Background
The COVID-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented burden on the delivery of intensive care services worldwide.
Research question
What is the global point estimate of mortality and risk factors for patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) with severe COVID-19?
Methods
In this systematic review and meta-analysis Medline, Embase and the Cochrane library were searched up to 1 August 2020. Pooled prevalence of participant characteristics, clinical features and outcome data were calculated using random effects models. Subgroup analyses were based on geographical distribution, study type, quality assessment, sample size, end date and patient disposition
Results
Forty-five studies with 16561 patients from 17 countries across four continents were included. Patients with COVID-19 admitted to ICU had a mean age of 62·6 years (95%CI 60.4-64·7). Common comorbidities included hypertension (49·5% (44·9-54·0)) and diabetes (26·6% (22·7-30·8)). Over three-quarters developed Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (76·1% (65·7-85·2)). Invasive mechanical ventilation was required in 67.7% (59.1-75.7), vasopressor support in 65·9% (52.4-78.4), renal replacement therapy in 16·9% (12.1-22·2) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in 6·4% (4·1-9.1). The duration of ICU and hospital admission was 10·8 days (9·3-18·4) and 19·1 days (16·3-21·9) respectively with in-hospital mortality of 28·1% (23·4-33·0, I
2
96%). No significant subgroup effect was observed.
Interpretation
Critically ill patients with COVID-19 who are admitted to ICU require substantial organ support and prolonged ICU and hospital level care. The pooled estimate of global mortality for severe COVID-19 is <1/3.
BackgroundThere has been worldwide debate on lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer, with increasing consensus on performing an extended (D2) resection. There is a paucity of data in Australia. Our aim is to compare overall outcomes between a D1 and D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer in a single specialist unit.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis on patients who underwent a curative primary gastric resection for gastric adenocarcinoma between January 1996 and April 2016, primary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to balance covariates between D1/D1+ and D2 groups. Kaplan-Meier survival curves of D1/D1+ versus D2 were constructed and evaluated using the log-rank test with subgroup analyses for pathological node (pN) status. Multiple Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine predictors of overall survival.ResultsTwo hundred four patients underwent a gastrectomy, 54 had D1/D1+, and 150 had a D2 lymphadenectomy. After PSM, there were 39 patients in each group, the 10-year OS for D1/D1+ was 52.1 and 76.2% for D2 (p = 0.008), and 10-year DFS was 35% for D1 and 58.1% for D2 (p = 0.058). Subgroup analysis showed that node-negative (N0) patients had improved 5-year OS for D2 (90.9%), compared to D1/D1+ (76.4%) (p = 0.028). There was no difference in operative mortality between the groups (D1 vs D2: 2 vs 0%, p = 0.314), nor in post-operative complications (p = 0.227). Multiple Cox analysis showed advanced tumor stage (stages III and IV), and lymphadenectomy type (D1) and the presence of postoperative complications were independent predictors of poor overall survival.ConclusionsD2 lymphadenectomy with spleen and pancreas preservation can be performed safely on patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. Significant improvement in overall survival is observed in patients with N0 disease who underwent D2 lymphadenectomy without increasing operative morbidity or mortality. This paper supports the notion of a global consensus for a D2 lymphadenectomy, particularly in the Western context.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.