Minimally invasive postmortem intestinal tissue sampling in malnourished and acutely ill children is feasible and informative

BACKGROUND: Intestinal disorders such as environmental enteric dysfunction (EED) are prevalent in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and important contributors to childhood undernutrition and mortality. Autopsies are rarely performed in LMICs but minimally invasive tissue sampling is increasingly deployed as a more feasible and acceptable procedure, although protocols have been devoid of intestinal sampling to date. We sought to determine (1) the feasibility of postmortem intestinal sampling, (2) whether autolysis precludes enteric biopsies\u27 utility, and (3) histopathologic features among children who died during hospitalization with acute illness or undernutrition. METHODS: Transabdominal needle and endoscopic forceps upper and lower intestinal sampling were conducted among children aged 1 week to 59 months who died while hospitalized in Blantyre, Malawi. Autolysis ratings were determined for each hematoxylin and eosin slide, and upper and lower intestinal scoring systems were adapted to assess histopathologic features and their severity. RESULTS: Endoscopic and transabdominal sampling procedures were attempted in 28 and 14 cases, respectively, with \u3e90% success obtaining targeted tissue. Varying degrees of autolysis were present in all samples and precluded histopathologic scoring of 6% of 122 biopsies. Greater autolysis in duodenal samples was seen with longer postmortem interval (Beta = 0.06, 95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.11). Histopathologic features identified included duodenal Paneth and goblet cell depletion. Acute inflammation was absent but chronic inflammation was prevalent in both upper and lower enteric samples. Severe chronic rectal inflammation was identified in children as young as 5.5 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive postmortem intestinal sampling is feasible and identifies histopathology that can inform mortality contributors

Minimally invasive postmortem intestinal tissue sampling in malnourished and acutely ill children is feasible and informative

BACKGROUND: Intestinal disorders such as environmental enteric dysfunction (EED) are prevalent in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and important contributors to childhood undernutrition and mortality. Autopsies are rarely performed in LMICs but minimally invasive tissue sampling is increasingly deployed as a more feasible and acceptable procedure, although protocols have been devoid of intestinal sampling to date. We sought to determine (1) the feasibility of postmortem intestinal sampling, (2) whether autolysis precludes enteric biopsies\u27 utility, and (3) histopathologic features among children who died during hospitalization with acute illness or undernutrition. METHODS: Transabdominal needle and endoscopic forceps upper and lower intestinal sampling were conducted among children aged 1 week to 59 months who died while hospitalized in Blantyre, Malawi. Autolysis ratings were determined for each hematoxylin and eosin slide, and upper and lower intestinal scoring systems were adapted to assess histopathologic features and their severity. RESULTS: Endoscopic and transabdominal sampling procedures were attempted in 28 and 14 cases, respectively, with \u3e90% success obtaining targeted tissue. Varying degrees of autolysis were present in all samples and precluded histopathologic scoring of 6% of 122 biopsies. Greater autolysis in duodenal samples was seen with longer postmortem interval (Beta = 0.06, 95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.11). Histopathologic features identified included duodenal Paneth and goblet cell depletion. Acute inflammation was absent but chronic inflammation was prevalent in both upper and lower enteric samples. Severe chronic rectal inflammation was identified in children as young as 5.5 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive postmortem intestinal sampling is feasible and identifies histopathology that can inform mortality contributors

Survival, regrowth and morphotype formation of Salmonella strains after exposure to high or low concentrations of first generation QAC in water

This study determines the differences in survival of eight Salmonella strains concentration of BAC in water, followed by regrowth in high and low nutrition conditions containing sublethal concentration of BAC. Our results show strain difference in survival, persistence of Salmonella in BAC at different concentrations. All eight strains of Salmonella were non-recoverable when exposed to 40 to 48 µg/ml BAC for 1h in water. When exposed to 24 µg/ml of BAC for 1 h in water, S. Typhimurium ATCC 14028 and S. Heidelberg ATCC 8326 cells were non-detectable from the initial 7 log CFU/ml. S. Blockley 7175, S. Virchow 7207, S. Poona 01A4242 and S. Poona 00A3208, were non-detectable after 1 h exposure at 24 µg/ml and continued to be non-detectable in 12 µg/ml BAC in both nutrient conditions after 24 h. 3/8 strains formed rugose morphotypes when exposed to BAC thus leading to understanding the role of strain differences

Procedural fairness for radiotherapy priority setting in a low resource context

Radiotherapy is an essential component of cancer treatment, yet many countries do not have adequate capacity to serve their populations. This mismatch between demand and supply creates the need for priority setting. There is no widely accepted system to guide patient prioritization for radiotherapy in a low resource context. In the absence of consensus on allocation principles, fair procedures for priority setting should be established. Research is needed to understand what elements of procedural fairness are important to decision makers in diverse settings, assess the feasibility of implementing fair procedures for priority setting in low resource contexts, and improve these processes. This study presents the views of decision makers engaged in everyday radiotherapy priority setting at a cancer center in Rwanda. Semi-structured interviews with 22 oncology physicians, nurses, program leaders, and advisors were conducted. Participants evaluated actual radiotherapy priority setting procedures at the program (meso) and patient (micro) levels, reporting facilitators, barriers, and recommendations. We discuss our findings in relation to the leading Accountability for Reasonableness (AFR) framework. Participants emphasized procedural elements that facilitate adherence to normative principles, such as objective criteria that maximize lives saved. They ascribed fairness to AFR's substantive requirement of relevance more than transparency, appeals, and enforcement. They identified several challenges unresolved by AFR, such as conflicting relevant rationales and unintended consequences of publicity and appeals. Implementing fair procedure itself is resource intensive, a paradox that calls for innovative, context-appropriate solutions. Finally, socioeconomic and structural barriers to care that undermine procedural fairness must be addressed

Moral Distress and Resilience Associated with Cancer Care Priority Setting in a Resource‐Limited Context

BackgroundMoral distress and burnout are highly prevalent among oncology clinicians. Research is needed to better understand how resource constraints and systemic inequalities contribute to moral distress in order to develop effective mitigation strategies. Oncology providers in low- and middle-income countries are well positioned to provide insight into the moral experience of cancer care priority setting and expertise to guide solutions.MethodsSemistructured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 22 oncology physicians, nurses, program leaders, and clinical advisors at a cancer center in Rwanda. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using the framework method.ResultsParticipants identified sources of moral distress at three levels of engagement with resource prioritization: witnessing program-level resource constraints drive cancer disparities, implementing priority setting decisions into care of individual patients, and communicating with patients directly about resource prioritization implications. They recommended individual and organizational-level interventions to foster resilience, such as communication skills training and mental health support for clinicians, interdisciplinary team building, fair procedures for priority setting, and collective advocacy for resource expansion and equity.ConclusionThis study adds to the current literature an in-depth examination of the impact of resource constraints and inequities on clinicians in a low-resource setting. Effective interventions are urgently needed to address moral distress, reduce clinician burnout, and promote well-being among a critical but strained oncology workforce. Collective advocacy is concomitantly needed to address the structural forces that constrain resources unevenly and perpetuate disparities in cancer care and outcomes.Implications for practiceFor many oncology clinicians worldwide, resource limitations constrain routine clinical practice and necessitate decisions about prioritizing cancer care. To the authors' knowledge, this study is the first in-depth analysis of how resource constraints and priority setting lead to moral distress among oncology clinicians in a low-resource setting. Effective individual and organizational interventions and collective advocacy for equity in cancer care are urgently needed to address moral distress and reduce clinician burnout among a strained global oncology workforce. Lessons from low-resource settings can be gleaned as high-income countries face growing needs to prioritize oncology resources

Ethical dilemmas in prioritizing patients for scarce radiotherapy resources

BackgroundRadiotherapy is an essential component of cancer treatment, yet many countries do not have adequate capacity to serve all patients who would benefit from it. Allocation systems are needed to guide patient prioritization for radiotherapy in resource-limited contexts. These systems should be informed by allocation principles deemed relevant to stakeholders. This study explores the ethical dilemmas and views of decision-makers engaged in real-world prioritization of scarce radiotherapy resources at a cancer center in Rwanda in order to identify relevant principles.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 22 oncology clinicians, program leaders, and clinical advisors. Interviews explored the factors considered by decision-makers when prioritizing patients for radiotherapy. The framework method of thematic analysis was used to characterize these factors. Bioethical analysis was then applied to determine their underlying normative principles.ResultsParticipants considered both clinical and non-clinical factors relevant to patient prioritization for radiotherapy. They widely agreed that disease curability should be the primary overarching driver of prioritization, with the goal of saving the most lives. However, they described tension between curability and competing factors including age, palliative benefit, and waiting time. They were divided about the role that non-clinical factors such as social value should play, and agreed that poverty should not be a barrier.ConclusionsMultiple competing principles create tension with the agreed upon overarching goal of maximizing lives saved, including another utilitarian approach of maximizing life-years saved as well as non-utilitarian principles, such as egalitarianism, prioritarianism, and deontology. Clinical guidelines for patient prioritization for radiotherapy can combine multiple principles into a single allocation system to a significant extent. However, conflicting views about the role that social factors should play, and the dynamic nature of resource availability, highlight the need for ongoing work to evaluate and refine priority setting systems based on stakeholder views

Minimally invasive postmortem intestinal tissue sampling in malnourished and acutely ill children is feasible and informative

No abstract available