Elevating fungal care: bridging Brazil’s healthcare practices to global standards

Brazil faces unique challenges in managing invasive fungal infections (IFIs) due to diverse ecosystems, a rural workforce, and prevalent health conditions. In Europe, IFIs are primarily associated with transplantation, intensive care, and chronic diseases. Inspired by initiatives in the Caribbean and Latin America in 2019, efforts to map global diagnostic and treatment resources expanded to Africa, Europe, and Asia/Pacific. This study conducts a comparative analysis, mainly drawing data from Brazil and Europe, to investigate IFI epidemiology and management. Data were collected through online surveys distributed to Brazilian and European institutions, with collaborations from scientific organizations. Surveys covered institutional profiles, IFI diagnoses, accessibil ity to diagnostic techniques, and antifungal drugs. A comparative survey involving 96 Brazilian and 388 European institutions revealed variations in the perception and practices related to fungal pathogens. Differences in ranking and prevalence were observed, along with variations in diagnostic procedures, fluorescence dye usage, culture practices, antifungal medication availability, and technological approaches. Europe exhibited higher utilization rates for molecular diagnostic approaches, including PCR tests, and therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) was more widespread in Europe compared with Brazil, indicating substantial differences in understanding and managing fungal infections. Customized IFI management is crucial, considering regional differences and addressing technological gaps like underutilized PCR. The study advocates for increased international collaboration, targeted training, and enhanced resources to foster a unified global approach in preventing, diagnosing, and treating IFI

Relation of Lipoprotein(a) Levels to Incident Type 2 Diabetes and Modification by Alirocumab Treatment

OBJECTIVE In observational data, lower levels of lipoprotein(a) have been associated with greater prevalence of type 2 diabetes. Whether pharmacologic lowering of lipoprotein(a) influences incident type 2 diabetes is unknown. We determined the relationship of lipoprotein(a) concentration with incident type 2 diabetes and effects of treatment with alirocumab, a PCSK9 inhibitor. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial alirocumab was compared with placebo in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Incident diabetes was determined from laboratory, medication, and adverse event data. RESULTS Among 13,480 patients without diabetes at baseline, 1,324 developed type 2 diabetes over a median 2.7 years. Median baseline lipoprotein(a) was 21.9 mg/dL. With placebo, 10 mg/dL lower baseline lipoprotein(a) was associated with hazard ratio 1.04 (95% CI 1.02−1.06, P &amp;lt; 0.001) for incident type 2 diabetes. Alirocumab reduced lipoprotein(a) by a median 23.2% with greater absolute reductions from higher baseline levels and no overall effect on incident type 2 diabetes (hazard ratio 0.95, 95% CI 0.85–1.05). At low baseline lipoprotein(a) levels, alirocumab tended to reduce incident type 2 diabetes, while at high baseline lipoprotein(a) alirocumab tended to increase incident type 2 diabetes compared with placebo (treatment–baseline lipoprotein(a) interaction P = 0.006). In the alirocumab group, a 10 mg/dL decrease in lipoprotein(a) from baseline was associated with hazard ratio 1.07 (95% CI 1.03−1.12; P = 0.0002) for incident type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS In patients with acute coronary syndrome, baseline lipoprotein(a) concentration associated inversely with incident type 2 diabetes. Alirocumab had neutral overall effect on incident type 2 diabetes. However, treatment-related reductions in lipoprotein(a), more pronounced from high baseline levels, were associated with increased risk of incident type 2 diabetes. Whether these findings pertain to other therapies that reduce lipoprotein(a) is undetermined. </jats:sec

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 &lt; 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)

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19–Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study

PURPOSEAs cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway.PATIENTS AND METHODSThis international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation).RESULTSOf 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76).CONCLUSIONWithin available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks.</jats:sec