Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento quirúrgico de pacientes con urolitiasis en el Seguro Social del Perú (EsSalud)

Introduction. This article summarizes the clinical practice guide (CPG) for the surgical treatment of patients with urolithiasis in the Social Security of Peru (EsSalud). Objective. To provide clinical recommendations based on evidence for the surgical treatment of patients with urolithiasis in EsSalud. Method. A guideline group (GEG) constituted by urologists and methodologists was formed, who formulated the clinical questions that were answered within the present CPG. For each of these questions systematic searches of systematic reviews and primary studies (when considered pertinent) were carried out in PubMed during 2018. The evidence was selected to answer each one of the clinical questions posed, later the certainty was evaluated of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Regular work meetings were scheduled, in which the GEG reviewed the evidence and made recommendations, points of good clinical practice, and flow charts; using the GRADE methodology. The CPG was approved with Resolution No. 66-IETSI-ESSALUD-2018. Results. Six clinical questions on the subject of surgical treatment in urolithiasis were addressed. Based on these questions, 5 recommendations were formulated (2 strong recommendations and 3 conditional recommendations), 21 points of good clinical practice, and 3 management flow charts. Conclusion. This article summarizes the methodology and conclusions based on evidence from the CPG for the surgical treatment of patients with urolithiasis in EsSalud.Introducción. El presente artículo resume la guía de práctica clínica (GPC) para el tratamiento quirúrgico de pacientes con urolitiasis en el Seguro Social del Perú (EsSalud). Objetivo. Proveer recomendaciones clínicas basadas en evidencias para la para el tratamiento quirúrgico de los pacientes con urolitiasis en EsSalud. Método. Se conformó un grupo elaborador de la guía (GEG) constituido por médicos urólogos y metodólogos, los cuales formularon las preguntas clínicas que fueron respondidas dentro de la presente GPC. Para cada una de estas preguntas se realizó búsquedas de revisiones sistemáticas y de estudios primarios (cuando se consideró pertinente) en PubMed durante el 2018. Se seleccionó la evidencia para responder cada una de las preguntas clínicas planteadas, posteriormente se evaluó la certeza de la evidencia usando la metodología Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Se programaron reuniones de trabajo periódicas en las cuales el GEG revisó la evidencia y formuló recomendaciones, puntos de buenas prácticas clínicas y flujogramas usando la metodología GRADE. La GPC fue aprobada con Resolución N° 66–IETSI-ESSALUD-2018. Resultados. Se abordó 6 preguntas clínicas sobre el tema de tratamiento quirúrgico en urolitiasis. En base a dichas preguntas se formularon 5 recomendaciones (2 recomendaciones fuertes y 3 recomendaciones condicionales), 21 puntos de buena práctica clínica, y 3 flujogramas de manejo. Conclusión. El presente artículo resume la metodología y las conclusiones basadas en evidencias de la GPC para el tratamiento quirúrgico de pacientes con urolitiasis en EsSalud

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

Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento quirúrgico de pacientes con urolitiasis en el Seguro Social del Perú (EsSalud)

ntroduction. This article summarizes the clinical practice guide (CPG) for the surgical treatment of patients with urolithiasis in the Social Security of Peru (EsSalud). Objective. To provide clinical recommendations based on evidence for the surgical treatment of patients with urolithiasis in EsSalud. Method. A guideline group (GEG) constituted by urologists and methodologists was formed, who formulated the clinical questions that were answered within the present CPG. For each of these questions systematic searches of systematic reviews and primary studies (when considered pertinent) were carried out in PubMed during 2018. The evidence was selected to answer each one of the clinical questions posed, later the certainty was evaluated of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Regular work meetings were scheduled, in which the GEG reviewed the evidence and made recommendations, points of good clinical practice, and flow charts; using the GRADE methodology. The CPG was approved with Resolution No. 66-IETSI-ESSALUD-2018. Results. Six clinical questions on the subject of surgical treatment in urolithiasis were addressed. Based on these questions, 5 recommendations were formulated (2 strong recommendations and 3 conditional recommendations), 21 points of good clinical practice, and 3 management flow charts. Conclusion. This article summarizes the methodology and conclusions based on evidence from the CPG for the surgical treatment of patients with urolithiasis in EsSalud.Introducción. El presente artículo resume la guía de práctica clínica (GPC) para el tratamiento quirúrgico de pacientes con urolitiasis en el Seguro Social del Perú (EsSalud). Objetivo. Proveer recomendaciones clínicas basadas en evidencias para la para el tratamiento quirúrgico de los pacientes con urolitiasis en EsSalud. Método. Se conformó un grupo elaborador de la guía (GEG) constituido por médicos urólogos y metodólogos, los cuales formularon las preguntas clínicas que fueron respondidas dentro de la presente GPC. Para cada una de estas preguntas se realizó búsquedas de revisiones sistemáticas y de estudios primarios (cuando se consideró pertinente) en PubMed durante el 2018. Se seleccionó la evidencia para responder cada una de las preguntas clínicas planteadas, posteriormente se evaluó la certeza de la evidencia usando la metodología Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Se programaron reuniones de trabajo periódicas en las cuales el GEG revisó la evidencia y formuló recomendaciones, puntos de buenas prácticas clínicas y flujogramas usando la metodología GRADE. La GPC fue aprobada con Resolución N° 66–IETSI-ESSALUD-2018. Resultados. Se abordó 6 preguntas clínicas sobre el tema de tratamiento quirúrgico en urolitiasis. En base a dichas preguntas se formularon 5 recomendaciones (2 recomendaciones fuertes y 3 recomendaciones condicionales), 21 puntos de buena práctica clínica, y 3 flujogramas de manejo. Conclusión. El presente artículo resume la metodología y las conclusiones basadas en evidencias de la GPC para el tratamiento quirúrgico de pacientes con urolitiasis en EsSalud