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

Background 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

Erythrocyte sedimentation rate and c-reactive protein in acute inflammation: Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies

Objectives: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) in acute inflammation. Methods: PubMed and Scopus were searched and eligible articles were screened for methodologic quality using the Quality Assessment of the Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-Revised. Meta-analysis with calculation of pooled sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), and summary area under the curve (SAUC) was performed. Results: Twenty-nine studies were eligible. Se and Sp were 0.78 and 0.68 (SAUC = 0.80) for ESR in orthopedic infections and 0.79 and 0.70 (SAUC = 0.81) for CRP. For the diagnosis of other various inflammatory conditions, CRP had a superior diagnostic accuracy, with a Se of 0.86, Sp of 0.67, and SAUC of 0.86 compared with a Se of 0.77, Sp of 0.59, and SAUC of 0.75 for ESR. Heterogeneity among studies was elevated. Combined use of ESR and CRP yielded higher diagnostic accuracy. Conclusions: Despite observed heterogeneity among studies, ESR and CRP have a similar diagnostic accuracy in assessment of inflammation, especially in orthopedic conditions

Automated measurement of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate: Method validation and comparison

Development of automated analyzers for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) has imposed the need for extensive validation prior to their implementation in routine practice, to ensure comparability with the reference Westergren method. The aim of our study was to perform the analytical validation of two automated ESR analyzers, the Ves-Matic Cube 200 and the TEST1. Validation was performed according to the recent International Council for Standardization in Hematology recommendations and included determination of intrarun and inter-run precision, assessment of sample carryover, hemolysis interference, sensitivity to fibrinogen, method comparison with the gold standard Westergren method and stability test. The highest intrarun imprecision was obtained for the low ESR range (33.5% for Ves-Matic Cube; 37.3% for TEST1) while inter-run coefficients of variation on three levels were much better for the TEST1 (0%, 2% and 1.2%) compared to the Ves-Matic Cube 200 on two levels (24.9% and 5.8%). Both Ves-Matic Cube 200 and TEST1 showed no statistically significant difference when compared with Westergren. Bland-Altman analysis yielded overall insignificant mean biases for all comparisons, but a wider dispersion of results and 95% limits of agreement for comparisons including the Ves-Matic Cube 200. Carryover was considered insignificant, while hemolysis had a negative effect on all assessed ESR methods. The highest sensitivity to fibrinogen was observed for the Ves-Matic Cube 200, followed by Westergren and the least sensitive was the TEST1. The obtained results proved the analytical validity of the TEST1 and the Ves-Matic Cube 200, and high comparability with the gold standard Westergren method, showing obvious improvements in standardization of ESR methods

Automated measurement of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate: Method validation and comparison

Development of automated analyzers for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) has imposed the need for extensive validation prior to their implementation in routine practice, to ensure comparability with the reference Westergren method. The aim of our study was to perform the analytical validation of two automated ESR analyzers, the Ves-Matic Cube 200 and the TEST1. Validation was performed according to the recent International Council for Standardization in Hematology recommendations and included determination of intrarun and inter-run precision, assessment of sample carryover, hemolysis interference, sensitivity to fibrinogen, method comparison with the gold standard Westergren method and stability test. The highest intrarun imprecision was obtained for the low ESR range (33.5% for Ves-Matic Cube; 37.3% for TEST1) while inter-run coefficients of variation on three levels were much better for the TEST1 (0%, 2% and 1.2%) compared to the Ves-Matic Cube 200 on two levels (24.9% and 5.8%). Both Ves-Matic Cube 200 and TEST1 showed no statistically significant difference when compared with Westergren. Bland-Altman analysis yielded overall insignificant mean biases for all comparisons, but a wider dispersion of results and 95% limits of agreement for comparisons including the Ves-Matic Cube 200. Carryover was considered insignificant, while hemolysis had a negative effect on all assessed ESR methods. The highest sensitivity to fibrinogen was observed for the Ves-Matic Cube 200, followed by Westergren and the least sensitive was the TEST1. The obtained results proved the analytical validity of the TEST1 and the Ves-Matic Cube 200, and high comparability with the gold standard Westergren method, showing obvious improvements in standardization of ESR methods

Analytical validation of the iSED automated analyzer for erythrocyte sedimentation rate

Introduction: iSED is an alternate automated analyzer for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) based on photometric rheology technology that estimates ESR by measuring rouleaux formation. The aim was to evaluate the analytical performance of the iSED analyzer and compare the results with the Westergren method and another alternate ESR analyzer, TEST1. Methods: Validation was performed at two study sites according to the recommendations by the International Council for Standardization in Haematology and included determination of intrarun precision and inter-run precision, bias, carryover, and method comparison, which was further assessed for samples with normal and low hematocrit, as well as per low, middle, and upper third of the analytical range. Results: Intrarun coefficients of variation (CVs) with commercial controls were 4.0% and 1.8%, while inter-run CVs 7.5% and 0.7%, for the normal and pathological range, respectively. Intrarun CVs obtained with patient samples were 19.9%, 9.9%, 10.3%, and 9.4%, the highest being for the lowest ESR value. Correlation coefficients for the comparison between iSED and Westergren were 0.862 (Site-1) and 0.916 (Site-2). While proportional difference with a positive bias was revealed at Site-1, comparison at Site-2 showed both constant and proportional difference and a negligible negative bias. Higher correlation was obtained for samples with low than normal hematocrit. Comparison between iSED and TEST1 yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.986, constant and proportional difference, and positive bias. Carryover was 3.2%. Conclusion: This study proved the analytical validity of the iSED analyzer, despite minor discrepancies to the Westergren method that can be attributed to methodological differences