Background: Radical cystectomy (RC) and urinary diversion are the recommended treatment for patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer. This is complex surgery, associated with significant patient morbidity and mortality. Frailty has been shown to be an independent risk factor for adverse outcomes in several surgical populations. Preoperative assessment of frailty is advocated in current guidelines but is not yet standard clinical practice. Aims: This systematic review and narrative synthesis aims to examine whether patients undergoing RC are assessed for frailty, what tools are used, and whether an association is found between frailty and adverse outcomes in this population. Results: Nine studies, published within the last 4 years, describe the use of tools reporting to measure frailty in the RC population. All demonstrate increased risk of adverse postoperative outcomes with higher frailty levels. Only one study used a validated frailty tool. The majority of studies measure frailty using variations on a tool derived from a large database (ACS-NSQIP) effectively counting co-morbidities, rather than assessing the multidomain nature of the frailty syndrome. Conclusion: The recognition of frailty as an important consideration in the perioperative period is welcome. This systematic review and narrative synthesis demonstrates the need for collaboration in research and delivery of clinical care for older surgical patients. Such collaboration may provide clarity regarding terms such as frailty and multimorbidity, preventing the development of assessment tools inaccurately measuring these discreet syndromes interchangeably. More accurate assessment of patients in terms of frailty, multimorbidity and functional status may allow better modification and shared decision making leading to improved postoperative outcomes in older patients undergoing RC.

With the increasing prevalence of obesity in the population, anaesthetists must confidently manage both the pathophysiological and technical challenges presented in bariatric and non-bariatric surgery. The intraoperative period represents an important opportunity to optimise and mitigate risk. However, there is little formal guidance on what intraoperative monitoring techniques should be used in this population. This narrative review collates the existing evidence for intraoperative monitoring devices in the obese patients. Although a number of non-invasive blood pressure monitors have been tested, an invasive arterial line remains the most reliable monitor if accurate, continuous monitoring is required. Goal-directed fluid therapy is recommended by clinical practice guidelines, but the methods tested to assess this had guarded applicability to the obese population. Transcutaneous carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) monitoring may offer additional benefit to standard capnography in this population. Individually titrated positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) and recruitment manoeuvres improved intraoperative mechanics but yielded no benefit in the immediate postoperative period. Depth of anaesthesia monitoring appears to be beneficial in the perioperative period regarding recovery times and complications. Objective confirmation of reversal of neuromuscular blockade continues to be a central tenet of anaesthesia practice, particularly relevant to this group who have been characterised as an “at risk” extubation group. Where deep neuromuscular blockade is used, continuous neuromuscular blockade is suggested. Both obesity and the intraoperative context represent somewhat unstable search terms, as the clinical implications of the obesity phenotype are not uniform, and the type and urgency of surgery have significant impact on the intraoperative setting. This renders the generation of summary conclusions around what intraoperative monitoring techniques are suitable in this population highly challenging.

Background: Influenza is a global cause of morbidity and mortality and a significant risk for a future pandemic infection. Host hyperinflammation, similar to that seen in COVID-19, may occur in response to influenza virus pneumonia, with Janus kinase (JAK) signalling and proinflammatory cytokines Interleukin (IL)-1 and IL-6 involved. Immune modulation treatment of hospitalised and critically ill COVID-19 patients, including with IL-6 and JAK inhibitors, has been found to be beneficial. Significant interest exists in the use of immunomodulatory agents targeting these pathways in the treatment of severe influenza pneumonia. Methods: We conducted a review with both systematic and narrative methods to assess whether, in patients with severe influenza pneumonia, treatment with immunomodulatory agents targeting IL-1, IL-6 or JAK signalling, in comparison to no immune modulation, is beneficial and improves clinical outcomes. Results: Our systematic search screened 5409 records and found no randomised controlled trials of IL-1, IL-6 or JAK immunomodulatory agents in patients with severe influenza pneumonia. To support this systematic search, we provide a narrative review of the biological rationale, previous use of these agents, including in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, and an overview of their safety profiles. Conclusions: Although immune modulation has proven successful in treating hospitalised and critically ill patients with COVID-19 and a biological rationale exists for testing these agents in influenza, no agents targeting IL-1, IL-6 or JAK signalling have been assessed in randomised controlled trials of patients with severe influenza pneumonia. This highlights a significant evidence gap.