Mortality from gastrointestinal congenital anomalies at 264 hospitals in 74 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries: a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study

Summary Background Congenital anomalies are the fifth leading cause of mortality in children younger than 5 years globally. Many gastrointestinal congenital anomalies are fatal without timely access to neonatal surgical care, but few studies have been done on these conditions in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared outcomes of the seven most common gastrointestinal congenital anomalies in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries globally, and identified factors associated with mortality. Methods We did a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of patients younger than 16 years, presenting to hospital for the first time with oesophageal atresia, congenital diaphragmatic hernia, intestinal atresia, gastroschisis, exomphalos, anorectal malformation, and Hirschsprung’s disease. Recruitment was of consecutive patients for a minimum of 1 month between October, 2018, and April, 2019. We collected data on patient demographics, clinical status, interventions, and outcomes using the REDCap platform. Patients were followed up for 30 days after primary intervention, or 30 days after admission if they did not receive an intervention. The primary outcome was all-cause, in-hospital mortality for all conditions combined and each condition individually, stratified by country income status. We did a complete case analysis. Findings We included 3849 patients with 3975 study conditions (560 with oesophageal atresia, 448 with congenital diaphragmatic hernia, 681 with intestinal atresia, 453 with gastroschisis, 325 with exomphalos, 991 with anorectal malformation, and 517 with Hirschsprung’s disease) from 264 hospitals (89 in high-income countries, 166 in middleincome countries, and nine in low-income countries) in 74 countries. Of the 3849 patients, 2231 (58·0%) were male. Median gestational age at birth was 38 weeks (IQR 36–39) and median bodyweight at presentation was 2·8 kg (2·3–3·3). Mortality among all patients was 37 (39·8%) of 93 in low-income countries, 583 (20·4%) of 2860 in middle-income countries, and 50 (5·6%) of 896 in high-income countries (p<0·0001 between all country income groups). Gastroschisis had the greatest difference in mortality between country income strata (nine [90·0%] of ten in lowincome countries, 97 [31·9%] of 304 in middle-income countries, and two [1·4%] of 139 in high-income countries; p≤0·0001 between all country income groups). Factors significantly associated with higher mortality for all patients combined included country income status (low-income vs high-income countries, risk ratio 2·78 [95% CI 1·88–4·11], p<0·0001; middle-income vs high-income countries, 2·11 [1·59–2·79], p<0·0001), sepsis at presentation (1·20 [1·04–1·40], p=0·016), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score at primary intervention (ASA 4–5 vs ASA 1–2, 1·82 [1·40–2·35], p<0·0001; ASA 3 vs ASA 1–2, 1·58, [1·30–1·92], p<0·0001]), surgical safety checklist not used (1·39 [1·02–1·90], p=0·035), and ventilation or parenteral nutrition unavailable when needed (ventilation 1·96, [1·41–2·71], p=0·0001; parenteral nutrition 1·35, [1·05–1·74], p=0·018). Administration of parenteral nutrition (0·61, [0·47–0·79], p=0·0002) and use of a peripherally inserted central catheter (0·65 [0·50–0·86], p=0·0024) or percutaneous central line (0·69 [0·48–1·00], p=0·049) were associated with lower mortality. Interpretation Unacceptable differences in mortality exist for gastrointestinal congenital anomalies between lowincome, middle-income, and high-income countries. Improving access to quality neonatal surgical care in LMICs will be vital to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 3.2 of ending preventable deaths in neonates and children younger than 5 years by 2030

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

Mediterranean diet and psychological well-being intervention to reverse metabolic syndrome in Chile (CHILEMED trial)

Psychosocial status and lifestyle are key risk factors of non-communicable diseases (NCDs), which, in turn, are main drivers of healthcare costs and morbimortality worldwide, including Chile. Mediterranean diet (MedDiet) is one of the healthiest dietary patterns under study. However, its impact on high-risk conditions, such as metabolic syndrome (MetS), and NCDs outside the Mediterranean Basin remains mostly unexplored. Even though Central Chile has an environment, food production, and culinary traditions comparable to those present in Mediterranean countries, few studies -some with significant methodological limitations- have evaluated the effect of MedDiet on health and/or disease in Chilean subjects. Importantly, a Mediterranean lifestyle is a modus vivendi that integrates physical health with mental and social well-being. Psychological well-being (PWB) is associated with healthy behaviors, positive health outcomes, and longevity, thereby emerging as a novel healthcare goal. We report here an ongoing randomized controlled clinical trial in Chilean patients with MetS seeking to test whether (1) a PWB theory-based intervention facilitates induction to and increases long-term adherence to a locally adapted MedDiet, and (2) a MedDiet intervention -implemented alone or combined with well-being promotion- is more effective at reversing MetS compared to individuals following a low-fat diet without psychological support. The CHILEan MEDiterranean (CHILEMED) diet intervention study is a 1-year trial including patients with MetS living in Chile. Participants will be assigned randomly by a computer-generated random number sequence to one of the three intervention arms: a) low-fat diet as control group, b) MedDiet alone, and c) MedDiet plus well-being support. Patients will be followed-up by individual and/or group online nutritional sessions or phone cal as well as 6- and 12-month in-person re-assessment of medical history, medication use, food intake, PWB, anthropometrics/physical exam, and blood collection for laboratory analysis. The primary outcome of the trial will be the effect of the MedDiet -with or without PWB intervention- on overall reversal of MetS compared to low-fat diet alone. Based on a statistical superiority trial, expected impact, and patient loss, the estimated study sample is 339 subjects (113 individuals per arm in 3 equal-sized groups). Currently, we have enrolled 179 patients, predominantly women, evenly distributed by age (group means ranging from 45.7 to 48,9 years-old), 3/4 are obese with almost all of them showing abdominal obesity, 70% are hypertensive, whereas <10% exhibit diabetes. If findings turn out as expected (e.g., MedDiet -with or without PWB intervention- is better than the low-fat diet for reversion of MetS at 1-year follow-up), CHILEMED will provide further beneficial evidence of the MedDiet on NCD risk conditions beyond the Mediterranean region