Colorectal surgery in Italy during the Covid19 outbreak: a survey from the iCral study group

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Elective and Emergency Surgeries, and Postoperative Mortality in a Brazilian Metropolitan Area: A Time-Series Cohort Study

Purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic posed a worldwide challenge, leading to radical changes in surgical services. The primary objective of the study was to assess the impact of COVID-19 on elective and emergency surgeries in a Brazilian metropolitan area. The secondary objective was to compare the postoperative hospital mortality before and during the pandemic.

Patients and Methods

Time-series cohort study including data of all patients admitted for elective or emergency surgery at the hospitals in the Public Health System of Federal District, Brazil, between March 2018 and February 2022, using data extracted from the Hospital Information System of Brazilian Ministry of Health (SIH/DATASUS) on September 30, 2022. A causal impact analysis was used to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on elective and emergency surgeries and hospital mortality.

Results

There were 174,473 surgeries during the study period. There was a reduction in overall (absolute effect per week: -227.5; 95% CI: -307.0 to -149.0), elective (absolute effect per week: -170.9; 95% CI: -232.8 to -112.0), and emergency (absolute effect per week: -57.7; 95% CI: -87.5 to -27.7) surgeries during the COVID-19 period. Comparing the surgeries performed before and after the COVID-19 onset, there was an increase in emergency surgeries (53.0% vs 68.8%, P < 0.001) and no significant hospital length of stay (P = 0.112). The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on postoperative hospital mortality was not statistically significant (absolute effect per week: 2.1, 95% CI: -0.01 to 4.2).

Conclusion

Our study showed a reduction in elective and emergency surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic, possibly due to disruptions in surgical services. These findings highlight that it is crucial to implement effective strategies to prevent the accumulation of surgical waiting lists in times of crisis and improve outcomes for surgical patients.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on short-term outcomes after low anterior resection in patients with rectal cancer: Analysis of data from the Japanese National Clinical Database

Aim

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected the allocation of various medical resources to several areas, including intensive care units (ICUs). However, currently, its impact on the short-term postoperative outcomes of gastrointestinal cancer surgeries remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on the incidence of complications occurring after low anterior resection in patients with rectal cancer in Japan.

Methods

Data from the Japanese National Clinical Database between 2018 and 2021 were retrospectively examined. The primary outcome of the study was the postoperative morbidity and mortality rates before and after COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, the postoperative ICU admission rate was assessed. Morbidity and mortality rates were also assessed using a standardized morbidity/mortality ratio (SMR, the ratio of the actual number of incidences to the expected number of incidences calculated by the risk calculator).

Results

This study included 74 181 patients, including 43 663 (58.9%) from COVID-19 epidemic areas. The mean actual incidences of anastomotic leakage (AL) and pneumonia during the study period were 9.2% and 0.9%, respectively. The SMRs of these complications did not increase during the pandemic but those of AL declined gradually. The mean 30-day mortality and operative mortality rates were 0.3% and 0.5%, respectively. Moreover, SMRs did not change significantly in the pandemic or regional epidemic status. The ICU admission rate temporarily decreased, especially in the epidemic areas.

Conclusion

Although the pandemic temporarily decreased the ICU admission rate, its impact on short-term outcomes following low anterior resection in patients with rectal cancer was insignificant in Japan.

The change of clinical features and surgical outcomes in patients with pressure injury during the COVID-19 pandemic

This retrospective study aims to explore whether the COVID-19 pandemic altered patient conditions and surgery outcomes by studying 213 pressure injury (PI) patients who underwent surgery during 2016 to 2019 (pre-COVID) and 2020 to 2021 (COVID) in Taiwan. We extracted patient demographics, surgical and blood test records, preoperative vital signs, and flap surgery outcomes. In total, 464 surgeries were performed, including 308 pre-COVID and 156 COVID. During the COVID period, there were more patients presenting with dementia, and it had significantly more patients with >12 000 white blood cells/μL (24.03% vs 15.59%, P = 0.029), higher C-reactive protein levels (7.13 ± 6.36 vs 5.58 ± 5.09 mg/dL, P = 0.014), pulse rates (86.67 ± 14.76 vs 81.26 ± 13.66 beats/min, P < 0.001), and respiratory rates (17.87 ± 1.98 vs 17.31 ± 2.39 breaths/min, P = 0.009) but lower haemoglobin levels (9.75 ± 2.02 vs 10.43 ± 1.67 mg/dL, P < 0.001) preoperatively. There were no between-group differences in flap surgery outcomes but had fewer flap surgeries during COVID-19. Thus, PI patient condition was generally poor during the COVID-19 pandemic because of reduced access to medical treatment; this problem may be resolved through holistic care during a future pandemic or pandemic-like situation.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Return to Intended Oncologic Therapy After Colorectal Enhanced Recovery Pathway

Objective:

To evaluate the influence of enhanced recovery pathway (ERP) on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and return to intended oncologic therapy (RIOT) after colorectal surgery.

Background:

ERP improves early outcomes after colorectal surgery; however, little is known about its influence on PROMs and on RIOT.

Methods:

Prospective multicenter enrollment of patients who underwent colorectal resection with anastomosis was performed, recording variables related to patient-, institution-, procedure-level data, adherence to the ERP, and outcomes. The primary endpoints were PROMs (administered before surgery, at discharge, and 6 to 8 weeks after surgery) and RIOT after surgery for malignancy, defined as the intended oncologic treatment according to national guidelines and disease stage, administered within 8 weeks from the index operation, evaluated through multivariate regression models.

Results:

The study included 4529 patients, analyzed for PROMs, 1467 of which were analyzed for RIOT. Compared to their baseline preoperative values, all PROMs showed significant worsening at discharge and improvement at late evaluation. PROMs values at discharge and 6 to 8 weeks after surgery, adjusted through a generalized mixed regression model according to preoperative status and other variables, showed no association with ERP adherence rates. RIOT rates (overall 54.5%) were independently lower by aged > 69 years, ASA Class III, open surgery, and presence of major morbidity; conversely, they were independently higher after surgery performed in an institutional ERP center and by ERP adherence rates > median (69.2%).

Conclusions:

Adherence to the ERP had no effect on PROMs, whereas it independently influenced RIOT rates after surgery for colorectal cancer.

In this prospective multicenter study performed on 4529 patients who underwent colorectal resection, adherence to an enhanced recovery pathway showed no effect on patient-reported outcomes but independently influenced the return to intended oncologic therapy.

The worldwide impact of COVID-19 on cancer care: A meta-analysis of surveys published after the first wave of the pandemic

Background

The rapid and global spread of COVID-19 posed a massive challenge to healthcare systems, which came across the need to provide high-intensity assistance to thousands of patients suffering from SARS-CoV-2 infection while assuring continuous care for all other diseases. This has been of particular importance in the oncology field. This study explores how oncology centers responded to the pandemic at a single center level by assessing surveys addressing different aspects of cancer care after the pandemic outbreak.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the cancer care surveys published until December 11th, 2020. Data were analyzed according to three main areas of interest, namely health care organization, including cancellation/delay and/or modification of scheduled treatments, cancellation/delay of outpatient visits, and reduction of overall cancer care activities; routine use of preventive measures, such as personal protective equipment (PPE) by both patients and health care workers, and systematic SARS-CoV-2 screening by nasopharyngeal swabs; and implementation of telemedicine through remote consultations.

Findings

Fifty surveys reporting data on 9150 providers from 121 countries on 5 continents were included. Cancellation/delay of treatment occurred in 58% of centers; delay of outpatient visits in 75%; changes in treatment plans in 65%; and a general reduction in clinical activity in 58%. Routine use of PPE by patients and healthcare personnel was reported by 81% and 80% of centers, respectively; systematic SARS-CoV-2 screening by nasopharyngeal swabs was reported by only 41% of centers. Virtual visits were implemented by the majority (72%) of centers.

Interpretation

These results describe the negative impact of COVID-19 on cancer care, the rapid response of cancer centers in terms of preventive measures and alternative treatment approaches such as telemedicine, and confirm that surveys can provide the valuable, low-cost and immediate information that critical situations require.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Elective Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: Lessons to Be Learned

The review investigates the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the elective surgical treatment of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer, and the modifications of the duration of hospital stay scheduled for the surgery. Most of the studies included in our analysis showed a decrease in the number of elective surgical procedures applied to patients with colorectal cancer, varying from 14% to 70% worldwide. We have also observed a significant shortening of the hospital stay in most of the cases, associated with a longer waiting time until hospital admission. In the end, we have performed a synthesis of all the valuable data and advice gathered from real life observations, proposing a strategy to deal with the pandemic and with the large number of cancer patients accumulated during these difficult times.

Changes in the quality of cancer care as assessed through performance indicators during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Cancer comprises a high burden on health systems. Performance indicators monitoring cancer outcomes are routinely used in OECD countries. However, the development of process and cancer-pathway based information is essential to guide health care delivery, allowing for better monitoring of changes in the quality of care provided. Assessing the changes in the quality of cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic requires a structured approach considering the high volume of publications. This study aims to summarize performance indicators used in the literature to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care (January-June 2020) in OECD countries and to assess changes in the quality of care as reported via selected indicators.

METHODS

Search conducted in MEDLINE and Embase databases. Performance indicators and their trends were collated according to the cancer care pathway.

RESULTS

This study included 135 articles, from which 1013 indicators were retrieved. Indicators assessing the diagnostic process showed a decreasing trend: from 33 indicators reporting on screening, 30 (91%) signalled a decrease during the pandemic (n = 30 indicators, 91%). A reduction was also observed in the number of diagnostic procedures (n = 64, 58%) and diagnoses (n = 130, 89%). The proportion of diagnoses in the emergency setting and waiting times showed increasing trends (n = 8, 89% and n = 14, 56%, respectively). A decreasing trend in the proportion of earliest stage cancers was reported by 63% of indicators (n = 9), and 70% (n = 43) of indicators showed an increasing trend in the proportion of advanced-stage cancers. Indicators reflecting the treatment process signalled a reduction in the number of procedures: 79%(n = 82) of indicators concerning surgeries, 72%(n = 41) of indicators assessing radiotherapy, and 93%(n = 40) of indicators related to systemic therapies. Modifications in cancer treatment were frequently reported: 64%(n = 195) of indicators revealed changes in treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a summary of performance indicators used in the literature to assess the cancer care pathway from January 2020 to June 2020 in OECD countries, and the changes in the quality of care signalled by these indicators. The trends reported inform on potential bottlenecks of the cancer care pathway. Monitoring this information closely could contribute to identifying moments for intervention during crises.

ERAS program adherence-institutionalization, major morbidity and anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery: the iCral2 multicenter prospective study

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs influence morbidity rates and length of stay after colorectal surgery (CRS), and may also impact major complications and anastomotic leakage rates. A prospective multicenter observational study to investigate the interactions between ERAS program adherence and early outcomes after elective CRS was carried out.

METHODS

Prospective enrolment of patients submitted to elective CRS with anastomosis in 18 months. Adherence to 21 items of ERAS program was measured upon explicit criteria in every case. After univariate analysis, independent predictors of primary endpoints [major morbidity (MM) and anastomotic leakage (AL) rates] were identified through logistic regression analyses including all significant variables, presenting odds ratios (OR).

RESULTS

Institutional ERAS protocol was declared by 27 out of 38 (71.0%) participating centers. Median overall adherence to ERAS program items was 71.4%. Among 3830 patients included in the study, MM and AL rates were 4.7% and 4.2%, respectively. MM rates were independently influenced by intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 7.79, 95% CI 5.46-11.10; p < 0.0001) and standard anesthesia protocol (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48-0.96; p = 0.028). AL rates were independently influenced by male gender (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.06-2.07; p = 0.021), intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 4.29, 95% CI 2.93-6.50; p < 0.0001) and non-standard resections (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.01-2.22; p = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

This study disclosed wide room for improvement in compliance to several ERAS program items. It failed to detect any significant association between institutionalization and/or adherence rates to ERAS program with primary endpoints. These outcomes were independently influenced by gender, intra- and postoperative blood transfusions, non-standard resections, and standard anesthesia protocol.

The influence of the Covid-19 pandemic on the 90-day mortality rate after emergency surgery for colon cancer

The Covid-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the treatment of colon cancer. This was due to the redistribution of doctors and medical resources to empower the treatment of Sars-CoV-2-infected patients. Moreover, the restrictions imposed by the authorities on the general population and hospitals were other key elements that had to be taken into consideration. The surgical activity was massively reduced for both elective and emergency surgeries during the pandemic; initially, the elective ones were postponed. This study aimed to analyze the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the 90-day postoperative mortality rate of patients who underwent emergency surgery for colon cancer in the First General Surgery Clinic of Pius Brinzeu County Hospital Timisoara. For conducting this study, data from patients who underwent emergency surgery for colon cancer between 26.02.2020-01.10.2021 and the same period of 2016-2017 and 2018-2019 were collected and analyzed, with a p<0.05 being considered statistically significant. As a result, the 90-days postoperative mortality rate increased to 34.5% during the pandemic. A 22.55% rate was observed during 2016-2017 and an 18.4% rate in 2018-2019. In addition, during the pandemic, correlations w ere identified between the presence of 90-day postoperative mortality and severe symptomatology when presenting to the hospital, stage of the disease, and Charlson comorbidity index. All these aspects influenced the 90-days mortality rate of patients undergoing emergency surgery to treat colon cancer during the pandemic.

Anastomotic leakage in colorectal cancer surgery

The safety of colorectal surgery for oncological disease is steadily improving, but anastomotic leakage is still the most feared and devastating complication from both a surgical and oncological point of view. Anastomotic leakage affects the outcome of the surgery, increases the times and costs of hospitalization, and worsens the prognosis in terms of short- and long-term outcomes. Anastomotic leakage has a wide range of clinical features ranging from radiological only finding to peritonitis and sepsis with multi-organ failure. C-reactive protein and procalcitonin have been identified as early predictors of anastomotic leakage starting from postoperative day 2-3, but abdominal-pelvic computed tomography scan is still the gold standard for the diagnosis. Several treatments can be adopted for anastomotic leakage. However, there is not a universally accepted flowchart for the management, which should be individualized based on patient's general condition, anastomotic defect size and location, indication for primary resection and presence of the proximal stoma. Non-operative management is usually preferred in patients who underwent proximal faecal diversion at the initial operation. Laparoscopy can be attempted after minimal invasive surgery and can reduce surgical stress in patients allowing a definitive treatment. Reoperation for sepsis control is rarely necessary in those patients who already have a diverting stoma at the time of the leak, especially in extraperitoneal anastomoses. In patients without a stoma who do not require abdominal reoperation for a contained pelvic leak, there are several treatment options, including laparoscopic diverting ileostomy combined with trans-anal anastomotic tube drainage, percutaneous drainage or recently developed endoscopic procedures, such as stent or clip placement or endoluminal vacuum-assisted therapy. We describe the current approaches to treat this complication, as well as the clinical tests necessary to diagnose and provide an effective therapy.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of colorectal cancer in Denmark

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a global impact on cancer care but the extent to which this has affected the management of colorectal cancer (CRC) in different countries is unknown. CRC management in Denmark was thought to have been relatively less impacted than in other nations during the first wave of the pandemic. The aim of this study was to determine the pandemic's impact on CRC in Denmark.

METHODS

The Danish national cancer registry identified patients with newly diagnosed with CRC from 1 March 2020 to 1 August 2020 (pandemic interval) and corresponding dates in 2019 (prepandemic interval). Data regarding clinicopathological demographics and perioperative outcomes were retrieved and compared between the two cohorts.

RESULTS

Total CRC diagnoses (201 versus 359 per month, P = 0.008) and screening diagnoses (38 versus 80 per month, P = 0.016) were both lower in the pandemic interval. The proportions of patients presenting acutely and the stage at presentation were, however, unaffected. For those patients having surgery, both colonic and rectal cancer operations fell to about half the prepandemic levels: colon (187 (i.q.r. 183-188) to 96 (i.q.r. 94-112) per month, P = 0.032) and rectal cancers (63 (i.q.r. 59-75) to 32 (i.q.r. 28-42) per month, P = 0.008). No difference was seen in surgical practice or postoperative 30-day mortality rate (colon 2.2 versus 2.2 per cent, P = 0.983; rectal 1.0 versus 2.9 per cent, P = 0.118) between the cohorts. Treatment during the pandemic interval was not independently associated with death at 30 or 90 days.

CONCLUSION

The initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic reduced the number of new diagnoses made and number of operations but had limited impact on technique or outcomes of CRC care in Denmark.

Impact of the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2/Covid-19 pandemic on digestive surgical activities: a Belgian National Survey

BACKGROUND

Belgium was one of the first European countries affected by the first wave of the Covid-19 epidemic after Italy and France and has the highest rate of Covid-19-related deaths. Very few studies have evaluated the impact of the pandemic on surgical activity on a large scale. The primary objective of this national survey was to evaluate the impact of the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic on surgical activities (elective non-oncological and oncological) in Belgian hospitals.

METHODS

A nationwide, multicenter survey was conducted in Belgium by the Royal Belgian Surgical Society (RBSS) board. The questionnaire focused on digestive surgical activity at different time points: period 1 (P1), before the epidemic; period 2 (P2), lockdown; and period 3 (P3), after stabilization of the epidemic.

RESULTS

The participation rate in the survey was 28.2% (24 out of 85 solicited hospitals), including 15 (62.5%) from the French speaking part of Belgium and 9 (37.5%) from the Flemish speaking part. Eighteen (75%) were non-academic and 6 (25%) were academic hospitals. All surgical activities were impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic except for the number of cholecystectomies. No statistical differences were observed between regions or according to the type of hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

Our national survey confirms that the COVID-19 outbreak has severely impacted in-person consultations and surgical activity for benign and malignant disease and for acute appendicitis. However, procedures for benign disease were much more affected than those for malignancies.

International cooperation group of emergency surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed working conditions for emergency surgical teams around the world. International surgical societies have issued clinical recommendations to optimize surgical management. This international study aimed to assess the degree of emergency surgical teams' adoption of recommendations during the pandemic.

METHODS

Emergency surgical team members from over 30 countries were invited to answer an anonymous, prospective, online survey to assess team organization, PPE-related aspects, OR preparations, anesthesiologic considerations, and surgical management for emergency surgery during the pandemic.

RESULTS

One-hundred-and-thirty-four questionnaires were returned (N = 134) from 26 countries, of which 88% were surgeons, 7% surgical trainees, 4% anesthetists. 81% of the respondents got involved with COVID-19 crisis management. Social media were used by 91% of the respondents to access the recommendations, and 66% used videoconference tools for team communication. 51% had not received PPE training before the pandemic, 73% reported equipment shortage, and 55% informed about re-use of N95/FPP2/3 respirators. Dedicated COVID operating areas were cited by 77% of the respondents, 44% had performed emergency surgical procedures on COVID-19 patients, and over half (52%), favored performing laparoscopic over open surgical procedures.

CONCLUSION

Surgical team members have responded with leadership to the COVID-19 pandemic, with crisis management principles. Social media and videoconference have been used by the vast majority to access guidelines or to communicate during social distancing. The level of adoption of current recommendations is high for organizational aspects and surgical management, but not so for PPE training and availability, and anesthesiologic considerations.

ICG fluorescence imaging in colorectal surgery: a snapshot from the ICRAL study group

Background

Fluorescence-guided visualization is a recently proposed technology in colorectal surgery. Possible uses include evaluating perfusion, navigating lymph nodes and searching for hepatic metastases and peritoneal spread. Despite the absence of high-level evidence, this technique has gained considerable popularity among colorectal surgeons due to its significant reliability, safety, ease of use and relatively low cost. However, the actual use of this technique in daily clinical practice has not been reported to date.

Methods

This survey was conducted on April 2020 among 44 centers dealing with colorectal diseases and participating in the Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group. Surgeons were approximately equally divided based on geographical criteria from multiple Italian regions, with a large proportion based in public (89.1%) and nonacademic (75.7%) centers. They were invited to answer an online survey to snapshot their current behaviors regarding the use of fluorescence-guided visualization in colorectal surgery. Questions regarding technological availability, indications and techniques, personal approaches and feelings were collected in a 23-item questionnaire.

Results

Questionnaire replies were received from 37 institutions and partially answered by 8, as this latter group of centers do not implement fluorescence technology (21.6%). Out of the remaining 29 centers (78,4%), fluorescence is utilized in all laparoscopic colorectal resections by 72.4% of surgeons and only for selected cases by the remaining 27.6%, while 62.1% of respondents do not use fluorescence in open surgery (unless the perfusion is macroscopically uncertain with the naked eye, in which case 41.4% of them do). The survey also suggests that there is no agreement on dilution, dosing and timing, as many different practices are adopted based on personal judgment. Only approximately half of the surgeons reported a reduced leak rate with fluorescence perfusion assessment, but 65.5% of them strongly believe that this technique will become a minimum requirement for colorectal surgery in the future.

Conclusion

The survey confirms that fluorescence is becoming a widely used technique in colorectal surgery. However, both the indications and methods still vary considerably; furthermore, the surgeons' perceptions of the results are insufficient to consider this technology essential. This survey emphasizes the need for further research to reach recommendations based on solid scientific evidence.

DElayed COloRectal cancer care during COVID-19 Pandemic (DECOR-19): Global perspective from an international survey

BACKGROUND

The widespread nature of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been unprecedented. We sought to analyze its global impact with a survey on colorectal cancer care during the pandemic.

METHODS

The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on preoperative assessment, elective surgery, and postoperative management of colorectal cancer patients was explored by a 35-item survey, which was distributed worldwide to members of surgical societies with an interest in colorectal cancer care. Respondents were divided into 2 comparator groups: (1) "delay" group: colorectal cancer care affected by the pandemic and (2) "no delay" group: unaltered colorectal cancer practice.

RESULTS

A total of 1,051 respondents from 84 countries completed the survey. No substantial differences in demographics were found between the delay (745, 70.9%) and no delay (306, 29.1%) groups. Suspension of multidisciplinary team meetings, staff members quarantined or relocated to coronavirus disease 2019 units, units fully dedicated to coronavirus disease 2019 care, and personal protective equipment not readily available were factors significantly associated to delays in endoscopy, radiology, surgery, histopathology, and prolonged chemoradiation therapy-to-surgery intervals. In the delay group, 48.9% of respondents reported a change in the initial surgical plan, and 26.3% reported a shift from elective to urgent operations. Recovery of colorectal cancer care was associated with the status of the outbreak. Practicing in coronavirus disease-free units, no change in operative slots and staff members not relocated to coronavirus disease 2019 units were statistically associated with unaltered colorectal cancer care in the no delay group, while the geographic distribution was not.

CONCLUSION

Global changes in diagnostic and therapeutic colorectal cancer practices were evident. Changes were associated with differences in health care delivery systems, hospital's preparedness, resource availability, and local coronavirus disease 2019 prevalence rather than geographic factors. Strategic planning is required to optimize colorectal cancer care.

Delays and Disruptions in Cancer Health Care Due to COVID-19 Pandemic: Systematic Review

PURPOSE

There has been noteworthy concern about the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on health services including the management of cancer. In addition to being considered at higher risk for worse outcomes from COVID-19, people with cancer may also experience disruptions or delays in health services. This systematic review aimed to identify the delays and disruptions to cancer services globally.

METHODS

This is a systematic review with a comprehensive search including specific and general databases. We considered any observational longitudinal and cross-sectional study design. The selection, data extraction, and methodological assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by specific tools. The delays and disruptions identified were categorized, and their frequency was presented.

RESULTS

Among the 62 studies identified, none exhibited high methodological quality. The most frequent determinants for disruptions were provider- or system-related, mainly because of the reduction in service availability. The studies identified 38 different categories of delays and disruptions with impact on treatment, diagnosis, or general health service. Delays or disruptions most investigated included reduction in routine activity of cancer services and number of cancer surgeries; delay in radiotherapy; and delay, reschedule, or cancellation of outpatient visits. Interruptions and disruptions largely affected facilities (up to 77.5%), supply chain (up to 79%), and personnel availability (up to 60%).

CONCLUSION

The remarkable frequency of delays and disruptions in health care mostly related to the reduction of the COVID-19 burden unintentionally posed a major risk on cancer care worldwide. Strategies can be proposed not only to mitigate the main delays and disruptions but also to standardize their measurement and reporting. As a high number of publications continuously are being published, it is critical to harmonize the upcoming reports and constantly update this review.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the detection and management of colorectal cancer in England: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

There are concerns that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative effect on cancer care but there is little direct evidence to quantify any effect. This study aims to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the detection and management of colorectal cancer in England.

METHODS

Data were extracted from four population-based datasets spanning NHS England (the National Cancer Cancer Waiting Time Monitoring, Monthly Diagnostic, Secondary Uses Service Admitted Patient Care and the National Radiotherapy datasets) for all referrals, colonoscopies, surgical procedures, and courses of rectal radiotherapy from Jan 1, 2019, to Oct 31, 2020, related to colorectal cancer in England. Differences in patterns of care were investigated between 2019 and 2020. Percentage reductions in monthly numbers and proportions were calculated.

FINDINGS

As compared to the monthly average in 2019, in April, 2020, there was a 63% (95% CI 53-71) reduction (from 36 274 to 13 440) in the monthly number of 2-week referrals for suspected cancer and a 92% (95% CI 89-95) reduction in the number of colonoscopies (from 46 441 to 3484). Numbers had just recovered by October, 2020. This resulted in a 22% (95% CI 8-34) relative reduction in the number of cases referred for treatment (from a monthly average of 2781 in 2019 to 2158 referrals in April, 2020). By October, 2020, the monthly rate had returned to 2019 levels but did not exceed it, suggesting that, from April to October, 2020, over 3500 fewer people had been diagnosed and treated for colorectal cancer in England than would have been expected. There was also a 31% (95% CI 19-42) relative reduction in the numbers receiving surgery in April, 2020, and a lower proportion of laparoscopic and a greater proportion of stoma-forming procedures, relative to the monthly average in 2019. By October, 2020, laparoscopic surgery and stoma rates were similar to 2019 levels. For rectal cancer, there was a 44% (95% CI 17-76) relative increase in the use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy in April, 2020, relative to the monthly average in 2019, due to greater use of short-course regimens. Although in June, 2020, there was a drop in the use of short-course regimens, rates remained above 2019 levels until October, 2020.

INTERPRETATION

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a sustained reduction in the number of people referred, diagnosed, and treated for colorectal cancer. By October, 2020, achievement of care pathway targets had returned to 2019 levels, albeit with smaller volumes of patients and with modifications to usual practice. As pressure grows in the NHS due to the second wave of COVID-19, urgent action is needed to address the growing burden of undetected and untreated colorectal cancer in England.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, the Medical Research Council, Public Health England, Health Data Research UK, NHS Digital, and the National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.

The clinical and translational research activities at the INT - IRCCS "Fondazione Pascale" cancer center (Naples, Italy) during the COVID-19 pandemic

COVID-19 pandemic following the outbreak in China and Western Europe, where it finally lost the momentum, is now devastating North and South America. It has not been identified the reason and the molecular mechanisms of the two different patterns of the pulmonary host responses to the virus from a minimal disease in young subjects to a severe distress syndrome (ARDS) in older subjects, particularly those with previous chronic diseases (including diabetes) and cancer. The Management of the Istituto Nazionale Tumori - IRCCS "Fondazione Pascale" in Naples (INT-Pascale), along with all Health professionals decided not to interrupt the treatment of those hospitalized and to continue, even if after a careful triage in order not to allow SARS-CoV-2 positive subjects to access, to take care of cancer patients with serious conditions. Although very few (n = 3) patients developed a symptomatic COVID-19 and required the transfer to a COVID-19 area of the Institute, no patients died during the hospitalization and completed their oncology treatment. Besides monitoring of the patients, all employees of the Institute (physicians, nurses, researchers, lawyers, accountants, gatekeepers, guardians, janitors) have been tested for a possible exposure. Personnel identified as positive, has been promptly subjected to home quarantine and subdued to health surveillance. One severe case of respiratory distress has been reported in a positive employees and one death of a family member. Further steps to home monitoring of COVID-19 clinical course have been taken with the development of remote Wi-Fi connected digital devices for the detection of early signs of respiratory distress, including heart rate and oxygen saturation.In conclusion cancer care has been performed and continued safely also during COVID-19 pandemic and further remote home strategies are in progress to ensure the appropriate monitoring of cancer patients.

ERAS pathway in colorectal surgery: structured implementation program and high adherence for improved outcomes

Although there is clear evidence that an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program in colorectal surgery leads to significantly reduced morbidity rates and length of hospital stay (LOS), it is still unclear what modalities and levels of implementation of the program are necessary to achieve these results. The purpose of this study is to analyze the methods and results of the first year of structured implementation of a colorectal ERAS program in two surgical units of the Azienda Sanitaria Unica Regionale (ASUR) Marche in Italy. A two-center observational study on a prospectively maintained database was performed on 196 consecutive colorectal resections (excluding emergencies and American Society of Anesthesiologists class > III cases) over a 1-year period. More than 50 variables including adherence to the individual items of the ERAS program were considered. Primary outcomes were overall morbidity, major morbidity, mortality and anastomotic leakage rates; secondary outcomes were LOS, re-admission and re-operation. The results were evaluated by univariate and multivariate analyses through logistic regression. After a median follow-up of 39.5 days, we recorded complications in 72 patients (overall morbidity 36.7%), major complications in 14 patients (major morbidity 7.1%), 6 deaths (mortality 3.1%), anastomotic dehiscence in 9 cases (4.9%), mean overall LOS of 6.6 days, 10 readmissions (5.1%) and 13 reoperations (6.7%). The mean adherence rate to the items of the ERAS program was 85.4%, showing a significant dose-effect curve for overall and major morbidity rates, anastomotic leakage rates and LOS. The implementation methods of a colorectal ERAS program in this study led to a high adherence (> 80%) to the program items. High adherence had significant effects also on major morbidity and anastomotic leakage rates.

Deadlock of proctologic practice in Italy during COVID-19 pandemic: a national report from ProctoLock2020

Proctology is one of the surgical specialties that suffered the most during COVID-19 pandemic. Using data from a cross-sectional worldwide web survey, we aimed to snapshot the current status of proctologic practice in Italy with differences between three macro areas (North, Centre, South). Specialists affiliated to renowned scientific societies with an interest in coloproctology were invited to join a 27-item survey. Predictive power of respondents' and hospitals' demographics on the change of status of surgical activities was calculated. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04392245). Of 299 respondents from Italy, 94 (40%) practiced in the North, 60 (25%) in the Centrer and 82 (35%) in the South and Islands. The majority were men (79%), at consultant level (70%), with a mean age of 46.5 years, practicing in academic hospitals (39%), where a dedicated proctologist was readily available (68%). Southern respondents were more at risk of infection compared to those from the Center (OR, 3.30; 95%CI 1.46; 7.47, P = 0.004), as were males (OR, 2.64; 95%CI 1.09; 6.37, P = 0.031) and those who routinely tested patients prior to surgery (OR, 3.02; 95%CI 1.39; 6.53, P = 0.005). The likelihood of ongoing surgical practice was higher in the South (OR 1.36, 95%CI 0.75; 2.46, P = 0.304) and in centers that were not fully dedicated to COVID-19 care (OR 4.00, 95%CI 1.88; 8.50, P < 0.001). The results of this survey highlight important factors contributing to the deadlock of proctologic practice in Italy and may inform the development of future management strategies.