Global patient outcomes after elective surgery: prospective cohort study in 27 low-, middle- and high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: As global initiatives increase patient access to surgical treatments, there remains a need to understand the adverse effects of surgery and define appropriate levels of perioperative care. METHODS: We designed a prospective international 7-day cohort study of outcomes following elective adult inpatient surgery in 27 countries. The primary outcome was in-hospital complications. Secondary outcomes were death following a complication (failure to rescue) and death in hospital. Process measures were admission to critical care immediately after surgery or to treat a complication and duration of hospital stay. A single definition of critical care was used for all countries. RESULTS: A total of 474 hospitals in 19 high-, 7 middle- and 1 low-income country were included in the primary analysis. Data included 44 814 patients with a median hospital stay of 4 (range 2-7) days. A total of 7508 patients (16.8%) developed one or more postoperative complication and 207 died (0.5%). The overall mortality among patients who developed complications was 2.8%. Mortality following complications ranged from 2.4% for pulmonary embolism to 43.9% for cardiac arrest. A total of 4360 (9.7%) patients were admitted to a critical care unit as routine immediately after surgery, of whom 2198 (50.4%) developed a complication, with 105 (2.4%) deaths. A total of 1233 patients (16.4%) were admitted to a critical care unit to treat complications, with 119 (9.7%) deaths. Despite lower baseline risk, outcomes were similar in low- and middle-income compared with high-income countries. CONCLUSIONS: Poor patient outcomes are common after inpatient surgery. Global initiatives to increase access to surgical treatments should also address the need for safe perioperative care. STUDY REGISTRATION: ISRCTN5181700

Erratum to: 36th International Symposium on Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s13054-016-1208-6.]

Metabolic Syndrome and Atrial Fibrillation: Different Entities or Combined Disorders

Obesity, hypertension, insulin resistance, and dyslipidemia are all clusters of an entity called “Metabolic Syndrome”. The global trends of this syndrome’s incidence/prevalence continue to increase reciprocally, converting it into a massive epidemic problem in the medical community. Observing the risk factors of atrial fibrillation, a medical condition that is also converted to a scourge, almost all parts of the metabolic syndrome are encountered. In addition, several studies demonstrated a robust correlation between metabolic syndrome and the occurrence of atrial fibrillation. For atrial fibrillation to develop, a combination of the appropriate substrate and a trigger point is necessary. The metabolic syndrome affects the left atrium in a multifactorial way, leading to atrial remodeling, thus providing both the substrate and provoking the trigger needed, which possibly plays a substantial role in the progression of atrial fibrillation. Due to the remodeling, treatment of atrial fibrillation may culminate in pernicious sequelae, such as repeated catheter ablation procedures. A holistic approach of the patient, with simultaneous treatment of both entities, is suggested in order to ensure better outcomes for the patients

Plant food residues as a source of nutraceuticals and functional foods

This chapter describes the use of different plant and vegetable food residues as nutraceuticals and functional foods. Different nutraceuticals are mentioned and explained. Their uses are well addressed along with their disease management and their action as nutraceutical delivery vehicles

New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in the Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients Hospitalized in the Intensive Care Unit

New-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is the most frequently encountered cardiac arrhythmia observed in patients with COVID-19 infection, particularly in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients. The purpose of the present review is to delve into the occurrence of NOAF in COVID-19 and thoroughly review recent, pertinent data. However, the causality behind this connection has yet to be thoroughly explored. The proposed mechanisms that could contribute to the development of AF in these patients include myocardial damage resulting from direct virus-induced cardiac injury, potentially leading to perimyocarditis; a cytokine crisis and heightened inflammatory response; hypoxemia due to acute respiratory distress; disturbances in acid-base and electrolyte levels; as well as the frequent use of adrenergic drugs in critically ill patients. Additionally, secondary bacterial sepsis and septic shock have been suggested as primary causes of NOAF in ICU patients. This notion gains strength from the observation of a similar prevalence of NOAF in septic non-COVID ICU patients with ARDS. It is plausible that both myocardial involvement from SARS-CoV-2 and secondary sepsis play pivotal roles in the onset of arrhythmia in ICU patients. Nonetheless, there exists a significant variation in the prevalence of NOAF among studies focused on severe COVID-19 cases with ARDS. This discrepancy could be attributed to the inclusion of mixed populations with varying degrees of illness severity, encompassing not only patients in general wards but also those admitted to the ICU, whether intubated or not. Furthermore, the occurrence of NOAF is linked to increased morbidity and mortality. However, it remains to be determined whether NOAF independently influences outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 ICU patients or if it merely reflects the disease’s severity. Lastly, the management of NOAF in these patients has not been extensively studied. Nevertheless, the current guidelines for NOAF in non-COVID ICU patients appear to be effective, while accounting for the specific drugs used in COVID-19 treatment that may prolong the QT interval (although drugs like lopinavir/ritonavir, hydrochlorothiazide, and azithromycin have been discontinued) or induce bradycardia (e.g., remdesivir)

Levosimendan in the Treatment of Patients with Severe Septic Cardiomyopathy

(1) Background: The optimal treatment of septic cardiomyopathy (SCM) remains questionable. The aim of the study was to compare the treatment of SCM based on levosimendan versus the best available therapy. (2) Methods: We conducted an observational study including patients with severe septic cardiomyopathy and circulatory failure. (3) Results: Fourteen patients (61%) received levosimendan, and nine received other treatments. The patients in the levosimendan group were more severely ill [APACHE II: 23.5 (14, 37) vs. 14 (13, 28), respectively, p = 0.012], and there was a trend for more decompensated LV function depicted by the LVEF [15% (10, 20) vs. 25% (5, 30), respectively, p = 0.061]. However, they presented a significantly higher increase in LVEF after seven days [15% (10, 20) to 50% (30, 68) (p p = 0.309), and a significantly higher decrease in lactate levels during the first 24 h [4.5 (2.5, 14.4) to 2.85 (1.2, 15), p = 0.036 vs. 2.9 (2, 18.9) to 2.8 (1, 15), p = 0.536]. Seven-day survival (64.3% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.424) and ICU survival (50% vs. 22.2%, p = 0.172) were higher in the first group, although differences did not reach statistical significance. The degree of left ventricular impairment and the magnitude of EF improvement by the seventh-day post-SCM onset were associated with mortality in regression analysis. (4) Conclusions: Our study presents main hemodynamic data supporting the possible efficacy of levosimendan treatment in patients with severe SCM

The Role of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Left Ventricular Outflow Tract Velocity-Time Integral in Assessing Cardiovascular Impairment in Septic Shock

Background: the role of echocardiography in septic shock remains controversial, since depressed cardiac afterload may overestimate left ventricular (LV) systolic performance and mask septic cardiomyopathy (SC). We hypothesized that afterload-adjusted LV ejection fraction (LVEF) and LV outflow tract velocity-time integral (VTI) values for given systemic vascular resistances (SVR) could provide novel insights into recognizing and stratifying the severity of SC. Methods: in this observational, monocentric study, we prospectively included 14 mechanically-ventilated patients under septic-shock who all had a Pulse index Continuous Cardiac Output (PiCCO) system in place for hemodynamic monitoring. Echocardiographic and PiCCO longitudinal examinations (71 measurements overall) were performed simultaneously at the onset of septic shock and every 12 h for 60 h overall. Results: VTI-derived stroke volume (SV) and cardiac output (CO) were significantly correlated with PiCCO measurements (r ≥ 0.993, both p p p (−0.0005×SVR) were found to provide “predicted” values for given SVR. Measured to predicted LVEF ratios (for given SVR), the afterload-adjusted LVEF defined the severity of SC (mild ≥ 90%, 80% ≤ moderate p p p ≤ 0.038). LVEF and VTI demonstrated significant performance in identifying severe SC [cut-off p p −5 and SVR > 1500 dynes·s·cm−5 (cut-off > 24.46 cm, AUC = 0.889 ± 0.049, sensitivity/specificity = 75/100, p p = 0.002, respectively).Conclusions: our study suggests that ICU bedside echocardiographic assessment of LVEF, VTI and their adjusted to corresponding SVR values provides valuable insights for the comprehension of SC phenotypes, underlying vasoplegia and cardiac output fluctuations in septic shock

Unveiling the Role of Endothelial Dysfunction: A Possible Key to Enhancing Catheter Ablation Success in Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation, a prevalent type of arrhythmia, is increasingly contributing to the economic burden on healthcare systems. The development of innovative treatments, notably catheter ablation, has demonstrated both impressive and promising outcomes. However, these treatments have not yet fully replaced pharmaceutical approaches, primarily due to the relatively high incidence of atrial fibrillation recurrence post-procedure. Recent insights into endothelial dysfunction have shed light on its role in both the onset and progression of atrial fibrillation. This emerging understanding suggests that endothelial function might significantly influence the effectiveness of catheter ablation. Consequently, a deeper exploration into endothelial dynamics could potentially elevate the status of catheter ablation, positioning it as a primary treatment option for atrial fibrillation