Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative sars-cov-2 infection: An international cohort study

Background The impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on postoperative recovery needs to be understood to inform clinical decision making during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study reports 30-day mortality and pulmonary complication rates in patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods This international, multicentre, cohort study at 235 hospitals in 24 countries included all patients undergoing surgery who had SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed within 7 days before or 30 days after surgery. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality and was assessed in all enrolled patients. The main secondary outcome measure was pulmonary complications, defined as pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or unexpected postoperative ventilation. Findings This analysis includes 1128 patients who had surgery between Jan 1 and March 31, 2020, of whom 835 (740%) had emergency surgery and 280 (248%) had elective surgery. SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed preoperatively in 294 (261%) patients. 30-day mortality was 238% (268 of 1128). Pulmonary complications occurred in 577 (512%) of 1128 patients; 30-day mortality in these patients was 380% (219 of 577), accounting for 817% (219 of 268) of all deaths. In adjusted analyses, 30-day mortality was associated with male sex (odds ratio 175 [95% CI 128-240], p<00001), age 70 years or older versus younger than 70 years (230 [165-322], p<00001), American Society of Anesthesiologists grades 3-5 versus grades 1-2 (235 [157-353], p<00001), malignant versus benign or obstetric diagnosis (155 [101-239], p=0046), emergency versus elective surgery (167 [106-263], p=0026), and major versus minor surgery (152 [101-231], p=0047). Interpretation Postoperative pulmonary complications occur in half of patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with high mortality. Thresholds for surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic should be higher than during normal practice, particularly in men aged 70 years and older. Consideration should be given for postponing non-urgent procedures and promoting non-operative treatment to delay or avoid the need for surgery. Funding National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, NIHR Academy, Sarcoma UK, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research

Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection: an international cohort study

Background: The impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on postoperative recovery needs to be understood to inform clinical decision making during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study reports 30-day mortality and pulmonary complication rates in patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: This international, multicentre, cohort study at 235 hospitals in 24 countries included all patients undergoing surgery who had SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed within 7 days before or 30 days after surgery. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality and was assessed in all enrolled patients. The main secondary outcome measure was pulmonary complications, defined as pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or unexpected postoperative ventilation. Findings: This analysis includes 1128 patients who had surgery between Jan 1 and March 31, 2020, of whom 835 (74·0%) had emergency surgery and 280 (24·8%) had elective surgery. SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed preoperatively in 294 (26·1%) patients. 30-day mortality was 23·8% (268 of 1128). Pulmonary complications occurred in 577 (51·2%) of 1128 patients; 30-day mortality in these patients was 38·0% (219 of 577), accounting for 81·7% (219 of 268) of all deaths. In adjusted analyses, 30-day mortality was associated with male sex (odds ratio 1·75 [95% CI 1·28–2·40], p\textless0·0001), age 70 years or older versus younger than 70 years (2·30 [1·65–3·22], p\textless0·0001), American Society of Anesthesiologists grades 3–5 versus grades 1–2 (2·35 [1·57–3·53], p\textless0·0001), malignant versus benign or obstetric diagnosis (1·55 [1·01–2·39], p=0·046), emergency versus elective surgery (1·67 [1·06–2·63], p=0·026), and major versus minor surgery (1·52 [1·01–2·31], p=0·047). Interpretation: Postoperative pulmonary complications occur in half of patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with high mortality. Thresholds for surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic should be higher than during normal practice, particularly in men aged 70 years and older. Consideration should be given for postponing non-urgent procedures and promoting non-operative treatment to delay or avoid the need for surgery. Funding: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, NIHR Academy, Sarcoma UK, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

A review of support tools to assess multi-sector interactions in the emerging offshore Blue Economy

Multiple ocean sectors compete for space and resources, creating conflicts but also opportunities to plan for synergistic outcomes that benefit multiple sectors. Planning and management are increasingly informed by qualitative and quantitative methods for assessing multi-sector interactions to identify trade-offs and synergies among sectors and with the environment, but there is a need to critically review the alignment of these tools with the requirements of Blue Economy stakeholders. Through a systematic literature review, an operational maturity analysis, and a survey of Blue Economy stakeholders, we found that the most well-developed tools for assessing interactions between multiple Blue Economy industries, and with the environment, are spatial prioritization tools, such as Marxan and multi-criteria decision support tools; and spatial static tools, such as cumulative effect mapping. More complex process/dynamic tools such as ecosystem and oceanographic models are well developed for single sectors, particularly water quality assessments and commercial fisheries, but have been less commonly applied in multi-sector contexts. Our review and stakeholder survey highlighted that assessing the environmental and operational suitability of sites for Blue Economy infrastructure in conjunction with operational impacts, trade-offs and decommissioning considerations requires: 1) a toolbox of approaches that covers a range of spatial, temporal and ecological scales; 2) tools that capture interactions and feedbacks among sectors, and with the environment, without being unnecessarily complicated (i.e., tractable to use and allow for effective communication of findings); and 3) continued synthesis of approaches and tools used across sectors such as commercial fishing, aquaculture, offshore renewable energy, and offshore engineering

Head injury: long-term consequences for patients and families and implications for nurses

Background: Head injury as a result of trauma is an important cause of long-term disability. Recently published guidance from the National Institute for Clinical Excellence on Acute Head Injuries and a forthcoming National Service Framework for Long-Term Neurological Conditions provides renewed focus on this practice speciality. Aims and objectives: This article presents a narrative review of a range of quantitative and qualitative studies that have explored the impact of head injury and postinjury disabilities on patients' and families lives. Results: Patients may experience a range of physical, emotional, cognitive, social and behavioural problems after head injury that will have a significant impact on both their own and their families' everyday lives. It is important that the behavioural, physical and psychological aspects of head injury are addressed. Carers may be vulnerable to stress and anxiety as a result of their caring role. Conclusions: It is often in the longer term that the true complexity and impact of head injury may become apparent. Ongoing support, from a range of services, will be required to assist both patient and family to cope with their circumstances. Ensuring that practice is evidence based, it is necessary to conduct further research, both to explore the effectiveness of current service provision and investigate those aspects deemed important by patients and carers. Relevance to clinical practice: As nurses play an important role in both the acute and long-term care and support of those who have suffered a head injury, it is vital that they are aware of the wide ranging needs with which patients and families may present

The association between blood pressure variability (BPV) with dementia and cognitive function: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

Background: A body of empirical work demonstrates that wide fluctuations in a person's blood pressure across consecutive measures, known as blood pressure variability (BPV), hold prognostic value to predict stroke and transient ischemic attack. However, the magnitude of association between BPV and other neurological outcomes remains less clear. This systematic review aims to pool together data regarding BPV with respect to incident dementia, cognitive impairment, and cognitive function. Methods: Electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and SCOPUS) will be searched for the key words blood pressure variability and outcomes of dementia, cognitive impairment, and cognitive function. Authors and reference lists of included studies will also be contacted to identify additional published and unpublished studies. Eligibility criteria are as follows: population - adult humans (over 18 years but with no upper age limit) without dementia at baseline, with or without elevated blood pressure, or from hypertensive populations (systolic blood pressure ≥ 140 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥ 90 mmHg or use of antihypertensive drug for hypertension) and from primary care, community cohort, electronic database registry, or randomized controlled trial (RCT); exposure - any metric of BPV (systolic, diastolic or both) over any duration; comparison - persons without dementia who do not have elevated BPV; and outcome - dementia, cognitive impairment, cognitive function at follow-up from standardized neurological assessment, or cognitive testing. Article screening will be undertaken by two independent reviewers with disagreements resolved through discussion. Data extraction will include original data specified as hazard ratios, odds ratios, correlations, regression coefficients, and original cell data if available. Risk of bias assessment will be undertaken by two independent reviewers. Meta-analytic methods will be used to synthesize the data collected relating to the neurological outcomes with Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Version 2.0 (Biostat Inc., Engelwood, NJ). Discussion: This systematic review aims to clarify whether BPV is associated with elevated risk for dementia, cognitive impairment, and cognitive function. An evaluation of the etiological links between BPV with incident dementia might inform evidence-based clinical practice and policy concerning blood pressure measurement and hypertension management. The review will identify sources of heterogeneity and may inform decisions on whether it is feasible and desirable to proceed with an individual participant data meta-analysis