No abstract

Background The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery (LCoGS) published its seminal report in 2015, carving a niche for global surgery academia. Six years after the LCoGS, a scoping review was conducted to see how the term 'global surgery' is characterized by the literature and how it relates to LCoGS and its domains. Methods PubMed was searched for publications between January 2015 and February 2021 that used the term ‘global surgery’ in the title, abstract, or key words or cited the LCoGS. Variables extracted included LCoGS domains, authorship metrics, geographic scope, and clinical specialty. Results The search captured 938 articles that qualified for data extraction. Nearly 80% of first and last authors had high-income country affiliations. Africa was the most frequently investigated region, though many countries within the region were under-represented. The World Journal of Surgery was the most frequent journal, publishing 13.9% of all articles. General surgery, pediatric surgery, and neurosurgery were the most represented specialties. Of the LCoGS domains, healthcare delivery and management were the most studied, while economics and financing were the least studied. Conclusion A lack of consensus on the definition of global surgery remains. Additional research is needed in economics and financing, while obstetrics and trauma are under-represented in literature using the term ‘global surgery’. Efforts in academic global surgery must give a voice to those carrying the global surgery agenda forward on the frontlines. Focusing on research capacity-building and encouraging contribution by local partners will lead to a stronger, more cohesive global surgery community.

Background The impact of extent of resection (EOR), residual tumor volume (RTV), and gross-total resection (GTR) in glioblastoma subgroups is currently unknown. This study aimed to analyze their impact in patient subgroups in relation to neurological and functional outcomes. Methods Patients with tumor resection for eloquent glioblastoma between 2010 and 2020 at four tertiary centers were recruited from a cohort of 3919 patients. Results One thousand and forty-seven (1047) patients were included. Higher EOR and lower RTV were significantly associated with improved OS and PFS across all subgroups, but RTV was a stronger prognostic factor. GTR based on RTV improved median OS in the overall cohort (19.0 months, p<0.0001), and in the subgroups with IDH wildtype tumors (18.5 months, p=0.00055), MGMT methylated tumors (35.0 months, p<0.0001), aged <70 (20.0 months, p<0.0001), NIHSS 0-1 (19.0 months, p=0.0038), KPS 90-100 (19.5 months, p=0.0012), and KPS ≤ 80 (17.0 months, p=0.036). GTR was significantly associated with improved OS in the overall cohort (HR 0.58, p=0.0070) and improved PFS in the NIHSS 0-1 subgroup (HR 0.47, p=0.012). GTR combined with preservation of neurological function (OFO 1 grade) yielded the longest survival times (median OS 22.0 months, p <0.0001), which was significantly more frequently achieved in the awake mapping group (50.0%) than in the asleep group (21.8%) (p<0.0001). Conclusions Maximum resection was especially beneficial in the subgroups aged <70, NIHSS 0-1, and KPS 90-100 without increasing the risk of postoperative NIHSS or KPS worsening. These findings may assist surgical decision making in individual glioblastoma patients.

Introduction: Improving access to information for health professionals and researchers in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) is under-prioritized. This study examines publication policies that affect authors and readers from LMICs.