Background: Surgical mortality data are collected routinely in high-income countries, yet virtually no low-or middle-income countries have outcome surveillance in place. The aim was prospectively to collect worldwide mortality data following emergency abdominal surgery, comparing findings across countries with a low, middle or high Human Development Index (HDI).Methods: This was a prospective, multicentre, cohort study. Self-selected hospitals performing emergency surgery submitted prespecified data for consecutive patients from at least one 2-week interval during July to December 2014. Postoperative mortality was analysed by hierarchical multivariable logistic regression.

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.

If morbidity and mortality are to be reduced in patients with penetrating abdominal trauma, first priority goes to prompt and accurate determination of peritoneal penetration and identification of the need for surgery. In this setting, laparoscopy may have an important impact on the rate of negative or non-therapeutic laparotomies. We analyzed indications and patient selection criteria for laparoscopy in penetrating trauma along with outcomes. The analysis focused on identification of peritoneal penetration and injuries to the diaphragm, small intestine, and mesentery. Results from the early phase of laparoscopy were compared with those from recent decades with more advanced laparoscopic equipment and instruments and more experienced surgeons. A systematic review of the role of laparoscopy in penetrating abdominal trauma shows a sensitivity ranging from 66.7 to 100%, specificity from 33.3 to 100% and accuracy from 50 to 100%. Publications from the 1990s found trauma laparoscopy to be inadequate for detecting intestinal injuries and so to lead to missed injuries. Twenty-three of the 50 studies including the most recent ones report sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 100%. Laparoscopy is more cost effective than negative laparotomy. Laparoscopy can be performed safely and effectively on stable patients with penetrating abdominal trauma. The most important advantages are reduction of morbidity, accuracy in detecting diaphragmatic and intestinal injuries, and elimination of prolonged hospitalization for observation, so reducing the length of stay and increasing cost effectiveness.

No abstract