV) virus, Neospora caninum and Brucella abortus using various tests. For BVD/MD virus, 49.37 % tested positive, 74.47 % for IBR/IPV virus, 8.96 % for Neospora caninum and 3.8 % for Brucella abortus. The result for Brucella abortus is higher than the national average, possibly due to the small sample size. A high seroprevalence of antibodies to both BVD/MD virus and IBR/IPV virus was evident. These 2 viruses should be considered, in addition to Brucella abortus, when trying to establish causes of abortion in cattle. The clinical significance of Neospora caninum as a cause of abortion in Gauteng needs further investigation. One hundred and forty-three bulls were tested for Campylobacter fetus and Trichomonas fetus, and a low prevalence of 1.4 % and 2.1 % respectively was found in this study. The clinical implications of these findings are discussed

Evaluation of prognostic risk models for postoperative pulmonary complications in adult patients undergoing major abdominal surgery: a systematic review and international external validation cohort study

Background Stratifying risk of postoperative pulmonary complications after major abdominal surgery allows clinicians to modify risk through targeted interventions and enhanced monitoring. In this study, we aimed to identify and validate prognostic models against a new consensus definition of postoperative pulmonary complications. Methods We did a systematic review and international external validation cohort study. The systematic review was done in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched MEDLINE and Embase on March 1, 2020, for articles published in English that reported on risk prediction models for postoperative pulmonary complications following abdominal surgery. External validation of existing models was done within a prospective international cohort study of adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing major abdominal surgery. Data were collected between Jan 1, 2019, and April 30, 2019, in the UK, Ireland, and Australia. Discriminative ability and prognostic accuracy summary statistics were compared between models for the 30-day postoperative pulmonary complication rate as defined by the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine Core Outcome Measures in Perioperative and Anaesthetic Care (StEP-COMPAC). Model performance was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCC). Findings In total, we identified 2903 records from our literature search; of which, 2514 (86·6%) unique records were screened, 121 (4·8%) of 2514 full texts were assessed for eligibility, and 29 unique prognostic models were identified. Nine (31·0%) of 29 models had score development reported only, 19 (65·5%) had undergone internal validation, and only four (13·8%) had been externally validated. Data to validate six eligible models were collected in the international external validation cohort study. Data from 11 591 patients were available, with an overall postoperative pulmonary complication rate of 7·8% (n=903). None of the six models showed good discrimination (defined as AUROCC ≥0·70) for identifying postoperative pulmonary complications, with the Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia score showing the best discrimination (AUROCC 0·700 [95% CI 0·683–0·717]). Interpretation In the pre-COVID-19 pandemic data, variability in the risk of pulmonary complications (StEP-COMPAC definition) following major abdominal surgery was poorly described by existing prognostication tools. To improve surgical safety during the COVID-19 pandemic recovery and beyond, novel risk stratification tools are required. Funding British Journal of Surgery Society