Genomic Analysis of G2P[4] Group A Rotaviruses in Zambia Reveals Positive Selection in Amino Acid Site 7 of Viral Protein 3

The G2P[4] genotype is among the rotavirus strains that circulate commonly in humans. Several countries have reported its immediate upsurge after the introduction of rotavirus vaccination, raising concern about sub-optimal vaccine effectiveness against this genotype in the long term. This study aimed to gain insight into the evolution of post-vaccine Zambian G2P[4] group A rotavirus (RVA) strains and their overall genetic make-up by analysis of sequence alignments at the amino acid (AA) level. Twenty-nine Zambian G2P[4] rotavirus strains were subjected to whole-genome sequencing using the Illumina MiSeq® platform. All the strains exhibited the typical DS-1-like genotype constellation, and the nucleotide sequences of the 11 genome segments showed high nucleotide similarities (>97%). Phylogenetic analyses together with representative global G2P[4] RVA showed that Zambian strains clustered into human lineages IV (for VP2, VP4, VP7, NSP1, and NSP5), V (for VP1, VP3, VP6, NSP2, and NSP3), and XXIII (for NSP4). The AA differences between the lineages where the study strains clustered and lineages of global reference strains were identified and analyzed. Selection pressure analysis revealed that AA site seven in the Viral Protein 3 (VP3) genome segment was under positive selection. This site occurs in the region of intrinsic disorder in the VP3 protein, and Zambian G2P[4] strains could potentially be utilizing this intrinsically disordered region to survive immune pressure. The Zambian G2P[4] strains from 2012 to 2016 comprised the G2P[4] strains that have been circulating globally since the early 2000s, highlighting the epidemiological fitness of these contemporary G2P[4] strains. Continuous whole-genome surveillance of G2P[4] strains remains imperative to understand their evolution during the post-vaccination period

Prospective observational cohort study on grading the severity of postoperative complications in global surgery research

Background The Clavien–Dindo classification is perhaps the most widely used approach for reporting postoperative complications in clinical trials. This system classifies complication severity by the treatment provided. However, it is unclear whether the Clavien–Dindo system can be used internationally in studies across differing healthcare systems in high- (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods This was a secondary analysis of the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), a prospective observational cohort study of elective surgery in adults. Data collection occurred over a 7-day period. Severity of complications was graded using Clavien–Dindo and the simpler ISOS grading (mild, moderate or severe, based on guided investigator judgement). Severity grading was compared using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Data are presented as frequencies and ICC values (with 95 per cent c.i.). The analysis was stratified by income status of the country, comparing HICs with LMICs. Results A total of 44 814 patients were recruited from 474 hospitals in 27 countries (19 HICs and 8 LMICs). Some 7508 patients (16·8 per cent) experienced at least one postoperative complication, equivalent to 11 664 complications in total. Using the ISOS classification, 5504 of 11 664 complications (47·2 per cent) were graded as mild, 4244 (36·4 per cent) as moderate and 1916 (16·4 per cent) as severe. Using Clavien–Dindo, 6781 of 11 664 complications (58·1 per cent) were graded as I or II, 1740 (14·9 per cent) as III, 2408 (20·6 per cent) as IV and 735 (6·3 per cent) as V. Agreement between classification systems was poor overall (ICC 0·41, 95 per cent c.i. 0·20 to 0·55), and in LMICs (ICC 0·23, 0·05 to 0·38) and HICs (ICC 0·46, 0·25 to 0·59). Conclusion Caution is recommended when using a treatment approach to grade complications in global surgery studies, as this may introduce bias unintentionally

Critical care admission following elective surgery was not associated with survival benefit: prospective analysis of data from 27 countries

This was an investigator initiated study funded by Nestle Health Sciences through an unrestricted research grant, and by a National Institute for Health Research (UK) Professorship held by RP. The study was sponsored by Queen Mary University of London

The surgical safety checklist and patient outcomes after surgery: a prospective observational cohort study, systematic review and meta-analysis

© 2017 British Journal of Anaesthesia Background: The surgical safety checklist is widely used to improve the quality of perioperative care. However, clinicians continue to debate the clinical effectiveness of this tool. Methods: Prospective analysis of data from the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), an international observational study of elective in-patient surgery, accompanied by a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature. The exposure was surgical safety checklist use. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcome was postoperative complications. In the ISOS cohort, a multivariable multi-level generalized linear model was used to test associations. To further contextualise these findings, we included the results from the ISOS cohort in a meta-analysis. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals. Results: We included 44 814 patients from 497 hospitals in 27 countries in the ISOS analysis. There were 40 245 (89.8%) patients exposed to the checklist, whilst 7508 (16.8%) sustained ≥1 postoperative complications and 207 (0.5%) died before hospital discharge. Checklist exposure was associated with reduced mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.49 (0.32–0.77); P\u3c0.01], but no difference in complication rates [OR 1.02 (0.88–1.19); P=0.75]. In a systematic review, we screened 3732 records and identified 11 eligible studies of 453 292 patients including the ISOS cohort. Checklist exposure was associated with both reduced postoperative mortality [OR 0.75 (0.62–0.92); P\u3c0.01; I2=87%] and reduced complication rates [OR 0.73 (0.61–0.88); P\u3c0.01; I2=89%). Conclusions: Patients exposed to a surgical safety checklist experience better postoperative outcomes, but this could simply reflect wider quality of care in hospitals where checklist use is routine