Perioperative blood transfusion in major abdominal cancer surgery : a multi-centre service evaluation and national survey

Background Anaemia is associated with complications and death after surgery. Perioperative red-cell transfusion triggers are not well defined in patients having oncological surgery, or with cardiovascular disease. Methods We carried out a prospective multicentre cohort study and a clinician survey of UK transfusion practice in adult patients undergoing surgery for abdominal malignancy. The primary outcome was red cell transfusion. Secondary outcomes were transfusion trigger haemoglobin, incidence of complications, length of hospital stay, and acute hospital mortality. Results In this prospective cohort study, data were collected on 412 patients undergoing surgery for intrabdominal malignancy in 14 NHS hospitals. Twenty-two (5.2%) patients received preoperative, 42 (10.2%) intraoperative, and 52 (12.2%) postoperative red blood cell transfusion. The mean postoperative transfusion trigger was 75.3 g L−1, and the mean number of units of red blood cells transfused was 1.5 (standard deviation, 1.1). Seventeen (4.0%) patients had a documented postoperative troponin elevation. Five (1.2%) patients died within 30 days of surgery. In the survey, 117 clinicians submitted complete responses, of whom 62 (53%) indicated that a transfusion threshold of 70 g L−1 was appropriate: however, this decreased to six (5.1%) if there was evidence of recent cardiac ischaemia. There were 100 (86%) respondents who indicated equipoise for a trial of restrictive vs liberal transfusion, decreasing to 56% if there was coexisting cardiovascular disease. Conclusions Many patients having oncological surgery receive red cell transfusion, the majority being given postoperatively. Restrictive transfusion practice is generally followed; however, variability exists especially in cardiovascular disease. Equipoise exists for a study of transfusion thresholds in this group

Machine learning risk prediction of mortality for patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 : the COVIDSurg mortality score

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic tens of millions of operations have been cancelled as a result of excessive postoperative pulmonary complications (51.2 per cent) and mortality rates (23.8 per cent) in patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection. There is an urgent need to restart surgery safely in order to minimize the impact of untreated non-communicable disease

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer : an international prospective cohort study

Aim The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. Methods This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January–April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. Results Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90–1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69–1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. Conclusion One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease

Outcomes of gynecologic cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic : an international, multicenter, prospective CovidSurg-Gynecologic Oncology Cancer study

Background The CovidSurg-Cancer Consortium aimed to explore the impact of COVID-19 in surgical patients and services for solid cancers at the start of the pandemic. The CovidSurg-Gynecologic Oncology Cancer subgroup was particularly concerned about the magnitude of adverse outcomes caused by the disrupted surgical gynecologic cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic, which are currently unclear. Objective This study aimed to evaluate the changes in care and short-term outcomes of surgical patients with gynecologic cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that the COVID-19 pandemic had led to a delay in surgical cancer care, especially in patients who required more extensive surgery, and such delay had an impact on cancer outcomes. Study Design This was a multicenter, international, prospective cohort study. Consecutive patients with gynecologic cancers who were initially planned for nonpalliative surgery, were recruited from the date of first COVID-19-related admission in each participating center for 3 months. The follow-up period was 3 months from the time of the multidisciplinary tumor board decision to operate. The primary outcome of this analysis is the incidence of pandemic-related changes in care. The secondary outcomes included 30-day perioperative mortality and morbidity and a composite outcome of unresectable disease or disease progression, emergency surgery, and death. Results We included 3973 patients (3784 operated and 189 nonoperated) from 227 centers in 52 countries and 7 world regions who were initially planned to have cancer surgery. In 20.7% (823/3973) of the patients, the standard of care was adjusted. A significant delay (>8 weeks) was observed in 11.2% (424/3784) of patients, particularly in those with ovarian cancer (213/1355; 15.7%; P<.0001). This delay was associated with a composite of adverse outcomes, including disease progression and death (95/424; 22.4% vs 601/3360; 17.9%; P=.024) compared with those who had operations within 8 weeks of tumor board decisions. One in 13 (189/2430; 7.9%) did not receive their planned operations, in whom 1 in 20 (5/189; 2.7%) died and 1 in 5 (34/189; 18%) experienced disease progression or death within 3 months of multidisciplinary team board decision for surgery. Only 22 of the 3778 surgical patients (0.6%) acquired perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infections; they had a longer postoperative stay (median 8.5 vs 4 days; P<.0001), higher predefined surgical morbidity (14/22; 63.6% vs 717/3762; 19.1%; P<.0001) and mortality (4/22; 18.2% vs 26/3762; 0.7%; P<.0001) rates than the uninfected cohort. Conclusion One in 5 surgical patients with gynecologic cancer worldwide experienced management modifications during the COVID-19 pandemic. Significant adverse outcomes were observed in those with delayed or cancelled operations, and coordinated mitigating strategies are urgently needed

Effect of COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns on planned cancer surgery for 15 tumour types in 61 countries : an international, prospective, cohort study

Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services

Death following pulmonary complications of surgery before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

Background This study aimed to determine the impact of pulmonary complications on death after surgery both before and during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Methods This was a patient-level, comparative analysis of two, international prospective cohort studies: one before the pandemic (January–October 2019) and the second during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (local emergence of COVID-19 up to 19 April 2020). Both included patients undergoing elective resection of an intra-abdominal cancer with curative intent across five surgical oncology disciplines. Patient selection and rates of 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications were compared. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality. Mediation analysis using a natural-effects model was used to estimate the proportion of deaths during the pandemic attributable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results This study included 7402 patients from 50 countries; 3031 (40.9 per cent) underwent surgery before and 4371 (59.1 per cent) during the pandemic. Overall, 4.3 per cent (187 of 4371) developed postoperative SARS-CoV-2 in the pandemic cohort. The pulmonary complication rate was similar (7.1 per cent (216 of 3031) versus 6.3 per cent (274 of 4371); P = 0.158) but the mortality rate was significantly higher (0.7 per cent (20 of 3031) versus 2.0 per cent (87 of 4371); P < 0.001) among patients who had surgery during the pandemic. The adjusted odds of death were higher during than before the pandemic (odds ratio (OR) 2.72, 95 per cent c.i. 1.58 to 4.67; P < 0.001). In mediation analysis, 54.8 per cent of excess postoperative deaths during the pandemic were estimated to be attributable to SARS-CoV-2 (OR 1.73, 1.40 to 2.13; P < 0.001). Conclusion Although providers may have selected patients with a lower risk profile for surgery during the pandemic, this did not mitigate the likelihood of death through SARS-CoV-2 infection. Care providers must act urgently to protect surgical patients from SARS-CoV-2 infection

Transdiagnostic clinical staging for childhood mental health:An adjunctive tool for classifying internalizing and externalizing syndromes that emerge in children aged 5-11 years

Clinical staging is now recognized as a key tool for facilitating innovation in personalized and preventative mental health care. It places a strong emphasis on the salience of indicated prevention, early intervention, and secondary prevention of major mental disorders. By contrast to established models for major mood and psychotic syndromes that emerge after puberty, developments in clinical staging for childhood-onset disorders lags significantly behind. In this article, criteria for a transdiagnostic staging model for those internalizing and externalizing disorders that emerge in childhood is presented. This sits alongside three putative pathophysiological profiles (developmental, circadian, and anxious-arousal) that may underpin these common illness trajectories. Given available evidence, we argue that it is now timely to develop a transdiagnostic staging model for childhood-onset syndromes. It is further argued that a transdiagnostic staging model has the potential to capture more precisely the dimensional, fluctuating developmental patterns of illness progression of childhood psychopathology. Given potential improvements in modelling etiological processes, and delivering more personalized interventions, transdiagnostic clinical staging for childhood holds much promise for assisting to improve outcomes. We finish by presenting an agenda for research in developments of transdiagnostic clinical staging for childhood mental health

Moral distress among intensive care unit professions in the UK : a mixed-methods study

Objective: To assess the experience of moral distress among intensive care unit (ICU) professionals in the UK. Design: Mixed methods: validated quantitative measure of moral distress followed by purposive sample of respondents who underwent semistructured interviews. Setting: Four ICUs of varying sizes and specialty facilities. Participants: Healthcare professionals working in ICU. Results: 227 questionnaires were returned and 15 interviews performed. Moral distress occurred across all ICUs and professional demographics. It was most commonly related to providing care perceived as futile or against the patient’s wishes/interests, followed by resource constraints compromising care. Moral distress score was independently influenced by profession (p=0.02) (nurses 117.0 vs doctors 78.0). A lack of agency was central to moral distress and its negative experience could lead to withdrawal from engaging with patients/families. One-third indicated their intention to leave their current post due to moral distress and this was greater among nurses than doctors (37.0% vs 15.0%). Moral distress was independently associated with an intention to leave their current post (p<0.0001) and a previous post (p=0.001). Participants described a range of individualised coping strategies tailored to the situations faced. The most common and highly valued strategies were informal and relied on working within a supportive environment along with a close-knit team, although participants acknowledged there was a role for structured and formalised intervention. Conclusions: Moral distress is widespread among UK ICU professionals and can have an important negative impact on patient care, professional wellbeing and staff retention, a particularly concerning finding as this study was performed prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Moral distress due to resource-related issues is more severe than comparable studies in North America. Interventions to support professionals should recognise the individualistic nature of coping with moral distress. The value of close-knit teams and supportive environments has implications for how intensive care services are organised

The response of perennial and temporary headwater stream invertebrate communities to hydrological extremes

The headwaters of karst rivers experience considerable hydrological variability, including spates and streambed drying. Extreme summer flooding on the River Lathkill (Derbyshire, UK) provided the opportunity to examine the invertebrate community response to unseasonal spate flows, flow recession and, at temporary sites, streambed drying. Invertebrates were sampled at sites with differing flow permanence regimes during and after the spates. Following streambed drying at temporary sites, dewatered surface sediments were investigated as a refugium for aquatic invertebrates. Experimental rehydration of these dewatered sediments was conducted to promote development of desiccation-tolerant life stages. At perennial sites, spate flows reduced invertebrate abundance and diversity, whilst at temporary sites, flow reactivation facilitated rapid colonisation of the surface channel by a limited number of invertebrate taxa. Following streambed drying, 38 taxa were recorded from the dewatered and rehydrated sediments, with Oligochaeta being the most abundant taxon and Chironomidae (Diptera) the most diverse. Experimental rehydration of dewatered sediments revealed the presence of additional taxa, including Stenophylax sp. (Trichoptera: Limnephilidae) and Nemoura sp. (Plecoptera: Nemouridae). The influence of flow permanence on invertebrate community composition was apparent despite the aseasonal high-magnitude flood events