7 research outputs found

    Global variation in anastomosis and end colostomy formation following left-sided colorectal resection

    Get PDF
    Background End colostomy rates following colorectal resection vary across institutions in high-income settings, being influenced by patient, disease, surgeon and system factors. This study aimed to assess global variation in end colostomy rates after left-sided colorectal resection. Methods This study comprised an analysis of GlobalSurg-1 and -2 international, prospective, observational cohort studies (2014, 2016), including consecutive adult patients undergoing elective or emergency left-sided colorectal resection within discrete 2-week windows. Countries were grouped into high-, middle- and low-income tertiles according to the United Nations Human Development Index (HDI). Factors associated with colostomy formation versus primary anastomosis were explored using a multilevel, multivariable logistic regression model. Results In total, 1635 patients from 242 hospitals in 57 countries undergoing left-sided colorectal resection were included: 113 (6·9 per cent) from low-HDI, 254 (15·5 per cent) from middle-HDI and 1268 (77·6 per cent) from high-HDI countries. There was a higher proportion of patients with perforated disease (57·5, 40·9 and 35·4 per cent; P < 0·001) and subsequent use of end colostomy (52·2, 24·8 and 18·9 per cent; P < 0·001) in low- compared with middle- and high-HDI settings. The association with colostomy use in low-HDI settings persisted (odds ratio (OR) 3·20, 95 per cent c.i. 1·35 to 7·57; P = 0·008) after risk adjustment for malignant disease (OR 2·34, 1·65 to 3·32; P < 0·001), emergency surgery (OR 4·08, 2·73 to 6·10; P < 0·001), time to operation at least 48 h (OR 1·99, 1·28 to 3·09; P = 0·002) and disease perforation (OR 4·00, 2·81 to 5·69; P < 0·001). Conclusion Global differences existed in the proportion of patients receiving end stomas after left-sided colorectal resection based on income, which went beyond case mix alone

    Serious complications of pancreatoduodenectomy correlate with lower rates of adjuvant chemotherapy: Results from the recurrence after Whipple's (RAW) study

    No full text
    Introduction: Adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) can prolong overall survival (OS) after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, fitness for AC may be influenced by postoperative recovery. We aimed to investigate if serious (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ IIIa) postoperative complications affected AC rates, disease recurrence and OS. Materials and methods: Data were extracted from the Recurrence After Whipple's (RAW) study (n = 1484), a retrospective study of PD outcomes (29 centres from eight countries). Patients who died within 90-days of PD were excluded. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare OS in those receiving or not receiving AC, and those with and without serious postoperative complications. The groups were then compared using univariable and multivariable tests. Results: Patients who commenced AC (vs no AC) had improved OS (median difference: (MD): 201 days), as did those who completed their planned course of AC (MD: 291 days, p < 0.0001). Those who commenced AC were younger (mean difference: 2.7 years, p = 0.0002), more often (preoperative) American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade I-II (74% vs 63%, p = 0.004) and had less often experienced a serious postoperative complication (10% vs 18%, p = 0.002). Patients who developed a serious postoperative complication were less often ASA grade I-II (52% vs 73%, p = 0.0004) and less often commenced AC (58% vs 74%, p = 0.002). Conclusion: In our multicentre study of PD outcomes, PDAC patients who received AC had improved OS, and those who experienced a serious postoperative complication commenced AC less frequently. Selected high-risk patients may benefit from targeted preoperative optimisation and/or neoadjuvant chemotherapy

    Serious Asthma Events with Fluticasone plus Salmeterol versus Fluticasone Alone

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: The safe and appropriate use of long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) for the treatment of asthma has been widely debated. In two large clinical trials, investigators found a potential risk of serious asthma-related events associated with LABAs. This study was designed to evaluate the risk of administering the LABA salmeterol in combination with an inhaled glucocorticoid, fluticasone propionate. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, adolescent and adult patients (age, ≥12 years) with persistent asthma were assigned to receive either fluticasone with salmeterol or fluticasone alone for 26 weeks. All the patients had a history of a severe asthma exacerbation in the year before randomization but not during the previous month. Patients were excluded from the trial if they had a history of life-threatening or unstable asthma. The primary safety end point was the first serious asthma-related event (death, endotracheal intubation, or hospitalization). Noninferiority of fluticasone-salmeterol to fluticasone alone was defined as an upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the risk of the primary safety end point of less than 2.0. The efficacy end point was the first severe asthma exacerbation. RESULTS: Of 11,679 patients who were enrolled, 67 had 74 serious asthma-related events, with 36 events in 34 patients in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 38 events in 33 patients in the fluticasone-only group. The hazard ratio for a serious asthma-related event in the fluticasone-salmeterol group was 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 1.66), and noninferiority was achieved (P=0.003). There were no asthma-related deaths; 2 patients in the fluticasone-only group underwent asthma-related intubation. The risk of a severe asthma exacerbation was 21% lower in the fluticasone-salmeterol group than in the fluticasone-only group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.89), with at least one severe asthma exacerbation occurring in 480 of 5834 patients (8%) in the fluticasone-salmeterol group, as compared with 597 of 5845 patients (10%) in the fluticasone-only group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received salmeterol in a fixed-dose combination with fluticasone did not have a significantly higher risk of serious asthma-related events than did those who received fluticasone alone. Patients receiving fluticasone-salmeterol had fewer severe asthma exacerbations than did those in the fluticasone-only group
    corecore