Lipopolysaccharide O-antigen molecular and supramolecular modifications of plant root microbiota are pivotal for host recognition

11 pags., 5 figs.Lipopolysaccharides, the major outer membrane components of Gram-negative bacteria, are crucial actors of the host-microbial dialogue. They can contribute to the establishment of either symbiosis or bacterial virulence, depending on the bacterial lifestyle. Plant microbiota shows great complexity, promotes plant health and growth and assures protection from pathogens. How plants perceive LPS from plant-associated bacteria and discriminate between beneficial and pathogenic microbes is an open and urgent question. Here, we report on the structure, conformation, membrane properties and immune recognition of LPS isolated from the Arabidopsis thaliana root microbiota member Herbaspirillum sp. Root189. The LPS consists of an O-methylated and variously acetylated D-rhamnose containing polysaccharide with a rather hydrophobic surface. Plant immunology studies in A. thaliana demonstrate that the native acetylated O-antigen shields the LPS from immune recognition whereas the O-deacylated one does not. These findings highlight the role of Herbaspirillum LPS within plant-microbial crosstalk, and how O-antigen modifications influence membrane properties and modulate LPS host recognition.This study was supported by PRIN 2017 "Glytunes" (2017XZ2ZBK, 2019-2022) to AS; by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 851356 to RM. Neutron Reflectivity (NR) measurements were performed at the INTER instrument at ISIS Pulsed Neutron and Muon Source, Science and Technology Facilities Council, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, UK. The authors thank the ISIS facility for provision of beam time. MACR and DS gratefully acknowl- edge financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation, and Universities (RTI2018-099985-B-I00), and the CIBER of Respiratory Diseases (CIBERES), an initiative from the Spanish Institute of Health Carlos III (ISCIII). AZ and LM acknowledge support from the Cluster of Excellence on Plant Sciences (CEPLAS) funded by the Deutsche For- schungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) under Ger- many’s Excellence Strategy-EXC 2048/1-Project ID: 390686111 and project ZU 263/11-1 (SPP DECRyPT)Peer reviewe

Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

Aim The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. Methods This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. Results Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. Conclusion One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Effects of hospital facilities on patient outcomes after cancer surgery: an international, prospective, observational study

Background 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.Methods 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.Findings 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.Interpretation 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

Experiences of Acute Surgical Care During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic Among Patients and Their Next of Kin

BACKGROUND: Since March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has widely affected healthcare systems worldwide. It is largely unknown how acutely ill surgical patients and their next of kin have perceived the hospital care during the ongoing pandemic. Therefore, we aimed to explore their experience during this period. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed 12 interviews with patients who had undergone acute abdominal surgery in a public acute care hospital in Sweden during March to June 2020. In addition, we interviewed 10 of the patients’ next of kin. We analysed the interviews using content analysis. RESULTS: Our analysis resulted in two themes: “Worries about seeking acute care” ‘‘and " The surgical care worked adequately, even though the system was overloaded” The participants experienced that the hospital maintained its functionality during the ongoing pandemic. Both the patients and their next of kin experienced insufficient information by the hospital, especially during the initial acute phase and at discharge, which led to a perceived loss of control. The implemented ban on visitors was found to have had both positive and negative effects for the patients, while the next of kin’s experiences focused on the difficulties with not being able to visit. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that the challenges of communication with the patients and their next of kin are exacerbated during a crisis such as a pandemic. In addition, a ban on visitors might have both positive and negative aspects. The potential benefits of limiting visits to acute surgical patients in non-pandemic situations are in need of further investigation