International guidelines and recommendations for surgery during Covid-19 pandemic: A Systematic Review

Short-term impact of delayed surgical treatment on the prognosis of patients with T1bN1-stage PTC: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

As the incidence of papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) increases, optimal timing for surgical interventions remains undefined. While surgical delays are known to affect prognosis adversely in various cancers, their impact on PTC is controversial.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on 478 T1bN1-stage PTC patients treated at West China Hospital from January 2020 to May 2022. Patients underwent thyroidectomy with lymph node dissection and were categorized into three groups based on surgical delay: ≤90 days (group A, n = 264), > 90-180 days (group B, n = 92), and > 180 days (group C, n = 122). Additionally, patients were reclassified into two groups based on a one-year threshold: ≤365 days (group D, n = 420) and > 365 days (group E, n = 58). Tumor metastasis rates and postoperative complications were analyzed across these groups.

RESULTS

The median surgical delay was 79 days, and the median follow-up was 1362 days. Tumor metastasis occurred in 1.67% (8 patients), while postoperative complications occurred in 5.65% (27 patients). Metastasis rates were 1.89%, 1.09%, and 1.64%, and complication rates were 5.68%, 4.35%, and 6.56% for groups A, B, and C, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed in metastasis or complication rates among the three groups. Similarly, no significant differences were found between groups D and E in tumor metastasis (p = 1.000) or complication rates (p = 0.555).

CONCLUSION

Delayed surgery was not associated with significantly increased short-term tumor metastasis or postoperative complication rates in patients with T1bN1-stage PTC.

Impact of COVID-19 on Thrombotic Complications in Microsurgery: Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Outcomes Amid Pandemic

Background

Emerging research underscores the heightened risk of vasculitis and microvascular thrombosis in COVID-19 patients, alongside concerns about prothrombotic events post-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination. Following the pandemic's end, we sought a comprehensive analysis to elucidate its impact on microsurgical thrombosis rates, informed by empirical and anecdotal evidence.

Methods

An institutional review board-approved retrospective review analyzed autologous breast reconstruction cases in women from January 2019 to March 2022. Data on patient history, COVID-19 infection, vaccination status, and postoperative complications were collected. Patients were categorized as prepandemic and pandemic, and based on COVID-19 influence (infection or vaccination) for statistical evaluation.

Results

Among 527 patients, 216 underwent surgery prepandemic and 311 during the pandemic, revealing thrombotic event rates of 3.2% and 5.4%, respectively. Further comparative analysis showed no significant difference in thrombotic events among patients affected by COVID-19 through infection or vaccination during the pandemic.

Conclusions

Contrary to concerns, COVID-19 infection or vaccination status does not significantly increase thrombotic event rates in deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstructions. This study offers vital insights, affirming the safety and efficacy of microsurgical procedures amid the pandemic, thereby guiding microsurgeons in optimizing patient care in the post-COVID-19 era.

Health system resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comparative analysis of disruptions in care from 32 countries

OBJECTIVE

To quantify disruptions in hospitalization and ambulatory care throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for 32 countries, and examine associations of health system characteristics and COVID-19 response strategies on disruptions.

DATA SOURCES

We utilized aggregated inpatient hospitalization and surgical procedure data from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Health Database from 2010 to 2021. Covariate data were extracted from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Health Database, World Health Organization, and Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a descriptive study using time-series analyses to quantify the annual effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on non-COVID-19 hospitalizations for 20 diagnostic categories and 15 surgical procedures. We compared expected hospitalizations had the pandemic never occurred in 2020-2021, estimated using autoregressive integrated moving average modeling with data from 2010 to 2019, with observed hospitalizations. Observed-to-expected ratios and missed hospitalizations were computed as measures of COVID-19 impact. Mixed linear models were employed to examine associations between hospitalization observed-to-expected ratios and covariates.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with 16,300,000 (95% uncertainty interval 14,700,000-17,900,000; 18.0% [16.5%-19.4%]) missed hospitalizations in 2020. Diseases of the respiratory (-2,030,000 [-2,300,000 to -1,780,000]), circulatory (-1,680,000 [-1,960,000 to -1,410,000]), and musculoskeletal (-1,480,000 [-1,720,000 to -1,260,000]) systems contributed most to the declines. In 2021, there were an additional 14,700,000 (95% uncertainty interval 13,100,000-16,400,000; 16.3% [14.9%-17.9%]) missed hospitalizations. Total healthcare workers per capita (β = 1.02 [95% CI 1.00, 1.04]) and insurance coverage (β = 1.05 [1.02, 1.09]) were associated with fewer missed hospitalizations. Stringency index (β = 0.98 [0.98, 0.99]) and excess all-cause deaths (β = 0.98 [0.96, 0.99]) were associated with more missed hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

There was marked cross-country variability in disruptions to hospitalizations and ambulatory care. Certain health system characteristics appeared to be more protective, such as insurance coverage, and number of inputs including healthcare workforce and beds.

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THIS TOPIC

Substantial disruptions in health services associated with the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic have placed a renewed interest in health system resilience. While there is a growing body of evidence documenting disruptions in services, there are limited comparative assessments across diverse countries with different health system designs, preparedness levels, and public health responses. Learning and adapting from health system-specific gaps and challenges highlighted by the pandemic will be critical for improving resilience.

WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS

All countries experienced disruptions to hospitalizations and surgical procedures with a combined total of 30 million missed hospitalizations and 4 million missed surgical procedures in 2020-2021, but there was marked cross-country heterogeneity in disruptions. Countries with greater baseline healthcare workers, insurance coverage, and hospital beds had disproportionately lower disruptions in care. National health planning discussions may need to balance health system resiliency and efficiency to avert preventable morbidity and mortality.

Examining the surgical backlog due to COVID-19 in Latin America and the Caribbean: insights from a scoping review

This scoping review assessed the surgical backlog in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) due to COVID-19 and identified mitigation strategies. We searched seven databases for citations from December 2019 to December 2022, focusing on LAC patients with cancelled or postponed procedures. We registered our protocol at Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/x2nd8) and adhered to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. We included 83 citations covering 23 LAC countries and 19 surgical specialities, with Brazil (67%, 56/83) and transplant surgery (24%, 20/83) being the most documented. Surgical backlogs were mainly reported at the hospital (44%, 37/83) and national levels (38%, 32/83). We identified 58 citations that reported a total of 42 strategies to mitigate the backlog, the most cited being establishing prioritisation criteria for surgical cases (41%, 24/58). Our findings highlight challenges across differing healthcare systems in LAC, including disparities in data availability, surgical capacity, and resource allocation. For instance, while countries like Brazil had extensive data on national surgical backlogs, others lacked comprehensive national-level data. Our review can help inform policymakers and healthcare stakeholders to implement targeted interventions to prepare LAC-based surgical systems for future health emergencies.

Surgical Challenges During the COVID-19 Crisis: A Comparative Study of Inguinal Hernia Treatment in Romania

Background and Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted healthcare systems worldwide, leading to the postponement of elective surgeries, including inguinal hernia repair (IHR), as healthcare resources prioritized critical care. This study aims to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on the incidence and outcomes of IHR procedures. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on 604 patients who underwent IHR over six years, spanning pre-pandemic, pandemic, and post-pandemic periods. Data on patient demographics, type of surgical procedure (elective or emergency), use of mesh, surgical duration, hospitalization period, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed across the three time frames. Results: Patient age remained consistent across the three periods, but a significant increase in female patients was observed during and after the pandemic (p < 0.001). Elective IHR surgeries significantly decreased during the pandemic (p < 0.001), paralleled by an increase in emergency cases (p = 0.004). In the post-pandemic period, elective surgeries rebounded, while emergency interventions declined (21.9% vs. 10.3%). Mesh repair usage increased notably in the post-pandemic phase (p < 0.001). Although surgeries took longer during the pandemic (p < 0.001), both total and postoperative hospital stays were reduced during and after the pandemic (p < 0.001). Minimal postoperative complications were reported throughout, with only one mortality during the pandemic. Conclusions: This study highlights the need for robust healthcare strategies to maintain elective surgical care during global crises, as delays in IHR may elevate risks for complications like hernia incarceration and strangulation.

Sustained improved emergency laparotomy outcomes over 3 years after a transdisciplinary perioperative care pathway-A 1:1 propensity score matched study

BACKGROUND

Emergency laparotomy is associated with high morbidity and significant global health burden. This study aims to compare postoperative outcomes of patients who underwent emergency laparotomy before and after implementation of a emergency laparotomy pathway.

METHODS

This is a single-center study of all patients who presented with an acute abdomen and/or conditions requiring emergency laparotomy during pre-emergency laparotomy pathway (retrospective cohort from January 2016 to December 2018) and after the emergency laparotomy pathway (prospective cohort from January 2019 to December 2021). Patients who underwent emergency laparotomy for trauma or vascular surgery were excluded. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed to address for confounding factors.

RESULTS

There were 888 patients (emergency laparotomy pathway, n = 428, and pre-emergency laparotomy pathway, n = 460) in the unmatched cohort. The mean age was 63.0 ± 15.4 years, and 43.8% had predicted mortality >10% using Portsmouth-Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the Enumeration of Mortality and Morbidity. The most common indication for emergency laparotomy was intestinal obstruction (30.5%). Overall incidence rates of major morbidity and 30-day mortality were 16.2% and 3.5%, respectively. There were 736 patients (n = 368 patients per arm) after propensity score matching. Demographic characteristics were comparable after propensity score matching. The emergency laparotomy pathway was associated with more patients assessed by geriatric medicine (odds ratio = 15.22; P < .001), reduced major morbidity (odds ratio = 0.63; P = .024), reduced intra-abdominal collection (odds ratio = 0.39; P = .006), and need for unplanned radiological and/or surgical intervention after index emergency laparotomy (odds ratio = 0.63; P = .024). Length of stay and 30-day mortality were comparable between the emergency laparotomy pathway and pre-emergency laparotomy pathway in both the unmatched and propensity score matched cohort.

CONCLUSION

Sustained improved postoperative outcomes were achieved 3 years postimplementation of the emergency laparotomy pathway .

Matching patients with therapists in culturally diverse rehabilitation services during civil unrest

A primary consideration in rehabilitation is the compatibility between clinicians and patients, where cultural diversity is a defining feature for both. The intricacies of cultural considerations in patient-clinician matching are heightened in areas of conflict and civil unrest. This paper presents three perspectives of the significance of cultural considerations in such assignments: patient-centred approach - prioritizing patients' preferences; professional-centred approach - clinicians' safety, social-emotional, and training needs; and utilitarian approach - what is best for the majority. A case study from an Israeli rehabilitation clinic is presented to exhibit the multifaceted considerations in patient-clinician matching within areas of conflict and civil unrest. The reconciliation of these three approaches in the context of cultural diversity is discussed, suggesting the benefit of a case-by-case strategy involving combinations of the three. Further research could examine how this might feasibly and beneficially optimize outcomes for all in culturally diverse societies in times of unrest.

Surgery for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors during the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective cohort from a high-volume center

During the COVID-19 pandemic, pancreatic surgery for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) with surgical indications was postponed or canceled. Patients with PNET patients who underwent pancreatic surgery during the COVID-19 restriction period (3 years) were compared with a similar cohort of patients who underwent surgery in the previous 3 years. Data on patients' characteristics, waiting time, and surgical and pathology outcomes were evaluated. During the study period, 370 patients received surgery for PNETs, 205 (55%) during the first period, and 165 (45%) during the pandemic. A lengthening of the waiting list (182 [IQR 100-357] vs. 60 [40-88] days, p < 0.001) and increased use of anti-tumor medical treatments (any therapy, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, and somatostatin analogs; all p < 0.001) was found. During the pandemic, surgery occurred after a median of 381 days [IQR 200-610] from diagnosis (vs. 103 [IQR 52-192] of the pre-COVID-19 period, p < 0.001). No statistically significant differences in tumor size and grading distribution were found between the two periods (both p > 0.05), yet only a modest increase of the median Ki67 values in cases operated during the pandemic (4% vs. 3%, p = 0.03). Lastly, these latter patients experienced less major postoperative complications (13% vs. 24%, p = 0.007). During COVID-19, the surgical waiting list of PNET patients was drastically extended, and bridge therapies were preferred. This did not result in more advanced cases at final pathology. PRRT and SSA are valid alternative therapies for PNETs when surgery is not feasible.

[Severe cholecystitis during the COVID-19 pandemic : Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the frequency of surgery and outcome for elective and emergency cholecystectomy: a monocentric retrospective cohort analysis]

BACKGROUND

With the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic medical care focused on management of the infectious event. Elective interventions were cancelled and the general advice was to stay at home. How this impacted urgent and elective cholecystectomies is the subject of this work.

METHOD

Urgent and elective cholecystectomy patients during the first year of the pandemic were compared with those of the previous year. The primary endpoint was the frequency of surgery. Furthermore, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, symptom duration until presentation as well as until surgery, preoperative inflammatory parameters, imaging, positive Murphy's sign, type and duration of surgery, intraoperative drain placement, intraoperative and histological severity, need for and duration of postoperative antibiotic therapy, intensive care stay, length of stay and occurrence of postoperative complications were recorded.

RESULTS

During the pandemic patients were sicker (ASA 2.13 vs. 2.31; p = 0.039), the operating time was prolonged (64.4 min vs. 74.9 min; p = 0.001) and patients were more likely to have concomitant peritonitis (15.4% vs. 29.1%: p = 0.007). Furthermore, there was a trend in the presence of leukocytosis, a positive Murphy's sign, intraoperative drain placement, intraoperative severity of inflammation, duration of postoperative antibiotic therapy and complication rate.

CONCLUSION

During the COVID-19 pandemic cholecystitis presented with more pronounced inflammation, the surgical conditions were more difficult and postoperative recovery was prolonged.

Analysis of pancreatic cancer treatment and survival disparities in Florida throughout the Covid-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is currently the third-leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. African Americans (AAs) with PDAC have worse survival in comparison to other racial groups. The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant stress to the healthcare system. We aim to evaluate the pandemic's impact on already known disparities in newly diagnosed patients with PDAC in Florida.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of newly diagnosed patients with PDAC in the OneFlorida+ Data Trust based upon date of diagnosis: Pre-pandemic (01/01/2017- 09/30/2019), Transition (10/01/2019-02/28/2020), and Pandemic (03/1/2020-10/31/2020). Primary endpoints are time to treatment initiation and rate of surgery and secondary endpoint is survival time. Disparities due to age, sex, race, and income were also evaluated. Chi-squared or Fisher's exact test when necessary, Kruskal-Wallis test, and Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank test were performed to compare the differences between the comparative groups for categorical, quantitative, and survival outcomes, respectively. Multivariable regression analyses were conducted to estimate the effects of cofactors.

RESULTS

934 patients with a median age of 67 years were included. There were 47.8% females and 52.2% males; 19.4% AA, 70.2% Caucasian, 10.4% Other race; median income was $53,551. While we observed a significant reduction in the diagnosis rate of new PDAC cases during the pandemic, there were no significant differences in demographic distributions among the three cohorts. Time to treatment did not significantly change from the pre-pandemic to the pandemic, and no difference was observed across all demographics. Rate of surgery increased significantly from the pre-pandemic (35.8%) to the pandemic (55.6%). AAs in the pre-pandemic cohort had a significantly lower rate of surgery of 25.0% compared to 41.7% in Caucasians. AAs, patients ≥ 67 years, and income < $53,000 had significantly higher hazards to death and shorter median survival time (mST).

CONCLUSIONS

While no differences in time to initial treatment are observed among the newly diagnosed PDAC patients, there remain significant disparities in the rate of surgery and overall survival. Observing a significant reduction in diagnosis rate and analyzing disparities can provide insight into the effect of a resource-restricting pandemic for patients with newly diagnosed PDAC.

Changes in Time to Initial Physician Contact and Cancer Stage Distribution during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma at a Large Hungarian Cancer Center

The aim of our study was to compare the characteristics and time to initial physician contact in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic at a large Hungarian cancer center. This was a retrospective study of patients 18 years or older presenting at the regional cancer center of Pécs Clinical Center with HNSCC between 1 January 2017, and 15 March 2020 (the pre-COVID-19 period) and between 16 March 2020, and 13 May 2021 (the COVID-19 period). Demographic and clinical data were collected, and the time between initial symptom onset and initial physician contact (TTP) was determined. Descriptive and exploratory statistical analyses were performed. On average, the number of patients diagnosed with HNSCC per month during the pandemic decreased by 12.4% compared with the pre-COVID-19 period. There was a significant increase in stage I and stage II cancers (from 15.9% to 20.3% and from 12.2% to 13.8%, respectively; p < 0.001); a decrease in stage III and IVa,c cancers; and a significant increase in stage IVb cancers (from 6% to 19.9%; p < 0.001) during the pandemic. The median TTP increased during the pandemic from 43 to 61 days (p = 0.032). To our knowledge, this is the first study investigating the effect of COVID-19 on patients with HNSCC in the Central-Eastern European region. We found a bidirectional shift in cancer stages and increased TTP during the pandemic. Our findings highlight the necessity for more nuanced analyses of the effects of COVID-19.

Aerosol generation during pediatric otolaryngological procedures

OBJECTIVES

To assess the extent of staff exposure to aerosol generation in common pediatric otorhinolaryngological procedures (tonsillotomies, adenoidectomies, and tympanostomies) and determine the surgical phases responsible for most aerosol generation in these procedures.

METHODS

Aerosol generation was measured during 35 pediatric otolaryngological procedures using an Optical Particle Sizer that measures aerosol concentrations for particle sizes between 0.3 and 10.0 μm. The different phases of and instruments used in each procedure were logged. Operating room background aerosol levels and coughing were used as references.

RESULTS

Total aerosol concentrations were significantly higher during tonsillotomies and adenoidectomies when compared to tympanostomies (p = 0.011 and p = 0.042) and to empty room background aerosol concentrations (p = 0.0057 and p < 0.001). Aerosol concentration during tonsillotomies did not differ from coughing, which is considered as standard for high-risk aerosol procedures. During tympanostomies, aerosol concentrations were even lower than during perioperative concentrations. No statistically significant difference in aerosol generation comparing suction, electrocautery, cold instruments, and paracentesis was found.

CONCLUSION

According to the results of this study, tympanostomies are low-risk aerosol-generating procedures. On the other hand, pediatric tonsillotomies produced aerosols comparable to coughing, pointing to them being significantly aerosol-producing procedures and viral transmission is theoretically possible intraoperatively.

Impact of Covid-19 Pandemic on Waitlisted Preoperative General Surgical Patients in a Tertiary Care Hospital in India - Problems and Probable Solutions: an Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Among patients affected by Covid-19, a large subset included those who were on preoperative general surgical waiting list for elective operations. There are very few studies on the various factors that impacted these patients during the pandemic in India. The current study aimed to analyse the factors which hampered the surgical management of such patients and to suggest implementable solutions which can mitigate those factors in future pandemics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a cross sectional observational study conducted from March 2021 to February 2022. Patients from the surgical register who were placed on a waiting list for routine elective procedures like hernias, gallstone disease, benign thyroid swellings, etc were included, while those with malignancy and emergencies were excluded. We sought information about their current status regarding the planned surgery, the factors which have prevented or are preventing them from accessing suitable surgical service and the current status of individually experienced symptoms.

RESULTS

There were 38 respondents. Most of the patients belonged to the age group 40-60 years and had an average waiting period of more than six months. In 20/38 patients, surgery was postponed because of Covid-19 pandemic, seven patients were admitted but operation was postponed for various reasons, while a few others suffered due to financial difficulty or lockdown restrictions. In 23/38 patients' symptoms progressed and nine patients had unbearable symptoms at the time of the study. Two of the 38 respondents underwent emergency surgery outside the institute. All subjects knew that Covid-19 patients were being treated in the institute, where most of them were still willing to continue their treatment. Three patients refused to continue treatment because of apprehension about getting Covid-19.

CONCLUSION

Although the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the Covid-19 pandemic over, experts opine that there might be more such incidents in not-too-distant future. Our study is among the few of its kind that provides some analytical data regarding the factors which prevented the general surgical patients access to surgical service in India during the Covid-19 pandemic and to suggest some implementable strategies to mitigate the effect of those factors in future pandemics.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on surgical volume and outcomes in a terciary care center in Brazil

BACKGROUNDS

COVID-19 pandemic led to a sharp decline in surgical volume worldwide due to the postponement of elective procedures. This study evaluated the impact of COVID-19 pandemic in surgical volumes and outcomes of abdominal surgery in high-risk patients requiring intensive care unit admission.

METHODS

patients admitted for postoperative care were retrospectively evaluated. Data concerning perioperative variables and outcomes were compared in two different periods: January 2017-December 2019 and January 2020-December 2022, respectively, before (period I) and after (period II) the onset of COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

1.402 patients (897 women, mean age 62+17 years) were investigated. Most of the patients underwent colorectal (n=393) and pancreato-biliary (n=240) surgery, 52% of elective procedures. Surgical volume was significantly lower in period II (n=514) when compared to period I (n= 888). No recovery was observed in the number of surgical procedures in 2022 (n=135) when compared to 2021(n=211) and 2020 (n=168). Subjects who underwent abdominal surgery in period II had higher Charlson comorbidity index (4,85+3,0 vs. 4,35+2,8, p=0,002), more emergent/urgent procedures (51% vs. 45%, p=0,03) and more clean-contaminated wounds (73,5% vs. 66,8%, p=0,02). A significant decrease in the volume of colorectal surgery was also observed (24% vs, 31%, p<0,0001) after the onset of COVID-19 pandemic, 125 (8,9%) died, no deaths due to COVID-19 infection. Mortality was higher in period II when compared to period I (11% vs. 8%, p=0,08).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a decrease in surgical volume of high-risk patients without apparent recovery in recent years. No influence of COVID-19 was noted in postoperative mortality.

Safety of lung resection surgery after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection in the post-vaccination era

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the postoperative outcomes of lung resection in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and determine the optimal timing of surgery.

METHODS

This retrospective, single-centre cohort study included patients who underwent lung resection between June 2021 and June 2022. Patients were divided into the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and non-COVID-19 groups based on their preoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection history, and postoperative outcomes were compared. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify the risk factors of complications after lung resection surgery.

RESULTS

In total, 1194 patients were enrolled, of whom, 79 had a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In the COVID-19 group, 66 patients (90.4%) had received at least 1 vaccination dose. The average interval between infection and surgery was 67 days, with no significant impact on postoperative outcomes. Regarding postoperative outcomes, there were no significant differences in major complication rate (6.3% vs 5.4%, P = 0.613), respiratory complication rate (19.0% vs 12.2%, P = 0.079) or length of stays (4.9 ± 3.4 vs 5.0 ± 5.6, P = 0.992) between the 2 groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that age, male sex, poor pulmonary function test, open surgery and extensive lung resection were risk factors for postoperative complications, while preoperative COVID-19 infection status was not a statistically significant risk factor.

CONCLUSIONS

In the post-vaccination era, lung resection surgery can be safely performed shortly after SARS-CoV-2 infection, even within 4 weeks of infection.

The impact of elective surgery postponement during COVID-19 on emergency bellwether procedures in a large tertiary centre in Singapore

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic drove many healthcare systems worldwide to postpone elective surgery to increase healthcare capacity, manpower, and reduce infection risk to staff. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of an elective surgery postponement policy in response to the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical volumes and patient outcomes for three emergency bellwether procedures. A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent any of the three emergency procedures [Caesarean section (CS), emergency laparotomy (EL), and open fracture (OF) fixation] between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2021 was conducted using clinical and surgical data from electronic medical records. The volumes and outcomes of each surgery were compared across four time periods: pre-COVID (January 2018-January 2020), elective postponement (February-May 2020), recovery (June-November 2020), and postrecovery (December 2020-December 2021) using Kruskal-Wallis test and segmented negative binomial regression. There was a total of 3886, 1396, and 299 EL, CS, and OF, respectively. There was no change in weekly volumes of CS and OF fixations across the four time periods. However, the volume of EL increased by 47% [95% confidence interval: 26-71%, P = 9.13 × 10-7) and 52% (95% confidence interval: 25-85%, P = 3.80 × 10-5) in the recovery and postrecovery period, respectively. Outcomes did not worsen throughout the four time periods for all three procedures and some actually improved for EL from elective postponement onwards. Elective surgery postponement in the early COVID-19 pandemic did not affect volumes of emergency CS and OF fixations but led to an increase in volume for EL after the postponement without any worsening of outcomes.

Timing to Surgery and Lymph Node Upstaging in Gastric Cancer: An NCDB Analysis

BACKGROUND

Prior studies have shown tumor specificity on the impact of longer time interval from diagnosis to surgery, however in gastric cancer (GC) this remains unclear. We aimed to determine if a longer time interval from diagnosis to surgery had an impact on lymph node (LN) upstaging and overall survival (OS) outcomes among patients with clinically node negative (cN0) GC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients diagnosed with cN0 GC undergoing surgery between 2004-2018 were identified in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) and divided into intervals between time of diagnosis and surgery [short interval (SI): ≥ 4 days to < 8 weeks and long interval (LI): ≥ 8 weeks]. Multivariable regression analysis evaluated the independent impact of surgical timing on LN upstaging and a Cox proportional hazards analysis and Kaplan-Meier curves evaluated survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 1824 patients with cN0 GC, 71.8% had a SI to surgery and 28.1% had a LI to surgery. LN upstaging was seen more often in the SI group when compared to LI group (82% versus 76%, p = 0.004). LI to surgery showed to be an independent factor protective against LN upstaging [adjusted odds ratio = 0.62, 95% CI: (0.39-0.99)]. Multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that time to surgery was not associated with a difference in overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.91, 95% CI: (0.71-1.17)], however uncontrolled Kaplan-Meier curves showed OS difference between the SI and LI to surgery groups (p = 0.037).

CONCLUSION

Timing to surgery was not a predictor of LN upstaging or overall survival, suggesting that additional medical optimization in preparation for surgery and careful preoperative staging may be appropriate in patients with node negative early stage GC without affecting outcomes.

Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer: An Observational Cohort Study

Early pancreatic cancer diagnosis is crucial for timely intervention and better outcomes. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted routine health care globally. The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted routine health care globally. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer. This retrospective study compared pancreatic cancer patients from 2 tertiary hospitals in pre and COVID-19 periods. Pre-COVID-19 period spanned from January 1, 2018, to January 19, 2020, while the COVID-19 period extended from January 20, 2020, to December 31, 2021. Results: A total of 542 patients were included. In the pre-COVID-19 period, 280 new cases of pancreatic cancer were enrolled, compared to 262 during COVID-19. The annual incidence rates were 136.63 and 134.50 patients, respectively. The median age was significantly lower during COVID-19 (71.5 years) compared to pre-COVID-19 (77 years) (P < .001). In subgroup analyses for stage 3 and 4, the proportion of stage 4 pancreatic cancer increased during COVID-19 (χ2 = 5.53, P = .019), and the COVID-19 group had younger diagnoses, better performance status, more surgery, higher use of FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy, fewer hospital referrals, and better median overall survival compared to the pre-COVID-19 group. This study revealed changes in the characteristics and treatment of patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although further large-scale research is necessary, the findings of this study can function as foundational data for formulating policies for the management of patients with pancreatic cancer during future pandemics of other infectious diseases.

Burnout among surgeons before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: an international survey

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has had many significant impacts within the surgical realm, and surgeons have been obligated to reconsider almost every aspect of daily clinical practice.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study reported in compliance with the CHERRIES guidelines and conducted through an online platform from June 14th to July 15th, 2020. The primary outcome was the burden of burnout during the pandemic indicated by the validated Shirom-Melamed Burnout Measure.

RESULTS

Nine hundred fifty-four surgeons completed the survey. The median length of practice was 10 years; 78.2% included were male with a median age of 37 years old, 39.5% were consultants, 68.9% were general surgeons, and 55.7% were affiliated with an academic institution. Overall, there was a significant increase in the mean burnout score during the pandemic; longer years of practice and older age were significantly associated with less burnout. There were significant reductions in the median number of outpatient visits, operated cases, on-call hours, emergency visits, and research work, so, 48.2% of respondents felt that the training resources were insufficient. The majority (81.3%) of respondents reported that their hospitals were included in the management of COVID-19, 66.5% felt their roles had been minimized; 41% were asked to assist in non-surgical medical practices, and 37.6% of respondents were included in COVID-19 management.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a significant burnout among trainees. Almost all aspects of clinical and research activities were affected with a significant reduction in the volume of research, outpatient clinic visits, surgical procedures, on-call hours, and emergency cases hindering the training.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered on clicaltrials.gov "NCT04433286" on 16/06/2020.

International Hepato-Pancreato-Billiary Association (IHPBA) registry study on COVID-19 infections in HPB surgery patients

BACKGROUND

In response to the pandemic, the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (IHPBA) developed the IHPBA-COVID Registry to capture data on HPB surgery outcomes in COVID-positive patients prior to mass vaccination programs. The aim was to provide a tool to help members gain a better understanding of the impact of COVID-19 on patient outcomes following HPB surgery worldwide.

METHODS

An online registry updated in real time was disseminated to all IHPBA, E-AHPBA, A-HPBA and A-PHPBA members to assess the effects of the pandemic on the outcomes of HPB procedures, perioperative COVID-19 management and other aspects of surgical care.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-five patients from 35 centres in 18 countries were included. Seventy-three (58%) patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 preoperatively. Operative mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy and major hepatectomy was 28% and 15%, respectively, and 2.5% after cholecystectomy. Postoperative complication rates of pancreatic procedures, hepatic interventions and biliary interventions were respectively 80%, 50% and 37%. Respiratory complication rates were 37%, 31% and 10%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study reveals a high risk of mortality and complication after HPB surgeries in patient infected with COVID-19. The more extensive the procedure, the higher the risk. Nonetheless, an increased risk was observed across all types of interventions, suggesting that elective HPB surgery should be avoided in COVID positive patients, delaying it at distance from the viral infection.

Impact of the first wave of COVID-19 epidemy on the surgical management of sigmoid diverticular disease in France: National French retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the surgical management of sigmoid diverticular disease (SDD) before, during, and after the first containment rules (CR) for the first wave of COVID-19.

METHODS

From the French Surgical Association multicenter series, this study included all patients operated on between January 2018 and September 2021. Three groups were compared: A (before CR period: 01/01/18-03/16/20), B (CR period: 03/17/20-05/03/20), and C (post CR period: 05/04/20-09/30/21).

RESULTS

A total of 1965 patients (A n = 1517, B n = 52, C n = 396) were included. The A group had significantly more previous SDD compared to the two other groups (p = 0.007), especially complicated (p = 0.0004). The rate of peritonitis was significantly higher in the B (46.1%) and C (38.4%) groups compared to the A group (31.7%) (p = 0.034 and p = 0.014). As regards surgical treatment, Hartmann's procedure was more often performed in the B group (44.2%, vs A 25.5% and C 26.8%, p = 0.01). Mortality at 90 days was significantly higher in the B group (9.6%, vs A 4% and C 6.3%, p = 0.034). This difference was also significant between the A and B groups (p = 0.048), as well as between the A and C groups (p = 0.05). There was no significant difference between the three groups in terms of postoperative morbidity.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the management of SDD was impacted by COVID-19 at CR, but also after and until September 2021, both on the initial clinical presentation and on postoperative mortality.

Evaluation of the difficulty of laparoscopic cholecystectomy during COVID-19 pandemic using externally validated prediction models: A retrospective cohort study

Introduction

During the COVID-19 pandemic, elective surgeries suspension, led to delayed hospital visits for non-emergent diseases like acute cholecystitis. Although nonsurgical treatment was successful in numerous cases, there are some warnings about the progression of the disease to more advanced stages for laparoscopy. In this study, we aimed to find out if COVID-19 had adverse effects on the difficulty of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Methods

In a retrospective cohort study at a referral center for minimally-invasive surgeries, medical records from February 2019 to February 2020 (before the pandemic) and from February 2020 until 2021 (during the outbreak) were reviewed and various data were extracted. Using two different preoperative scoring systems, we estimated the rate of difficulty of LCs, and the results compared to each other with appropriate statistical methods.

Results

A total of 531 LCs were performed. Pre-COVID and post-COVID patients had a mean age of 46 ± 15 and 44 ± 14 years old, respectively, and less than 35 % of patients in each group were males. LCs decreased notably during the pandemic (161 vs. 369, p < 0.001). Besides, elective surgeries were reduced in this period (36.6 % vs. 55.7 %, p < 0.001). Despite no significant changes in operation duration (123 ± 42 vs. 129 ± 40, p = 0.16), scoring models revealed a remarkable change in difficulties.

Conclusion

Using two well-established scoring models, we concluded that LCs were done with less difficulty during that period. However, there was a remarkable decrease in elective surgeries, and higher volume studies are required to confirm our results.

Highlights

Postoperative Complications in Patients With the Preoperative COVID-19 Infection at King Fahad Specialist Hospital: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by a new coronavirus strain. Indeed, the timing of COVID-19 infection before surgery plays an important role in the surgery outcomes and complications.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to assess the prevalence and predictors of postoperative complications for patients who underwent surgery with previous COVID-19 infection.

METHODOLOGY

This was a retrospective hospital-based study which was conducted on 75 patients who had been infected with COVID-19 and underwent surgery.

RESULTS

We included 75 patients. The time between COVID-19 infection and the surgery was from one to six months in 52% of patients, 24% of patients were more than six months, and 24% of patients were less than one month. In this study, most of the patients had no complications (77.3%) while 22.7% of patients had complications that were mainly respiratory (n= 13). The overall mortality in our study was 5.3%. There was a significant association between comorbidity and postoperative complications, and the status of COVID-19 preoperative and postoperative complications (p < 0.01) but not patients' age as well as the type of anesthesia and postoperative complication (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Respiratory complications were the most common postoperative complications in patients who had surgery after COVID-19 infection. Comorbidity and COVID-19 status were significantly associated with higher postoperative complications. Mortality was relatively small. We recommend extreme care to patients with COVID-19 infection prior to surgery to decrease the COVID-19 hazards that develop post-surgery.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on free tissue transfer outcomes: A NSQIP analysis

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted hospital resources and patient care, although its effect on free tissue transfer procedures is poorly understood. We conducted the current study to investigate the potential impact of COVID-19 and its accompanying system shut-downs on the surgical outcomes of patients undergoing free flap procedures.

METHODS

Patients undergoing free tissue transfer procedures were identified from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database from 2016 to 2020. We used 2016-2019 as baseline (pre-pandemic) data to compare with 2020 (peri-pandemic). We divided the patients into the following 3 groups: all patients undergoing free tissue transfer, breast reconstruction free tissue transfer, and non-breast free tissue transfer cases. Outcomes of interest included patient morbidity/mortality, time to surgery, time to takeback, and length of hospital stay. We used Pearson's chi-square and Fisher's exact tests to assess categorical variables. Wilcoxon's ranked sign tests and ANOVA tests were used for non-parametric and parametric continuous variables, respectively. Significance was set at alpha < 0.05.

RESULTS

When comparing peri-pandemic to pre-pandemic rates, patient morbidity and mortality and unplanned primary or secondary takeback operations were both significantly higher in all 3 groups peri-pandemic. Median time to primary or secondary takeback operation was also significantly greater peri-pandemic.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing flap procedures peri-pandemic had an overall increase in median morbidity and mortality, unplanned primary or secondary takebacks, and median number of days to takebacks compared to the pre-pandemic period. This is concerning given that any future protocols instituted can have detrimental effects on patients who receive a free tissue transfer procedure.

Integration of functional capacity to medically necessary, time-sensitive scoring system: A prospective observational study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate 2 new modifications to medically necessary, time-sensitive (MeNTS) scoring systems integrating functional capacity assessment in estimating intensive care unit (ICU) requirements.

METHODS

This prospective observational study included patients undergoing elective surgeries between July 2021 and January 2022. The MeNTS scores and our 2 modified scores: MeNTS-METs (integrated Duke activity status index [DASI] as metabolic equivalents [METs]) and MeNTS-DASI-5Q (integrated modified DASI [M-DASI] as 5 questions) were calculated. The patients' ICU requirements (group ICU+ and group ICU-), DASIs, patient-surgery-anesthesia characteristics, hospital stay lengths, rehospitalizations, postoperative complications, and mortality were recorded.

RESULTS

This study analyzed 718 patients. The MeNTS, MeNTS-METs, and MeNTS-DASI-5Q scores were higher in group ICU+ than in group ICU- (p<0.001). Group ICU+ had longer operation durations and hospital stay lengths (p<0.001), lower DASI scores (p<0.001), and greater hospital readmissions, postoperative complications, and mortality (p<0.001). The MeNTS-METs and MeNTS-DASI-5Q scores better predicted ICU requirement with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.806 and 0.804, than the original MeNTS (AUC=0.782).

CONCLUSION

The 5-questionnaire M-DASI is easy to calculate and, when added to a triage score, is as reliable as the original DASI for predicting postoperative ICU requirements.

Patients' characteristics and 30-day mortality for those undergoing elective surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic in Bangladesh

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the surgical practice throughout the world, including elective surgical care. This study investigated the characteristics of patients undergoing elective surgery, the prevalence of COVID-19 infection, the surgical procedures performed, and 30-day mortality in general and pediatric surgical settings in selected tertiary-level hospitals in Bangladesh from November 2020 to August 2021.

METHODS

This serial cross-sectional study included 264 patients scheduled for elective surgeries during the study period. All patients underwent COVID-19 real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing within 24 hours before surgery. Data on age, sex, common comorbidities, surgical procedures, and 30-day mortality were collected and analyzed. Furthermore, comparisons were made between COVID-19 positive and negative patients.

RESULTS

The prevalence of COVID-19 infection among patients was 10.6%. Older age, a history of major surgery within the last three months, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus were significantly associated with COVID-19 infection. All COVID-19-negative patients underwent surgery, while only 46.4% of COVID-19-positive patients underwent surgery. The most common surgical procedures were related to the digestive system, breast, and urinary system. Only one patient (0.4%) died within 30 days after surgery among the COVID-19-negative patients, whereas two patients (7.1%) died among the COVID-19-positive patients: one before surgery and one after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides valuable insights into the characteristics, burden of COVID-19 infection, and 30-day mortality of patients undergoing elective surgery in tertiary care centers in Bangladesh during the pandemic.

Management of abdominal gas leakage from surgical trocars in laparoscopic surgery: a preclinical study

Introduction: There is an ongoing concern about the potential infectious risk due to pneumoperitoneal gas leakage from surgical trocars in laparoscopic surgery. We aimed to visually confirm the presence of leakage from trocars and investigate the changes in the leakage scale according to intra-abdominal pressures and trocar types. Material and methods: We established a porcine pneumoperitoneum model and performed experimental forceps manipulation using 5-mm grasping forceps with 12-mm trocars. The gas leakage, if any, was imaged using a Schlieren optical system, which can visualize minute gas flow invisible to the naked eye. For measuring the scale, we calculated the gas leakage velocity and area using image analysis software. Four types of unused and exhausted disposable trocars were compared. Results: Gas leakage was observed from trocars during forceps insertion and removal. Both the gas leakage velocity and area increased as the intra-abdominal pressure increased. Every type of trocar we handled was associated with gas leakage, and exhausted disposable trocars had the largest scale gas leakage. Conclusions: We confirmed gas leakage from trocars during device traffic. The scale of leakage increased with high intra-abdominal pressure and with the use of exhausted trocars. Current protection against gas leakage may not be sufficient and new surgical safety measures and device development may be needed in the future.

Impact of COVID-19 on the gastrointestinal surgical oncology patient population

Background

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic led to substantial alterations in healthcare delivery and access. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on the presentation and surgical care of patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers.

Methods

All patients who underwent GI cancer surgery at a large, tertiary referral center between March 15, 2019 and March 15, 2021 were included. March 15, 2020 was considered the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Changes in patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics before the pandemic compared to during the pandemic were evaluated.

Results

Of 522 patients that met study criteria, 252 (48.3%) were treated before the COVID-19 pandemic. During the first COVID-19 wave, weekly volume of GI cancer cases was one-third lower than baseline (p = 0.041); during the second wave, case volume remained at baseline levels (p = 0.519). There were no demographic or tumor characteristic differences between patients receiving GI cancer surgery before versus during COVID-19 (p > 0.05 for all), and no difference in rate of emergency surgery (p > 0.9). Patients were more likely to receive preoperative chemotherapy during the first six months of the pandemic compared to the subsequent six months (35.6% vs. 15.5%, p < 0.001). Telemedicine was rapidly adopted at the start of the pandemic, rising from 0% to 47% of GI surgical oncology visits within two months.

Conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic caused an initial disruption to the surgical care of GI cancers, but did not compromise stage at presentation. Preoperative chemotherapy and telemedicine were utilized to mitigate the impact of a high COVID-19 burden on cancer care.

The safety of colorectal cancer surgery during the COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has placed unprecedented pressure on the healthcare systems. This study evaluated the safety of colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (PROSPERO ID: CRD 42022327968). Relevant articles were systematically searched in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases. The postoperative complications, anastomotic leakage, postoperative mortality, 30-day readmission, tumor stage, total hospitalization, postoperative hospitalization, preoperative waiting, operation time, and hospitalization in the intensive care unit (ICU) were compared between the pre-pandemic and during the COVID-19 pandemic periods.

Results

Among the identified 561 articles, 12 met the inclusion criteria. The data indicated that preoperative waiting time related to CRC surgery was higher during the COVID-19 pandemic (MD, 0.99; 95%CI, 0.71-1.28; p < 0.00001). A similar trend was observed for the total operative time (MD, 25.07; 95%CI, 11.14-39.00; p =0.0004), and on T4 tumor stage during the pandemic (OR, 1.77; 95%CI, 1.22-2.59; p=0.003). However, there was no difference in the postoperative complications, postoperative 90-day mortality, anastomotic leakage, and 30-day readmission times between pre-COVID-19 pandemic and during the COVID-19 pandemic periods. Furthermore, there was no difference in the total hospitalization time, postoperative hospitalization time, and hospitalization time in ICU related to CRC surgery before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic did not affect the safety of CRC surgery. The operation of CRC during the COVID-19 pandemic did not increase postoperative complications, postoperative 90-day mortality, anastomotic leakage, 30-day readmission, the total hospitalization time, postoperative hospitalization time, and postoperative ICU hospitalization time. However, the operation of CRC during COVID-19 pandemic increased T4 of tumor stage during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, the preoperative waiting and operation times were longer during the COVID-19 pandemic. This provides a reference for making CRC surgical strategy in the future.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022327968.

The impact of delayed nonurgent surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic on surgeons in Alberta: a qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, nonurgent surgeries were delayed to preserve capacity for patients admitted with COVID-19; surgeons were challenged personally and professionally during this time. We aimed to describe the impact of delays to nonurgent surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic from the surgeons' perspective in Alberta.

METHODS

We conducted an interpretive description qualitative study in Alberta from January to March 2022. We recruited adult and pediatric surgeons via social media and through personal contacts from our research network. Semistructured interviews were conducted via Zoom, and we analyzed the data via inductive thematic analysis to identify relevant themes and subthemes related to the impact of delaying nonurgent surgery on surgeons and their provision of surgical care.

RESULTS

We conducted 12 interviews with 9 adult surgeons and 3 pediatric surgeons. Six themes were identified: accelerator for a surgical care crisis, health system inequity, system-level management of disruptions in surgical services, professional and interprofessional impact, personal impact, and pragmatic adaptation to health system strain. Participants also identified strategies to mitigate the challenges experienced due to nonurgent surgical delays during the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e., additional operating time, surgical process reviews to reduce inefficiencies, and advocacy for sustained funding of hospital beds, human resources and community-based postoperative care).

INTERPRETATION

Our study describes the impacts and challenges experienced by adult and pediatric surgeons of delayed nonurgent surgeries because of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Surgeons identified potential health system-, hospital- and physician-level strategies to minimize future impacts on patients from delays of nonurgent surgery.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Management and Outcomes of Acute Cholecystitis at US Academic Centers

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has had wide-ranging effects on management of medical conditions. Many hospitals encountered staffing shortages, limited operating room availability, and shortage of hospital beds. There was increased psychological stress and fear of contracting COVID-19 infection, leading to delay in medical care for various disease processes. The objective of this study was to examine changes in management and outcomes attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic in patients presenting with acute calculus cholecystitis at US academic centers.

STUDY DESIGN

Using the Vizient database, patients with the diagnosis of acute calculus cholecystitis who underwent intervention during the 15 months before the pandemic (prepandemic, October 2018 to December 2019) were compared with 15 months during the pandemic (pandemic, March 2020 to May 2021). Outcomes measures included demographics, characteristics, type of intervention, length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and direct cost.

RESULTS

There were 146,459 patients with acute calculus cholecystitis identified (prepandemic: 74,605 vs pandemic: 71,854). Patients in the pandemic group were more likely to undergo medical management (29.4% vs 31.8%; p < 0.001) or percutaneous cholecystostomy tube placement (21.5% vs 18%; p < 0.001) and less likely to undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy (69.8% vs 73.0%; p < 0.001). Patients in the pandemic group who underwent procedural intervention had longer length of stay (6.5 days vs 5.9 days; p < 0.001), higher in-hospital death (3.1% vs 2.3%; p < 0.001), and higher cost ($14,609 vs $12,570; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this analysis of patients with acute calculus cholecystitis, there were distinct changes in the management and outcomes of patients due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Changes in the type of intervention and outcomes are likely related to delayed presentation with increases in the severity and complexity of the disease.

Impact on Spine Surgery during the First Two Years of COVID-19 Pandemic: A Nationwide Study in South Korea

Since December 2019, the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) has infected people worldwide. Owing to its rapid spread, elective surgeries, including spine surgery, have been re-scheduled. We analyzed nationwide data to investigate changes in the volume of spine surgery during the first two years of the pandemic. Nationwide data from January 2016 to December 2021 were obtained. We compared the total number of patients who underwent spine surgery and related medical expenses before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. In February and September, the number of patients was significantly smaller compared to January and August, respectively. Despite the pandemic, the proportion of patients undergoing spine surgery for degenerative diseases in 2021 was the highest. In contrast, the proportions of patients undergoing spine surgery for tumors showed a continuous decrease from 2019 to 2021. Although the number of spine surgeries performed at tertiary hospitals was lowest in 2020, it was not significantly smaller than that in 2019.The number of patients who underwent spine surgery in March 2020, during the first outbreak, decreased compared to the previous month, which differed from the trend observed in the pre-COVID-19 period. However, as the pandemic continues, the impact of COVID-19 on spine surgery has become less evident.

Management of acute appendicitis during COVID-19 pandemic. Single center data from a tertiary care hospital in Germany

Objectives

The unexpected global overload of the health system during COVID-19 pandemic has caused changes in management of acute appendicitis worldwide. Whereas conservative treatment was widely recommended, the appendicectomy remained standard therapy in Germany. We aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on treatment routine for acute appendicitis at University Hospital of Magdeburg.

Methods

Adult patients with clinical and/or radiological diagnosis of acute appendicitis were included in the single center retrospective study. Data was collected to patient demographics, treatment modality and outcomes including morbidity and length of stay. The patient data related to COVID-19 period from March 22, 2020 to December 31, 2021 (649 days) were compared to the Non-COVID-19 period from June 12, 2018 to March 21, 2020 (649 days). Subgroup analysis related to conservative or surgical treatment has been performed.

Results

A total of 385 patients was included in the study, 203 (52.73 %) during Non-COVID-19 period and 182 (47.27 %) during COVID-19 period. Mean age of entire collective was 43.28 years, containing 43.9 % female patients (p=0.095). Conservative treatment was accomplished in 49 patients (12.7 % of entire collective), increasing from 9.9 % to 15.9 % during COVID-19 period (p=0.074). Laparoscopic appendicectomy was performed in 99.3 % (n=152) of operated patients during COVID-19 period (p=0.013), followed by less postoperative complications compared to reference period (23.5 % vs. 13.1 %, p=0.015). The initiation of antibiotic therapy after the diagnosis increased from 37.9 % to 53.3 % (p=0.002) during COVID-19 period regardless the following treatment modality. Antibiotic treatment showed shorter duration during pandemic period (5.57 days vs. 3.16 days, p<0.001) and it was given longer in the conservative treatment group (5.63 days vs. 4.26 days, p=0.02). The overall length of stay was shorter during COVID-19 period (4.67 days vs. 4.12 days, p=0.052) and in the conservative treatment group (3.08 days vs. 4.47 days, p<0.001). However, the overall morbidity was lower during the COVID-19 period than before (17.2 % vs. 7.7 %, p=0.005) and for conservative therapy compared to appendicectomy (2 % vs. 14.3 %, p=0.016). There was no mortality documented.

Conclusions

According to our findings the COVID-19 pandemic had a relevant impact on treatment of acute appendicitis, but it was possible to maintain the traditional diagnostic and treatment pathway. Although laparoscopic appendicectomy remains a recommended procedure, the conservative treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis with excellent short-term outcome can be a safe alternative to surgery during potential new wave of COVID-19 pandemic and in the daily routine.

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.

Laparoscopic and robotic intracorporeal resection and end-to-end anastomosis in left colectomy: a prospective cohort study - stage 2a IDEAL framework for evaluating surgical innovation

PURPOSE

To analyze the safety and feasibility of intracorporeal resection and anastomosis in upper rectum, sigmoid, and left colon surgery, via both laparoscopic and robotic approaches. The secondary aim was to assess possible short-term differences between laparoscopic versus robotic surgery.

METHODS

A prospective observational cohort study according to IDEAL framework exploration and assessment stage (Development, stage 2a), evaluating and comparing the laparoscopic approach and the robotic approach in left colon, sigmoid, and upper rectum surgery with intracorporeal resection and end-to-end anastomosis. Demographic, preoperative, surgical, and postoperative variables of patients undergoing laparoscopic and robotic surgery are described and compared according to the surgical technique used.

RESULTS

Between May 2020 and March 2022, seventy-nine patients were consecutively included in the study, 41 operated via laparoscopy (laparoscopic left colectomy: LLC) and 38 by robotic surgery (robotic left colectomy: RLC). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of demographic variables. In surgical variables, the median surgical times differed significantly: 198 min (SD 48 min) for LLC vs. 246 min (SD 72 min) for RLC (p = 0.01, 95% CI: - 75.2 to - 20.5)). The only significant difference regarding postoperative complications was a higher degree of relevant morbidity in the LLC (Clavien-Dindo > II (14.6% vs. 0%, p = 0.03) and Comprehensive Complication Index (IQR 22 vs. IQR 0, p = 0.03). The pathological results were similar in both approaches.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic and robotic intracorporeal resection and anastomosis are feasible and safe, and obtain similar surgical, postoperative, and pathological results than described in literature. However, morbidity seems to be higher in LLC group with fewer relevant postoperative complications. The results of this study enable us to proceed to stage 2b of the IDEAL framework.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATIONS

The study is registered in Clinical trials with the registration code NCT0445693.

Is perioperative COVID-19 really associated with worse surgical outcomes? A nationwide COVIDSurg propensity-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing surgery with perioperative COVID-19 are suggested to have worse outcomes, but whether this is COVID-related or due to selection bias remains unclear. We aimed to compare the postoperative outcomes of patients with and without perioperative COVID-19.

METHODS

Patients with perioperative COVID-19 diagnosed within 7 days before or 30 days after surgery between February and July 2020 from 68 US hospitals in COVIDSurg, an international multicenter database, were 1:1 propensity score matched to patients without COVID-19 undergoing similar procedures in the 2012 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. The matching criteria included demographics (e.g., age, sex), comorbidities (e.g., diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease), and operation characteristics (e.g., type, urgency, complexity). The primary outcome was 30-day hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay and 13 postoperative complications (e.g., pneumonia, renal failure, surgical site infection).

RESULTS

A total of 97,936 patients were included, 1,054 with and 96,882 without COVID-19. Prematching, COVID-19 patients more often underwent emergency surgery (76.1% vs. 10.3%, p < 0.001). A total of 843 COVID-19 and 843 non-COVID-19 patients were successfully matched based on demographics, comorbidities, and operative characteristics. Postmatching, COVID-19 patients had a higher mortality (12.0% vs. 8.1%, p = 0.007), longer length of stay (6 [2-15] vs. 5 [1-12] days), and higher rates of acute renal failure (19.3% vs. 3.0%, p < 0.001), sepsis (13.5% vs. 9.0%, p = 0.003), and septic shock (11.8% vs. 6.0%, p < 0.001). They also had higher rates of thromboembolic complications such as deep vein thrombosis (4.4% vs. 1.5%, p < 0.001) and pulmonary embolism (2.5% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001) but lower rates of bleeding (11.6% vs. 26.1%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing surgery with perioperative COVID-19 have higher rates of 30-day mortality and postoperative complications, especially thromboembolic, compared with similar patients without COVID-19 undergoing similar surgeries. Such information is crucial for the complex surgical decision making and counseling of these patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level IV.

Reconstruction surgery in head and neck cancer patients amidst the COVID-19 pandemic: Current practice and lessons for the future

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has imposed a radical change in daily life and work routine. In this context, health systems have suffered important and serious repercussions in all fields. Among the changes brought about by the state of global health emergency, adjustments to guidelines, priorities, structures, professional teams, and epidemiological data stand out. In light of this, the oncological field has witnessed several changes in the approach to cancer, whether due to delay in diagnosis, screening deficit, personnel shortage or the psychological impact that the pandemic has had on cancer patients. This article focuses on the management of oral carcinoma and the surgical approaches that oral and maxillofacial specialists have had at their disposal during the health emergency. In this period, the oral and maxillofacial surgeons have faced many obstacles. The proximity of maxillofacial structures to the airways, the need of elective and punctual procedures in cancerous lesions, the aggressiveness of head and neck tumors, and the need for important healthcare costs to support such delicate surgeries are examples of some of the challenges imposed for this field. One of the possible surgical 'solutions' to the difficulties in managing surgical cases of oral carcinoma during the pandemic is locoregional flaps, which in the pre-COVID-19 era were less used than free flaps. However, during the health emergency, its use has been widely reassessed. This setback may represent a precedent for opening up new reflections. In the course of a long-term pandemic, a reassessment of the validity of different medical and surgical therapeutic approaches should be considered. Finally, given that the pandemic has high-lighted vulnerabilities and shortcomings in a number of ways, including the issues of essential resource shortages, underinvestment in public health services, lack of coordination and versatility among politicians, policymakers and health leaders, resulting in overloaded health systems, rapid case development, and high mortality, a more careful analysis of the changes needed in different health systems to satisfactorily face future emergencies is essential to be carried out. This should be directed especially towards improving the management of health systems, their coordination as well as reviewing related practices, even in the surgical field.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis and treatment of ocular cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of social isolation due to the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of new cases and therapeutic approaches at the Ocular Oncology division from the Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP).

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted by medical records review of new patients treated before the pandemic from March 2019 to September 2019 (pre-pandemic group) and during the pandemic from March 2020 to September 2020 (pandemic group). Data regarding age, sex, ethnicity, place of origin, clinical diagnosis, time since referral, and proposed therapy were analyzed.

RESULTS

We analyzed 186 new cases, 122 from the pre-pandemic group and 64 from the pandemic group, representing a decrease of 47.54% in new cases. There was no statistically significant change in sex, race, state of origin, history of cancer, age, or time with suspected cancer (p>0.05). A higher frequency of malignancies was observed in the pandemic group (68%) when compared to the pre-pandemic group (48.48%). Benign tumors were the most common diagnosis in the pre-pandemic group (41.80%), while conjunctival squamous cell carcinoma was the modal diagnosis in the pandemic group (31.25%). There was a decreasing trend (p=0.097) in the number of surgeries (-7.63%) and an increase in topical treatment (+10.68%). There was also a tendency to perform fewer surgeries in benign tumors and decreased follow-up visits.

CONCLUSION

Our findings showed a significant decrease in the number of new cases referred to the Ocular Oncology service. Moreover, the pandemic led to a switch in the therapeutic approach with preference to non-invasive treatments that would demand operating rooms. A drastic increase of cases perhaps in advanced stages might be expected because of the decrease observed in the first six months of quarantine.

Implementation of total laparoscopic hysterectomy as day case surgery

Elective surgeries within the National Health Service are frequently cancelled due to shortages of inpatient beds due to acute emergency admissions, and more recently, the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this quality improvement project was to initiate a day case hysterectomy pathway, prospectively collecting data on a group of selected motivated patients to assess its feasibility and safety. Interventions to maximise the chance of same day discharge included preoperative education and hydration, alterations in anaesthetic and surgical techniques and collaborative working between surgeons and recovery nurses to safely discharge patients. In change cycle 1, 93% of patients were discharged on the same day as surgery. In change cycle 2, 100% of patients were discharged on the same day as surgery. In a patient questionnaire, 90% of patients would recommend a day case hysterectomy to their friends or family. Day case hysterectomy was safely introduced to our unit, through leaders actively encouraging contributions and feedback throughout the initiation of the pathway from different components of the multidisciplinary team, from conception to roll out of the guideline for use by other gynaecological surgical teams within the trust.

Were surgical outcomes for acute appendicitis impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic?

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted healthcare systems throughout the world. We examine whether appendectomy outcomes in 2020 and 2021 were affected by the pandemic.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 30-day appendectomy outcomes using the ACS-NSQIP database from 2019 through 2021. Logistic regression and linear regression analyses were performed to create models of post-operative outcomes.

RESULTS

There were no associations between the time period of surgery and death, readmission, reoperation, deep incisional SSI, organ space SSI, sepsis, septic shock, rate of complicated appendicitis, failure to wean from the ventilator, or days from admission to operation. During the first 21 months of the pandemic (April 2020 through December 2021), there was a decreased length of hospital stay (p = 0.016), increased operative time (p < 0.001), and increased likelihood of laparoscopic versus open surgery (p < 0.001) in compared to 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

There were minimal differences in emergent appendectomy outcomes during the first 21 months of the pandemic when compared to 2019. Surgical systems in the US successfully adapted to the challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Educational Scoring System in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Is It the Right Time to Standardize?

Background and Objectives: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is one of the most performed surgeries worldwide. Procedure difficulty and patient outcomes depend on several factors which are not considered in the current literature, including the learning curve, generating confusing and subjective results. This study aims to create a scoring system to calculate the learning curve of LC based on hepatobiliopancreatic (HPB) experts' opinions during an educational course. Materials and Methods: A questionnaire was submitted to the panel of experts attending the HPB course at Research Institute against Digestive Cancer-IRCAD (Strasbourg, France) from 27-29 October 2022. Experts scored the proposed variables according to their degree of importance in the learning curve using a Likert scale from 1 (not useful) to 5 (very useful). Variables were included in the composite scoring system only if more than 75% of experts ranked its relevance in the learning curve assessment ≥4. A positive or negative value was assigned to each variable based on its effect on the learning curve. Results: Fifteen experts from six different countries attended the IRCAD HPB course and filled out the questionnaire. Ten variables were finally included in the learning curve scoring system (i.e., patient body weight/BMI, patient previous open surgery, emergency setting, increased inflammatory levels, presence of anatomical bile duct variation(s), and appropriate critical view of safety (CVS) identification), which were all assigned positive values. Minor or major intraoperative injuries to the biliary tract, development of postoperative complications related to biliary injuries, and mortality were assigned negative values. Conclusions: This is the first scoring system on the learning curve of LC based on variables selected through the experts' opinions. Although the score needs to be validated through future studies, it could be a useful tool to assess its efficacy within educational programs and surgical courses.

Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on the survival of patients with high-grade glioma and best practice recommendations

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has changed the clinical day-to-day practice. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on patients with high-grade glioma (HGG) as well as to derive best practice recommendations. We compared a multi-institutional cohort with HGG (n = 251) from 03/2020 to 05/2020 (n = 119) to a historical cohort from 03/2019 to 05/2019 (n = 132). The endpoints were outcome (progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)) as well as patterns of care and time intervals between treatment steps. The median OS for WHO grade 4 gliomas was 12 months in 2019 (95% Confidence Interval 9.7-14.3 months), and not reached in 2020 (p = .026). There were no other significant differences in the Kaplan-Meier estimates for OS and PFS between cohorts of 2019 and 2020, neither did stratification by WHO grade reveal any significant differences for OS, PFS or for patterns of care. The time interval between cranial magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI) and biopsy was significantly longer in 2020 cohort (11 versus 21 days, p = .031). Median follow-up was 10 months (range 0-30 months). Despite necessary disease containment policies, it is crucial to ensure that patients with HGG are treated in line with the recent guidelines and standard of care (SOC) algorithms. Therefore, we strongly suggest pursuing no changes to SOC treatment, a timely diagnosis and treatment with short time intervals between first symptoms, initial diagnosis, and treatment, as well as a guideline-based cMRI follow-up.

The Course and Surgical Treatment of Acute Appendicitis during the First and Second Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective Analysis in University Affiliated Hospital in Latvia

Background and Objectives: Acute appendicitis is the most common abdominal emergency requiring surgery and it has an estimated lifetime risk of 6.7 to 8.6%. The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed medical care worldwide, influencing diagnostic tactics, treatment modalities and outcomes. Our study aims to compare and analyze management of acute appendicitis before and during the first and second waves of the pandemic. Materials and Methods: Patients suffering acute appendicitis were enrolled retrospectively in a single-center study for a 10-month period before the pandemic (pre-COVID-19 period: 1 March to 31 December 2019) and during the pandemic (COVID-19 period: 1 March to 31 December 2020). The total number of patients, disease severity, diagnostic methods, complications, length of hospitalization and outcomes were analyzed. Results: A total number of 863 patients were included, 454 patients in the pre-COVID-19 period and 409 patients in the COVID-19 period. Compared to the pre-COVID-19 period, the number of complicated appendicitis increased in the COVID-19 period (24.4% to 37.2%; p < 0.001). The proportion of laparoscopic appendectomies increased during the COVID-19 period but did not show statistically significant differences between periods. In both time periods, we found that open technique was the chosen surgical approach more frequently in elderly patients (p < 0.001). Generalized peritonitis was significantly more common during the COVID-19 period (3.5% vs. 6.1%, p < 0.001). The postoperative course of patients was similar in the pre-COVID-19 period and during the COVID-19 period, with no significant differences in ICU admissions, overall hospital stay or morbidity. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a significant increase in complicated forms of acute appendicitis; however, no significant impact was observed in terms of diagnostic or treatment approach.

Estudio de los desenlaces perioperatorios de la apendicitis aguda durante la pandemia por COVID-19: un estudio observacional analítico de cohorte

Introducción. La condición de pandemia por COVID-19 impactó a la sociedad y los sistemas de salud a nivel mundial. Las adaptaciones institucionales procuraron mantener la calidad de la atención a pesar de un contexto organizacional desfavorable. La apendicitis aguda requirió ser manejada en un nuevo escenario institucional. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la efectividad del tratamiento quirúrgico de la apendicitis durante la pandemia. Métodos. Estudio observacional analítico, retrospectivo, en el que se incluyeron pacientes sometidos a apendicectomía, antes y durante la pandemia por COVID-19. Se evaluaron las complicaciones, infección del sitio operatorio, reingresos y estancia hospitalaria. Adicionalmente, se analizaron los desenlaces en los 3 picos epidemiológicos de la pandemia. Se efectuaron estadísticas descriptivas y analíticas entre los grupos a comparar. Resultados. Se incluyeron 1521 pacientes con apendicitis, 48,3 % operados antes y 51,7 % durante la pandemia. No hubo diferencias entre los grupos en complicaciones (p=0,352), infección del sitio operatorio (p=0,191), reingreso en los primeros 30 días (p=0,605) y estancia hospitalaria (p=0,514). El manejo de la apendicitis durante el tercer pico fue similar a las prácticas habituales. El tiempo de evolución fue mayor durante la pandemia (p=0,04) y los pacientes fueron llevados a cirugía más pronto que previo a la pandemia (p<0,001). > <0,001). Conclusiones. No se evidenció un incremento de complicaciones quirúrgicas, reingresos, estancia hospitalaria ni infección del sitio operatorio en los pacientes operados durante la pandemia. Hubo un efecto favorable para los pacientes como consecuencia de la adaptación institucional en la pandemia por COVID-19.

A systematic evaluation of methodological and reporting quality of meta-analysis published in the field of gastrointestinal endoscopy

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of published meta-analyses (MAs) in four major gastrointestinal endoscopic journals, and identify the predicted factors for high quality.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed to identify MAs from 1, January, 2016 to 31, December, 2020 in four major gastrointestinal endoscopic journals (including Digestive Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Surgical Endoscopy, and Endoscopy). We collected the characteristics of MAs after filtering unqualified articles, and assessed methodological and reporting qualities for eligible articles by AMSTAR tool and PRISMA checklist, respectively. Logistic regression was used for identifying predictive factors for high quality.

RESULTS

A total of 289 MAs were identified after screening by predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The scores (mean ± SD) of AMSTAR and PRISMA were 7.73 ± 1.11 and 22.90 ± 1.85, respectively. In PRISMA checklist, some items had less than 50% complete adherence, including item 2 (structured summary), items 5 (protocol and registration), items 12 and 19 (risk of bias in studies), item 27 (funding support). Item 1 (a priori design), item 4 (gray literature research), item 5 (list of included and excluded) were inferior to 50% adherence in AMSTAR tool. We found the predictive factors for high quality through logistic regression analysis: a priori design and funding support were associated with methodological quality. Protocol and registration influenced the methodological and reporting quality closely.

CONCLUSION

In general, qualities on the methodology and the reporting of MAs published in the gastrointestinal endoscopic journals are good, but both of which still potentially need further improvement.

Perioperative management of emergency and elective surgeries during the pandemic

The effects of the 2019 novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, and its associated pandemic are complex and widespread. It has permeated all aspects of daily life around the world. Unsurprisingly, it also had significant impacts on proceedings within hospitals around the world as well. Most notably, the multiple waves of the pandemic have each had untoward effects on surgical productivity within hospital systems. More specifically, the disruption of surgical procedures has impacted both emergent and elective cases. In the context of emergent procedures, hospital systems have had to reevaluate how they define 'emergent,' forcing them to determine which cases could not be rescheduled versus those that could. Elective procedures, on the other hand, were nearly halted altogether in the initial pandemic waves. If these were not completely stopped in some places, then they were greatly reduced. This paper will serve to describe the effect the pandemic has had on the proceedings of both elective and emergent surgeries. It will also describe how we have reevaluated and changed the way we define 'emergent' surgeries and describe the potential implications of this. We will also describe literature that speaks to the implications of the delay of elective procedures. Additionally, the cost implications of fewer surgical procedures performed will be discussed. Finally, we will describe literature that has established protocols for scheduling surgeries in waves of the pandemic, how these have evolved over time, and how they have created confusion for hospital systems navigating the pandemic.

The impact of lag time to cancer diagnosis and treatment on clinical outcomes prior to the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted cancer care, raising concerns regarding the impact of wait time, or 'lag time', on clinical outcomes. We aimed to contextualize pandemic-related lag times by mapping pre-pandemic evidence from systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses on the association between lag time to cancer diagnosis and treatment with mortality- and morbidity-related outcomes.

Methods

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews for reviews published prior to the pandemic (1 January 2010-31 December 2019). We extracted data on methodological characteristics, lag time interval start and endpoints, qualitative findings from systematic reviews, and pooled risk estimates of mortality- (i.e., overall survival) and morbidity- (i.e., local regional control) related outcomes from meta-analyses. We categorized lag times according to milestones across the cancer care continuum and summarized outcomes by cancer site and lag time interval.

Results

We identified 9032 records through database searches, of which 29 were eligible. We classified 33 unique types of lag time intervals across 10 cancer sites, of which breast, colorectal, head and neck, and ovarian cancers were investigated most. Two systematic reviews investigating lag time to diagnosis reported different findings regarding survival outcomes among paediatric patients with Ewing's sarcomas or central nervous system tumours. Comparable risk estimates of mortality were found for lag time intervals from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy for breast, colorectal, and ovarian cancers. Risk estimates of pathologic complete response indicated an optimal time window of 7-8 weeks for neoadjuvant chemotherapy completion prior to surgery for rectal cancers. In comparing methods across meta-analyses on the same cancer sites, lag times, and outcomes, we identified critical variations in lag time research design.

Conclusions

Our review highlighted measured associations between lag time and cancer-related outcomes and identified the need for a standardized methodological approach in areas such as lag time definitions and accounting for the waiting-time paradox. Prioritization of lag time research is integral for revised cancer care guidelines under pandemic contingency and assessing the pandemic's long-term effect on patients with cancer.

Funding

The present work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR-COVID-19 Rapid Research Funding opportunity, VR5-172666 grant to Eduardo L. Franco). Parker Tope, Eliya Farah, and Rami Ali each received an MSc. stipend from the Gerald Bronfman Department of Oncology, McGill University.

The impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on emergency general surgery in the first German "hotspot region" Aachen-Heinsberg-A multicentre retrospective cohort study

This study aimed to observe the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on acute general surgery in the first German "hotspot" regions of Heinsberg and Aachen, during the first months of the pandemic. The incidence and severity of acute appendicitis, acute cholecystitis and mechanical bowel obstruction, were compared between March and May 2020 and a control period (same months of the previous three years). Pre-, intra- and postoperative data was compared between three regional hospitals of Heinsberg and the closest maximum care, university hospital. A total of 592 operated patients were included, 141 belonging to the pandemic cohort and 451 to the historic cohort. The pandemic group showed higher rates of clinical peritonitis (38% vs. 27%, p = 0.015), higher rates of mean white blood cell count (13.2±4.4 /nl vs. 12.3±4.7 /nl, p = 0.044) and mean C-reactive protein (60.3±81.1 mg/l vs. 44.4±72.6 mg/l, p = 0.015) preoperatively. Specifically in patients with acute appendicitis, there were less patients with catarrhal appendicitis (23% vs. 35%, p = 0.021) and a tendency towards more advanced histological findings in the pandemic cohort. In the university hospital, a 42% reduction in acute operated cases was observed at the onset of the pandemic (n = 30 in 2020 vs. n = 52 in 2019), whereas in the peripheral hospitals of Heinsberg there was only a 10% reduction (n = 111 in 2020 vs. n = 123 in 2019). The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in our region was accompanied by advanced preoperative and intraoperative findings in patients undergoing emergency general surgery. A greater reduction in acute operated surgical cases was observed at the university hospital, in contrast to the smaller hospitals of Heinsberg, suggesting a possible shift of emergency patients, requiring immediate operation, from maximum care hospital to the periphery.

Colorectal Surgery Outcomes in the United States During the COVID-19 Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to assess colorectal surgery outcomes, discharge destination, and readmission in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Adult colorectal surgery patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2019-2020) and its colectomy and proctectomy procedure-targeted files were included. The prepandemic time period was defined from April 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019. The pandemic time period was defined from April 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020 in quarterly intervals (Q2 April-June; Q3 July-September; Q4 October-December). Factors associated with morbidity and in-hospital mortality were assessed using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 62,393 patients, 34,810 patients (55.8%) underwent colorectal surgery prepandemic and 27,583 (44.2%) during the pandemic. Patients who had surgery during the pandemic had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class and presented more frequently with dependent functional status. The proportion of emergent surgeries increased (12.7% prepandemic versus 15.2% pandemic, P < 0.001), with less laparoscopic cases (54.0% versus 51.0%, P < 0.001). Higher rates of morbidity with a greater proportion of discharges to home and lesser proportion of discharges to skilled care facilities were observed with no considerable differences in length of stay or worsening readmission rates. Multivariable analysis demonstrated increased odds of overall and serious morbidity and in-hospital mortality, during Q3 and/or Q4 of the 2020 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in hospital presentation, inpatient care, and discharge disposition of colorectal surgery patients were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pandemic responses should emphasize balancing resource allocation, educating patients and providers on timely medical workup and management, and optimizing discharge coordination pathways.

The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Surgery Process

With this review, it was aimed to discuss the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the process before, during and after surgery. Studies that were accessed using the keywords “COVID-19”, “perioperative” and “surgery” in Pubmed and Science Direct and Turkish databases were discussed. The measures taken with the declaration of the pandemic also affected surgical practices, and postponing elective cases other than emergency and cancer surgery was one of the common measures implemented in many countries. In addition to all these measures and recommendations, the fact that the operating room environment has some unique risk factors draws attention to the process before, during and after the surgery. Guidelines for the measures to be taken in the national and international arena are published in order to plan the workforce of health professionals and to use limited health care resources effectively, as well as to prevent the spread of COVID-19. These measures and recommendations are shaped according to the statistical fluctuation in the number of infected cases and health care resources in countries, and policies and procedures regarding the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative period are updated. It is extremely important to follow the current literature in order to protect both patients and healthcare professionals involved in the surgical process and to prevent cross-contamination against the COVID-19 virus.