Vascular risk factors in older patients with depression: outcome of electroconvulsive therapy versus medication

Objective: Research suggests that in depression, vascular burden predicts a lower efficacy for medication (MED) and a more favourable outcome for electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). Therefore, we investigated the influence of the following vascular risk factors (VRF): hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, smoking, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, and cerebral vascular accident/transient ischemic attack, on remission from major depression after ECT versus MED.  Methods: The study sample consisted of 81 inpatients with a DSM-IV unipolar major depression diagnosis (mean age 72.2 years, SD = 7.6, mean Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score 32.9, SD = 6.2) participating in a randomized controlled trial comparing nortriptyline versus venlafaxine and 43 inpatients (mean age 73.7 years, SD = 7.5, mean Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score 30.6, SD = 7.1) from an randomized controlled trial comparing brief pulse versus ultrabrief pulse ECT. The presence of VRF was established from the medical records. The remission rate of patients with VRF was compared with those of patients without VRF.  Results: The remission rate was 58% (19/33) in the ECT group with ≥1 VRF and 32% (23/73) in the MED group with ≥1 VRF (χ2 = 6.456, p = 0.011). Comparing patients with no VRF versus ≥1 VRF, the remission rate decreased from 80 to 58% (χ2 = 1.652, p = 0.276) in ECT patients and from 38 to 32% (χ2 = 0.119, p = 0.707) in MED patients. Applying different cut-offs for the number of VRFs yielded the same trends. Logistic regression revealed no interaction between VRF and treatment condition.  Conclusion: The superior efficacy of ECT over pharmacotherapy in major depression in older age was independent of the presence of VRF

Evaluation of prognostic risk models for postoperative pulmonary complications in adult patients undergoing major abdominal surgery: a systematic review and international external validation cohort study

Background Stratifying risk of postoperative pulmonary complications after major abdominal surgery allows clinicians to modify risk through targeted interventions and enhanced monitoring. In this study, we aimed to identify and validate prognostic models against a new consensus definition of postoperative pulmonary complications. Methods We did a systematic review and international external validation cohort study. The systematic review was done in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched MEDLINE and Embase on March 1, 2020, for articles published in English that reported on risk prediction models for postoperative pulmonary complications following abdominal surgery. External validation of existing models was done within a prospective international cohort study of adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing major abdominal surgery. Data were collected between Jan 1, 2019, and April 30, 2019, in the UK, Ireland, and Australia. Discriminative ability and prognostic accuracy summary statistics were compared between models for the 30-day postoperative pulmonary complication rate as defined by the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine Core Outcome Measures in Perioperative and Anaesthetic Care (StEP-COMPAC). Model performance was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCC). Findings In total, we identified 2903 records from our literature search; of which, 2514 (86·6%) unique records were screened, 121 (4·8%) of 2514 full texts were assessed for eligibility, and 29 unique prognostic models were identified. Nine (31·0%) of 29 models had score development reported only, 19 (65·5%) had undergone internal validation, and only four (13·8%) had been externally validated. Data to validate six eligible models were collected in the international external validation cohort study. Data from 11 591 patients were available, with an overall postoperative pulmonary complication rate of 7·8% (n=903). None of the six models showed good discrimination (defined as AUROCC ≥0·70) for identifying postoperative pulmonary complications, with the Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia score showing the best discrimination (AUROCC 0·700 [95% CI 0·683–0·717]). Interpretation In the pre-COVID-19 pandemic data, variability in the risk of pulmonary complications (StEP-COMPAC definition) following major abdominal surgery was poorly described by existing prognostication tools. To improve surgical safety during the COVID-19 pandemic recovery and beyond, novel risk stratification tools are required. Funding British Journal of Surgery Society