Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

EVALUATION OF N-RATIO IN SELECTING PATIENTS FOR ADJUVANT CHEMORADIOTHERAPY AFTER D2-GASTRECTOMY

Context Whether adjuvant chemoradiotherapy may contribute to improve survival outcomes after D2-gastrectomy remains controvertial. Objective To explore the clinical utility of N-Ratio in selecting gastric cancer patients for adjuvant chemoradiotherapy after D2-gastrectomy. Methods A retrospective cohort study was carried out on gastric cancer patients who underwent D2-gastrectomy alone or D2-gastrectomy plus adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (INT-0116 protocol) at the Hospital A. C. Camargo from September 1998 to December 2008. Statistical analysis were performed using multiple conventional methods, such as c-statistic, adjusted Cox's regression and stratified survival analysis. Results Our analysis involved 128 patients. According to c-statistic, the N-Ratio (i.e., as a continuous variable) presented “area under ROC curve” (AUC) of 0.713, while the number of metastatic nodes presented AUC of 0.705. After categorization, the cut-offs provide by Marchet et al. displayed the highest discriminating power – AUC value of 0.702. This N-Ratio categorization was confirmed as an independent predictor of survival using multivariate analyses. There also was a trend of better survival by adding of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy only for patients with milder degrees of lymphatic spread – 5-year survival of 23.1% vs 66.9%, respectively (HR = 0.426, 95% CI 0.150–1.202; P = 0.092). Conclusions This study confirms the N-Ratio as a tool to improve the lymph node metastasis staging in gastric cancer and suggests the cut-offs provided by Marchet et al. as the best way for its categorization after a D2-gastrectomy. In these settings, the N-Ratio appears a useful tool to select patients for adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and the benefit of adding this type of adjuvancy to D2-gastrectomy is suggested to be limited to patients with milder degrees of lymphatic spread (i.e., NR2, 10%–25%)

Allium vegetables intake and the risk of gastric cancer in the Stomach cancer Pooling (StoP) Project

41siBackground: The role of allium vegetables on gastric cancer (GC) risk remains unclear. Methods: We evaluated whether higher intakes of allium vegetables reduce GC risk using individual participant data from 17 studies participating in the "Stomach cancer Pooling (StoP) Project", including 6097 GC cases and 13,017 controls. Study-specific odds ratios (ORs) were pooled using a two-stage modelling approach. Results: Total allium vegetables intake was inversely associated with GC risk. The pooled OR for the highest versus the lowest study-specific tertile of consumption was 0.71 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.56-0.90), with substantial heterogeneity across studies (I2 > 50%). Pooled ORs for high versus low consumption were 0.69 (95% CI, 0.55-0.86) for onions and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.75-0.93) for garlic. The inverse association with allium vegetables was evident in Asian (OR 0.50, 95% CI, 0.29-0.86) but not European (OR 0.96, 95% CI, 0.81-1.13) and American (OR 0.66, 95% CI, 0.39-1.11) studies. Results were consistent across all other strata. Conclusions: In a worldwide consortium of epidemiological studies, we found an inverse association between allium vegetables and GC, with a stronger association seen in Asian studies. The heterogeneity of results across geographic regions and possible residual confounding suggest caution in results interpretation.restrictednoneDalmartello, Michela; Turati, Federica; Zhang, Zuo-Feng; Lunet, Nuno; Rota, Matteo; Bonzi, Rossella; Galeone, Carlotta; Martimianaki, Georgia; Palli, Domenico; Ferraroni, Monica; Yu, Guo-Pei; Morais, Samantha; Malekzadeh, Reza; López-Carrillo, Lizbeth; Zaridze, David; Maximovitch, Dmitry; Aragonés, Nuria; Fernández-Tardón, Guillermo; Martin, Vicente; Vioque, Jesus; Garcia de la Hera, Manoli; Curado, Maria Paula; Coimbra, Felipe Jose Fernandez; Assumpcao, Paulo; Pakseresht, Mohammadreza; Hu, Jinfu; Hernández-Ramírez, Raúl Ulises; Ward, Mary H; Pourfarzi, Farhad; Mu, Lina; Tsugane, Shoichiro; Hidaka, Akihisa; Lagiou, Pagona; Lagiou, Areti; Trichopoulou, Antonia; Karakatsani, Anna; Boffetta, Paolo; Camargo, M Costanza; Negri, Eva; La Vecchia, Carlo; Pelucchi, ClaudioDalmartello, Michela; Turati, Federica; Zhang, Zuo-Feng; Lunet, Nuno; Rota, Matteo; Bonzi, Rossella; Galeone, Carlotta; Martimianaki, Georgia; Palli, Domenico; Ferraroni, Monica; Yu, Guo-Pei; Morais, Samantha; Malekzadeh, Reza; López-Carrillo, Lizbeth; Zaridze, David; Maximovitch, Dmitry; Aragonés, Nuria; Fernández-Tardón, Guillermo; Martin, Vicente; Vioque, Jesus; Garcia de la Hera, Manoli; Curado, Maria Paula; Coimbra, Felipe Jose Fernandez; Assumpcao, Paulo; Pakseresht, Mohammadreza; Hu, Jinfu; Hernández-Ramírez, Raúl Ulises; Ward, Mary H; Pourfarzi, Farhad; Mu, Lina; Tsugane, Shoichiro; Hidaka, Akihisa; Lagiou, Pagona; Lagiou, Areti; Trichopoulou, Antonia; Karakatsani, Anna; Boffetta, Paolo; Camargo, M Costanza; Negri, Eva; La Vecchia, Carlo; Pelucchi, Claudi

Effects of pre-operative isolation on postoperative pulmonary complications after elective surgery: an international prospective cohort study an international prospective cohort study

We aimed to determine the impact of pre-operative isolation on postoperative pulmonary complications after elective surgery during the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We performed an international prospective cohort study including patients undergoing elective surgery in October 2020. Isolation was defined as the period before surgery during which patients did not leave their house or receive visitors from outside their household. The primary outcome was postoperative pulmonary complications, adjusted in multivariable models for measured confounders. Pre-defined sub-group analyses were performed for the primary outcome. A total of 96,454 patients from 114 countries were included and overall, 26,948 (27.9%) patients isolated before surgery. Postoperative pulmonary complications were recorded in 1947 (2.0%) patients of which 227 (11.7%) were associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients who isolated pre-operatively were older, had more respiratory comorbidities and were more commonly from areas of high SARS-CoV-2 incidence and high-income countries. Although the overall rates of postoperative pulmonary complications were similar in those that isolated and those that did not (2.1% vs 2.0%, respectively), isolation was associated with higher rates of postoperative pulmonary complications after adjustment (adjusted OR 1.20, 95%CI 1.05–1.36, p = 0.005). Sensitivity analyses revealed no further differences when patients were categorised by: pre-operative testing; use of COVID-19-free pathways; or community SARS-CoV-2 prevalence. The rate of postoperative pulmonary complications increased with periods of isolation longer than 3 days, with an OR (95%CI) at 4–7 days or ≥ 8 days of 1.25 (1.04–1.48), p = 0.015 and 1.31 (1.11–1.55), p = 0.001, respectively. Isolation before elective surgery might be associated with a small but clinically important increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Longer periods of isolation showed no reduction in the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. These findings have significant implications for global provision of elective surgical care. We aimed to determine the impact of pre-operative isolation on postoperative pulmonary complications after elective surgery during the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We performed an international prospective cohort study including patients undergoing elective surgery in October 2020. Isolation was defined as the period before surgery during which patients did not leave their house or receive visitors from outside their household. The primary outcome was postoperative pulmonary complications, adjusted in multivariable models for measured confounders. Pre-defined sub-group analyses were performed for the primary outcome. A total of 96,454 patients from 114 countries were included and overall, 26,948 (27.9%) patients isolated before surgery. Postoperative pulmonary complications were recorded in 1947 (2.0%) patients of which 227 (11.7%) were associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients who isolated pre-operatively were older, had more respiratory comorbidities and were more commonly from areas of high SARS-CoV-2 incidence and high-income countries. Although the overall rates of postoperative pulmonary complications were similar in those that isolated and those that did not (2.1% vs 2.0%, respectively), isolation was associated with higher rates of postoperative pulmonary complications after adjustment (adjusted OR 1.20, 95%CI 1.05–1.36, p = 0.005). Sensitivity analyses revealed no further differences when patients were categorised by: pre-operative testing; use of COVID-19-free pathways; or community SARS-CoV-2 prevalence. The rate of postoperative pulmonary complications increased with periods of isolation longer than 3 days, with an OR (95%CI) at 4–7 days or ≥ 8 days of 1.25 (1.04–1.48), p = 0.015 and 1.31 (1.11–1.55), p = 0.001, respectively. Isolation before elective surgery might be associated with a small but clinically important increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Longer periods of isolation showed no reduction in the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. These findings have significant implications for global provision of elective surgical care