Summary Background 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.

No abstract

No abstract

SummaryThere is a need for improved treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). We reviewed the literature to explore the efficacy of HB vaccines alone or in combination therapy (CT) with antiviral drugs in CHB patients and to meta‐analyze data from randomized controlled trials. We conducted a systematic search in ten databases. All studies investigating the efficacy of HBV vaccine in HBV infected patients were included with no restrictions. Among 1359 studies initially identified, 23 studies (n = 1956 patients) were included for the final analysis. CT showed a significant reduction of HBV DNA compared with analogue monotherapy (AM) at the 12‐month follow‐up period (odds ratio (OR) = 2.835, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.275, 6.306], p = .011). Additionally, CT also remarkably induce HbsAg loss in comparison with AM (OR = 11.736, 95% CI [1.841, 74.794], p = .009). Our pooled data revealed no difference between treatment and control regarding alanine aminotransferase normalization, HBeAg seroconversion, and HBeAg disappearance. In addition, CT using vaccine and NAs resulted in a statistically significant higher incidence of adverse effects than AM. The therapeutic effects of combination therapy for patients with CHB were encouraging, but future studies need to investigate all possible treatment combinations and assess their cost‐effectiveness.

Background Two tocolytic drugs—atosiban and nifedipine—are currently used for first‐line treatment of preterm labor (PTL). Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of atosiban with nifedipine for PTL treatment. Search strategy In May 2017, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials with search terms including “nifedipine”, “atosiban”, and “preterm labor”. Selection criteria Randomized controlled trials of women with PTL. Data collection and analysis Data were extracted for study design, patient characteristics, risk of bias domains, and study outcomes. A random‐effects model was used to generate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results We included seven studies that enrolled 992 patients. There was no significant difference between atosiban and nifedipine for pregnancy prolongation of 48 hours or more regarding efficacy (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.92–1.22; P=0.440) or effectiveness (0.93, 0.84–1.03; P=0.177). Pregnancy prolongation for 7 days or more also did not differ between groups for efficacy (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.89–1.21; P=0.656) or effectiveness (0.91, 0.79–1.05; P=0.177). Atosiban‐however‐was associated with fewer maternal side‐effects than nifedipine. Conclusion Atosiban resulted in fewer maternal side‐effects than nifedipine, with no difference in pregnancy prolongation. PROSPERO registration: CRD42018090223.