Clustered Cardiometabolic Risk, Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Physical Activity in 10-11 Year-Old Children. The CHANGE! Project Baseline

Objectives: The primary objective of this cross sectional pilot study was to report clustered risk scores combining traditional invasive with non invasive cardiometabolic risk markers in 10-11 year old children participating in the CHANGE! project at baseline. A secondary objective was to determine the relationship between clustered risk score and objectively measured physical activity (PA) and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF). Methods: Habitual PA was measured using accelerometry and CRF (VO2peak) was assessed using an individually calibrated treadmill based protocol. Twenty-nine participants had valid data for all components of the clustered risk score, calculated using total cholesterol: high density lipoprotein-cholesterol (TC:HDL-C), glucose, systolic blood pressure (BP), LV Mass Index (g/m2.7), and trunk fat mass (g). Participants with a clustered risk score greater than 1SD above the mean, were categorised as ‘higher’ risk (n=6); all others were categorised as ‘normal’ risk. \ud \ud Results: Clustered risk score, controlling for somatic maturity and gender, was negatively correlated with VPA (r= -0.51, p=0.01), MVPA (r= -0.44, p=0.03) and VO2peak (r= -0.57, p<0.01). ANCOVA, with somatic maturity and gender as covariates, revealed that those in the ‘normal’ risk group were more fit than those in the ‘higher’ risk group [f (1,24)=4.518, p=0.044]). There were no statistically significant differences between risk groups and PA however mean data suggest that those in the ‘normal’ risk group accrued 4 minutes more daily VPA than the ‘higher’ risk group which may be clinically important. \ud \ud Conclusions: This provides further evidence of the importance of promoting CRF and VPA in children, to reduce cardiometabolic risk especially for those that are ‘higher’ risk

Clinical phenotype and outcome of hepatitis E virus - associated neuralgic amyotrophy

Objective: To determine the clinical phenotype and outcome in hepatitis E virus–associated neuralgic amyotrophy (HEV-NA). Methods: Cases of NA were identified in 11 centers from 7 European countries, with retrospective analysis of demographics, clinical/laboratory findings, and treatment and outcome. Cases of HEV-NA were compared with NA cases without evidence of HEV infection. Results: Fifty-seven cases of HEV-NA and 61 NA cases without HEV were studied. Fifty-six of 57 HEV-NA cases were anti-HEV IgM positive; 53/57 were IgG positive. In 38 cases, HEV RNA was recovered from the serum and in 1 from the CSF (all genotype 3). Fifty-one of 57 HEV-NA cases were anicteric; median alanine aminotransferase 259 IU/L (range 12–2,961 IU/L); in 6 cases, liver function tests were normal. HEV-NA cases were more likely to have bilateral involvement (80.0% vs 8.6%, p < 0.001), damage outside the brachial plexus (58.5% vs 10.5%, p < 0.01), including phrenic nerve and lumbosacral plexus injury (25.0% vs 3.5%, p = 0.01, and 26.4% vs 7.0%, p = 0.001), reduced reflexes (p = 0.03), sensory symptoms (p = 0.04) with more extensive damage to the brachial plexus. There was no difference in outcome between the 2 groups at 12 months. Conclusions: Patients with HEV-NA are usually anicteric and have a distinct clinical phenotype, with predominately bilateral asymmetrical involvement of, and more extensive damage to, the brachial plexus. Involvement outside the brachial plexus is more common in HEV-NA. The relationship between HEV and NA is likely to be causal, but is easily overlooked. Patients presenting with NA should be tested for HEV, irrespective of liver function test results. Prospective treatment/outcome studies of HEV-NA are warranted

Environmental and societal factors associated with COVID-19-related death in people with rheumatic disease: an observational study

Published by Elsevier Ltd.Background: Differences in the distribution of individual-level clinical risk factors across regions do not fully explain the observed global disparities in COVID-19 outcomes. We aimed to investigate the associations between environmental and societal factors and country-level variations in mortality attributed to COVID-19 among people with rheumatic disease globally. Methods: In this observational study, we derived individual-level data on adults (aged 18-99 years) with rheumatic disease and a confirmed status of their highest COVID-19 severity level from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance (GRA) registry, collected between March 12, 2020, and Aug 27, 2021. Environmental and societal factors were obtained from publicly available sources. The primary endpoint was mortality attributed to COVID-19. We used a multivariable logistic regression to evaluate independent associations between environmental and societal factors and death, after controlling for individual-level risk factors. We used a series of nested mixed-effects models to establish whether environmental and societal factors sufficiently explained country-level variations in death. Findings: 14 044 patients from 23 countries were included in the analyses. 10 178 (72·5%) individuals were female and 3866 (27·5%) were male, with a mean age of 54·4 years (SD 15·6). Air pollution (odds ratio 1·10 per 10 μg/m3 [95% CI 1·01-1·17]; p=0·0105), proportion of the population aged 65 years or older (1·19 per 1% increase [1·10-1·30]; p<0·0001), and population mobility (1·03 per 1% increase in number of visits to grocery and pharmacy stores [1·02-1·05]; p<0·0001 and 1·02 per 1% increase in number of visits to workplaces [1·00-1·03]; p=0·032) were independently associated with higher odds of mortality. Number of hospital beds (0·94 per 1-unit increase per 1000 people [0·88-1·00]; p=0·046), human development index (0·65 per 0·1-unit increase [0·44-0·96]; p=0·032), government response stringency (0·83 per 10-unit increase in containment index [0·74-0·93]; p=0·0018), as well as follow-up time (0·78 per month [0·69-0·88]; p<0·0001) were independently associated with lower odds of mortality. These factors sufficiently explained country-level variations in death attributable to COVID-19 (intraclass correlation coefficient 1·2% [0·1-9·5]; p=0·14). Interpretation: Our findings highlight the importance of environmental and societal factors as potential explanations of the observed regional disparities in COVID-19 outcomes among people with rheumatic disease and lay foundation for a new research agenda to address these disparities.MAG is supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (grant numbers K01 AR070585 and K24 AR074534 [JY]). KDW is supported by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Rheumatology Research Foundation Scientist Development award. JAS is supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (grant numbers K23 AR069688, R03 AR075886, L30 AR066953, P30 AR070253, and P30 AR072577), the Rheumatology Research Foundation (K Supplement Award and R Bridge Award), the Brigham Research Institute, and the R. Bruce and Joan M. Mickey Research Scholar Fund. NJP is supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (T32-AR-007258). AD-G is supported by grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Rheumatology Research Foundation. RH was supported by the Justus-Liebig University Giessen Clinician Scientist Program in Biomedical Research to work on this registry. JY is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (K24 AR074534 and P30 AR070155).info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

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

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