The impact of confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection on ambulatory procedures and associated delays in care for asymptomatic patients

Regional Trends in Unicondylar and Patellofemoral Knee Arthroplasty: An Analysis of the American Joint Replacement Registry

BACKGROUND

As the popularity of unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) and patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) have expanded, more patients who have limited arthritis are undergoing partial knee arthroplasty. No studies have evaluated if any regional differences in the United States (U.S.) exist between partial versus total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to utilize the American Joint Replacement Registry to evaluate regional differences in UKA, PFA, and TKA.

METHODS

The American Joint Replacement Registry was queried for all TKA, PFA, and UKA procedures between 2012 and 2021. Surgical volume was compared between the Midwest (MW), Northeast (NE), South, and West (W) regions. Trends were compared using multivariate logistic regression analyses and least squared mean logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Since 2012, there has been a steady increase in the amount of UKAs performed across the U.S., except during the COVID-19 pandemic when numbers decreased. Logistic regression analyses demonstrated a higher likelihood of receiving a UKA compared to TKA in the NE compared to other regions, and higher likelihood of receiving a PFA in the NE and W compared to other regions over the study period. Other factors that increased the likelihood of having a UKA nationally were men, the procedure being performed at a teaching hospital, and having surgery in urban areas. Patients were more likely to have a PFA in the NE compared to the S and MW, and higher odds in the South and W compared to the MW, with rates of PFA consistently lower in the MW compared to other regions.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients were more likely to have a UKA in the NE compared to other regions of the country. Patients had higher odds of having a PFA in the NE and W regions relative to the MW. Men had higher odds of having either UKA or PFA than women across the nation.

Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic on Utilization of Emergency Medical Services in New York City

Background: This study evaluates trends in the utilization of emergency medical services (EMS) in New York City, the "epicenter" of the first "wave" of the coronavirus pandemic. We hypothesize that EMS call volumes decreased overall in New York City during the first year of the pandemic, specifically with respect to trauma/injury calls. Contrarily, we posit that calls for "sick" events increased given pervasive fear of virus transmission. Materials and Methods: Retrospective New York City EMS calls data (January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2020) were obtained from the NYC Open Data/EMS Incident Dispatch database. Total EMS calls, trauma/injury calls, and "sick" event calls were collected for New York City and for all five boroughs. Census data for each borough were used to weigh daily EMS calls per 100,000 individuals. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare pre-pandemic (2019 to March 2020) versus pandemic (April 2020 to December 2020) EMS call volumes, p = 0.05. Results: Median daily EMS calls per 100,000 individuals decreased 21.6% at the start of the pandemic across New York City (pre-pandemic, 3,262 calls; pandemic, 2,556 calls; p < 0.001) and similarly decreased when stratified by borough (all, p < 0.001). Median daily trauma/injury and sick event calls per 100,000 also decreased in New York City and the five boroughs from pre-pandemic to pandemic time periods (all, p < 0.001). Discussion and Conclusions: These data reflect an unprecedented window into EMS utilization during an infectious disease pandemic. As decreased EMS utilization for multiple conditions likely reflects delayed or impeded access to care, utilization data have important implications for provision of acute care services during possible future disruptions related to the pandemic.

Low infectivity among asymptomatic patients with a positive severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) admission test at a tertiary care center, 2020-2022

We used a strand-specific RT-qPCR to evaluate viral replication as a surrogate for infectiousness among 242 asymptomatic inpatients with a positive severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) admission test. Only 21 patients (9%) had detectable SARS-CoV-2 minus-strand RNA. Because most patients were found to be noninfectious, our findings support the suspension of asymptomatic admission testing.

COVID-19 infection and ambulatory surgery: Decision making based on known knowns

During the spring of 2020, as Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections rapidly spread across the globe, all sectors of healthcare, everywhere, would change in ways that were unimaginable. Early on, the ambulatory surgery space, being no exception, would suffer deep and impactful reductions in patient volume and revenue. Though actual care stoppages were short-lived, decreased ambulatory surgical patient volumes continued for a myriad of reasons, though in some cases, ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) provided surgical care in limited numbers to patients who were "offloaded" from inpatient lists. Released on March 24, 2020, herein, we address the key perioperative issues as they relate to COVID-19 and ambulatory surgery including the many complexities and challenges of a new and rapidly changing virus, the impact of viral infection and vaccine development on perioperative outcomes, key ambulatory surgical approaches to COVID-19-related patient and staff safety, and finally, managing issues related to both supply chain (personal protective equipment (PPE) and other necessary equipment) and facility staffing.

Modeling the COVID Pandemic: Do Delays in Surgery Justify Using Stereotactic Radiation to Treat Low-Risk Early Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer?

INTRODUCTION

It was suggested that stereotactic radiation (SBRT) is an "alternative if no surgical capacity is available" for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to compare the oncologic outcomes of delayed surgical resection and early SBRT among operable patients with early stage lung cancer.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with cT1aN0M0 NSCLC who underwent surgery or SBRT (2010-2016) with no comorbidity. Patients with any comorbidities or age >80 were excluded. The outcome of interest was overall survival. Delays in surgical care were modeled using different times from diagnosis to surgery. A 1:1 propensity match was performed and survival was analyzed using multivariable Cox regression.

RESULTS

Of 6720 healthy cT1aN0M0 NSCLC patients, 6008 (89.4%) received surgery and 712 (10.6%) received SBRT. Among surgery patients, time to surgery >30 d was associated with inferior survival (HR > 1.4, P ≤ 0.013) compared with patients receiving surgery ≤14 d. Relative to SBRT, surgery demonstrated superior survival at all time points evaluated: 0-30 d, 31-60 d, 61-90 d, and >90 d (all P < 0.001). Among a propensity-matched cohort of 256 pairs of patients, delayed surgery (>90 d) remained association with better overall survival relative to early SBRT (5-year survival 76.9% versus 32.3%, HR = 0.266, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although longer time to surgery is associated with inferior survival among surgery patients, delayed surgery is superior to early SBRT. Surgical resection should remain the standard of care to treat operable early stage lung cancer despite delays imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Making a Joint Decision Regarding the Timing of Surgery for Elective Arthroplasty Surgery After Being Infected With COVID-19: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a substantial number of patients to have their elective arthroplasty surgeries rescheduled. While it is established that patients with COVID-19 who are undergoing surgery have a significantly higher risk of experiencing postoperative complications and mortality, it is not well-known at what time after testing positive the risk of postoperative complications or mortality returns to normal.

METHODS

PubMed (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica dataBASE, and professional society websites were systematically reviewed on March 7, 2022 to identify studies and guidelines on the optimal timeframe to reschedule patients for elective surgery after preoperatively testing positive for COVID-19. Outcomes included postoperative complications such as mortality, pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, septic shock, and pulmonary embolism.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies and professional society guidelines met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. Patients with asymptomatic COVID-19 should be rescheduled 4-8 weeks after testing positive (as long as they do not develop symptoms in the interim), patients with mild/moderate COVID-19 should be rescheduled 6-8 weeks after testing positive (with complete resolution of symptoms), and patients with severe/critical COVID-19 should be rescheduled at a minimum of 12 weeks after hospital discharge (with complete resolution of symptoms).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the negative association between preoperative COVID-19 and postoperative complications, patients should have elective arthroplasty surgery rescheduled at differing timeframes based on their symptoms. In addition, a multidisciplinary and patient-centered approach to rescheduling patients is recommended. Further study is needed to examine the impact of novel COVID-19 variants and vaccination on timeframes for rescheduling surgery.

COVID-19 in the perioperative setting: A review of the literature and the clinical landscape

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically affected societies and healthcare systems around the globe. The perioperative care continuum has also been under significant strain due to the pandemic-tasked with simultaneously addressing surgical strains and backlogs, infection prevention strategies, and emerging data regarding significantly higher perioperative risk for COVID-19 patients and survivors. Many uncertainties persist regarding the perioperative risk, assessment, and management of COVID-19 survivors-and the energy to catch up on surgical backlogs must be tempered with strategies to continue to mitigate COVID-19 related perioperative risk. Here, we review the available data for COVID-19-related perioperative risk, discuss areas of persistent uncertainty, and empower the perioperative teams to pursue evidence-based strategies for high quality, patient-centered, team-based care as we enter the third year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Infection Prevention during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic

COVID-19 is a nonspecific viral illness caused by a novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, and led to an ongoing global pandemic. Transmission is primarily human-to-human via contact with respiratory particles containing infectious virus. The risk of transmission to health care personnel is low with proper use of personal protective equipment, including gowns, gloves, N95 or surgical mask, and eye protection. Additional measures affecting the risk of transmission include physical distancing, hand hygiene, routine cleaning and disinfection, appropriate air handling and ventilation, and public health interventions such as universal masking and stay-at-home orders.

Outpatient stereotactic brain biopsies

Outpatient neurosurgery is rising popularity leading to patients’ satisfaction and cost-savings. Although several North-American teams have shown the safety of outpatient stereotactic brain biopsies, few data from other countries with different health care systems are available. We therefore conducted a feasibility and safety study on the outpatient stereotactic brain biopsies. We prospectively examined all the consecutive stereotactic brain biopsies performed in an outpatient setting at our tertiary medical center, between June 2018 and September 2020. Among the 437 patients who underwent stereotactic brain biopsy during the study period, 40 (9.2%) patients were enrolled for an outpatient management. The sex ratio was 1 and the median age on biopsy day was 55 [41–66] years. The median distance from patients’ home to hospital was 17 km [3–47]. 95% of patients had pre-biopsy ASA score of 1 or 2 and mRs equal to 2 or less. The rate of same-day discharge was 100%. No patient experienced post-biopsy symptomatic complication necessitating readmission within the month following the biopsy. One patient (2.5%) resorted to an unplanned consultation. Histological findings obtained from brain biopsy led to a diagnosis in all patients; the most frequently found were neoplastic lesions (77.5%). Stereotactic brain biopsies can therefore be safely achieved on an outpatient setting in carefully selected patients. This process could be more widely adopted in other neurosurgical centers, without affecting the quality of patient’s health care and safety. In this article, we propose management guidelines and pre-biopsy checklist for performing ambulatory stereotactic brain biopsies.