The Importance of Vaginal Natural Orifice Surgeries in the Era of COVID-19 Pandemic

Same-Day Discharge is Safe, Feasible Following Vaginal Hysterectomy with Apical Suspension

Purpose

Studies involving minimally invasive hysterectomy and robotic sacrocolpopexy have demonstrated safety and feasibility of same-day discharge. There are limited data, however, on same-day discharge outcomes for vaginal hysterectomy and pelvic reconstruction. This study aimed to compare 30 and 90-day surgical outcomes between same-day discharge versus overnight stay following vaginal hysterectomy and apical suspension.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective study evaluated surgeries performed over two time periods. Overnight stay was standard between December 2018 and February 2020. Same-day discharge was standard from December 2020 to February 2022. All patients who underwent vaginal hysterectomy with apical suspension were included. The primary outcome was to determine if there was an increase in 30-day readmission rates. Secondary outcomes included emergency department visits and reoperations within 30 days, the previous variables at 90 days, and the rate for successful same-day discharge.

Results

A total of 324 patients were analyzed over the 30 months: 149 (46%) in the overnight stay group and 175 (54%) in the same-day discharge group. At 30 days, no difference was found between groups for readmissions (2.7% vs 4.0%, p = 0.56), emergency department visits (14.8% vs 14.9%, p = 1.0), or reoperations (2.0% vs.1.7%, p = 1.0). At 90 days, outcomes were also similar. Same-day discharge as standard practice was successful in 80% of patients.

Conclusion

In this retrospective two cohort study, the safety of same-day discharge following vaginal hysterectomy with apical suspension was demonstrated with no increased risk of 30 or 90-day readmissions, emergency visits, or reoperation rates. The majority (80%) of patients were discharged on the day of surgery, suggesting feasibility of this model.

COVID-19 transmission in surgical smoke during laparoscopy and open surgery: a systematic review

AIM

To evaluate the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in surgical smoke and aerosols during laparoscopy and open surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review (PROSPERO ID: CRD42021268366) was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Articles were selected based on the title and abstract as well as the type of publication. Primary objectives of the study were to assess potential risk of contamination as well as comparing laparoscopic and open procedures in terms of danger of SARS-COV-2 transmission.

RESULTS

Fifty-three articles were identified and included in the review. No case of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to operating room personnel during open or minimally invasive surgery was identified at the time the review was conducted. Furthermore, no significant difference was observed between smoke and aerosols generated from open surgery and those generated from minimally invasive surgery.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 transmission in surgical smoke and aerosols has yet to be observed. However, given the potential risk of viral transmission, caution should be exercised when performing surgery to ensure the safety of the operating room personnel. When clinically indicated and when protective measures can be implemented, minimally invasive surgery should be performed instead of open surgery to ensure optimal patient outcomes.

Outcomes of universal SARS-CoV-2 testing program in pregnant women admitted to hospital and the adjuvant role of lung ultrasound in screening: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The emerging evidence for the asymptomatic carriers of SARS-CoV-2 infection emphasized the critical need for universal screening of pregnant women.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to present the prevalence of overall and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection rates in pregnant women admitted to the hospital, and assess the diagnostic accuracy of maternal symptoms and lung ultrasound (LUS) findings in detecting the infection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective cohort study was conducted at a single tertiary center in Istanbul, Turkey, for a month period starting from 27 April 2020. Women with a confirmed pregnancy regardless of the gestational week admitted to the obstetric unit with any indication were consecutively underwent LUS and PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2.

RESULTS

A total of 296 patients were included for the final analysis. The universal screening strategy diagnosed 23 pregnant women (7.77%) with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The rate of symptomatic and asymptomatic patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 was found as 3.72% (n = 11) and 4.05% (n = 12), respectively. Four of nine women who underwent a second testing for SARS-CoV-2 upon abnormal LUS findings were found positive eventually (17.4%, n = 4/23). The asymptomatic pregnant women with LUS score of 1 and those with normal LUS findings were considered as likely to be normal. Symptomatic patients with LUS score of 1 and those with score of 2 or 3 were considered as abnormal. On a secondary diagnostic performance analysis, the positive predictive value and the sensitivity were found as 44% and 47.8% for the triage based on maternal symptoms and, 82.3% and 60.9% for the triage based on LUS, respectively.

CONCLUSION

A one-month trial period of universal testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection with RT-PCR in pregnant women who admitted to the hospital showed an overall and asymptomatic infection diagnose rate of 7.77% and 4%, respectively. Using lung ultrasound was found more predictive in detecting the infection than the use of symptomatology solely.