Mortality from gastrointestinal congenital anomalies at 264 hospitals in 74 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries: a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study

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 middle-income 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 low-income 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 low-income, 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

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Births, Vaginal Deliveries, Cesarian Sections, and Maternal Mortality in a Brazilian Metropolitan Area: A Time-Series Cohort Study

Dilson Palhares Ferreira,1,&ast; Cláudia Vicari Bolognani,2,3,&ast; Levy Aniceto Santana,2,&ast; Sérgio Eduardo Soares Fernandes,2,3,&ast; Matheus Serwy Fiuza de Moraes,3,&ast; Luana Argollo Souza Fernandes,3,&ast; Camila de Sousa Pereira,3,&ast; Gabriela Billafan Ferreira,3,&ast; Leila Bernarda Donato Göttems,2,3,&ast; Fábio Ferreira Amorim1– 4,&ast; 1Graduation Program in Health Sciences, University of Brasília (UnB), Brasília, Federal District, Brazil; 2Department of Research and Scientific Communication, Escola Superior de Ciências da Saúde (ESCS), Brasília, Federal District, Brazil; 3Medical School, Escola Superior de Ciências da Saúde (ESCS), Brasília, Federal District, Brazil; 4Graduation Program in Health Sciences of School Health Sciences, Escola Superior de Ciências da Saúde (ESCS), Brasília, Federal District, Brazil&ast;These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Fábio Ferreira Amorim; Dilson Palhares Ferreira, Coordenação de Pesquisa e Comunicação Científica - Escola Superior de Ciências da Saúde, SMHN Quadra 03, conjunto A, Bloco 1 - Edifício FEPECS, Brasília, Federal District, CEP 70701-907, Brazil, Email [email protected]; [email protected]: The COVID-19 pandemic posed a worldwide challenge, leading to radical changes in healthcare. The primary objective of the study was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on birth, vaginal delivery, and cesarian section (c-section) rates. The secondary objective was to compare the maternal mortality before and after the pandemic.Patients and Methods: Time-series cohort study including data of all women admitted for childbirth (vaginal delivery or c-section) at the maternities in the Public Health System of Federal District, Brazil, between March 2018 and February 2022, using data extracted from the Hospital Information System of Brazilian Ministry of Health (SIH/DATASUS) on September 30, 2022. Causal impact analysis was used to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on birth, vaginal delivery, and c-section using the CausalImpact R package, and a propensity score matching was used to evaluate the effect on maternal mortality rate using the Easy R (EZR) software.Results: There were 150,617 births, and considering total births, the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic was not statistically significant (absolute effect per week: 5.5, 95% CI: − 24.0− 33.4). However, there was an increase in c-sections after COVID-19 (absolute effect per week: 18.1; 95% CI: 11.9− 23.9). After propensity score matching, the COVID-19 period was associated with increased maternal mortality (OR: 3.22, 95% CI: 1.53− 6.81). The e-value of the adjusted OR for the association between the post-COVID-19 period and maternal mortality was 5.89, with a 95% CI: 2.43, suggesting that unmeasured confounders were unlikely to explain the entirety of the effect.Conclusion: Our study revealed a rise in c-sections and maternal mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic, possibly due to disruptions in maternal care. These findings highlight that implementing effective strategies to protect maternal health in times of crisis and improve outcomes for mothers and newborns is crucial.Keywords: COVID-19, cesarean section, maternal health services, maternal mortalit

Delayed colorectal cancer care during covid-19 pandemic (decor-19). Global perspective from an international survey

Background The widespread nature of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been unprecedented. We sought to analyze its global impact with a survey on colorectal cancer (CRC) care during the pandemic. Methods The impact of COVID-19 on preoperative assessment, elective surgery, and postoperative management of CRC patients was explored by a 35-item survey, which was distributed worldwide to members of surgical societies with an interest in CRC care. Respondents were divided into two comparator groups: 1) ‘delay’ group: CRC care affected by the pandemic; 2) ‘no delay’ group: unaltered CRC practice. Results A total of 1,051 respondents from 84 countries completed the survey. No substantial differences in demographics were found between the ‘delay’ (745, 70.9%) and ‘no delay’ (306, 29.1%) groups. Suspension of multidisciplinary team meetings, staff members quarantined or relocated to COVID-19 units, units fully dedicated to COVID-19 care, personal protective equipment not readily available were factors significantly associated to delays in endoscopy, radiology, surgery, histopathology and prolonged chemoradiation therapy-to-surgery intervals. In the ‘delay’ group, 48.9% of respondents reported a change in the initial surgical plan and 26.3% reported a shift from elective to urgent operations. Recovery of CRC care was associated with the status of the outbreak. Practicing in COVID-free units, no change in operative slots and staff members not relocated to COVID-19 units were statistically associated with unaltered CRC care in the ‘no delay’ group, while the geographical distribution was not. Conclusions Global changes in diagnostic and therapeutic CRC practices were evident. Changes were associated with differences in health-care delivery systems, hospital’s preparedness, resources availability, and local COVID-19 prevalence rather than geographical factors. Strategic planning is required to optimize CRC care