Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) and “Near MIS-C”: A continuum?

IntroductionReports of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, have been increasing worldwide, with an incidence varying significantly across studies based on the definition used for the diagnosis. At our tertiary medical center in Lebanon, we encountered several cases that presented a diagnostic challenge because they mimicked MIS-C but did not meet the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) definition. We decided to review these cases and describe their features in comparison with cases that met the CDC criteria of MIS-C and those that had an alternative diagnosis.MethodsThis is a retrospective chart review of subjects aged <19 years old admitted to the American University of Beirut Medical Center (AUBMC) between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2021, with suspected or confirmed MIS-C, following documented COVID-19 infection, with sufficient or insufficient criteria for diagnosis. Subjects were classified into 3 groups: “MIS-C”, “Near MIS-C” and “Alternative Diagnosis”.ResultsA total number of 29 subjects were included in our cohort. Fever was present in all subjects. In the MIS-C group, evidence for cardiovascular system involvement was the most common feature followed by the mucocutaneous and gastrointestinal systems. In the “Near MIS-C” and “Alternative Diagnosis” group, gastrointestinal symptoms were the most common with only one patient with cardiac abnormalities and none with coagulopathy. Subjects with typical MIS-C presentation had higher inflammatory markers when compared to subjects in the other groups. Almost all the subjects had positive IgG for SARS-CoV-2. Of the 29 subjects, the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) case definition would have identified all suspected cases without an alternative diagnosis as MIS-C, whereas the World Health Organization (WHO) and the CDC definitions would have excluded 6 and 10 subjects, respectively.ConclusionMIS-C presents a diagnostic challenge due to the nonspecific symptoms, lack of pathognomonic findings, and potentially fatal complications. More research is needed to fully understand its pathogenesis, clinical presentation spectrum, and diagnostic criteria. Based on our experience, we favor the hypothesis that MIS-C has a continuum of severity that necessitates revisiting and unifying the current definitions

Interchangeability of cardiac output measurements between non-invasive photoplethysmography and bolus thermodilution: A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis

International audienceBackground: Continuous non-invasive cardiac output devices using digital photoplethysmography (PPG) are widely available for bedside use, but their interchangeability with reference methods has not yet been evaluated in a systematic review and patient data meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing non-invasive cardiac output monitoring using PPG with the invasive bolus thermodilution method was performed. With ethical approval, all published studies from the PUBMED, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases from January 1, 2010 to January 1, 2018 were included. From these analysed studies, individual patient data were interpreted using the interchangeability methods for both absolute values and changes in cardiac output measurements. Results: Ten studies comparing PPG and bolus thermodilution in the operating room and intensive care settings were included. The interchangeability rate (95% CI) was 37% (24-48) (n = 1350 pairs of measurements). The interchangeability rate was poorer with the CHAP device (CNSystems, Graz, Austria) [18% (17-20)] than with the Clearsight (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) device [33% (31-34), P < 0.0001], for patients receiving norepinephrine [19% (17-20) vs. 33% (32-34), P < 0.0001], and for patients with low mean arterial pressure (< 65 mmHg) [26% (23-29) vs. 30% (29-31), P < 0.0001]. Among the 1009 comparisons of the changes in cardiac output between both methods, 561 (56%) were interpretable with a trend interchangeability rate at 24% (12-36). Conclusions: Cardiac output measurements using PPG were not interchangeable with bolus thermodilution in regard to both absolute values and changes in cardiac output measurements, and should be used with caution in clinical practice. (C) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS on behalf of Societe francaise danesthesie et de reanimation (Sfar). This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Global variation in postoperative mortality and complications after cancer surgery: a multicentre, prospective cohort study in 82 countries

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licenseBackground: 80% of individuals with cancer will require a surgical procedure, yet little comparative data exist on early outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared postoperative outcomes in breast, colorectal, and gastric cancer surgery in hospitals worldwide, focusing on the effect of disease stage and complications on postoperative mortality. Methods: This was a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients undergoing surgery for primary breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer requiring a skin incision done under general or neuraxial anaesthesia. The primary outcome was death or major complication within 30 days of surgery. Multilevel logistic regression determined relationships within three-level nested models of patients within hospitals and countries. Hospital-level infrastructure effects were explored with three-way mediation analyses. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03471494. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and Jan 31, 2019, we enrolled 15 958 patients from 428 hospitals in 82 countries (high income 9106 patients, 31 countries; upper-middle income 2721 patients, 23 countries; or lower-middle income 4131 patients, 28 countries). Patients in LMICs presented with more advanced disease compared with patients in high-income countries. 30-day mortality was higher for gastric cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (adjusted odds ratio 3·72, 95% CI 1·70–8·16) and for colorectal cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (4·59, 2·39–8·80) and upper-middle-income countries (2·06, 1·11–3·83). No difference in 30-day mortality was seen in breast cancer. The proportion of patients who died after a major complication was greatest in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (6·15, 3·26–11·59) and upper-middle-income countries (3·89, 2·08–7·29). Postoperative death after complications was partly explained by patient factors (60%) and partly by hospital or country (40%). The absence of consistently available postoperative care facilities was associated with seven to 10 more deaths per 100 major complications in LMICs. Cancer stage alone explained little of the early variation in mortality or postoperative complications. Interpretation: Higher levels of mortality after cancer surgery in LMICs was not fully explained by later presentation of disease. The capacity to rescue patients from surgical complications is a tangible opportunity for meaningful intervention. Early death after cancer surgery might be reduced by policies focusing on strengthening perioperative care systems to detect and intervene in common complications. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit

Effects of hospital facilities on patient outcomes after cancer surgery: an international, prospective, observational study

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 licenseBackground: Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide. Methods: A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study—a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3·85 [95% CI 2·58–5·75]; p<0·0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63·0% vs 82·7%; OR 0·35 [0·23–0·53]; p<0·0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer. Interpretation: Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research