Quantification and monitoring of lean body mass is an important component of nutrition assessment to determine nutrition status and muscle loss. The negative impact of reduced muscle mass and muscle function is increasingly evident across acute and chronic disease states but is particularly pronounced in patients with cancer. Ultrasound is emerging as a promising tool to directly measure skeletal muscle mass and quality. Unlike other ionizing imaging techniques, ultrasound can be used repeatedly at the bedside and may compliment nutritional risk assessment. This review aims to describe the current use of skeletal muscle ultrasound (SMUS) to measure muscle mass and quality in patients with acute and chronic clinical conditions and its ability to predict functional capacity, severity of malnutrition, hospital admission, and survival. Databases were searched from their inception to August 2021 for full-text articles in English. Relevant articles were included if SMUS was investigated in acute or chronic clinical contexts and correlated with a defined clinical outcome measure. Data were synthesized for narrative review due to heterogeneity between studies. This review analysed 37 studies (3100 patients), which met the inclusion criteria. Most studies (n = 22) were conducted in critical care. The clinical outcomes investigated included functional status at discharge (intensive care unit-acquired weakness), nutritional status, and length of stay. SMUS was also utilized in chronic conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic heart failure, and chronic renal failure to predict hospital readmission and disease severity. Only two studies investigated the use of SMUS in patients with cancer. Of the 37 studies, 28 (76%) found that SMUS (crosssectional area, muscle thickness, and echointensity) showed significant associations with functional capacity, length of stay, readmission, and survival. There was significant heterogeneity in terms of ultrasound technique and outcome measurement across the included studies. This review highlights that SMUS continues to gain momentum as a potential tool for skeletal muscle assessment and predicting clinically important outcomes. Further work is required to standardize the technique in nutritionally vulnerable patients, such as those with cancer, before SMUS can be widely adopted as a bedside prognostic tool.

Background Ileus is common after elective colorectal surgery, and is associated with increased adverse events and prolonged hospital stay. The aim was to assess the role of non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for reducing ileus after surgery. Methods A prospective multicentre cohort study was delivered by an international, student‐ and trainee‐led collaborative group. Adult patients undergoing elective colorectal resection between January and April 2018 were included. The primary outcome was time to gastrointestinal recovery, measured using a composite measure of bowel function and tolerance to oral intake. The impact of NSAIDs was explored using Cox regression analyses, including the results of a centre‐specific survey of compliance to enhanced recovery principles. Secondary safety outcomes included anastomotic leak rate and acute kidney injury. Results A total of 4164 patients were included, with a median age of 68 (i.q.r. 57–75) years (54·9 per cent men). Some 1153 (27·7 per cent) received NSAIDs on postoperative days 1–3, of whom 1061 (92·0 per cent) received non‐selective cyclo‐oxygenase inhibitors. After adjustment for baseline differences, the mean time to gastrointestinal recovery did not differ significantly between patients who received NSAIDs and those who did not (4·6 versus 4·8 days; hazard ratio 1·04, 95 per cent c.i. 0·96 to 1·12; P = 0·360). There were no significant differences in anastomotic leak rate (5·4 versus 4·6 per cent; P = 0·349) or acute kidney injury (14·3 versus 13·8 per cent; P = 0·666) between the groups. Significantly fewer patients receiving NSAIDs required strong opioid analgesia (35·3 versus 56·7 per cent; P < 0·001). Conclusion NSAIDs did not reduce the time for gastrointestinal recovery after colorectal surgery, but they were safe and associated with reduced postoperative opioid requirement.

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unparalleled changes to patient care, including the suspension of cancer surgery. Concerns regarding COVID-19-related risks to patients and healthcare workers with the re-introduction of major complex minimally invasive and open surgery have been raised. This study examines the COVID-19 related risks to patients and healthcare workers following the re-introduction of major oesophago-gastric (EG) surgery. Patients and Methods This was an international, multi-centre, observational study of consecutive patients treated by open and minimally invasive oesophagectomy and gastrectomy for malignant or benign disease. Patients were recruited from nine European centres serving regions with a high population incidence of COVID-19 between 1 May and 1 July 2020. The primary endpoint was 30-day COVID-19-related mortality. All staff involved in the operative care of patients were invited to complete a health-related survey to assess the incidence of COVID-19 in this group. Results In total, 158 patients were included in the study (71 oesophagectomy, 82 gastrectomy). Overall, 87 patients (57%) underwent MIS (59 oesophagectomy, 28 gastrectomy). A total of 403 staff were eligible for inclusion, of whom 313 (78%) completed the health survey. Approaches to mitigate against the risks of COVID-19 for patients and staff varied amongst centres. No patients developed COVID-19 in the post-operative period. Two healthcare workers developed self-limiting COVID-19. Conclusions Precautions to minimise the risk of COVID-19 infection have enabled the safe re-introduction of minimally invasive and open EG surgery for both patients and staff. Further studies are necessary to determine the minimum requirements for mitigations against COVID-19.