Neural stem cells in the adult olfactory bulb core generate mature neurons in vivo

Although previous studies suggest that neural stem cells (NSCs) exist in the adult olfactory bulb (OB), their location, identity, and capacity to generate mature neurons in vivo has been little explored. Here, we injected enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP)-expressing retroviral particles into the OB core of adult mice to label dividing cells and to track the differentiation/maturation of any neurons they might generate. EGFP-labeled cells initially expressed adult NSC markers on days 1 to 3 postinjection (dpi), including Nestin, GLAST, Sox2, Prominin-1, and GFAP. EGFP+ -doublecortin (DCX) cells with a migratory morphology were also detected and their abundance increased over a 7-day period. Furthermore, EGFP-labeled cells progressively became NeuN+ neurons, they acquired neuronal morphologies, and they became immunoreactive for OB neuron subtype markers, the most abundant representing calretinin expressing interneurons. OB-NSCs also generated glial cells, suggesting they could be multipotent in vivo. Significantly, the newly generated neurons established and received synaptic contacts, and they expressed presynaptic proteins and the transcription factor pCREB. By contrast, when the retroviral particles were injected into the subventricular zone (SVZ), nearly all (98%) EGFP+ -cells were postmitotic when they reached the OB core, implying that the vast majority of proliferating cells present in the OB are not derived from the SVZ. Furthermore, we detected slowly dividing label-retaining cells in this region that could correspond to the population of resident NSCs. This is the first time NSCs located in the adult OB core have been shown to generate neurons that incorporate into OB circuits in vivo

Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection: an international cohort study

Background: The impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on postoperative recovery needs to be understood to inform clinical decision making during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study reports 30-day mortality and pulmonary complication rates in patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: This international, multicentre, cohort study at 235 hospitals in 24 countries included all patients undergoing surgery who had SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed within 7 days before or 30 days after surgery. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality and was assessed in all enrolled patients. The main secondary outcome measure was pulmonary complications, defined as pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or unexpected postoperative ventilation. Findings: This analysis includes 1128 patients who had surgery between Jan 1 and March 31, 2020, of whom 835 (74·0%) had emergency surgery and 280 (24·8%) had elective surgery. SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed preoperatively in 294 (26·1%) patients. 30-day mortality was 23·8% (268 of 1128). Pulmonary complications occurred in 577 (51·2%) of 1128 patients; 30-day mortality in these patients was 38·0% (219 of 577), accounting for 81·7% (219 of 268) of all deaths. In adjusted analyses, 30-day mortality was associated with male sex (odds ratio 1·75 [95% CI 1·28–2·40], p\textless0·0001), age 70 years or older versus younger than 70 years (2·30 [1·65–3·22], p\textless0·0001), American Society of Anesthesiologists grades 3–5 versus grades 1–2 (2·35 [1·57–3·53], p\textless0·0001), malignant versus benign or obstetric diagnosis (1·55 [1·01–2·39], p=0·046), emergency versus elective surgery (1·67 [1·06–2·63], p=0·026), and major versus minor surgery (1·52 [1·01–2·31], p=0·047). Interpretation: Postoperative pulmonary complications occur in half of patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with high mortality. Thresholds for surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic should be higher than during normal practice, particularly in men aged 70 years and older. Consideration should be given for postponing non-urgent procedures and promoting non-operative treatment to delay or avoid the need for surgery. Funding: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, NIHR Academy, Sarcoma UK, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research

Pre-pandemic melatonin treatment for sleep disorders and COVID-19 infection: a retrospective cross-sectional study

Resumen: La melatonina es una medicación segura que tiene múltiples usos en medicina del sueño para el tratamiento de insomnios, diferentes alteraciones del ritmo circadiano y trastorno del comportamiento durante el sueño REM. Dado que durante la pandemia por COVID 19 se propusieron sus propiedades antiinflamatorias como coadyuvante, nuestro objetivo fue evaluar los antecedentes de infección por COVID-19 y requerimiento de internación hospitalaria en un grupo de pacientes adultos tratados previamente al inicio de la pandemia con melatonina por diversos trastornos del sueño. Material y métodos: Estudio de corte transversal, retrospectivo. Se analizaron datos de una población cerrada de un hospital universitario de pacientes adultos tratados con melatonina por diversos trastornos del sueño, hasta el inicio de la pandemia. Se analizaron variables demográficas, variables relacionadas con melatonina: dosis indicada, tiempo de tratamiento. Se los reevaluó durante el período de pandemia, por tele-consulta programada o telefónicamente, sobre diagnóstico, requerimiento de internación, variables relacionadas a infección por COVID 19 en forma previa a vacunación específica. Se describieron a las variables categóricas con frecuencias relativas y absolutas. Resultados: N=110 pacientes. Rango de edad= 40-96 años (media= 71 años ± 9,9), adultos mayores >65 años: N =87 (79,1%). Se registró infección por COVID 19 en 15 pacientes (13,5%) con requerimiento de internación en 5 de los infectados, sólo uno de ellos con neumonía grave. No se registraron óbitos por causa de COVID 19. No hubo diferencias entre infectados vs. no infectados en edad (p=0,74), índice de masa corporal (p=0,65) o dosis de melatonina (p=0,10). El rango de dosis de melatonina fue 3-150 mg/día (media=46,33 ± 34,1) recibiendo los adultos mayores una dosis media de 50,3 ±35,6. El 75.5% de los pacientes fueron tratados durante de doce meses con esta droga. Conclusión: Encontramos que 13.5% de pacientes tratados previamente con melatonina por diversos trastornos del sueño se infectaron por COVID-19, requiriendo internación con posterior alta médica un tercio de ellos. La tasa de letalidad en adultos mayores en agosto 2020 según los registros nacionales era de 10,5%. Ningún paciente tratado con melatonina falleció por dicha causa en esta muestra. No encontramos diferencias estadísticamente significativas en cuanto a dosis de melatonina indicada, edad o índice de masa corporal, al comparar los infectados con los no infectados. Los pacientes en general, eran mayoritariamente adultos mayores, tratados con dosis media mayor a 40 mg/día de melatonina por diversos trastornos del sueño, principalmente por quejas de insomnio, durante más de 12 meses. Los resultados son compatibles con un posible efecto preventivo de la melatonina en la pandemia COVID 19.Abtract: Melatonin is a safe medication with multiple uses in sleep medicine for the treatment of circadian rhythm disorders, insomnia, and REM sleep behavior disorder. In view that melatonin has been recommended as an adjuvant treatment in COVID 19 pandemic mainly due to its anti-inflammatory properties, the objective of the present study was to evaluate the history of COVID-19 infection and the requirement of hospitalization in a group of adult patients previously treated with melatonin for various sleep disorders. Material and methods: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study of data from a closed population of 110 adult patients at a University Hospital treated with melatonin for various sleep disorders, analyzed until the onset of COVID 19 pandemic. Demographic and melatonin-related variables (dose, treatment time) were analyzed and were reevaluated during the pandemic period, by scheduled tele-consultation regarding diagnosis, hospitalization requirements, variables related to COVID 19 infection prior to specific vaccination. Categorical variables were described as relative and absolute frequencies. Results: N = 110 patients. Age range = 40- 96 years (mean = 71 years ± 9.9), older adults> 65 years: N =87 (79,1%). COVID 19 infection was recorded in 15 patients (13.5%) requiring hospitalization in 5 of those infected, only one of them with severe pneumonia. There were no deaths due to COVID 19. There were no differences between infected vs. uninfected in age (p = 0.74), body mass index (p = 0.65) or melatonin dose (p = 0.10). The melatonin dose range was 3-150 mg / day (mean = 46.33 ± 34.1), older adults receiving a mean dose of 50,3 ± 35,6. The 75.5% of the patients were treated for at least 12 months with melatonin. Conclusion: We found that 13.5% of patients previously treated with melatonin for various sleep disorders were infected by COVID-19, requiring hospitalization with subsequent medical discharge one third of them. According to national records the lethality rate in older adults in August 2020 was 10.5%. No patient treated with melatonin died for this cause in this sample. We did not find statistically significant differences in terms of indicated melatonin dose, age or body mass index, when comparing those infected with those not infected. The patients in general were mostly older adults, treated with a mean dose greater than 40 mg / day of melatonin for various sleep disorders, mainly for complaints of insomnia, for more than 12 months. The results are consistent with a possible preventive effect of melatonin in the COVID 19 pandemic

Weaning from mechanical ventilation in intensive care units across 50 countries (WEAN SAFE): a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study

Background Current management practices and outcomes in weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation are poorly understood. We aimed to describe the epidemiology, management, timings, risk for failure, and outcomes of weaning in patients requiring at least 2 days of invasive mechanical ventilation. Methods WEAN SAFE was an international, multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study done in 481 intensive care units in 50 countries. Eligible participants were older than 16 years, admitted to a participating intensive care unit, and receiving mechanical ventilation for 2 calendar days or longer. We defined weaning initiation as the first attempt to separate a patient from the ventilator, successful weaning as no reintubation or death within 7 days of extubation, and weaning eligibility criteria based on positive end-expiratory pressure, fractional concentration of oxygen in inspired air, and vasopressors. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients successfully weaned at 90 days. Key secondary outcomes included weaning duration, timing of weaning events, factors associated with weaning delay and weaning failure, and hospital outcomes. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03255109. Findings Between Oct 4, 2017, and June 25, 2018, 10 232 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 5869 were enrolled. 4523 (77·1%) patients underwent at least one separation attempt and 3817 (65·0%) patients were successfully weaned from ventilation at day 90. 237 (4·0%) patients were transferred before any separation attempt, 153 (2·6%) were transferred after at least one separation attempt and not successfully weaned, and 1662 (28·3%) died while invasively ventilated. The median time from fulfilling weaning eligibility criteria to first separation attempt was 1 day (IQR 0–4), and 1013 (22·4%) patients had a delay in initiating first separation of 5 or more days. Of the 4523 (77·1%) patients with separation attempts, 2927 (64·7%) had a short wean (≤1 day), 457 (10·1%) had intermediate weaning (2–6 days), 433 (9·6%) required prolonged weaning (≥7 days), and 706 (15·6%) had weaning failure. Higher sedation scores were independently associated with delayed initiation of weaning. Delayed initiation of weaning and higher sedation scores were independently associated with weaning failure. 1742 (31·8%) of 5479 patients died in the intensive care unit and 2095 (38·3%) of 5465 patients died in hospital. Interpretation In critically ill patients receiving at least 2 days of invasive mechanical ventilation, only 65% were weaned at 90 days. A better understanding of factors that delay the weaning process, such as delays in weaning initiation or excessive sedation levels, might improve weaning success rates

Weaning from mechanical ventilation in intensive care units across 50 countries (WEAN SAFE): a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study

Background: Current management practices and outcomes in weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation are poorly understood. We aimed to describe the epidemiology, management, timings, risk for failure, and outcomes of weaning in patients requiring at least 2 days of invasive mechanical ventilation. Methods: WEAN SAFE was an international, multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study done in 481 intensive care units in 50 countries. Eligible participants were older than 16 years, admitted to a participating intensive care unit, and receiving mechanical ventilation for 2 calendar days or longer. We defined weaning initiation as the first attempt to separate a patient from the ventilator, successful weaning as no reintubation or death within 7 days of extubation, and weaning eligibility criteria based on positive end-expiratory pressure, fractional concentration of oxygen in inspired air, and vasopressors. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients successfully weaned at 90 days. Key secondary outcomes included weaning duration, timing of weaning events, factors associated with weaning delay and weaning failure, and hospital outcomes. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03255109. Findings: Between Oct 4, 2017, and June 25, 2018, 10 232 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 5869 were enrolled. 4523 (77·1%) patients underwent at least one separation attempt and 3817 (65·0%) patients were successfully weaned from ventilation at day 90. 237 (4·0%) patients were transferred before any separation attempt, 153 (2·6%) were transferred after at least one separation attempt and not successfully weaned, and 1662 (28·3%) died while invasively ventilated. The median time from fulfilling weaning eligibility criteria to first separation attempt was 1 day (IQR 0-4), and 1013 (22·4%) patients had a delay in initiating first separation of 5 or more days. Of the 4523 (77·1%) patients with separation attempts, 2927 (64·7%) had a short wean (≤1 day), 457 (10·1%) had intermediate weaning (2-6 days), 433 (9·6%) required prolonged weaning (≥7 days), and 706 (15·6%) had weaning failure. Higher sedation scores were independently associated with delayed initiation of weaning. Delayed initiation of weaning and higher sedation scores were independently associated with weaning failure. 1742 (31·8%) of 5479 patients died in the intensive care unit and 2095 (38·3%) of 5465 patients died in hospital. Interpretation: In critically ill patients receiving at least 2 days of invasive mechanical ventilation, only 65% were weaned at 90 days. A better understanding of factors that delay the weaning process, such as delays in weaning initiation or excessive sedation levels, might improve weaning success rates. Funding: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine, European Respiratory Society

Evaluation of a quality improvement intervention to reduce anastomotic leak following right colectomy (EAGLE): pragmatic, batched stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial in 64 countries

Background Anastomotic leak affects 8 per cent of patients after right colectomy with a 10-fold increased risk of postoperative death. The EAGLE study aimed to develop and test whether an international, standardized quality improvement intervention could reduce anastomotic leaks. Methods The internationally intended protocol, iteratively co-developed by a multistage Delphi process, comprised an online educational module introducing risk stratification, an intraoperative checklist, and harmonized surgical techniques. Clusters (hospital teams) were randomized to one of three arms with varied sequences of intervention/data collection by a derived stepped-wedge batch design (at least 18 hospital teams per batch). Patients were blinded to the study allocation. Low- and middle-income country enrolment was encouraged. The primary outcome (assessed by intention to treat) was anastomotic leak rate, and subgroup analyses by module completion (at least 80 per cent of surgeons, high engagement; less than 50 per cent, low engagement) were preplanned. Results A total 355 hospital teams registered, with 332 from 64 countries (39.2 per cent low and middle income) included in the final analysis. The online modules were completed by half of the surgeons (2143 of 4411). The primary analysis included 3039 of the 3268 patients recruited (206 patients had no anastomosis and 23 were lost to follow-up), with anastomotic leaks arising before and after the intervention in 10.1 and 9.6 per cent respectively (adjusted OR 0.87, 95 per cent c.i. 0.59 to 1.30; P = 0.498). The proportion of surgeons completing the educational modules was an influence: the leak rate decreased from 12.2 per cent (61 of 500) before intervention to 5.1 per cent (24 of 473) after intervention in high-engagement centres (adjusted OR 0.36, 0.20 to 0.64; P < 0.001), but this was not observed in low-engagement hospitals (8.3 per cent (59 of 714) and 13.8 per cent (61 of 443) respectively; adjusted OR 2.09, 1.31 to 3.31). Conclusion Completion of globally available digital training by engaged teams can alter anastomotic leak rates. Registration number: NCT04270721 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)

Global variation in postoperative mortality and complications after cancer surgery: a multicentre, prospective cohort study in 82 countries

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licenseBackground: 80% of individuals with cancer will require a surgical procedure, yet little comparative data exist on early outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared postoperative outcomes in breast, colorectal, and gastric cancer surgery in hospitals worldwide, focusing on the effect of disease stage and complications on postoperative mortality. Methods: This was a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients undergoing surgery for primary breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer requiring a skin incision done under general or neuraxial anaesthesia. The primary outcome was death or major complication within 30 days of surgery. Multilevel logistic regression determined relationships within three-level nested models of patients within hospitals and countries. Hospital-level infrastructure effects were explored with three-way mediation analyses. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03471494. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and Jan 31, 2019, we enrolled 15 958 patients from 428 hospitals in 82 countries (high income 9106 patients, 31 countries; upper-middle income 2721 patients, 23 countries; or lower-middle income 4131 patients, 28 countries). Patients in LMICs presented with more advanced disease compared with patients in high-income countries. 30-day mortality was higher for gastric cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (adjusted odds ratio 3·72, 95% CI 1·70–8·16) and for colorectal cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (4·59, 2·39–8·80) and upper-middle-income countries (2·06, 1·11–3·83). No difference in 30-day mortality was seen in breast cancer. The proportion of patients who died after a major complication was greatest in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (6·15, 3·26–11·59) and upper-middle-income countries (3·89, 2·08–7·29). Postoperative death after complications was partly explained by patient factors (60%) and partly by hospital or country (40%). The absence of consistently available postoperative care facilities was associated with seven to 10 more deaths per 100 major complications in LMICs. Cancer stage alone explained little of the early variation in mortality or postoperative complications. Interpretation: Higher levels of mortality after cancer surgery in LMICs was not fully explained by later presentation of disease. The capacity to rescue patients from surgical complications is a tangible opportunity for meaningful intervention. Early death after cancer surgery might be reduced by policies focusing on strengthening perioperative care systems to detect and intervene in common complications. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit

Effects of hospital facilities on patient outcomes after cancer surgery: an international, prospective, observational study

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 licenseBackground: Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide. Methods: A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study—a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3·85 [95% CI 2·58–5·75]; p<0·0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63·0% vs 82·7%; OR 0·35 [0·23–0·53]; p<0·0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer. Interpretation: Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research