Global patient outcomes after elective surgery: prospective cohort study in 27 low-, middle- and high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: As global initiatives increase patient access to surgical treatments, there remains a need to understand the adverse effects of surgery and define appropriate levels of perioperative care. METHODS: We designed a prospective international 7-day cohort study of outcomes following elective adult inpatient surgery in 27 countries. The primary outcome was in-hospital complications. Secondary outcomes were death following a complication (failure to rescue) and death in hospital. Process measures were admission to critical care immediately after surgery or to treat a complication and duration of hospital stay. A single definition of critical care was used for all countries. RESULTS: A total of 474 hospitals in 19 high-, 7 middle- and 1 low-income country were included in the primary analysis. Data included 44 814 patients with a median hospital stay of 4 (range 2-7) days. A total of 7508 patients (16.8%) developed one or more postoperative complication and 207 died (0.5%). The overall mortality among patients who developed complications was 2.8%. Mortality following complications ranged from 2.4% for pulmonary embolism to 43.9% for cardiac arrest. A total of 4360 (9.7%) patients were admitted to a critical care unit as routine immediately after surgery, of whom 2198 (50.4%) developed a complication, with 105 (2.4%) deaths. A total of 1233 patients (16.4%) were admitted to a critical care unit to treat complications, with 119 (9.7%) deaths. Despite lower baseline risk, outcomes were similar in low- and middle-income compared with high-income countries. CONCLUSIONS: Poor patient outcomes are common after inpatient surgery. Global initiatives to increase access to surgical treatments should also address the need for safe perioperative care. STUDY REGISTRATION: ISRCTN5181700

Hébergement alterné et autorité parentale conjointe

The joint custody may be a positive application of shared parental status, but it's not an obligation. Ideas, inner feelings and attitudes of each parent are more important than material dispositions to make sure the well-being of the child. The probability of success of a joint custody will increase following these positive conditions: 1. The child agrees with the project, when interviewed by a non-suggestive adult. When the child is undecided or indifferent, decision of joint custody can be taken, like a reviewable bet. Nevertheless very young children, under four years, need more stability and don't usually benefit from a joint custody. 2. Spontaneously or after having thinking about, both parents are positively interested by the project. At least, they must have ceased permanent fights in front of the child and be able to mutual polite respect. A joint custody never should be considered as a therapy aimed to make peace between the parents. 3. Material conditions must be considered; among others, a geographical proximity between both houses, the possibility to have some important objects and clothes twice... 4. So much the better if this measure can be applied with flexibility and can be revised at long intervals. © 2005 Elsevier SAS. Tous droits réservés

Safety and efficacy of once-daily risdiplam in type 2 and non-ambulant type 3 spinal muscular atrophy (SUNFISH part 2): a phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

Background: Risdiplam is an oral small molecule approved for the treatment of patients with spinal muscular atrophy, with approval for use in patients with type 2 and type 3 spinal muscular atrophy granted on the basis of unpublished data. The drug modifies pre-mRNA splicing of the SMN2 gene to increase production of functional SMN. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of risdiplam in patients with type 2 or non-ambulant type 3 spinal muscular atrophy. Methods: In this phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients aged 2–25 years with confirmed 5q autosomal recessive type 2 or type 3 spinal muscular atrophy were recruited from 42 hospitals in 14 countries across Europe, North America, South America, and Asia. Participants were eligible if they were non-ambulant, could sit independently, and had a score of at least 2 in entry item A of the Revised Upper Limb Module. Patients were stratified by age and randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either daily oral risdiplam, at a dose of 5·00 mg (for individuals weighing ≥20 kg) or 0·25 mg/kg (for individuals weighing <20 kg), or daily oral placebo (matched to risdiplam in colour and taste). Randomisation was conducted by permutated block randomisation with a computerised system run by an external party. Patients, investigators, and all individuals in direct contact with patients were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in the 32-item Motor Function Measure total score at month 12. All individuals who were randomly assigned to risdiplam or placebo, and who did not meet the prespecified missing item criteria for exclusion, were included in the primary efficacy analysis. Individuals who received at least one dose of risdiplam or placebo were included in the safety analysis. SUNFISH is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908685. Recruitment is closed; the study is ongoing. Findings: Between Oct 9, 2017, and Sept 4, 2018, 180 patients were randomly assigned to receive risdiplam (n=120) or placebo (n=60). For analysis of the primary endpoint, 115 patients from the risdiplam group and 59 patients from the placebo group were included. At month 12, the least squares mean change from baseline in 32-item Motor Function Measure was 1·36 (95% CI 0·61 to 2·11) in the risdiplam group and –0·19 (–1·22 to 0·84) in the placebo group, with a treatment difference of 1·55 (0·30 to 2·81, p=0·016) in favour of risdiplam. 120 patients who received risdiplam and 60 who received placebo were included in safety analyses. Adverse events that were reported in at least 5% more patients who received risdiplam than those who received placebo were pyrexia (25 [21%] of 120 patients who received risdiplam vs ten [17%] of 60 patients who received placebo), diarrhoea (20 [17%] vs five [8%]), rash (20 [17%] vs one [2%]), mouth and aphthous ulcers (eight [7%] vs 0), urinary tract infection (eight [7%] vs 0), and arthralgias (six [5%] vs 0). The incidence of serious adverse events was similar between treatment groups (24 [20%] of 120 patients in the risdiplam group; 11 [18%] of 60 patients in the placebo group), with the exception of pneumonia (nine [8%] in the risdiplam group; one [2%] in the placebo group). Interpretation: Risdiplam resulted in a significant improvement in motor function compared with placebo in patients aged 2–25 years with type 2 or non-ambulant type 3 spinal muscular atrophy. Our exploratory subgroup analyses showed that motor function was generally improved in younger individuals and stabilised in older individuals, which requires confirmation in further studies. SUNFISH part 2 is ongoing and will provide additional evidence regarding the long-term safety and efficacy of risdiplam. Funding: F Hoffmann-La Roche