Background Little information is available about the geo-economic variations in demographics, management, and outcomes of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We aimed to characterise the effect of these geo-economic variations in patients enrolled in the Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure (LUNG SAFE). Methods LUNG SAFE was done during 4 consecutive weeks in winter, 2014, in a convenience sample of 459 intensivecare units in 50 countries across six continents. Inclusion criteria were admission to a participating intensive-care unit (including transfers) within the enrolment window and receipt of invasive or non-invasive ventilation. One of the trial's secondary aims was to characterise variations in the demographics, management, and outcome of patients with ARDS. We used the 2016 World Bank countries classification to define three major geo-economic groupings, namely European high-income countries (Europe-High), high-income countries in the rest of the world (rWORLD-High), and middle-income countries (Middle). We compared patient outcomes across these three groupings. LUNG SAFE is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02010073. Findings Of the 2813 patients enrolled in LUNG SAFE who fulfilled ARDS criteria on day 1 or 2, 1521 (54%) were recruited from Europe-High, 746 (27%) from rWORLD-High, and 546 (19%) from Middle countries. We noted significant geographical variations in demographics, risk factors for ARDS, and comorbid diseases. The proportion of patients with severe ARDS or with ratios of the partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO 2) to the fractional concentration of oxygen in inspired air (F I O 2) less than 150 was significantly lower in rWORLD-High countries than in the two other regions. Use of prone positioning and neuromuscular blockade was significantly more common in Europe-High countries than in the other two regions. Adjusted duration of invasive mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the intensive-care unit were significantly shorter in patients in rWORLD-High countries than in Europe-High or Middle countries. High gross national income per person was associated with increased survival in ARDS; hospital survival was significantly lower in Middle countries than in Europe-High or rWORLD-High countries. Interpretation Important geo-economic differences exist in the severity, clinician recognition, and management of ARDS, and in patients' outcomes. Income per person and outcomes in ARDS are independently associated.

IntroductionThe development of acute kidney injury (AKI) is associated with poor outcome. The modified RIFLE (risk, injury, failure, loss of kidney function, and end-stage renal failure) classification for AKI, which classifies patients with renal replacement therapy needs according to RIFLE failure class, improves the predictive value of AKI in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Our aim was to assess risk factors for post-operative AKI and the impact of renal function on short- and long-term survival among all AKI subgroups using the modified RIFLE classification.MethodsWe prospectively studied 2,940 consecutive cardiosurgical patients between January 2004 and July 2009. AKI was defined according to the modified RIFLE system. Pre-operative, operative and post-operative variables usually measured on and during admission, which included main outcomes, were recorded together with cardiac surgery scores and ICU scores. These data were evaluated for association with AKI and staging in the different RIFLE groups by means of multivariable analyses. Survival was analyzed via Kaplan-Meier and a risk-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression model. A complete follow-up (mean 6.9 ± 4.3 years) was performed in 2,840 patients up to April 2013.ResultsOf those patients studied, 14% (n = 409) were diagnosed with AKI. We identified one intra-operative (higher cardiopulmonary bypass time) and two post-operative (a longer need for vasoactive drugs and higher arterial lactate 24 hours after admission) predictors of AKI. The worst outcomes, including in-hospital mortality, were associated with the worst RIFLE class. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed survival of 74.9% in the RIFLE risk group, 42.9% in the RIFLE injury group and 22.3% in the RIFLE failure group (P <0.001). Classification at RIFLE injury (Hazard ratio (HR) = 2.347, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.122 to 4.907, P = 0.023) and RIFLE failure (HR = 3.093, 95% CI 1.460 to 6.550, P = 0.003) were independent predictors for long-term patient mortality.ConclusionsAKI development after cardiac surgery is associated mainly with post-operative variables, which ultimately could lead to a worst RIFLE class. Staging at the RIFLE injury and RIFLE failure class is associated with higher short- and long-term mortality in our population.

Patients suffering from liver cirrhosis (LC) frequently require non-hepatic abdominal surgery, even before liver transplantation. LC is an important risk factor itself for surgery, due to the higher than average associated morbidity and mortality. This high surgical risk occurs because of the pathophysiology of liver disease itself and to the presence of contributing factors, such as coagulopathy, poor nutritional status, adaptive immune dysfunction, cirrhotic cardiomyopathy, and renal and pulmonary dysfunction, which all lead to poor outcomes. Careful evaluation of these factors and the degree of liver disease can help to reduce the development of complications both during and after abdominal surgery. In the emergency setting, with the presence of decompensated LC, alcoholic hepatitis, severe/advanced LC, and significant extrahepatic organ dysfunction conservative management is preferred. A multidisciplinary, individualized, and s p e c i a l i z e d a p p r o a c h c a n i m p r o v e o u t c o m e s ; preoperative optimization after risk stratification and careful management are mandatory before surgery. Laparoscopic techniques can also improve outcomes. We review the impact of LC on surgical outcome in non-hepatic abdominal surgeries required in this cirrhotic population before, during, and after surgery.Key words: Liver cirrhosis; Outcomes; Coagulopathy; Nutritional status; Abdominal surgery; Adaptive levels of expertise of the surgeons, anesthetists, and intensive care unit (ICU) staff. Liver function is usually assessed by the Child-Turcott-Pugh (CTP) and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores [11] . Early studies found 30 d mortality rates after surgery were 10% in CTP-A, 30% in CTP-B, and 76%-82% in CTP-C, figures that have not significantly changed in more recent assessments [12,13] . Despite the poor results, advances in the medical management of LC and life expectancy have increased the eligibility of these patients for abdominal surgery [14] . To be able to give definitive recommendations and indications for non-hepatic abdominal surgery in the cirrhotic population, it is important to identify the patients most likely to benefit from it. There is also a need to assess contemporary surgical techniques and the various scoring systems currently in use.This review summarizes the outcomes of patients with LC undergoing non-hepatic abdominal surgery. Indexed articles in Medline of series of patients with LC who underwent non-hepatic abdominal surgery between 1950 and March 2014 were reviewed using the OVID interface. We aimed to select manuscripts addressing outcome based on the degree of LC assessed with MELD and/or CTP scores. Articles addressing the pathophysiology of cirrhotic patients and the clinical implications in non-hepatic abdominal surgery were selected based on their importance, their date of publication, and the citations of the manuscripts. As for articles describing the different types of surgery in LC patients, the most recent publications were selected in order to preser...

No abstract