No abstract

BackgroundThere is currently conflicting evidence surrounding the effects of obesity on postoperative outcomes. Previous studies have found obesity to be associated with adverse events, but others have found no association. The aim of this study was to determine whether increasing body mass index (BMI) is an independent risk factor for development of major postoperative complications.MethodsThis was a multicentre prospective cohort study across the UK and Republic of Ireland. Consecutive patients undergoing elective or emergency gastrointestinal surgery over a 4‐month interval (October–December 2014) were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was the 30‐day major complication rate (Clavien–Dindo grade III–V). BMI was grouped according to the World Health Organization classification. Multilevel logistic regression models were used to adjust for patient, operative and hospital‐level effects, creating odds ratios (ORs) and 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i.).ResultsOf 7965 patients, 2545 (32·0 per cent) were of normal weight, 2673 (33·6 per cent) were overweight and 2747 (34·5 per cent) were obese. Overall, 4925 (61·8 per cent) underwent elective and 3038 (38·1 per cent) emergency operations. The 30‐day major complication rate was 11·4 per cent (908 of 7965). In adjusted models, a significant interaction was found between BMI and diagnosis, with an association seen between BMI and major complications for patients with malignancy (overweight: OR 1·59, 95 per cent c.i. 1·12 to 2·29, P = 0·008; obese: OR 1·91, 1·31 to 2·83, P = 0·002; compared with normal weight) but not benign disease (overweight: OR 0·89, 0·71 to 1·12, P = 0·329; obese: OR 0·84, 0·66 to 1·06, P = 0·147).ConclusionOverweight and obese patients undergoing surgery for gastrointestinal malignancy are at increased risk of major postoperative complications compared with those of normal weight.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of guanfacine extended release (GXR) adjunctive to a psychostimulant on oppositional symptoms in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: A multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-optimization study of GXR (1-4 mg/d) or placebo administered morning (a.m.) or evening (p.m.) adjunctive to psychostimulant was conducted in subjects ages 6-17 with suboptimal response to psychostimulant alone. Suboptimal response was defined as treatment with a stable dose of psychostimulant for ‡ 4 weeks with ADHD Rating Scale IV total score ‡ 24 and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness score ‡ 3, as well as investigator opinion. Primary efficacy and safety results have been reported previously. Secondary efficacy measures included the oppositional subscale of the Conners' Parent Rating Scale-Revised: Long Form (CPRS-R:L); these are reported herein. Results: Significant reductions from baseline to the final on-treatment assessment on the oppositional subscale of the CPRS-R:L were seen with GXR plus psychostimulant compared with placebo plus psychostimulant, both in the overall study population (placebo-adjusted least squares [LS] mean change from baseline to the final on-treatment assessment: GXR a.m. + psychostimulant, -2.4, p = 0.001; GXR p.m. + psychostimulant, -2.2, p = 0.003) as well as in the subgroup of subjects with significant baseline oppositional symptoms (GXR a.m. + psychostimulant, -3.6, p = 0.001; GXR p.m. + psychostimulant, -2.7, p = 0.013). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 77.3%, 76.3%, and 63.4% of subjects in the GXR a.m., GXR p.m., and placebo groups, respectively, in the overall study population. Conclusions: GXR adjunctive to a psychostimulant significantly reduced oppositional symptoms compared with placebo plus a psychostimulant in subjects with ADHD and a suboptimal response to psychostimulant alone.

Adjunctive GXR AM or GXR PM was associated with improvements in morning and evening ADHD symptoms in children and adolescents.

Background Many surgeons routinely place intraperitoneal drains after elective colorectal surgery. However, enhanced recovery after surgery guidelines recommend against their routine use owing to a lack of clear clinical benefit. This study aimed to describe international variation in intraperitoneal drain placement and the safety of this practice. Methods COMPASS (COMPlicAted intra-abdominal collectionS after colorectal Surgery) was a prospective, international, cohort study which enrolled consecutive adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery (February to March 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of intraperitoneal drain placement. Secondary outcomes included: rate and time to diagnosis of postoperative intraperitoneal collections; rate of surgical site infections (SSIs); time to discharge; and 30-day major postoperative complications (Clavien–Dindo grade at least III). After propensity score matching, multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to estimate the independent association of the secondary outcomes with drain placement. Results Overall, 1805 patients from 22 countries were included (798 women, 44.2 per cent; median age 67.0 years). The drain insertion rate was 51.9 per cent (937 patients). After matching, drains were not associated with reduced rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.33, 95 per cent c.i. 0.79 to 2.23; P = 0.287) or earlier detection (hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 0.33 to 2.31; P = 0.780) of collections. Although not associated with worse major postoperative complications (OR 1.09, 0.68 to 1.75; P = 0.709), drains were associated with delayed hospital discharge (HR 0.58, 0.52 to 0.66; P < 0.001) and an increased risk of SSIs (OR 2.47, 1.50 to 4.05; P < 0.001). Conclusion Intraperitoneal drain placement after elective colorectal surgery is not associated with earlier detection of postoperative collections, but prolongs hospital stay and increases SSI risk.