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

Optimizing timing for elective surgery in cancer patients following COVID-19 infection; a post-pandemic analysis

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic introduced challenges including delaying elective surgery. For cancer patients, reducing delays is preferred to prevent unfavorable outcomes. there is a lack of consensus regarding the optimal timing of elective surgery following a SARS-CoV-2. This study aimed to find the optimal time to elective surgery to minimize 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality.

METHODS

This is a retrospective chart review of all adult patients who underwent elective surgery with a confirmed preoperative COVID-19 diagnosis between September 2020 and April 2023. Patients' elective surgeries delays were examined to determine the optimal time to surgery in terms of postoperative complications. Analysis was controlled for age, ASA score, comorbidities, and smoking status.

RESULTS

358 records examined, 94.7% had delayed surgery and 5.3% had cancelled surgery. The optimal time to surgery was ≥ 17 days to minimize postoperative pulmonary complications [OR: 0.299, p = 0.048], other postoperative complications [OR: 0.459, p = 0.01], and a decrease in length of hospital stay. In multivariate analysis, the only significant predictors for postoperative complications were time to surgery; surgery ≥ 17 days after diagnosis had better postoperative outcomes [p < 0.001], and COVID-19 symptoms status [p = 0.019].

CONCLUSION

The best time to surgery in this cohort is at least 17 days (or a range of 2-3 weeks) for optimal results. Further research is needed to investigate the effect of such delays on oncological outcomes in this cohort.

Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the providers of oncological abdominal surgery services- a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic, led to significant global health challenges. Medical services worldwide had to reconfigure to manage the surge in COVID-19 cases, including oncological abdominal surgery (OAS). This study investigates the impact of the pandemic on the OAS workforce and aims to enhance future healthcare preparedness to potential pandemics.

METHODS

This scoping review followed the methodologies from Arksey & O'Malley and the Joanna Briggs Institute. The search included the databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, with backward citation tracking using Google Scholar™. The results were reported narratively and divided in categories and sub-categories. The reporting followed the PRISMA-ScR guidelines.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included in this scoping review. Seven studies were conducted in the United Kingdom and eight in the European Union. Key findings include treatment plan alterations such as postponing or cancelling surgeries, referring patients to alternative treatments, and changes in surgical techniques. Organizational challenges included patient and healthcare professionals' reallocation, resource shortages, and cold site availability. Measures to handle COVID-19 included adherence to guidelines, patient prioritization, and nursing roles. Testing and contamination prevention involved routine testing and the use of protective equipment. Communication shifted to virtual formats, with the introduction of telemedicine and video conferences. The pandemic induced significant psychological stress among surgical teams and highlighted lessons for future pandemics.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic required substantial adjustments in oncological surgery. Keeping up with rapidly changing recommendations was challenging, yet provided valuable lessons for future healthcare management and crisis response. Future pandemic preparedness strategies should include innovative solutions that unburden healthcare professionals.

Influence of SARS-CoV2 Pandemic on Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis, Presentation, and Surgical Management in a Tertiary Center: A Retrospective Study

Background: Oncological surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic was performed only in carefully selected cases, due to variation in the allocation of resources. The purpose of this study was to highlight the impact of the pandemic lockdown on the presentation, diagnosis, and surgical management of colorectal cancers as well as the post-pandemic changes in this area. Material and methods: This single center, retrospective comparative study contained 1687 patients, divided into three groups with equal time frames of two years, consisting of a pre-pandemic, pandemic, and post-pandemic period, in which preoperative and perioperative as well as postoperative parameters were compared. Results: Statistically significant differences regarding environment, type of admission, and ASA score, as well as a more advanced tumoral stage, increased number of important postoperative complications, and a lower minimally invasive surgical approach, were highlighted within the pandemic group. Statistically significant differences regarding emergency diagnosis as well as late diagnosis were highlighted. There were no significant differences regarding the tumor location, postoperative 30-day mortality, or hospitalization duration. Conclusions: COVID-19 significantly impacted the surgical timing in colorectal cancer, as well as addressability for the rural population, with a marked decrease in elective cases as well as an increased number of cases diagnosed in an emergency setting, with locally advanced tumors. However, no significant changes in postoperative mortality or hospitalization duration were highlighted. In addition, most of the changes highlighted were reverted in the post-pandemic period. Further studies are required to observe the long-term effects in terms of morbidity and mortality, regarding the delay of diagnosis and oncological treatment.

Examining the COVID-19 impact on cancer surgery in Ireland using three national data sources

Background

The healthcare system in Ireland was profoundly affected by COVID-19. This study aimed to explore the impact of the pandemic on cancer surgery in Ireland, from 2019 to 2022 using three national health data sources.

Methods

A repeated cross-sectional study design was used and included: (i) cancer resections from the National Histopathology Quality Improvement (NHQI) Programmes; (ii) cancer surgery from the National Cancer Registry Ireland (NCRI), and (iii) cancer surgery from Hospital Inpatient Enquiry (HIPE) System. Cancer surgery was presented by invasive/in situ and invasive only cancers (NCRI & HIPE), and by four main cancer types (breast, lung, colorectal & melanoma for NCRI & HIPE data only).

Results

The annual number of cancer resections (NHQI) declined by 4.4% in 2020 but increased by 4% in 2021 compared with 2019. NCRI data indicated invasive/in-situ cancer surgery for the four main cancer types declined by 14% in 2020 and 5.1% in 2021, and by 12.3% and 7.3% for invasive cancer only, compared to 2019. Within HIPE for the same tumour types, invasive/in situ cancer surgery declined by 21.9% in 2020 and 9.9% in 2021 and by 20.8% and 9.6% for invasive cancer only. NHQI and HIPE data indicated an increase in the number of cancer surgeries performed in 2022.

Conclusions

Cancer surgery declined in the initial pandemic waves suggests mitigation measures for cancer surgery, including utilising private hospitals for public patients, reduced the adverse impact on cancer surgery.

Health systems strengthening through surgical and perioperative care pathways: a changing paradigm

Global health has traditionally focused on the primary health development with disease-specific focus such as HIV, malaria and non-communicable diseases (NCDs). As such, surgery has traditionally been neglected in global health as investment in them is often expensive, relative to these other priorities. Therefore, efforts to improve surgical care have remained on the periphery of initiatives in health system strengthening. However, today, many would argue that global health should focus on universal health coverage with primary health and surgery and perioperative care integrated as a part of this. In this article, we discuss the past developments and future-looking solutions on how surgery can contribute to the delivery of effective and equitable healthcare across the world. These include bidirectional integration of surgical and chronic disease pathways and better understanding financing initiatives. Specifically, we focus on access to safe elective and emergency surgery for NCDs and an integrated approach towards the rising multimorbidity from chronic disease in the population. Underpinning these, data-driven solutions from high-quality research from clinical trials and cohort studies through established surgical research networks are needed. Although challenges will remain around financing, we propose that development of surgical services will strengthen and improve performance of whole health systems and contribute to improvement in population health across the world.

Optimal surgical timing for lung cancer following SARS-CoV-2 infection: a prospective multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

With the ongoing prevalence of the emerging variant and global vaccination efforts, the optimal surgical timing for patients with resectable lung cancer in the Omicron-dominant period requires further investigation.

METHODS

This prospective multicenter study involved patients who underwent radical surgery for lung cancer between January 29, 2023 and March 31, 2023. Patients were categorized into four groups based on the interval between SARS-CoV-2 infection and surgery. The main outcomes evaluated were 30-day mortality and 30-day morbidity.

RESULTS

A total of 2081 patients were enrolled in the study, of which 1837 patients (88.3%) had a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis before surgery. Notably, no instances of 30-day mortality were observed in any patient. Patients without prior infection had a 30-day morbidity rate of 15.2%, with postoperative pneumonia occurring in 7.0% of cases. In contrast, patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 before surgery had significantly higher rates of 30-day morbidity and postoperative pneumonia when surgery was performed within 4-5 weeks (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) (95% CI):2.18 (1.29-3.71) and 2.39 (1.21-4.79), respectively) or within 6-7 weeks (aOR (95% CI):2.07 (1.36-3.20) and 2.10 (1.20-3.85), respectively). Conversely, surgeries performed ≥ 8 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis exhibited similar risks of 30-day morbidity and pneumonia compared to those in the no prior infection group (aOR (95% CI):1.13 (0.77-1.70) and 1.12 (0.67-1.99), respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracic surgery for lung cancer conducted 4-7 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 infection is still associated with an increased risk of 30-day morbidity in the Omicron-dominant period. Therefore, surgeons should carefully assess the individual risks and benefits to formulate an optimal surgical strategy for patients with lung cancer with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Current insights on social media as a tool for the dissemination of research and education in surgery: a narrative review

The purpose of our narrative review is to summarize the utilization of social media (SoMe) platforms for research communication within the field of surgery. We searched the PubMed database for articles in the last decade that discuss the utilization of SoMe in surgery and then categorized the diverse purposes of SoMe. SoMe proved to be a powerful tool for disseminating articles. Employing strategic methods like visual abstracts enhances article citation rates, the impact factor, h-index, and Altmetric score (an emerging alternative metric that comprehensively and instantly quantifies the social impact of scientific papers). SoMe also proved valuable for surgical education, with online videos shared widely for surgical training. However, it is essential to acknowledge the associated risk of inconsistency in quality. Moreover, SoMe facilitates discussion on specific topics through hashtags or closed groups and is instrumental in recruiting surgeons, with over half of general surgery residency programs in the US efficiently leveraging these platforms to attract the attention of potential candidates. Thus, there is a wealth of evidence supporting the effective use of SoMe for surgeons. In the contemporary era where SoMe is widely utilized, surgeons should be well-versed in this evidence.

The trends and outcomes of inflammatory bowel disease surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective propensity score-matched analysis from a multi-institutional research network

Background and Aims

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. Elective operations and surveillance endoscopies were postponed for IBD patients to preserve healthcare resources and to prevent the spread of COVID-19. This study aimed to describe the trends and outcomes of IBD surgery during the pandemic.

Methods

This was a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis using data extracted from TriNetX, a multi-institutional research database. IBD patients admitted for surgery were identified between March 2019 to February 2020 (prepandemic) and March 2020 to February 2023 (pandemic). The monthly volume of IBD surgical procedures was compared during the pandemic to the prepandemic period. After matching, the risk of adverse outcomes following IBD surgery was compared between the 3 years of the pandemic compared to the prepandemic cohort.

Results

There was a reduction in both elective and emergency IBD operations during the pandemic. These trends were not significant. After matching, the risks of returning to theaters and hospital readmission were comparable across the 3 years of the pandemic. In the first and second years of the pandemic, elective patients were at a greater risk of mortality (risk ratio [RR], 2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.160-3.448 and RR, 1.778; 95% CI, 1.003-3.150, respectively) and the emergency cohort had a higher risk of critical care admission (RR, 1.759; 95% CI, 1.126-2.747 and RR, 1.742; 95% CI, 1.131-2.682, respectively).

Conclusion

Our study highlights the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of IBD patients undergoing surgery. These results provide insights into the management of IBD surgery during times of crisis and can help guide decision-making and resource allocation for IBD patients requiring surgical intervention.

90-Day Complication and Readmission Rates for Geriatric Patients With Hip Fracture at Different Time Points From COVID-19 Positivity: A Database Study

INTRODUCTION

Geriatric patients with hip fracture are at risk of having COVID-19 while needing fracture treatment. Understanding the associated risks of variable timing of COVID-19 before surgery may help direct care algorithms.

METHODS

Geriatric patients with documented hip fracture surgery were identified within the PearlDiver M157 database. Patients with a preoperative COVID-19 diagnosis were classified based on time from diagnosis to surgery: ≤ 1 week, > 1 to ≤ 4 weeks, > 4 to ≤ 7 weeks, > 7 to ≤ 10 weeks, and > 10 to ≤ 13 weeks. The association of COVID-19 diagnoses with 90-day complications was evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 263,771 patients with hip fracture were identified, of which COVID-19 within 13 weeks of surgery was documented for 976. On multivariable analysis, patients with COVID-19 infection within ≤ 1 week preoperatively demonstrated increased rates of minor adverse events (odds ratio (OR) = 1.50), all adverse events (OR = 1.59), sepsis (OR = 1.70), and pneumonia (OR = 2.35) (P ≤ 0.0007 for each). For time points greater than 1 week, there were no differences in complication rates.

DISCUSSION

Patients with COVID-19 within 1 week of hip fracture surgery demonstrated greater odds of 90-day complications. Reassuringly, patients with COVID-19 diagnoses more than 1 week preoperatively were not associated with increased odds of any assessed complication.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on short-term outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer: A retrospective study from the Japanese National Clinical Database, 2018-2021

Aim

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic greatly impacted medical resources such as cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment given to people for various diseases. We surveyed the impacts of the pandemic on the incidence of complications and mortality following pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer in Japan.

Methods

Data on patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer were extracted from the Japanese National Clinical Database (NCD) between 2018 and 2021. The number of the pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer were obtained and then the morbidity and mortality rates were evaluated using a standardized morbidity/mortality ratio (SMR), which is the ratio of the observed number of incidences to the expected number of incidences calculated by the risk calculator previously developed by the NCD.

Results

This study included 22 255 cases. The number of pancreaticoduodenectomies exhibited an increasing trend even during the COVID-19 pandemic. The mean observed incidence rates of Grade C pancreatic fistula and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥4 complications, and the 30-day mortality and surgical mortality rates were 0.8%, 1.8%, 0.8% and 0.9%, respectively. The standardized morbidity ratios did not increase during the COVID-19 pandemic. The standardized mortality ratios remained within the range of variations observed before the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusion

The increasing trend in the number of pancreaticoduodenectomies and favorable short-term outcomes even in the COVID-19 pandemic suggest the medical care for pancreatic cancer in Japan functioned well during the pandemic.

Recent advances in COVID-19-induced liver injury: causes, diagnosis, and management

Since the start of the pandemic, considerable advancements have been made in our understanding of the effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the associated COVID-19 on the hepatic system. There is a broad range of clinical symptoms for COVID-19. It affects multiple systems and has a dominant lung illness depending on complications. The progression of COVID-19 in people with pre-existing chronic liver disease (CLD) has also been studied in large multinational groups. Notably, SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with a higher risk of hepatic decompensation and death in patients with cirrhosis. In this review, the source, composition, mechanisms, transmission characteristics, clinical characteristics, therapy, and prevention of SARS-CoV-2 were clarified and discussed, as well as the evolution and variations of the virus. This review briefly discusses the causes and effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with CLD. As part of COVID-19, In addition, we assess the potential of liver biochemistry as a diagnostic tool examine the data on direct viral infection of liver cells, and investigate potential pathways driving SARS-CoV-2-related liver damage. Finally, we explore how the pandemic has had a significant impact on patient behaviors and hepatology services, which may increase the prevalence and severity of liver disease in the future. The topics encompassed in this review encompass the intricate relationships between SARS-CoV-2, liver health, and broader health management strategies, providing valuable insights for both current clinical practice and future research directions.

Surgical reorganization during the COVID-19 pandemic and impact on case-mix and surgical site infections: A multicenter cohort study in Italy

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to major disruptions in surgical activity, particularly in the first year (2020). The objective of this study was to assess the impact of surgical reorganization on surgical outcomes in Northern Italy in 2020 and 2021.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted among 30 hospitals participating in the surveillance system for surgical site infections (SSIs). Abdominal surgery procedures performed between 2018 and 2021 were considered. Predicted SSI rates for 2020 and 2021 were estimated based on 2018-2019 data and compared with observed rates. Independent predictors for SSI were investigated using logistic regression, including procedure year.

RESULTS

7605 procedures were included. Significant differences in case-mix were found comparing the three time periods. Observed SSI rates among all patients in 2020 were significantly lower than expected based on 2018-2019 SSI rates (p 0.0465). Patients undergoing procedures other than cancer surgery in 2020 had significantly lower odds for SSI (odds ratio, OR 0.52, 95 % confidence interval, CI 0.3-0.89, p 0.018) and patients undergoing surgery in 2021 had significantly higher odds for SSI (OR 1.49, 95 % CI 1.07-2.09, p 0.019) compared to 2018-2019.

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced infection prevention and control (IPC) measures could explain the reduced SSI risk during the first pandemic year. IPC practices should continue to be reinforced beyond the pandemic context.

Digestive and breast cancer patients managed during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic: Short and middle term outcomes

BACKGROUND

The first wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Spain lasted from middle March to the end of June 2020. Spanish population was subjected to lockdown periods and scheduled surgeries were discontinued or reduced during variable periods. In our centre, we managed patients previously and newly diagnosed with cancer. We established a strategy based on limiting perioperative social contacts, preoperative screening (symptoms and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction) and creating separated in-hospital COVID-19-free pathways for non-infected patients. We also adopted some practice modifications (surgery in different facilities, changes in staff and guidelines, using continuously changing personal protective equipment…), that supposed new inconveniences.

AIM

To analyse cancer patients with a decision for surgery managed during the first wave, focalizing on outcomes and pandemic-related modifications.

METHODS

We prospectively included adults with a confirmed diagnosis of colorectal, oesophago-gastric, liver-pancreatic or breast cancer with a decision for surgery, regardless of whether they ultimately underwent surgery. We analysed short-term outcomes [30-d postoperative morbimortality and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection] and outcomes after 3 years (adjuvant therapies, oncological events, death, SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination). We also investigated modifications to usual practice.

RESULTS

From 96 included patients, seven didn't receive treatment that period and four never (3 due to COVID-19). Operated patients: 28 colon and 21 rectal cancers; laparoscopy 53.6%/90.0%, mortality 3.57%/0%, major complications 7.04%/25.00%, anastomotic leaks 0%/5.00%, 3-years disease-free survival (DFS) 82.14%/52.4% and overall survival (OS) 78.57%/76.2%. Six liver metastases and six pancreatic cancers: no mortality, one major complication, three grade A/B liver failures, one bile leak; 3-year DFS 0%/33.3% and OS 50.0%/33.3% (liver metastases/pancreatic carcinoma). 5 gastric and 2 oesophageal tumours: mortality 0%/50%, major complications 0%/100%, anastomotic leaks 0%/100%, 3-year DFS and OS 66.67% (gastric carcinoma) and 0% (oesophagus). Twenty breast cancer without deaths/major complications; 3-year OS 100% and DFS 85%. Nobody contracted SARS-CoV-2 postoperatively. COVID-19 pandemic-related changes: 78.2% treated in alternative buildings, 43.8% waited more than 4 weeks, two additional colostomies and fewer laparoscopies.

CONCLUSION

Some patients lost curative-intent surgery due to COVID-19 pandemic. Despite practice modifications and 43.8% delays higher than 4 weeks, surgery was resumed with minimal changes without impacting outcomes. Clean pathways are essential to continue surgery safely.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Oncological Surgeries: CORONAL Study

BACKGROUND

The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on postoperative recovery from oncology surgeries should be understood for the clinical decision-making. Therefore, this study was designed to evaluate the postoperative cumulative 28-day mortality and the morbidity of surgical oncology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients consecutively admitted to intensive care units (ICU) of three centres for postoperative care of oncologic surgeries between March to June 2019 (first phase) and March to June 2020 (second phase). The primary outcome was cumulative 28-day postoperative mortality. Secondary outcomes were postoperative organic dysfunction and the incidence of clinical complications. Because of the possibility of imbalance between groups, adjusted analyses were performed: Cox proportional hazards model (primary outcome) and multiple logistic regression model (secondary outcomes).

RESULTS

After screening 328 patients, 291 were included. The proportional hazard of cumulative 28-day mortality was higher in the second phase than that in the first phase in the Cox model, with the adjusted hazard ratio of 4.35 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.15-8.82). The adjusted incidences of respiratory complications (odds ratio [OR] 5.35; 95% CI 1.42-20.11) and pulmonary infections (OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.08-2.17) were higher in the second phase. However, the adjusted incidence of other infections was lower in the second phase (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.67-0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical oncology patients who underwent postoperative care in the intensive care unit during the COVID-19 pandemic had higher hazard of 28-day mortality. Furthermore, these patients had higher odds of respiratory complications and pulmonary infections. Trials registration The study is registered in the Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials under the code RBR-8ygjpqm, UTN code U1111-1293-5414.

Risk of Early Postoperative Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Complication in Patients with Preoperative COVID-19 Undergoing Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

As the COVID-19 pandemic shifts to an endemic phase, an increasing proportion of patients with cancer and a preoperative history of COVID-19 will require surgery. This study aimed to assess the influence of preoperative COVID-19 on postoperative risk for major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACEs) among those undergoing surgical cancer resection. Secondary objectives included determining optimal time-to-surgery guidelines based on COVID-19 severity and discerning the influence of vaccination status on MACE risk.

STUDY DESIGN

National COVID Cohort Collaborative Data Enclave, a large multi-institutional dataset, was used to identify patients that underwent surgical cancer resection between January 2020 and February 2023. Multivariate regression analysis adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and risk of surgery was performed to evaluate risk for 30-day postoperative MACE.

RESULTS

Of 204,371 included patients, 21,313 (10.4%) patients had a history of preoperative COVID-19. History of COVID-19 was associated with an increased risk for postoperative composite MACE as well as 30-day mortality. Among patients with mild disease who did not require hospitalization, MACE risk was elevated for up to 4 weeks after infection. Postoperative MACE risk remained elevated more than 8 weeks after infection in those with moderate disease. Vaccination did not reduce risk for postoperative MACE.

CONCLUSIONS

Together, these data highlight that assessment of the severity of preoperative COVID-19 infection should be a routine component of both preoperative patient screening as well as surgical risk stratification. In addition, strategies beyond vaccination that increase patients' cardiovascular fitness and prevent COVID-19 infection are needed.

COVID-free surgical pathways for treating patients with acute calculous cholecystitis: a retrospective comparative study

Introduction

During the Sars-Cov-2 crisis, some of the resources committed to emergency surgery services were transiently reallocated to the care of patients with severe COVID-19, preserving immediate treatment of mostly non-deferrable conditions. Moreover, the fear of contracting infections or hindering the treatment of critical COVID-19 patients has caused many individuals to defer seeking emergency care. This situation has then possibly modified the standard of care of some common surgical conditions and the relative outcomes. Our aims was to highlight any difference in surgical outcomes in patients treated for acute cholecystitis before and during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Method

This is a retrospective study on a prospectively collected database that included all consecutive patients treated for acute cholecystitis from March 2019 to February 2021 at the Lugano Regional Hospital, a COVID-free hospital for general surgery patients. Patients were divided into pre-and post-COVID-19 outbreak groups. We collected thorough clinical characteristics and intra-and postoperative outcomes.

Results

We included 124 patients, of which 60 and 64 were operated on before and after the COVID-19 outbreak respectively. The two groups resulted similar in terms of patients' clinical characteristics (age, gender, body mass index, ASA score, and comorbidities). Patients in the post-outbreak period were admitted to the hospital 0.7 days later than patients in the pre-outbreak period (3.8 ± 6.0 days vs. 3.1 ± 4.1 days, p = 0.453). Operative time, recovery room time, complications, and reoperations resulted similar between groups. More patients in the post-outbreak period received postoperative antibiotic therapy (63.3% vs. 37.5%, p = 0.004) and for a longer time (6.9 ± 5.1 days vs. 4.5 ± 3.9 days, p = 0.020). No significant histopathological difference was found in operatory specimens.

Discussion

Despite more frequent antibiotic therapy that suggests eventually worse inflammatory local status, our results showed similar outcomes for patients treated for acute cholecystitis before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The local COVID management, reallocating resources, and keeping COVID-free hospitals was key to offering patients a high standard of treatment.

Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Everyday Neurosurgical Practice in Alsace, France: Lessons Learned, Current Perspectives, and Future Challenges-Preliminary Results of a Longitudinal Multicentric Study Registry

Background and Objectives: The global outbreak caused by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic disrupted healthcare worldwide, impacting the organization of intensive care units and surgical care units. This study aimed to document the daily neurosurgical activity in Alsace, France, one of the European epicenters of the pandemic, and provide evidence of the adaptive strategies deployed during such a critical time for healthcare services. Materials and Methods: The multicentric longitudinal study was based on a prospective cohort of patients requiring neurosurgical care in the Neurosurgical Departments of Alsace, France, between March 2020 and March 2022. Surgical activity was compared with pre-pandemic performances through data obtained from electronic patient records. Results: A total of 3842 patients benefited from care in a neurosurgical unit during the period of interest; 2352 of them underwent surgeries with a wide range of pathologies treated. Surgeries were initially limited to neurosurgical emergencies only, then urgent cases were slowly reinstated; however, a significant drop in surgical volume and case mix was noticed during lockdown (March-May 2020). The crisis continued to impact surgical activity until March 2022; functional procedures were postponed, though some spine surgeries could progressively be performed starting in October 2021. Various social factors, such as increased alcohol consumption during the pandemic, influenced the severity of traumatic pathologies. The progressive return to the usual profile of surgical activity was characterized by a rebound of oncological interventions. Deferrable procedures for elective spinal and functional pathologies were the most affected, with unexpected medical and social impacts. Conclusions: The task shifting and task sharing approaches implemented during the first wave of the pandemic supported the reorganization of neurosurgical care in its aftermath and enabled the safe and timely execution of a broad spectrum of surgeries. Despite the substantial disruption to routine practices, marked by a significant reduction in elective surgical volumes, comprehensive records demonstrate the successful management of the full range of neurosurgical pathologies. This underscores the efficacy of adaptive strategies in navigating the challenges imposed by the largest healthcare crisis in recent history. Those lessons will continue to provide valuable insights and guidance for health and care managers to prepare for future unpredictable scenarios.

Optimum timing of lung resection surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection for non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection on postoperative recovery of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is need to be understood, thereby informing the optimal timing of surgical decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic for NSCLC patients. This study reports the postoperative outcomes of surgical NSCLC patients with preoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHOD

This single-center retrospective cohort study included 241 NSCLC patients who underwent lobectomy or sub-lobectomy between December 1, 2022 and February 14, 2023. Surgical outcomes of patients with preoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection (stratified by the time from diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection to surgery) were compared with those without preoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcomes were total postoperative complications and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs), the secondary outcomes included operation time, total postoperative drainage and time, length of hospital stay (LOS), 30-day and 90-day postoperative symptoms.

RESULTS

This study included 153 (63.5%) patients with preoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection and 88 (36.5%) patients without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. In patients with a preoperative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, the incidence of total postoperative complications (OR, 3.00; 95% CI, 1.12-8.01; p = 0.028) and PPCs (OR, 4.20; 95% CI, 1.11-15.91; p = 0.035) both increased in patients infected having surgery within 2 weeks compared with non-infection before surgery. However, patients who underwent lung resection more than 2 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis had a similar risk of postoperative complications and surgical outcomes with those non-infection before surgery.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to provide evidence regarding the optimum timing of lung resection surgery and assessing early outcomes after surgery in NSCLC patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our study documents that the SARS-CoV-2 infection did not complicate surgical procedures for lung cancer, and suggest that lung surgery should be postponed at least 2 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 infection for NSCLC patients.

Anastomotic Leak and Perioperative Outcomes of Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Objectives: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic influenced the healthcare system tremendously, as well as the number of elective surgical procedures worldwide. The aim of this study is to investigate the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on esophagectomies. Materials and Methods: The MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar bibliographical databases were systematically searched. Original clinical studies investigating the outcomes of esophageal cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic were deemed eligible. After exclusion criteria were applied, eight studies were considered eligible for inclusion. Results: Eight studies with non-overlapping populations, reporting on patients undergoing esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic, were included in our analysis, with a total of 18548 patients. Background characteristics for age, lung disease, smoking history as well as Body Mass Index and age were equal among the groups. The background of diabetes presented a statistically significant difference among the groups. Perioperative outcomes like reoperation rates, the length of intensive care unit stay, or readmission rates were not significantly increased during the pandemic. The 30-day readmission, and 30- and 90-day mortality were not affected either. The length of hospital stay was significantly lower in the non-pandemic period. Conclusions: The results of our study support the evidence that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, esophageal cancer operations took place safely and effectively, similarly to the standards of the non-COVID-19 era.

Operational strategies to deal with the COVID-19 emergency: recommendations from the Italian national society SIAGASCOT following the introduction of vaccines against the SARS-CoV-2 infection

BACKGROUND

This article aims to present the operational recommendations adopted by the Italian national society for orthopaedic surgery, arthroscopy, and sports medicine (SIAGASCOT) in managing patients eligible to undergo elective orthopaedic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic after the beginning of a national vaccination campaign.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An extensive literature search, analysing medical databases and scientific societies protocols, was performed to support this document. A four-step approach was used: 1-definition of priorities; 2-definition of significant clusters of interventions; 3-extraction of recommendations from international literature; and 4-adaptation of the recommendations to the specific features of the Italian healthcare system.

RESULTS

Three operational priorities were defined ("continuity of care and containment of the virus spread", "examination of waiting lists", and "definition of the role of vaccines"), six significant clusters of intervention were identified, and recommendations regarding the risk management for healthcare staff and hospital facility as well as the preoperative, in-hospital, and postoperative management were produced. Patient selection, preoperative screening, and pre-hospitalization procedures, which are regarded as pivotal roles in the safe management of patients eligible to undergo elective orthopaedic surgery, were analysed extensively.

CONCLUSIONS

This document presents national-wide recommendations for managing patients eligible to undergo elective orthopaedic surgery with the beginning of the vaccination campaign. This paper could be the basis for similar documents adapted to the local healthcare systems in other countries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Diagnostic and Therapeutic Management of Endometrial Cancer: A Monocentric Retrospective Comparative Study

Endometrial cancer represents an ideal target to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 being the most frequent gynecological malignancy in Italy, generally detected at early stages and correlated with favorable oncological outcomes. The present comparative retrospective study carried out at Campus Bio-medico University Foundation in Rome aims to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the presentation, diagnosis and treatment of EC. All women with a histological diagnosis of non-endometrioid and endometrioid endometrial cancer between 1 March 2018 and 31 October 2022 were included. The number of cases was higher in period 2 (95 vs. 64 cases). Time to diagnosis did not show statistically significant differences but in period 2, 92.06% of the diagnoses were made following abnormal uterine bleeding, while in period 1, only 67.02% were. The waiting time for the intervention was significantly shorter in period 2. Definitive histology, FIGO staging, surgical technique and adjuvant therapy did not show significant differences between the two periods. The study demonstrates that the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic did not have a direct effect on the diagnostic delay, tumor staging and type of therapy but rather on the presentation pattern of endometrial cancer.

Impact of 2 years of COVID-19 pandemic on ovarian cancer treatment in IRCCS-AUSL of Reggio Emilia

OBJECTIVE

To assess compliance with the 2019 regional recommendation to centralize epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) patients and to assess whether the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the quality of care for EOC patients.

METHODS

We compared data from EOC patients treated before the introduction of the 2019 regional recommendation (2018-2019) with data obtained from EOC patients treated after the regional recommendation was adopted during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2021). Data were retrieved from the Optimal Ovarian Cancer Pathway records. R software version 4.1.2 (the R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) was used for the statistical analysis.

RESULTS

251 EOC patients were centralized. The number of EOC patients centralized increased from 2% to 49% despite the COVID-19 pandemic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an increase in the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval debulking surgery. There was an improvement in the percentage of Stage III patients without gross residual disease following both primary and interval debulking surgery. The percentage of EOC cases discussed by the multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) increased from 66% to 89% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, centralization has increased and the quality of care has been preserved thanks to the MTB.

Effect of the COVID‑19 pandemic on the management and outcomes of patients with traumatic injuries (Review)

During the COVID-19 pandemic, ~10% of the global population was officially affected, resulting in diverse changes, ranging from shopping habits to stringent hospital protocols. This article sought to provide a concise summary of relevant data concerning the interplay between COVID-19 and trauma, encompassing the entire trajectory from presentation to hospital discharge. Throughout the pandemic, there was a noticeable reduction in trauma presentations, while the ranking of injury mechanisms remained largely unchanged. To ensure essential surgical support, protocols were adjusted accordingly. Although there were some less significant changes in injury severity score, hospital length of stay, intensive care unit stay and mortality, the overall patient outcomes appeared to improve. In conclusion, the COVID-19 pandemic led to a decline in trauma cases and an enhancement in patient outcomes. However, regrettably, certain mechanisms of injury saw an increase in frequency. To cope with the epidemiological context, management strategies were adapted, and unutilized resources were redirected to cater to the care of COVID-19 patients.

Oral antibiotics and mechanical bowel preparation for colorectal surgery: A prospective observational study of surgical site infection and microbial analysis

PURPOSE

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are common in colorectal surgery. Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) in conjunction with oral antibiotics (OABs) have been shown to reduce SSI rates. It however is still unclear which OABs to use, and how this can be implemented in practice.

METHODS

This is a prospective observational study carried out in Swansea Bay University Health Board during 2019-2021, evaluating the introduction of OABs in a stepwise manner on the incidence of SSI in major colorectal surgery. A control group having MBP only was compared to two OAB groups: one group had MBP plus metronidazole only and the second MBP plus metronidazole and neomycin. A 30-day follow-up after surgery was ascertained via chart review and telephone contact. Logistic regression was performed to estimate the relation between OAB use and SSI, with adjustment for confounding. In a subset of patients, faecal samples were analysed through 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing before and after OAB treatment, depicting the impact of the gut microbiome.

RESULTS

In total 160 patients were analysed: 46 patients had MBP only, whilst 76 patients had MBP plus metronidazole only and 38 patients had MBP with metronidazole/neomycin. The SSI rate in the entire cohort was 33.8%, whilst the adjusted ORs for the single- and dual-OAB groups were 0.76 (95% CI: 0.17-1.81) and 0.50 (95% CI: 0.17-1.52). The microbial analysis demonstrated that the relative abundance for many bacterial genera was changed before and after OAB treatment, but no link with SSI development could be shown.

CONCLUSIONS

Introduction of OABs in conjunction with MBP in colorectal surgery is feasible, and may potentially lead to lower rates of SSI, as well as altering the community structure of the faecal microbiome. More research is needed, especially considering different OABs and mechanistic studies of the gut microbiome in the context of colorectal surgery.

Experiences in Emergency Cardiac Surgery of COVID-19-Positive Patients: A Case Series

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has placed many restrictions on medical care. The timing of surgical treatment has been particularly affected, with patients experiencing delayed operation dates. This report describes three patients with preoperative COVID-19-positive diagnoses, tested with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, who were urgently treated surgically with excellent results. Case 1 involved an 89-year-old woman with a left ventricular rupture after a myocardial infarction. Case 2 involved a 52-year-old male patient with an acute type A aortic dissection. Case 3 involved a patient with an occlusion of an autologous dialysis shunt. All patient conditions were either life-threatening or overwhelmed hospital beds without surgical treatment. In Japan, we still experience cases where surgery is refused because of COVID-19 positivity, even if emergency surgery is necessary. This report describes three cases where standard precautions were taken, postoperative management was devised, and good results were achieved.

Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic on Treatment Pathways and Outcomes of Esophagogastric Cancer: A Pre- Versus Post-Pandemic Comparison of International Prospective Cohort Data

Introduction:

This study aimed to characterize the outcomes of esophagogastric (OG) cancer patients and compare perioperative outcomes with pre-pandemic data.

Methods:

Three international prospective cohort studies were included in this analysis. First, COVIDSurg-Cancer (n = 1999) included patients with an OG cancer planned for surgery from the start of the pandemic up to 14th April 2020 with follow-up until 31st August 2020. Treatment pathways and outcomes were compared against patients undergoing treatment for OG cancers before the pandemic, Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA, n = 2246) and GlobalSurg 3 (n = 1256) study. The surgical composite outcome was defined as in patients achieving margin negative resection, resectability and no postoperative mortality.

Results:

This study included 1999 patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, of which 32.4% had a change from standard pre-pandemic management. Patients with delay to surgery had significantly higher rates of no surgery (24.7%vs 7.5%, P  < .001) and less likely to have achieve a composite outcome (57.8%vs 73.4%, P  < .001) than those without any delay in surgery. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (3.5% vs 3.4%; OR: 0.98, CI95%: 0.69-1.37) or anastomotic leak rate (10.9% vs 10.2%%; OR: 1.11, CI95%: 0.90-1.37) but higher reoperation rates (13.6% vs 10.4%; OR: 1.59, CI95%: 1.30-1.92) in patients between pre-pandemic and pandemic cohorts.

Conclusion:

The pandemic appears to have led to widespread changes in management pathways affecting one-third of patients. Developing elective surgical pathways resilient to periods of system “stress” are key to minimizing future harm from treatment delay for OG cancer patients.

Variation in postoperative outcomes of patients with intracranial tumors: insights from a prospective international cohort study during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

This study assessed the international variation in surgical neuro-oncology practice and 30-day outcomes of patients who had surgery for an intracranial tumor during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We prospectively included adults aged ≥18 years who underwent surgery for a malignant or benign intracranial tumor across 55 international hospitals from 26 countries. Each participating hospital recorded cases for 3 consecutive months from the start of the pandemic. We categorized patients' location by World Bank income groups (high [HIC], upper-middle [UMIC], and low- and lower-middle [LLMIC]). Main outcomes were a change from routine management, SARS-CoV-2 infection, and 30-day mortality. We used a Bayesian multilevel logistic regression stratified by hospitals and adjusted for key confounders to estimate the association between income groups and mortality.

RESULTS

Among 1016 patients, the number of patients in each income group was 765 (75.3%) in HIC, 142 (14.0%) in UMIC, and 109 (10.7%) in LLMIC. The management of 200 (19.8%) patients changed from usual care, most commonly delayed surgery. Within 30 days after surgery, 14 (1.4%) patients had a COVID-19 diagnosis and 39 (3.8%) patients died. In the multivariable model, LLMIC was associated with increased mortality (odds ratio 2.83, 95% credible interval 1.37-5.74) compared to HIC.

CONCLUSIONS

The first wave of the pandemic had a significant impact on surgical decision-making. While the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection within 30 days after surgery was low, there was a disparity in mortality between countries and this warrants further examination to identify any modifiable factors.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care in Ireland - Perspectives from a COVID-19 and Cancer Working Group

Upon the COVID-19 pandemic onset in Ireland, cancer service disruptions occurred due to prioritisation of COVID-19 related care, redeployment of staff, initial pausing of screening, diagnostic, medical and surgical oncology procedures, staff shortages due to COVID-19 infection and impacts on the physical and mental health of cancer healthcare workers. This was coupled with reluctance among people with symptoms suspicious for cancer to attend for clinical evaluation, due to concerns of contracting the virus. This was further compounded by a cyber-attack on national health service IT systems on May 14th 2021. The Irish Cancer Society, a national cancer charity with a role in advocacy, research and patient supports, convened a multi-disciplinary stakeholder group (COVID-19 and Cancer Working Group) to reflect on and understand the impact of the pandemic on cancer patients and services in Ireland, and discuss potential mitigation strategies. Perspectives on experiences were gathered across domains including timeliness of data acquisition and its conversion into intelligence, and the resourcing of cancer care to address cancer service impacts. The group highlighted aspects for future research to understand the long-term pandemic impact on cancer outcomes, while also highlighting potential strategies to support cancer services, build resilience and address delayed diagnosis. Additional measures include the need for cancer workforce recruitment and retention, increased mental health supports for both patients and oncology professionals, improvements to public health messaging, a near real-time multimodal national cancer database, and robust digital and physical infrastructure to mitigate impacts of the current pandemic and future challenges to cancer care systems.

Use of Telemedicine for Postdischarge Assessment of the Surgical Wound: International Cohort Study, and Systematic Review With Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine whether remote wound reviews using telemedicine can be safely upscaled, and if standardized assessment tools are needed.

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common complication of surgery worldwide, and frequently occurs after hospital discharge. Evidence to support implementation of telemedicine during postoperative recovery will be an essential component of pandemic recovery.

METHODS

The primary outcome of this study was SSI reported up to 30 days after surgery (SSI), comparing rates reported using telemedicine (telephone and/or video assessment) to those with in-person review. The first part of this study analyzed primary data from an international cohort study of adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery who were discharged from hospital before 30 days after surgery. The second part combined this data with the results of a systematic review to perform a meta-analysis of all available data conducted in accordance with PRIMSA guidelines (PROSPERO:192596).

RESULTS

The cohort study included 15,358 patients from 66 countries (8069 high, 4448 middle, 1744 low income). Of these, 6907 (45.0%) were followed up using telemedicine. The SSI rate reported using telemedicine was slightly lower than with in-person follow-up (13.4% vs 11.1%, P <0.001), which persisted after risk adjustment in a mixed-effects model (adjusted odds ratio: 0.73, 95% confidence interval: 0.63-0.84, P <0.001). This association was consistent across sensitivity and subgroup analyses, including a propensity-score matched model. In 9 eligible nonrandomized studies identified, a pooled mean of 64% of patients underwent telemedicine follow-up. Upon meta-analysis, the SSI rate reported was lower with telemedicine (odds ratio: 0.67, 0.47-0.94) than in-person (reference) follow-up ( I2 =0.45, P =0.12), although there a high risk of bias in included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of telemedicine to assess the surgical wound postdischarge is feasible, but risks underreporting of SSI. Standardized tools for remote assessment of SSI must be evaluated and adopted as telemedicine is upscaled globally.

Global elective breast- and colorectal cancer surgery performance backlogs, attributable mortality and implemented health system responses during the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review

Globally, 28.4 million non-emergent ('elective') surgical procedures have been deferred during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on elective breast- or colorectal cancer (CRC) procedure backlogs and attributable mortality, globally. Further, we evaluated the interaction between procedure deferrals and health systems, internationally. Relevant articles from any country, published between December 2019-24 November 2022, were identified through searches of online databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE) and by examining the reference lists of retrieved articles. We organised health system-related findings thematically per the Structures-Processes-Outcomes conceptual model by Donabedian (1966). Of 337 identified articles, we included 50. Eleven (22.0%) were reviews. The majority of included studies originated from high-income countries (n = 38, 76.0%). An ecological, modelling study elucidated that global 12-week procedure cancellation rates ranged from 68.3%-73%; Europe and Central Asia accounted for the majority of cancellations (n = 8,430,348) and sub-Saharan Africa contributed the least (n = 520,459). The percentage reduction in global, institutional elective breast cancer surgery activity ranged from 5.68%-16.5%. For CRC, this ranged from 0%-70.9%. Significant evidence is presented on how insufficient pandemic preparedness necessitated procedure deferrals, internationally. We also outlined ancillary determinants of delayed surgery (e.g., patient-specific factors). The following global health system response themes are presented: Structural changes (i.e., hospital re-organisation), Process-related changes (i.e., adapted healthcare provision) and the utilisation of Outcomes (i.e., SARS-CoV-2 infection incidence among patients or healthcare personnel, postoperative pulmonary complication incidence, hospital readmission, length of hospital stay and tumour staging) as indicators of health system response efficacy. Evidence on procedure backlogs and attributable mortality was limited, partly due to insufficient, real-time surveillance of cancer outcomes, internationally. Elective surgery activity has decreased and cancer services have adapted rapidly, worldwide. Further research is needed to understand the impact of COVID-19 on cancer mortality and the efficacy of health system mitigation measures, globally.

The Cancer Hub Approach for Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery During COVID-19 Pandemic: Outcomes from a UK Cancer Centre

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused unprecedented disruption to global healthcare delivery. In England, the majority of elective surgery was postponed or cancelled to increase intensive care capacity. Our unit instituted the 'RM Partners Cancer Hub' at the Royal Marsden Hospital in London, to deliver ongoing cancer surgery in a 'COVID-lite' setting. This article describes the operational set-up and outcomes for upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer resections performed during this period.

METHODS

From April 2020 to April 2021, the Royal Marsden Hospital formed the RM Partners Cancer Hub. This approach was designed to coordinate resources and provide as much oncological treatment as feasible for patients across the RM Partners West London Cancer Alliance. A UGI surgical case prioritisation strategy, along with strict infection control pathways and pre-operative screening protocols, was adopted.

RESULTS

A total of 231 patients underwent surgery for confirmed or suspected UGI cancer during the RM Partners Cancer Hub, with 213 completed resections and combined 90-day mortality rate of 3.5%. Good short-term survival outcomes were demonstrated with 2-year disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) for oesophageal (70.8% and 72.9%), gastric (66.7% and 83.3%) and pancreatic cancer resections (68.0% and 88.0%). One patient who developed perioperative COVID-19 during the RM Partners Cancer Hub operation made a full recovery with no lasting clinical sequelae.

CONCLUSION

Our experience demonstrates that the RM Partners Cancer Hub approach is a safe strategy for continuing upper gastrointestinal (GI) resectional surgery during future periods of healthcare service disruption.

Delivering Safe Surgical Care While Simultaneously Caring for Patients With COVID-19; Assessment of Patient Selection, Volume and Outcomes in a Tertiary Care Hospital

Objectives: Compare patient selection and postoperative outcomes after surgical treatment for gastrointestinal disorders before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Methods: We assessed gastrointestinal surgeries conducted at a tertiary center from 2017–2021 for differences in patient populations and procedures before (up to February 2020) and during the pandemic (March 2020 to December 2021). We analyzed mortality, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) length of stay, admission to ICU and postoperative complications for complex procedures using descriptive statistics and regression models.

Results: 7309 procedures were analyzed, showing a caseload reduction in March and October 2020, but no statistical evidence for fewer overall procedures overall. Population characteristics differed with lower Body Mass Indices in 2020 and 2021, more patients smoking and with diabetes treated in 2020. There was no increased mortality, ICU length of stay and in 1,144 complex procedures assessed low overall morbidity at 90 days postoperative.

Conclusion: Delivering surgical care while treating patients for COVID-19 in the same hospital was safe. Healthcare officials should consider continuing surgical care during future health crises as consequences of limiting surgical treatment for gastrointestinal disorders may be fatal for patients.

Imaging and physician visits at cancer diagnosis: COVID -19 pandemic impact on cancer care

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the COVID-19 pandemic impact on the provision of diagnostic imaging and physician visits at cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

We used administrative databases from Ontario, Canada, to identify MRI/CT/ultrasound scans and in-person/virtual physician visits conducted with cancer patients within 91 days around the date of diagnosis in 2016-2020. In separate segmented regression procedures, we assessed the trends in weekly volume of these services per thousand cancer patients in prepandemic (June 26, 2016 to March 14, 2020), the change in mean volume at the start of the pandemic, and the additional change in weekly volume during the pandemic (March 15, 2020, to September 26, 2020).

RESULTS

Totally, 403,561 cancer patients were included. On March 15, 2020 (COVID-19 arrived), mean scan volume decreased by 12.3% (95% CI: 6.4%-17.9%) where ultrasound decreased the most by 31.8% (95% CI: 23.9%-37.0%). Afterward, the volume of all scans increased further by 1.6% per week (95% CI: 1.3%-2.0%), where ultrasound increased the fastest by 2.4% (95% CI: 1.8%-2.9%). Mean in-person visits dropped by 47.4% when COVID-19 started (95% CI: 41.6%-52.6%) while virtual visits rose by 55.15-fold (95% CI: 4927%-6173%). In the pandemic (until September 26, 2020), in-person visits increased each week by 2.6% (95% CI: 2.0%-3.2%), but no change was observed for virtual visits (p -value = 0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

Provision of diagnostic imaging and virtual visits at cancer diagnosis has been increasing since the start of COVID-19 and has exceeded prepandemic utilization levels. Future work should monitor the impact of these shifts on quality of delivered care.

Surgical Implications of Coronavirus Disease-19

As the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to evolve in 2022 with the surge of novel viral variants, it is important for physicians to understand and appreciate the surgical implications of the pandemic. This review provides an overview of the implications of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on surgical care and provides recommendations for perioperative management. Most observational studies suggest a higher risk for patients undergoing surgery with COVID-19 compared with risk-adjusted non-COVID-19 patients.

Victoria's surgical response to the COVID-19 pandemic: the first two years

Victoria suffered three major waves during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic. Melbourne became the longest locked down city in the world at 267 days. This narrative review documents the chronological waves of COVID-19 in Victoria and key themes influencing the State-wide surgical response. In 2020, Victoria needed to secure supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE) and later, recognizing the importance of aerosol transmission, introduced a respiratory protection program to protect health care workers (HCWs) with fit-tested N-95 masks. It established routine preoperative PCR testing for periods when community prevalence was high and developed strategies to restrict elective surgery when hospital capacity was limited. In 2021, three short-term outbreaks were contained and eliminated whilst vaccination of HCWs and the vulnerable was taking place. A third major wave (Delta) occurred July to November 2021, succeeded by another involving the Omicron variant from December 2021. Planned surgery waiting list numbers, and waiting times for surgery, doubled between March 2020 and March 2022. In early 2022, almost 300 patients underwent surgery when infected with Omicron, with a low mortality (2.6%), though mortality was significantly higher in the unvaccinated (7.3% versus 1.4%). In conclusion, the Victorian response to COVID-19 involved tight state-wide social restrictions, contact tracing, furlough, escalating PPE guidance and respiratory protection. HCW infections were greatly reduced in 2021 compared with 2020. Pre-operative PCR testing gave confidence for emergency and urgent elective surgery to proceed during pandemic waves. Other elective cases were performed as health system capacity allowed, without compromising outcomes.

Impact of Multiple COVID-19 Waves on Gynaecological Cancer Services in the UK

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess the impact of multiple COVID-19 waves on UK gynaecological-oncology services.

METHODS

An online survey was distributed to all UK-British-Gynaecological-Cancer-Society members during three COVID-19 waves from 2020 to2022.

RESULTS

In total, 51 hospitals (including 32 cancer centres) responded to Survey 1, 42 hospitals (29 centres) to Survey 2, and 39 hospitals (30 centres) to Survey 3. During the first wave, urgent referrals reportedly fell by a median of 50% (IQR = 25-70%). In total, 49% hospitals reported reduced staffing, and the greatest was noted for trainee doctors, by a median of 40%. Theatre capacity was reduced by a median of 40%. A median of 30% of planned operations was postponed. Multidisciplinary meetings were completely virtual in 39% and mixed in 65% of the total. A median of 75% of outpatient consultations were remote. By the second wave, fewer hospitals reported staffing reductions, and there was a return to pre-pandemic urgent referrals and multidisciplinary workloads. Theatre capacity was reduced by a median of 10%, with 5% of operations postponed. The third wave demonstrated worsening staff reductions similar to Wave 1, primarily from sickness. Pre-pandemic levels of urgent referrals/workload continued, with little reduction in surgical capacity.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 led to a significant disruption of gynaecological-cancer care across the UK, including reduced staffing, urgent referrals, theatre capacity, and working practice changes. Whilst disruption eased and referrals/workloads returned to normal, significant staff shortages remained in 2022, highlighting persistent capacity constraints.

Relation of COVID-19 with liver diseases and their impact on healthcare systems: The Portuguese case

BACKGROUND

The impact caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the Portuguese population has been addressed in areas such as clinical manifestations, frequent comorbidities, and alterations in consumption habits. However, comorbidities like liver conditions and changes concerning the Portuguese population's access to healthcare-related services have received less attention.

AIM

To (1) Review the impact of COVID-19 on the healthcare system; (2) examine the relationship between liver diseases and COVID-19 in infected individuals; and (3) investigate the situation in the Portuguese population concerning these topics.

METHODS

For our purposes, we conducted a literature review using specific keywords.

RESULTS

COVID-19 is frequently associated with liver damage. However, liver injury in COVID-19 individuals is a multifactor-mediated effect. Therefore, it remains unclear whether changes in liver laboratory tests are associated with a worse prognosis in Portuguese individuals with COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 has impacted healthcare systems in Portugal and other countries; the combination of COVID-19 with liver injury is common. Previous liver damage may represent a risk factor that worsens the prognosis in individuals with COVID-19.

The snapshot audit methodology: design, implementation and analysis of prospective observational cohort studies in surgery

PURPOSE

For some surgical conditionns and scientific questions, the "real world" effectiveness of surgical patient care may be better explored using a multi-institutional time-bound observational cohort assessment approach (termed a "snapshot audit") than by retrospective review of administrative datasets or by prospective randomized control trials. We discuss when this might be the case, and present the key features of developing, deploying, and assessing snapshot audit outcomes data.

METHODS

A narrative review of snapshot audit methodology was generated using the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA) guideline. Manuscripts were selected from domains including: audit design and deployment, statistical analysis, surgical therapy and technique, surgical outcomes, diagnostic testing, critical care management, concomitant non-surgical disease, implementation science, and guideline compliance.

RESULTS

Snapshot audits all conform to a similar structure: being time-bound, non-interventional, and multi-institutional. A successful diverse steering committee will leverage expertise that includes clinical care and data science, coupled with librarian services. Pre-published protocols (with specified aims and analyses) greatly helps site recruitment. Mentored trainee involvement at collaborating sites should be encouraged through manuscript contributorship. Current funding principally flows from medical professional organizations.

CONCLUSION

The snapshot audit approach to assessing current care provides insights into care delivery, outcomes, and guideline compliance while generating testable hypotheses.

Surgical management of acute appendicitis during the European COVID-19 second wave: safe and effective

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic drove acute care surgeons to pivot from long established practice patterns. Early safety concerns regarding increased postoperative complication risk in those with active COVID infection promoted antibiotic-driven non-operative therapy for select conditions ahead of an evidence-base. Our study assesses whether active or recent SARS-CoV-2 positivity increases hospital length of stay (LOS) or postoperative complications following appendectomy.

METHODS

Data were derived from the prospective multi-institutional observational SnapAppy cohort study. This preplanned data analysis assessed consecutive patients aged ≥ 15 years who underwent appendectomy for appendicitis (November 2020-May 2021). Patients were categorized based on SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity: no infection, active infection, and prior infection. Appendectomy method, LOS, and complications were abstracted. The association between SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and complications was determined using Poisson regression, while the association with LOS was calculated using a quantile regression model.

RESULTS

Appendectomy for acute appendicitis was performed in 4047 patients during the second and third European COVID waves. The majority were SARS-CoV-2 uninfected (3861, 95.4%), while 70 (1.7%) were acutely SARS-CoV-2 positive, and 116 (2.8%) reported prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. After confounder adjustment, there was no statistically significant association between SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and LOS, any complication, or severe complications.

CONCLUSION

During sequential SARS-CoV-2 infection waves, neither active nor prior SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with prolonged hospital LOS or postoperative complication. Despite early concerns regarding postoperative safety and outcome during active SARS-CoV-2 infection, no such association was noted for those with appendicitis who underwent operative management.

Evaluating Research Impact Based on Semantic Scholar Highly Influential Citations, Total Citations, and Altmetric Attention Scores: The Quest for Refined Measures Remains Illusive

Background: The evaluation of scholarly articles’ impact has been heavily based on the citation metrics despite the limitations of this approach. Therefore, the quest for meticulous and refined measures to evaluate publications’ impact is warranted. Semantic Scholar (SS) is an artificial intelligence-based database that allegedly identifies influential citations defined as “Highly Influential Citations” (HICs). Citations are considered highly influential according to SS when the cited publication has a significant impact on the citing publication (i.e., the citer uses or extends the cited work). Altmetrics are measures of online attention to research mined from activity in online tools and environments. Aims: The current study aimed to explore whether SS HICs provide an added value when it comes to measuring research impact compared to total citation counts and Altmetric Attention Score (AAS). Methods: Dimensions was used to generate the dataset for this study, which included COVID-19-related scholarly articles published by researchers affiliated to Jordanian institutions. Altmetric Explorer was selected as an altmetrics harvesting tool, while Semantic Scholar was used to extract details related to HICs. A total of 618 publications comprised the final dataset. Results: Only 4.57% (413/9029) of the total SS citations compiled in this study were classified as SS HICs. Based on SS categories of citations intent, 2626 were background citations (29.08%, providing historical context, justification of importance, and/or additional information related to the cited paper), 358 were result citations (3.97%, that extend on findings from research that was previously conducted), and 263 were method citations (2.91%, that use the previously established procedures or experiments to determine whether the results are consistent with findings in related studies). No correlation was found between HICs and AAS (r = 0.094). Manual inspection of the results revealed substantial contradictions, flaws, and inconsistencies in the SS HICs tool. Conclusions: The use of SS HICs in gauging research impact is significantly limited due to the enigmatic method of its calculation and total dependence on artificial intelligence. Along with the already documented drawbacks of total citation counts and AASs, continuous evaluation of the existing tools and the conception of novel approaches are highly recommended to improve the reliability of publication impact assessment.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on bone and soft tissue tumor treatment: A single-institution study

OBJECTIVE

The spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a great deal of damage to daily medical care. We investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on bone and soft tissue tumor treatment at our hospital.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective comparative study of two groups of patients at Osaka City University Hospital during the period of increasing COVID-19 infections (February-December 2020, group C) and the same period the previous year (February- December 2019, group NC). Clinical data, including patient's age, gender, type of tumor, neoplasms, number of surgical cases for inpatients and outpatients, operation time, use of implants, length of hospital stay, inpatient hospital costs, number of inpatients receiving anticancer drugs, and postoperative complications in these two groups were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

The number of cases of malignant bone and soft tissue tumors that were resected during hospitalization was predominantly higher in group C than in group NC (P = 0.01). There were no significant differences in operation time, use of implants, and postoperative complications between group C and group NC, but there were significant differences in the length of hospital stay and hospital costs (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic has been recognized throughout the world to have adverse effects in a variety of areas. It had a negative impact on hospital costs and the length of hospital stay in the field of bone and soft tissue tumor treatment.

COVID-protected pathways for image-guided lung cancer intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To compare the experience of COVID-protected and mixed cohort pathways in COVID-19 transmission at a tertiary referral hospital for elective CT-guided lung biopsy and ablation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

From September 2020 to August 2021, patients admitted for elective thoracic intervention were treated at a tertiary hospital (Site 1). Site 1 received patients for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and invasive ventilation in the treatment of COVID-19. Shared imaging, theater, and hallway facilities were used.From April 2020 to August 2020, patients admitted for elective thoracic intervention were treated at a COVID-protected hospital (Site 2). No patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were treated at Site 2.Patients were surveyed for clinical and laboratory signs of COVID-19 infection up to 30 days post-procedure.

RESULTS

At Sites 1 and 2, patients (2.4%) were tested positive for COVID-19 at 10 and 14 days post-procedure.At Site 2, there were no COVID-19 positive cases within 30 days of undergoing elective thoracic intervention.

CONCLUSION

A mixed-site method for infection control could represent a pragmatic approach to the management of elective procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic or for similar illnesses.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

Mixed-cohort infection control is possible in the prevention of nosocomial COVID-19 infection.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Diagnosis and Management of Gynecological Cancer: A Single-Center Analysis

Background and Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted health systems worldwide, particularly cancer care. Because the actual implications of these changes on gynecological oncology healthcare are still unclear, we aim to evaluate the impact of this pandemic on the diagnosis and management of gynecological cancer. Materials and Methods: This is a single-center retrospective observational study, including patients diagnosed with gynecological malignancies between January 2019 and December 2021. Patients were included into three groups based on the timing of cancer diagnosis: pre-pandemic (2019), pandemic with high restrictions (2020) and pandemic recovery (2021). Results: Overall, 234 patients were diagnosed with gynecological cancer during the period of study. A decrease in the number of newly diagnosed cervical cancers and other rare tumors (leiomyosarcoma, invasive hydatidiform mole) was apparent in 2020. Some aggressive histological types of endometrial and ovarian cancer were more commonly diagnosed in the pandemic recovery group (p < 0.05), although no differences were demonstrated concerning tumor staging in all gynecological cancers. The median time between the first multidisciplinary team meeting and the treatment initiation was higher after the COVID-19 pandemic in endometrial cancer (23.0 vs. 34.0 vs. 36.0 days, p < 0.05). Patients with ovarian cancer were more frequently proposed for neoadjuvant therapy in 2020 compared to the other periods (33.3% vs. 55.0% vs. 10.0% p < 0.05). A significant reduction in the laparoscopic approach was observed during 2020 in endometrial cancer (32.1% vs. 14.3% vs. 36.4%, p < 0.05). No significant differences were registered regarding median hospitalization days or intra- and post-operative complications between these periods. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the diagnosis and management of most gynecological malignancies, namely, on time to first treatment, chosen oncological therapies and surgical approaches. These results suggest important clinical and healthcare implications that should be addressed in future prospective studies.

Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on the diagnostic delay of oral carcinoma: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to investigate how the organisation of healthcare activity during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic affected the timing of diagnosis of oral carcinoma in the Functional Head and Neck Department of Padua (Italy). This study gives an effective temporal dimension of the diagnostic delay that occurred during the pandemic, compared with data from the literature.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the diagnostic path of a patient affected by oral cancer during COVID-19 pandemic was performed. The time elapsed from the patient's awareness of the problem to the first curative surgical intervention was considered both during the blockage of elective care activities and in the period immediately following. The results were compared to a group of patients treated in the same period of the year 2019.

RESULTS

The territorial time was 53.9% longer in the post-lockdown period than in the lockdown period (39.6 days) while the hospital time was 56.6% shorter than in the post-lockdown period (56 days).

CONCLUSIONS

The response time of territorial medicine has been longer during the pandemic peak. The unintentional creation of exclusive pathways for oncological patients speeded up the diagnostic process. The organization and accessibility of operating theatres can become particularly problematic during the acute phases of a pandemic.

COVID-19 Infection Risk Following Elective Arthroplasty and Surgical Complications in COVID-19-vaccinated Patients: A Multicenter Comparative Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to determine symptomatic Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) rates within 1 month of elective arthroplasty for vaccinated individuals and to determine whether vaccination guarantees protection against COVID-19 after arthroplasty (primary outcome). In addition, the 90-day surgical complications were compared to those of an unvaccinated group (secondary outcome).

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted on elective joint arthroplasty patients at 3 tertiary hospitals in 2 major cities (Tehran and Isfahan) in our country (Iran). The outcomes of the COVID-19-vaccinated group were assessed between October 2021 and March 2022. Ninety-day surgical complications were compared with a historical cohort of unvaccinated patients treated earlier in the pandemic (April 2020-March 2021).

RESULTS

The study included 1717 consecutive patients: 962 vaccinated and 755 unvaccinated. In the vaccinated group, 38 patients (3.9%) contracted COVID-19, 4 (10.5%) were hospitalized again, and none required intensive care unit admission. The multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that COVID-19-positive cases are more likely to be female (odds ratio [OR] = 12.5), to have visitors to their home (OR = 4.7), and to stay longer in the hospital (OR = 1.2) than COVID-19-negative cases. Compared to unvaccinated patients, the postoperative COVID-19 rate was not significantly different (3.9% vs 2.4%, P = .07). The incidence of surgical complications was similar between the 2 groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The vaccination does not provide a guarantee that a patient will not contract COVID-19 following their arthroplasty surgery, especially in a region with a high rate of COVID-19. We believe reasonable perioperative COVID-19 precautions may be warranted even in vaccinated patients.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical care in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic caused disruption of regular healthcare leading to reduced hospital attendances, repurposing of surgical facilities, and cancellation of cancer screening programmes. This study aimed to determine the impact of COVID-19 on surgical care in the Netherlands.

METHODS

A nationwide study was conducted in collaboration with the Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing. Eight surgical audits were expanded with items regarding alterations in scheduling and treatment plans. Data on procedures performed in 2020 were compared with those from a historical cohort (2018-2019). Endpoints included total numbers of procedures performed and altered treatment plans. Secondary endpoints included complication, readmission, and mortality rates.

RESULTS

Some 12 154 procedures were performed in participating hospitals in 2020, representing a decrease of 13.6 per cent compared with 2018-2019. The largest reduction (29.2 per cent) was for non-cancer procedures during the first COVID-19 wave. Surgical treatment was postponed for 9.6 per cent of patients. Alterations in surgical treatment plans were observed in 1.7 per cent. Time from diagnosis to surgery decreased (to 28 days in 2020, from 34 days in 2019 and 36 days in 2018; P < 0.001). For cancer-related procedures, duration of hospital stay decreased (5 versus 6 days; P < 0.001). Audit-specific complications, readmission, and mortality rates were unchanged, but ICU admissions decreased (16.5 versus 16.8 per cent; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The reduction in the number of surgical operations was greatest for those without cancer. Where surgery was undertaken, it appeared to be delivered safely, with similar complication and mortality rates, fewer admissions to ICU, and a shorter hospital stay.