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.

Transplant centers seeking to increase coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) vaccine coverage may consider requiring vaccination for healthcare workers or for candidates. The authors summarize current data to inform an ethical analysis of the harms, benefits, and individual and societal impact of mandatory vaccination, concluding that vaccine requirements for healthcare workers and transplant candidates are ethically justified by beneficence, net utility, and fiduciary duty to patients and public health. Implementation strategies should mitigate concerns about respect for autonomy and transparency for both groups. We clarify how the same arguments might be applied to related questions of caregiver vaccination, allocation of other healthcare resources, and mandates for non‐COVID‐19 vaccines. Finally, we call for effort to achieve global equity in vaccination as soon as possible.

The spectrum of renal pathology in HIV-positive individuals is diverse, including lesions directly related to intrarenal HIV gene expression and lesions related to comorbidities, ReviewBackground. HIV-positive patients had been successfully transplanted for the last 15 y and the donor pool had successfully been expanded to also include HIV-positive donors. Methods. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of transplantation in HIV-positive patients and highlight some of the important issues reported in the literature. We pooled clinical data from different cohorts to show some of the common issues encountered in HIV-positive transplantation. Furthermore, we searched MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL to create a comprehensive table for current evidence for different issues currently encountered when transplanting HIV-positive patients. Results. We included data from 19 cohort studies and reported on outcomes of the current HIV-positive transplant programs. We made recommendations based on personal experience as well as the experience reported in the literature regarding rejection, opportunistic infection, and HIV-associated nephropathy. Opportunistic infections and malignancies are not a major problem for this population group. Conclusions. HIV-positive patients encounter very specific issues after transplantation, specifically related to drug interactions and higher rejection rates. When utilizing HIV-positive donors, the recurrence of HIV-associated nephropathy in the graft kidney is an issue which can be important. Despite some issues with high rejection rates, HIV-positive patients have similar results to HIV-negative patients posttransplantation.

Background. Kidney transplantation (KT) is the optimal treatment for kidney failure and is associated with better quality of life and survival relative to dialysis. However, knowledge of the current capacity of countries to deliver KT is limited. This study reports on findings from the 2018 International Society of Nephrology Global Kidney Health Atlas survey, specifically addressing the availability, accessibility, and quality of KT across countries and regions. Methods. Data were collected from published online sources, and a survey was administered online to key stakeholders. All country-level data were analyzed by International Society of Nephrology region and World Bank income classification. Results. Data were collected via a survey in 182 countries, of which 155 answered questions pertaining to KT. Of these, 74% stated that KT was available, with a median incidence of 14 per million population (range: 0.04–70) and median prevalence of 255 per million population (range: 3–693). Accessibility of KT varied widely; even within high-income countries, it was disproportionately lower for ethnic minorities. Universal health coverage of all KT treatment costs was available in 31%, and 57% had a KT registry. Conclusions. There are substantial variations in KT incidence, prevalence, availability, accessibility, and quality worldwide, with the lowest rates evident in low- and lower-middle income countries. Understanding these disparities will inform efforts to increase awareness and the adoption of practices that will ensure high-quality KT care is provided around the world.

Background This study aimed to determine the impact of pulmonary complications on death after surgery both before and during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Methods This was a patient-level, comparative analysis of two, international prospective cohort studies: one before the pandemic (January–October 2019) and the second during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (local emergence of COVID-19 up to 19 April 2020). Both included patients undergoing elective resection of an intra-abdominal cancer with curative intent across five surgical oncology disciplines. Patient selection and rates of 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications were compared. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality. Mediation analysis using a natural-effects model was used to estimate the proportion of deaths during the pandemic attributable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results This study included 7402 patients from 50 countries; 3031 (40.9 per cent) underwent surgery before and 4371 (59.1 per cent) during the pandemic. Overall, 4.3 per cent (187 of 4371) developed postoperative SARS-CoV-2 in the pandemic cohort. The pulmonary complication rate was similar (7.1 per cent (216 of 3031) versus 6.3 per cent (274 of 4371); P = 0.158) but the mortality rate was significantly higher (0.7 per cent (20 of 3031) versus 2.0 per cent (87 of 4371); P < 0.001) among patients who had surgery during the pandemic. The adjusted odds of death were higher during than before the pandemic (odds ratio (OR) 2.72, 95 per cent c.i. 1.58 to 4.67; P < 0.001). In mediation analysis, 54.8 per cent of excess postoperative deaths during the pandemic were estimated to be attributable to SARS-CoV-2 (OR 1.73, 1.40 to 2.13; P < 0.001). Conclusion Although providers may have selected patients with a lower risk profile for surgery during the pandemic, this did not mitigate the likelihood of death through SARS-CoV-2 infection. Care providers must act urgently to protect surgical patients from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Background The National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit on Global Surgery is establishing research Hubs in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs). The aim of this study was for the Hubs to prioritize future research into areas of unmet clinical need for patients in LMICs requiring surgery. Methods A modified Delphi process was overseen by the research Hub leads and engaged LMIC clinicians, patients and expert methodologists. A four‐stage iterative process was delivered to prioritize research topics. This included anonymous electronic voting, teleconference discussions and a 2‐day priority‐setting workshop. Results In stage 1, Hub leads proposed 32 topics across six domains: access to surgery, cancer, perioperative care, research methods, acute care surgery and communicable disease. In stages 2 and 3, 40 LMICs and 20 high‐income countries participated in online voting, leading to identification of three priority research topics: access to surgery; outcomes of cancer surgery; and perioperative care. During stage 4, specific research plans to address each topic were developed by Hub leads at a priority‐setting workshop. Conclusion This process identified three priority areas for future research relevant to surgery in LMICs. It was driven by front‐line LMIC clinicians, patients and other stakeholders representing a diverse range of settings. The results of the prioritization exercise provide a future framework for researchers and funders.

Rationale & Objective: Clinical practice guidelines for dietary intake in hemodialysis focus on individual nutrients. Little is known about associations of dietary patterns with survival. We evaluated the associations of dietary patterns with cardiovascular and all-cause mortality among adults treated by hemodialysis.

Background. Infection remains a leading cause of death in kidney transplant recipients. This study aimed to assess the scope and consistency of infection outcomes reported in contemporary trials conducted in kidney transplant recipients. Methods. A literature review of all randomized trials and trial protocols reporting infection outcomes in adult kidney transplant recipients was identified in the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialized Register from January 2014 to July 2019. Characteristics and infection outcomes from the trials were analyzed. Results. From 102 included trials, 772 outcome measures were extracted and categorized into 216 unique measures with a median of 3.2 outcome measures per trial (range: 1-9). Measures were further grouped into 32 outcomes based on site of infection (14 outcomes) and organism (18 outcomes). The most commonly reported site-specific outcome and organism-specific outcome were systemic infection (71% trials) and cytomegalovirus infection (62% trials), respectively. Outcome metric and methods of aggregation included mean, median, proportion, proportional change, and number of patients with at least 1 episode. Across all trials, measures were assessed at 55 different time points with a range of 1-11 time points per trial. Conclusions. Infection outcomes in kidney transplant recipients were frequently reported by site and organism but varied widely in terms of outcome, metrics, method of aggregation, and time point of measurement. Establishment of core outcomes for infection based on the shared priorities of patients/caregivers and health professionals may improve the consistency, comparability, and usefulness of trial evidence.