International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE) guidelines and recommendations on gynecological endoscopy during the evolutionary phases of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

Patient care and access to clinical trials in gynaecological oncology: global implications of the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic

PURPOSE

Our prospective international survey evaluated the impact of the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management gynaecological malignancies from the multidisciplinary physicians' perspective with particular focus on clinical infrastructures and trial participation.

METHODS

Our survey consisted of 53 COVID-related questions. It was sent to healthcare professionals in gynaecological oncology centres across Europe and Pan-Arabian region via the study groups and gynaecological societies from April 2020 to October 2020. All healthcare professionals treating gynaecological cancers were able to participate in our survey.

RESULTS

A total of 255 answers were collected from 30 countries. The majority (73%) of participants were gynaecological oncologists from university hospitals (71%) with at least an Intensive Care Unit with cardiopulmonary support available at their institutions. Most institutions continued to perform elective surgeries only for oncological cases (98%). Patients had to wait on average 2 weeks longer for their surgery appointments compared to previous years (range 0-12 weeks). Most cases that were prioritised for surgical intervention across all gynaecological tumours were early-stage disease (74%), primary situation (61%) and good ECOG status (63%). The radicality of surgery did not change in the majority of cases (78%) across all tumour types. During the pandemic, only 38% of clinicians stated they would start a new clinical trial. Almost half of the participants stated the pandemic negatively impacted the financial structure and support for clinical trials. Approximately 20% of clinicians did not feel well-informed regarding clinical algorithm for COVID-19 patients throughout the pandemic. Thirty percent stated that they are currently having trouble in providing adequate medical care due to staff shortage.

CONCLUSION

Despite well-established guidelines, pandemic clearly affected clinical research and patientcare. Our survey underlines the necessity for building robust emergency algorithms tailored to gynaecological oncology to minimise negative impact in crises and to preserve access to clinical trials.

Improving image classification of gastrointestinal endoscopy using curriculum self-supervised learning

Endoscopy, a widely used medical procedure for examining the gastrointestinal (GI) tract to detect potential disorders, poses challenges in manual diagnosis due to non-specific symptoms and difficulties in accessing affected areas. While supervised machine learning models have proven effective in assisting clinical diagnosis of GI disorders, the scarcity of image-label pairs created by medical experts limits their availability. To address these limitations, we propose a curriculum self-supervised learning framework inspired by human curriculum learning. Our approach leverages the HyperKvasir dataset, which comprises 100k unlabeled GI images for pre-training and 10k labeled GI images for fine-tuning. By adopting our proposed method, we achieved an impressive top-1 accuracy of 88.92% and an F1 score of 73.39%. This represents a 2.1% increase over vanilla SimSiam for the top-1 accuracy and a 1.9% increase for the F1 score. The combination of self-supervised learning and a curriculum-based approach demonstrates the efficacy of our framework in advancing the diagnosis of GI disorders. Our study highlights the potential of curriculum self-supervised learning in utilizing unlabeled GI tract images to improve the diagnosis of GI disorders, paving the way for more accurate and efficient diagnosis in GI endoscopy.

The Future in Standards of Care for Gynecologic Laparoscopic Surgery to Improve Training and Education

Standards of care offer doctors and patients the confidence that an established quality, evidence-based, care is provided, and represent a tool for optimal responding to the population’s needs. It is expected that they will increasingly express a multimodal relationship with gynecologic laparoscopy. Laparoscopy is, now, a standard procedure in operative gynecology, standards are embedded in many laparoscopic procedures, standardization of the skills/competency assessment has been progressively developed, and the proof of competency in laparoscopy may become a standard of care. A continuous development of surgical education includes standard equipment (that may bring value for future advance), standardized training, testing (and performance) assessment, educational process and outcome monitoring/evaluation, patients’ care, and protection, etc. Standards of care and training have a reciprocally sustaining relationship, as training is an essential component of standards of care while care is provided at higher standards after a structured training and as credentialing/certification reunites the two. It is envisaged that through development and implementation, the European wide standards of care in laparoscopic surgery (in close harmonization with personalized medicine) would lead to effective delivery of better clinical services and provide excellent training and education.

Improving tissue characterization, differentiation and diagnosis in gynecology with the narrow-band imaging technique: A systematic review

Narrow-band imaging (NBI), an on-demand, real-time endoscopic imaging technique, was developed to enhance visualization of the mucosal vascular network and surface texture. The present article provides a systematic review of studies that assessed the use of NBI in gynecological endoscopy. The following electronic databases were searched: PubMed (1950-2020), Google Scholar (2004-2020) and Cochrane Library (2010-2020). In the initial search, 3,836 entries were identified, of which 31 were finally included in the systematic review. Of the selected studies, 10 (32%) were case reports, 19 (61.2%) were prospective studies and 2 (6.4%) were randomized controlled trials with control groups. The selected studies reported on the use of NBI in hysteroscopy, laparoscopy and colposcopy. It was revealed that NBI utilization in hysteroscopy increased the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity in detecting malignant and premalignant lesions. NBI improved the specificity and sensitivity in the detection of endometriotic lesions and cervical lesions. Conventional white light endoscopy in gynecology may be significantly improved by the use of NBI. Further studies with larger cohorts and improved design are required to achieve more reliable results. It is of special interest that utilization of this method requires apparatus which is expensive; concerns are the long training and experience of staff required and the long learning curve.

Collateral damage of COVID-19 pandemic: The impact on a gynecologic surgery department

Objective

This study focuses on changes in gynecologic surgical activity at Hospital Foch, Paris, France during the first French COVID lockdown in 2020. Additional goals include the evaluation the extent of the postponement suffered for each type of surgery and estimate the possible negative impact for patients.

Study design

Single-center, retrospective, chart-review cohort study in the gynecology department of Hospital Foch. Comparison of all patients scheduled, postponed and operated during the first COVID lockdown (March 14, to May 11, 2020) versus the same period in 2019. Postponed surgeries were classified into 4 scheduling interval categories according to the Society of Gynecology Oncology (SGO) recommendations: urgent (without delay), semi-urgent (1–4 weeks), non-urgent (>4–12 weeks) and elective (>3 months) and evaluated to determine whether COVID-19-related delays of surgeries fell within guidelines. The potential “loss of chance” or medical risk associated with postponed surgeries was estimated according to a composite criterion including death, aggravation of expected tumor stages/grades in cancers, increase in surgical complexity compared to that initially planned, need for preoperative transfusions, start of morphine consumption during preoperative treatment for opiate-naive patients, additional hospitalization or consultations in emergency room and delay in treatment when surgery was urgent.

Results

During the 2020 French COVID lockdown, 61 patients had a surgical procedure and 114 were postponed; in the comparator 2019 group, 232 patients underwent surgical procedures, indicating an overall decrease of 65% of activity. Analysis of differences between the two years revealed a reduction of 64% in emergency procedures, 90% of functional pathologies, and 13% of cancers. According to SGO guidelines, the only type of surgical procedures that had excessive delay was the semi-urgent group, where time to surgery was 6.7 weeks [range 5.4–10 weeks] instead of the recommended interval of 1–4 weeks. Among postponed surgeries there were 10 patients (8.7%) with a potential “loss of chance” according to the composite criteria, all included in the semi-urgent group.

Conclusion

The COVID 19 pandemic was responsible for a significant decrease of activity in the surgical department of Hospital Foch. Difficulty of rescheduling surgeries was responsible for an increased delay in semi-urgent operations. In almost 9% of postponed surgeries, there was a potential “loss of chance”, which likely represents only the tip of iceberg of collateral damages due to COVID 19 pandemic in this surgical unit. These data show the importance of continuing to treat pathologies requiring urgent or semi-urgent surgery during pandemics.

Intraoperative Measures to Reduce the Risk of COVID-19 Transmission During Minimally Invasive Procedures: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of Societies' Recommendations

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus 2019 pandemic and the hypothetical risk of virus transmission through aerosolized CO2 or surgical smoke produced during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) procedures have prompted societies to issue recommendations on measures to reduce this risk. The aim of this systematic review is to identify, summarize and critically appraise recommendations from surgical societies on intraoperative measures to reduce the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission to the operative room (OR) staff during MIS.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar databases were searched using a search strategy or free terms. The search was supplemented with searches of additional relevant records on coronavirus 2019 resource websites from Surgical Associations and Societies. Recommendations published by surgical societies that reported on the intraoperative methods to reduce the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission to the OR staff during MIS were also reviewed for inclusion. Expert opinion articles were excluded. A preliminary synthesis was performed of the extracted data to categorize and itemize the different types of recommendations. The results were then summarized in a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Thirty-three recommendation were included in the study. Most recommendations were targeted to general surgery (13) and gynecology (8). Areas covered by the documents were recommendations on performance of laparoscopic/robotic surgery versus open approach (28 documents), selection of surgical staff (13), management of pneumoperitoneum (33), use of energy devices (20), and management of surgical smoke and pneumoperitoneum desufflation (33) with varying degree of consensus on the specific recommendations among the documents.

CONCLUSIONS

While some of the early recommendations advised against the use of MIS, they were not strictly based on the available scientific evidence. After further consideration of the literature and of the well-known benefits of laparoscopy to the patient, later recommendations shifted to encouraging the use of MIS as long as adequate precautions could be taken to protect the safety of the OR staff. The release and implementation of recommendations should be based on evidence-based practices that allows health care systems to provide safe surgical and medical assistance.

COVID 19 pandemic and minimally invasive gynecology: consequences and future perspectives

The extent of the 2020 pandemic not only extends to the infected patients but also to patients who have been waiting for medical procedures. Reevaluation of the healthcare system is important in order to help assist the needs of intensive care units. The urgency of the gynaecological cases should be aligned based on surgical interventions and minimally invasive methods should be preferred. This will not endanger professional and other resource demands of ICUs. In acute cases, laparoscopy or hysteroscopy (preferring office hysteroscopy) should be chosen, that require no or only short period of hospitalization. Postponing non-acute surgeries is recommended to the post-pandemic period. Abbreviations: ICU: intensive care unit; COVID-19: coronavirus disease; SARS-CoV-2: severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronaviruses; IgM-IgG: immunoglobulin M; GAGP: aerosol generating procedures; PPE: personal protective equipment; ERAS: early recovery after surgery; mESAS: modified elective surgery acuity scale; RPOC: retained product of concept; PMB: postmenopausal bleeding.

Effects of Surgical Delay Due to COVID-19 on Women Requiring Emergency Gynaecological Surgery

In response to the coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic, the McGill University Health Centre introduced protocols to protect health care workers during emergency surgeries. These included waiting for a COVID-19 test result or waiting 20 minutes after aerosol-inducing procedures before proceeding with surgery. The following brief communication describes the impact of surgical delay on the outcomes of 3 emergency gynaecologic procedures: dilatation and curettage, laparoscopic salpingectomy, and laparoscopic cystectomy and detorsion. Our results show that delays associated with COVID-19 protocols did not negatively impact patients undergoing these surgeries.

COVID-19 in Women's health reducing the risk of infection to patients and staff during acute and elective hospital admission for gynaecological surgery

The novel coronavirus SARS-Cov-2 has changed healthcare on a worldwide scale. This highly contagious respiratory virus has overwhelmed healthcare systems. Many staff were redeployed, and there was widespread cessation of non-urgent outpatient clinics and surgery. Outpatient clinics and theatre areas were converted to COVID-19 wards and intensive care units. Following the first peak, services began to recommence with new triaging and prioritisation guidance to safeguard patients and staff. Different countries and healthcare systems produced differing guidance and, in particular, variation in the best approach to continuing acute and elective surgical procedures. This chapter collates and evaluates the increasing international literature concerning the surgical management of gynaecological conditions during the pandemic, such that clear inferences, recommendations and guidance can be generated to aid clinical practice and safeguard against further major disruption arising from further COVID-19 peaks. The available data are assessed within the context of the current phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.

A device category economic model of electrosurgery technologies across procedure types: a U.S. hospital budget impact analysis

AIMS

The electrosurgical technology category is used widely, with a diverse spectrum of devices designed for different surgical needs. Historically, hospitals are supplied with electrosurgical devices from several manufacturers, and those devices are often evaluated separately; it may be more efficient to evaluate the category holistically. This study assessed the health economic impact of adopting an electrosurgical device-category from a single manufacturer.

METHODS

A budget impact model was developed from a U.S. hospital perspective. The uptake of electrosurgical devices from EES (Ethicon Electrosurgery), including ultrasonic, advanced bipolar, smoke evacuators, and reusable dispersive electrodes were compared with similar MED (Medical Energy Devices) from multiple manufacturers. It was assumed that an average hospital performed 10,000 annual procedures 80% of which involved electrosurgery. Current utilization assumed 100% MED use, including advanced energy, conventional smoke mitigation options (e.g. ventilation, masks), and single-use disposable dispersive electrode devices. Future utilization assumed 100% EES use, including advanced energy devices, smoke evacuators (i.e. 80% uptake), and reusable dispersive electrodes. Surgical specialties included colorectal, bariatric, gynecology, thoracic and general surgery. Systematic reviews, network meta-analyses, and meta-regressions informed operating room (OR) time, hospital stay, and transfusion model inputs. Costs were assigned to model parameters, and price parity was assumed for advanced energy devices. The costs of disposables for dispersive electrodes and smoke-evacuators were included.

RESULTS

The base-case analysis, which assessed the adoption of EES instead of MED for an average U.S. hospital predicted an annual savings of $824,760 ($101 per procedure). Savings were attributable to associated reductions with EES in OR time, days of hospital stay, and volume of disposable electrodes. Sensitivity analyses were consistent with these base-case findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Category-wide adoption of electrosurgical devices from a single manufacturer demonstrated economic advantages compared with disaggregated product uptake. Future research should focus on informing comparisons of innovative electrosurgical devices.

Gynecological Surgery and Its Five Steps Towards Resilience: Minimally Invasive Approach in the COVID-19 Era

After the declaration of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, gynecological surgery joins the readjustment process that this great global health crisis implies. In the light of current literature, the five steps towards its resilience are described as below; (1) Dynamic prioritization of surgical indications and reintroduction of elective surgeries: Diverse surgical prioritization lists are published including the most common gynecological pathologies. (2) Minimally invasive surgery through laparoscopy and robotic assistance: Some authors suggest a theoretical but unproven risk of viral transmission during these approaches because of the aerosol generation. These theories are opposed to the well-proven advantages of these approaches compared to open surgery. (3) Optimization of surgical procedures, according to the recommendations of different societies aimed at reducing the dispersion of aerosols and surgical smoke. (4) Clinical, epidemiological and microbiological screening of all patients awaiting prompt surgery: This screening should be adapted to the local alert state. (5) Protection through the reduction of number of persons present in the operating room, and the use of adapted personal protective equipment according to physical proximity to the patient.