Clinical and economic impact of COVID in Vascular Surgery at a Tertiary University 'Hub' Hospital of Italy

Out-Patient versus In-Patient Arteriovenous Fistula Creation for Dialysis: Assessing Cost-Effectiveness Alongside Clinical Implications

(1) Background: The surgical procedure to create an arteriovenous fistula (AVF) can be performed in either an ambulatory or in-patient hospital setting, depending on the case's complexity, the anesthesia type used, and the patient's comorbidities. The main scope of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness and clinical implications of surgically creating an AVF in both ambulatory and in-hospital settings. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study, in which we initially enrolled all patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) admitted to the Vascular Surgery Department, Emergency County Hospital of Targu Mures, Romania, to surgically create an AVF for dialysis, between January 2020 and December 2022. The primary endpoint of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of surgically creating an AVF in an ambulatory vs. in-hospital setting by comparing the costs required for the two types of admissions. Further, the 116 patients enrolled in this study were divided into two groups based on their preference for hospitalization: out-patients and in-patients. (3) Results: Regarding in-patient comorbidities, there was a higher prevalence of peripheral artery disease (PAD) (p = 0.006), malignancy (p = 0.020), and previous myocardial infarction (p = 0.012). In addition, active smoking (p = 0.006) and obesity (p = 0.018) were more frequent among these patients. Regarding the laboratory data, the in-patients had lower levels of white blood cells (WBC) (p = 0.004), neutrophils count (p = 0.025), lymphocytes (p = 0.034), and monocytes (p = 0.032), but there were no differences between the two groups regarding the systemic inflammatory biomarkers or the AVF type. Additionally, we did not register any difference regarding the outcomes: local complications (p = 0.588), maturation failure (p = 0.267), and primary patency (p = 0.834). In our subsequent analysis, we discovered no significant difference between the hospitalization type chosen by patients regarding AVF primary patency failure (p = 0.195). We found no significant association between the hospitalization type and the recorded outcomes (all ps > 0.05) in both multivariate linear regression and Cox proportional hazard analysis. (4) Conclusions: In conclusion, there are no significant differences in the clinical implications, short-term and long-term complications of AVF for out-patient and in-patient admissions. Additionally, we found no variation in the costs associated with laboratory tests and surgical supplies for an AVF creation. Therefore, it is safe to perform ambulatory AVFs, which can reduce the risk of hospital-acquired infections and provide greater comfort to the patient.

The impact of the first and the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on vascular surgery practice in the leading regional center: a comparative, retrospective study

BACKGROUND

We conducted an analysis of the vascular surgery regional center reorganization in response to the first and the second wave of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic to see what lessons we learned from the first wave.

METHODS

The study included a total of 632 patients admitted to the vascular surgery department in three periods: March-May 2020, October-December 2020, and October-December 2019 as a control period.

RESULTS

In the pandemic periods the number of admitted patients decreased in relation to the control period. There was a reduction in performed procedures. We observed an increase in the ratio of less invasive procedures. There was a significant decline in hospitalization time in comparison to the control period.

CONCLUSIONS

The reduction of scheduled admissions and procedures affected vascular centers all over the world. Minimally invasive procedures were more willingly performed to shorten the hospitalization time and reduce the patient's exposure to hospital infection. It allowed us to treat more patients during the second wave. Nevertheless, an increased number of vascular patients should be expected in the future, which will result from the failure to perform elective procedures during the pandemic.

Optimizing Surgical Care Amidst COVID-19: A Scoping Review of Practices and Policies

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic significantly disrupted surgical care worldwide, affecting different specialties in various ways. Lockdowns, surges in COVID-19 cases, and changes in hospital policies notably impacted patient attendance, management practices, and access to surgical services. This scoping review examines the adverse impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical services and the policies adopted to address these care barriers.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature review using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Our search, spanning 31 December 2019, to 29 January 2023, focused on understanding the multifaceted impacts of COVID-19 on surgical services, particularly across different specialties.

RESULTS

An analysis of 75 articles indicated that the pandemic challenged surgeons worldwide to maintain a balance between delivering emergency and elective surgical care, and implementing safety measures against viral transmission. There was a marked decline in the surgical volume, leading to extended waitlists and decreased operating theater usage. Strategies such as prioritizing medically necessary and time-sensitive surgeries and integrating telemedicine have emerged as pivotal for ensuring the continuity of urgent care. Despite the reduced rates, essential surgeries such as appendectomies and cancer-related operations continued, yet faced hurdles, including reduced staffing, limited operating theater capacity, and complications in patient transfers.

CONCLUSIONS

This review emphasizes the steep reduction in surgical service utilization at the beginning of the pandemic and emergence of new compounded barriers. Policies that designated surgeries as essential, and focused on equitable and timely access, were effective. Incorporating these findings into post-pandemic assessments and future planning is crucial to sustain adequate surgical care during similar health emergencies.

A review of disparities in peripheral artery disease and diabetes-related amputations during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected health care delivery. In addition to the significant morbidity and mortality associated with acute illness from COVID-19, the indirect impact has been far-reaching, including substantial disruptions in chronic disease care. As a result of pandemic disruptions in health care, vulnerable and minority populations have faced health inequalities. The aim of this review was to investigate how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted vulnerable populations with limb-threatening peripheral artery disease and diabetic foot infections.

Association Between the Lockdown for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) and Reduced Surgical Site Infections after Vascular Exposure in the Groin at Two Italian Academic Hospitals

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the scrupulous hygiene rules and the restriction of contacts during the lockdown owing to the COVID-19 pandemic affected the rate and severity of surgical site infections (SSI) after vascular exposure in the groin at two Italian University Hospitals.

METHODS

Starting from March 2020, strict hygiene measures for protection of health care workers (HCW) and patients from COVID-19 infection were implemented, and partly lifted in July 2020. The main exposure for analysis purposes was the period in which patients were operated. Accordingly, study subjects were divided into two groups for subsequent comparisons (preCOVID-19 era: March-June 2018-2019 versus COVID-19 era: March-June 2020). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of superficial and/or deep SSI within 30 days after surgery. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definitions were used to classify superficial and deep SSI.

RESULTS

A total of 194 consecutive patients who underwent vascular exposure in the groin were retrospectively analyzed. Of those, 60 underwent surgery from April 1, 2018 to June 30 of the same year; 83 from April 1, 2019 to June 30 of the same year; and 51 from April 1, 2020 to June 30 of the same year. The mean age of the study cohort was 75 years and 140 (72%) were males. Patients who were operated in the COVID-19 era were less likely to develop SSI (10% vs. 28%; P = 0.008), including both deep SSI (4% vs. 13%; P = 0.04) and superficial SSI (6% vs. 15%; P = 0.05). After multivariate adjustments, being operated in the COVID-19 era was found to be a negative predictor for development of an SSI (odds ratio [OR] = 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.09-0.76; P < 0.001) or deep SSI (OR = 0.21; 95% CI = 0.03-0.98; P < 0.001). Operative time was also found as independent predictor for the development of deep SSI (OR = 1.21; 95%CI = 1.21-1.52; P = 0.02). Using binary logistic regression, there were no independent predictors of superficial SSI that could be identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Vascular exposure in the groin carries a non-negligible risk of SSI. In this study, we provided important insights that are simple and easily viable precautions (such as the universal use of surgical masks both for patients and health care professionals during wound care, the widespread diffusion of hand sanitizers, and the reduction of the number of visitors in the surgical wards) could be promising and safe tools for SSI risk reduction.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Clinical Care of Peripheral Arterial Disease Patients: A Single-Center Experience

OBJECTIVE

To better manage the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospitals, numerous scheduled procedures have been postponed nationwide.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patient characteristics and outcomes of patients hospitalized with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) in the period prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (2018 and 2019) and during the pandemic (2020 and 2021). This study assesses the in-hospital outcomes. Main endpoints are Rutherford stages at admission for intervention, incidence of amputation, of total occlusion, and duration of intervention. The data were analyzed descriptively.

RESULTS

The total number of interventions due to PAD had decreased in 2020, but not significantly during the pandemic period (n = 5351) compared to the period prior to COVID-19 pandemic (n = 5351) (p = 0.589). The proportion of interventions treated for critical limb-threatening ischaemia (CLTI) increased from 2018/2019 (n = 2112) to 2020/2021 (n = 2426) (p < 0.001). However, the proportion of patients with wounds requiring amputation was not higher during the pandemic (n = 191) than before (n = 176) (minor amputations p = 0.2302, major amputations p = 0.9803). The proportion of total occlusions did not differ significantly between the pre-COVID-19 (n = 3082) and the COVID-19 pandemic periods (n = 2996) (p = 0.8207). Multilevel interventions did not increase significantly from 2018/2019 (n = 1930) to 2020/2021 (n = 2071). Between 2018/2019 and 2020/2021, the procedure duration and fluoroscopy duration increased significantly. However, parameters such as contrast agent volume and radiation dose did not differ significantly. The average length of stay was 4.6 days.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on the in-patient care of PAD patients in terms of disease stage severity and complexity. However, the amputation rate was not affected.