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

La participación de la comunidad en salud

Se realizó una revisión bibliográfica sobre el tema actualizando los conceptos de comunidad, salud, participación social y participación comunitaria, así como analizando los requisitos indispensables para alcanzar esta última. Abordamos sus grados, tipos, etapas o fases, principales mecanismos para lograrla en los programas de salud, elementos con que se interrelaciona, factores desfavorables y la estrategia de promoción de salud a través del movimiento de Municipios Saludables. Finalmente se expone brevemente la experiencia en nuestro país sobre este movimiento y su articulación en los Consejos Populares, haciendo énfasis en las orientaciones metodológicas para el trabajo en la atención primaria de salud de nuestro Ministerio de Salud Pública, con el objetivo de facilitar un material de estudio para el personal de salud de este nivel, especialmente Médicos y Enfermeras de la Familia<br>A bibliographic review on the topic was made in order to bring up to date the concepts of community, health, social participation and community participation and to analyze the requirements necessary to attain comunity participation. We approached its degrees, types, stages or phases, main mechansism to achieve it in 2 health programs, elements with which it is interrelated, unfavorable factors and the strategy of health promotion through the Movement of Healthy Municipalities. Finally, the experience accumulated in our country in relation to this movement and its implementation in the People's Councils is briefly explained, making emphasis on the methodological instructions given by our Ministry of Public Health to work at the primary health care level, so that the health personnel working at this level, specially family physicians and nurses, have study materials

Jornadas Nacionales de Robótica y Bioingeniería 2023: Libro de actas

Las Jornadas de Robótica y Bioingeniería de 2023 tienen lugar en la Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Industrial de la Universidad Politécnica de IVIadrid, entre los días 14 y 16 de junio de 2023. En este evento propiciado por el Comité Español de Automática (CEA) tiene lugar la celebración conjunta de las XII Jornadas Nacionales de Robótica y el XIV Simposio CEA de Bioingeniería. Las Jornadas Nacionales de Robótica es un evento promovido por el Grupo Temático de Robótica (GTRob) de CEA para dar visibilidad y mostrar las actividades desarrolladas en el ámbito de la investigación y transferencia tecnológica en robótica. Asimismo, el propósito de Simposio de Bioingeniería, que cumple ahora su decimocuarta dicción, es el de proporcionar un espacio de encuentro entre investigadores, desabolladores, personal clínico, alumnos, industriales, profesionales en general e incluso usuarios que realicen su actividad en el ámbito de la bioingeniería. Estos eventos se han celebrado de forma conjunta en la anualidad 2023. Esto ha permitido aunar y congregar un elevado número de participantes tanto de la temática robótica como de bioingeniería (investigadores, profesores, desabolladores y profesionales en general), que ha posibilitado establecer puntos de encuentro, sinergias y colaboraciones entre ambos. El programa de las jornadas aúna comunicaciones científicas de los últimos resultados de investigación obtenidos, por los grupos a nivel español más representativos dentro de la temática de robótica y bioingeniería, así como mesas redondas y conferencias en las que se debatirán los temas de mayor interés en la actualidad. En relación con las comunicaciones científicas presentadas al evento, se ha recibido un total de 46 ponencias, lo que sin duda alguna refleja el alto interés de la comunidad científica en las Jornadas de Robótica y Bioingeniería. Estos trabajos serán expuestos y presentados a lo largo de un total de 10 sesiones, distribuidas durante los diferentes días de las Jornadas. Las temáticas de los trabajos cubren los principales retos científicos relacionados con la robótica y la bioingeniería: robótica aérea, submarina, terrestre, percepción del entorno, manipulación, robótica social, robótica médica, teleoperación, procesamiento de señales biológicos, neurorehabilitación etc. Confiamos, y estamos seguros de ello, que el desarrollo de las jornadas sea completamente productivo no solo para los participantes en las Jornadas que podrán establecer nuevos lazos y relaciones fructíferas entre los diferentes grupos, sino también aquellos investigadores que no hayan podido asistir. Este documento que integra y recoge todas las comunicaciones científicas permitirá un análisis más detallado de cada una de las mismas

A 12-gene pharmacogenetic panel to prevent adverse drug reactions: an open-label, multicentre, controlled, cluster-randomised crossover implementation study

© 2023Background: The benefit of pharmacogenetic testing before starting drug therapy has been well documented for several single gene–drug combinations. However, the clinical utility of a pre-emptive genotyping strategy using a pharmacogenetic panel has not been rigorously assessed. Methods: We conducted an open-label, multicentre, controlled, cluster-randomised, crossover implementation study of a 12-gene pharmacogenetic panel in 18 hospitals, nine community health centres, and 28 community pharmacies in seven European countries (Austria, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, and the UK). Patients aged 18 years or older receiving a first prescription for a drug clinically recommended in the guidelines of the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (ie, the index drug) as part of routine care were eligible for inclusion. Exclusion criteria included previous genetic testing for a gene relevant to the index drug, a planned duration of treatment of less than 7 consecutive days, and severe renal or liver insufficiency. All patients gave written informed consent before taking part in the study. Participants were genotyped for 50 germline variants in 12 genes, and those with an actionable variant (ie, a drug–gene interaction test result for which the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group [DPWG] recommended a change to standard-of-care drug treatment) were treated according to DPWG recommendations. Patients in the control group received standard treatment. To prepare clinicians for pre-emptive pharmacogenetic testing, local teams were educated during a site-initiation visit and online educational material was made available. The primary outcome was the occurrence of clinically relevant adverse drug reactions within the 12-week follow-up period. Analyses were irrespective of patient adherence to the DPWG guidelines. The primary analysis was done using a gatekeeping analysis, in which outcomes in people with an actionable drug–gene interaction in the study group versus the control group were compared, and only if the difference was statistically significant was an analysis done that included all of the patients in the study. Outcomes were compared between the study and control groups, both for patients with an actionable drug–gene interaction test result (ie, a result for which the DPWG recommended a change to standard-of-care drug treatment) and for all patients who received at least one dose of index drug. The safety analysis included all participants who received at least one dose of a study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03093818 and is closed to new participants. Findings: Between March 7, 2017, and June 30, 2020, 41 696 patients were assessed for eligibility and 6944 (51·4 % female, 48·6% male; 97·7% self-reported European, Mediterranean, or Middle Eastern ethnicity) were enrolled and assigned to receive genotype-guided drug treatment (n=3342) or standard care (n=3602). 99 patients (52 [1·6%] of the study group and 47 [1·3%] of the control group) withdrew consent after group assignment. 652 participants (367 [11·0%] in the study group and 285 [7·9%] in the control group) were lost to follow-up. In patients with an actionable test result for the index drug (n=1558), a clinically relevant adverse drug reaction occurred in 152 (21·0%) of 725 patients in the study group and 231 (27·7%) of 833 patients in the control group (odds ratio [OR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·54–0·91]; p=0·0075), whereas for all patients, the incidence was 628 (21·5%) of 2923 patients in the study group and 934 (28·6%) of 3270 patients in the control group (OR 0·70 [95% CI 0·61–0·79]; p <0·0001). Interpretation: Genotype-guided treatment using a 12-gene pharmacogenetic panel significantly reduced the incidence of clinically relevant adverse drug reactions and was feasible across diverse European health-care system organisations and settings. Large-scale implementation could help to make drug therapy increasingly safe. Funding: European Union Horizon 2020