Background: Although regular exercise is recommended for preventing and treating overweight/obesity, the most effective exercise type for improving cardiometabolic health in individuals with overweight/obesity remains largely undecided. This network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate and rank the comparative efficacy of 5 exercise modalities on cardiometabolic health measures in individuals with overweight/obesity.Methods: A database search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception up to September 2020. The review focused on randomized controlled trials involving exercise interventions consisting of continuous endurance training, interval training, resistance training, combined aerobic and resistance training (combined training), and hybrid-type training. Exercise interventions aimed to improve somatometric variables, body composition, lipid metabolism, glucose control, blood pressure, cardiorespiratory fitness, and muscular strength. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate eligible studies. A random-effects network meta-analysis was performed within a frequentist framework. The intervention ranking was carried out using a Bayesian model where mean and SD were equal to the respective frequentist estimates.Results: A total of 4331 participants (59% female; mean age: 38.7±12.3 years) from 81 studies were included. Combined training was the most effective modality and hybrid-type training the second most effective in improving cardiometabolic health-related outcomes in these populations suggesting a higher efficacy for multicomponent exercise interventions compared to single-component modalities, that is, continuous endurance training, interval training, and resistance training. A subgroup analysis revealed that the effects from different exercise types were mediated by gender.Conclusions: These findings corroborate the latest guidelines on exercise for individuals with overweight/obesity highlighting the importance of a multicomponent exercise approach to improve cardiometabolic health. Physicians and healthcare professionals should consider prescribing multicomponent exercise interventions to adults with overweight/obesity to maximize clinical outcomes.Registration: URL:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/; Unique identifier: CRD42020202647

Objective. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) was considered mainly as a restrictive procedure due to anatomic alterations in the upper gastrointestinal tract. Additionally, due to neurohormonal alterations, LSG modifies the gastrointestinal motility, which controls appetite and feeling of satiety. Aim. The aim of the study was to review the impact of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy on gastrointestinal motility. Material and Methods. A search of the medical literature was undertaken in Pubmed, Web of Science, and Cochrane library. Esophageal, gastric, bowel motility were assessed separately. Results. Nine studies assessed esophageal motility. The data remain debatable attributing to the heterogeneity of follow-up timing, surgical technique, bougie size, and distance from pylorus. The stomach motility was assessed in eighteen studies. Functionally, the sleeve was divided into a passive sleeve and an accelerated antrum. All scintigraphic studies revealed accelerated gastric emptying after LSG except of one. Patients demonstrated a rapid gastroduodenal transit time. The resection of the gastric pacemaker had as a consequence aberrant distal ectopic pacemaking or bioelectrical quiescence after LSG. The bowel motility was the least studied. Small bowel transit time was reduced; opposite to that the initiation of cecal filling and the ileocecal valve transit was delayed. Conclusion. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy has impacts on gastrointestinal motility. The data remain debatable for esophageal motility. Stomach and small bowel motility were accelerated, while the initiation of cecal filling and the ileocecal valve transit was delayed. Further pathophysiological studies are needed to evaluate the correlation of motility data with clinical symptoms.

Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide. A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study—a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital. Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3·85 [95% CI 2·58–5·75]; p<0·0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63·0% vs 82·7%; OR 0·35 [0·23–0·53]; p<0·0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer. Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised. National Institute for Health and Care Research.

The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) against computed tomography (CT) in various aspects of local staging in colon cancer patients. This study was a prospective single arm diagnostic accuracy study. All consecutive adult patients with confirmed colon cancer that met the current criteria for surgical resection were considered as eligible. Diagnostic performance assessment included T (T1/T2 vs T3/T4 and < T3ab vs > T3cd) and N (N positive) staging, serosa and retroperitoneal surgical margin (RSM) involvement and extramural vascular invasion (EMVI). Imaging was based on a 3 Tesla MRI system and the evaluation of all sequences (T1, T2 and diffusion-weighted imaging-DWI series) by two independent readers. CT scan was performed in a 128 row multidetector (MD) CT scanner (slice thickness: 1 mm) with intravenous contrast. Pathology report was considered as the gold standard for local staging. Sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated for both observers. MRI displayed a higher diagnostic performance over CT in terms of T1/T2 vs T3/T4 (SE: 100% vs 83.9%, SP: 96.6% vs 81%, AUC: 0.825 vs 0.983, p < 0.001), N positive (p < 0.001) and EMVI (p = 0.023) assessment. An excellent performance of MRI was noted in the T3ab vs T3cd (CT AUC_Reader1: 0.636, AUC_Reader2: 0.55 vs MRI AUC_Reader1: 0.829 AUC_Reader2 0.846, p = 0.01) and RSM invasion diagnosis. In contrast to these, MRI did not perform well in the identification of serosa invasion. MRI had a higher diagnostic yield than CT in several local staging parameters.