No abstract

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.

IntroductionThe high cost of many healthy foods poses a challenge to maintaining optimal blood glucose levels for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are experiencing food insecurity, leading to diabetes complications and excess acute care usage and costs. Healthy food prescription programmes may reduce food insecurity and support patients to improve their diet quality, prevent diabetes complications and avoid acute care use. We will use a type 2 hybrid-effectiveness design to examine the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation and maintenance (RE-AIM) of a healthy food prescription incentive programme for adults experiencing food insecurity and persistent hyperglycaemia. A randomised controlled trial (RCT) will investigate programme effectiveness via impact on glycosylated haemoglobin (primary outcome), food insecurity, diet quality and other clinical and patient-reported outcomes. A modelling study will estimate longer-term programme effectiveness in reducing diabetes-related complications, resource use and costs. An implementation study will examine all RE-AIM domains to understand determinants of effective implementation and reasons behind programme successes and failures.Methods and analysis594 adults who are experiencing food insecurity and persistent hyperglycaemia will be randomised to a healthy food prescription incentive (n=297) or a healthy food prescription comparison group (n=297). Both groups will receive a healthy food prescription. The incentive group will additionally receive a weekly incentive (CDN$10.50/household member) to purchase healthy foods in supermarkets for 6 months. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline and follow-up (6 months) in the RCT and analysed using mixed-effects regression. Longer-term outcomes will be modelled using the UK Prospective Diabetes Study outcomes simulation model-2. Implementation processes and outcomes will be continuously measured via quantitative and qualitative data.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the University of Calgary and the University of Alberta. Findings will be disseminated through reports, lay summaries, policy briefs, academic publications and conference presentations.Trial registration numberNCT04725630.Protocol versionVersion 1.1; February 2022

Background This study aimed to determine the impact of preoperative exposure to intravenous contrast for CT and the risk of developing postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery. Methods This prospective, multicentre cohort study included adults undergoing gastrointestinal resection, stoma reversal or liver resection. Both elective and emergency procedures were included. Preoperative exposure to intravenous contrast was defined as exposure to contrast administered for the purposes of CT up to 7 days before surgery. The primary endpoint was the rate of AKI within 7 days. Propensity score‐matched models were adjusted for patient, disease and operative variables. In a sensitivity analysis, a propensity score‐matched model explored the association between preoperative exposure to contrast and AKI in the first 48 h after surgery. Results A total of 5378 patients were included across 173 centres. Overall, 1249 patients (23·2 per cent) received intravenous contrast. The overall rate of AKI within 7 days of surgery was 13·4 per cent (718 of 5378). In the propensity score‐matched model, preoperative exposure to contrast was not associated with AKI within 7 days (odds ratio (OR) 0·95, 95 per cent c.i. 0·73 to 1·21; P = 0·669). The sensitivity analysis showed no association between preoperative contrast administration and AKI within 48 h after operation (OR 1·09, 0·84 to 1·41; P = 0·498). Conclusion There was no association between preoperative intravenous contrast administered for CT up to 7 days before surgery and postoperative AKI. Risk of contrast‐induced nephropathy should not be used as a reason to avoid contrast‐enhanced CT.