Ingestion of fishing gear and entanglements of seabirds: monitoring and implications for management

Fisheries are increasingly adopting ecosystem approaches to better manage impacts on non-target species. Although deliberate dumping of plastics at sea is banned, not all fisheries legislation prohibits discarding of gear (hooks and line) in offal, and compliance is often unknown. Analysis of a 16 year dataset collected at South Georgia indicated that the amount of gear found in association with wandering albatrosses was an order of magnitude greater than in any other species, reflecting their wider foraging range and larger gape. Unlike other taxa, most gear associated with grey-headed albatrosses was from squid and not longline fisheries, and mistaken for natural prey rather than the result of direct interaction. Observed rates of foul-hooking (entanglement during line-hauling) were much higher in giant petrels and wandering albatrosses than black-browed albatrosses, and no grey-headed albatross was affected. The index of wandering albatross gear abundance showed two peaks, the most recent corresponding with a substantial increase in the number of multifilament snoods (gangions), Suggesting that the widespread adoption of a new longline system (Chilean mixed) may have been responsible. Although all identified gear was demersal, given the widespread use of similar hooks, little could be assigned to a specific fishery. Stomach content analysis suggested that 1300-2048 items of gear are currently consumed per annum by the wandering albatross population. Many hooks are completely digested by chicks, long-term effects of which are entirely unknown. We suggest a number of management approaches for addressing the problem of gear discarding, and guidelines for monitoring schemes elsewhere. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Enhanced recovery programmes versus conventional care in bariatric surgery: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

BackgroundWith obesity prevalence projected to increase, the demand for bariatric surgery will consequently rise. Enhanced recovery programmes aim for improved recovery, earlier discharge, and more efficient use of resources following surgery. This systematic literature review aimed to evaluate the evidence available on the effects of enhanced recovery programmes after three common bariatric procedures: laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB).MethodsMEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database were searched for studies published in 2012-2019 comparing outcomes with enhanced recovery programmes versus conventional care after bariatric surgery in Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Data were extracted and meta-analyses or descriptive analyses performed when appropriate using R.ResultsOf 1152 screened articles, seven relevant studies including 3592 patients were identified. Six reported outcomes for 1434 patients undergoing LRYGB; however, as only individual studies reported on LSG and OAGB these could not be included in the analyses. The meta-analysis revealed a significantly shorter mean duration of hospital-stay for LRYGB enhanced recovery programmes than conventional care (mean difference [95% CI]: -1.34 days [-2.01, -0.67]; pConclusionThese results support enhanced recovery programmes allowing shorter inpatient stay without significant differences in readmission rate following LRYGB, although complication and reoperation rate comparisons were inconclusive. Further research is needed to fill current data gaps including the lack of studies on LSG and OAGB