Implementation of a clinical pathway for the surgical treatment of colorectal cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic

Management of patients at the hepatopancreatobiliary unit of a London teaching hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic

To mitigate COVID-19-related shortage of treatment capacity, the hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) unit of the Royal Free Hospital London (RFHL) transferred its practice to independent hospitals in Central London through the North Central London Cancer Alliance. The aim of this study was to critically assess this strategy and evaluate perioperative outcomes. Prospectively collected data were reviewed on all patients who were treated under the RFHL HPB unit in six hospitals between November 2020 and October 2021. A total of 1541 patients were included, as follows: 1246 (81%) at the RFHL, 41 (3%) at the Chase Farm Hospital, 23 (2%) at the Whittington Hospital, 207 (13%) at the Princess Grace Hospital, 12 (1%) at the Wellington Hospital and 12 (1%) at the Lister Hospital, Chelsea. Across all institutions, overall complication rate were 40%, major complication (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3a) rate were 11% and mortality rates were 1.4%, respectively. In COVID-19-positive patients (n = 28), compared with negative patients, complication rate and mortality rates were increased tenfold. Outsourcing HPB patients, including their specialist care, to surrounding institutions was safe and ensured ongoing treatment with comparable outcomes among the institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the lack of direct comparison with a non-pandemic cohort, these results can strictly only be applied within a pandemic setting.

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.

The Cancer Hub Approach for Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery During COVID-19 Pandemic: Outcomes from a UK Cancer Centre

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused unprecedented disruption to global healthcare delivery. In England, the majority of elective surgery was postponed or cancelled to increase intensive care capacity. Our unit instituted the 'RM Partners Cancer Hub' at the Royal Marsden Hospital in London, to deliver ongoing cancer surgery in a 'COVID-lite' setting. This article describes the operational set-up and outcomes for upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer resections performed during this period.

METHODS

From April 2020 to April 2021, the Royal Marsden Hospital formed the RM Partners Cancer Hub. This approach was designed to coordinate resources and provide as much oncological treatment as feasible for patients across the RM Partners West London Cancer Alliance. A UGI surgical case prioritisation strategy, along with strict infection control pathways and pre-operative screening protocols, was adopted.

RESULTS

A total of 231 patients underwent surgery for confirmed or suspected UGI cancer during the RM Partners Cancer Hub, with 213 completed resections and combined 90-day mortality rate of 3.5%. Good short-term survival outcomes were demonstrated with 2-year disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) for oesophageal (70.8% and 72.9%), gastric (66.7% and 83.3%) and pancreatic cancer resections (68.0% and 88.0%). One patient who developed perioperative COVID-19 during the RM Partners Cancer Hub operation made a full recovery with no lasting clinical sequelae.

CONCLUSION

Our experience demonstrates that the RM Partners Cancer Hub approach is a safe strategy for continuing upper gastrointestinal (GI) resectional surgery during future periods of healthcare service disruption.

Pediatric Residency Training amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: Exploring the Impact of Supervision and Clinical Practice Guidelines on Clinical and Financial Outcomes

Objective

This study is aimed at calculating the magnitude of the effect of clinical practice guidelines (CPG) and supervision in inhibiting the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical and financial outcomes of non-COVID-19 inpatient care by pediatric residents in academic medical center (AMC) hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

The cohort retrospective study was conducted. This study collected patient data from pediatric residency programs. A research cohort consisted of non-COVID-19 pediatric patients at Dr. Soetomo General Academic Hospital. This study compared the subgroup of patients treated during the pandemic with those treated before the pandemic. The results were analyzed using SPSS 26.0 and Smart-PLS.

Results

There was a 41.4% decrease in pediatric inpatients during the pandemic with an increased severity level and complexity level, a reduction of 7.46% availability of supervisors, an increase of 0.4% in readmission < 30 days, an increase of 0.31% in-hospital mortality, an increase the total costs of care, and a decrease of insurance claim profit. CPG did not moderate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the clinical outcomes (β = −0.006, P = 0.083) but moderated the financial outcomes (β = −0.022, P = 0.000), by reducing the total cost of care and increasing insurance claim profit. Supervision moderated the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the clinical outcomes (β = 0.040, P = 0.000) by increasing aLOS and on the financial outcomes (β = −0.031, P = 0.000) by reducing the total cost of care and increasing insurance claim profit. This study model had a 24.0% variance of explanatory power for clinical outcomes and 49.0% for financial outcomes. This study's structural model effectively predicted clinical outcomes (Q² = 0.238) and financial outcomes (Q² = 0.413).

Conclusion

Direct supervision inhibited the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on both clinical and financial outcomes of non-COVID-19 inpatient care by pediatric residents, while CPG only inhibited the negative impact on financial outcomes. Implication of This Study. In a disaster, the availability of CPG and direct supervision makes AMC hospitals able to inhibit the negative impact of disasters on clinical and financial outcomes.

Robotic Abdominal Surgery and COVID-19: A Systematic Review of Published Literature and Peer-Reviewed Guidelines during the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic

Background: Significant concern emerged at the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic regarding the safety and practicality of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS). We aimed to review reported surgical practice and peer-reviewed published review recommendations and guidelines relating to RAS during the pandemic. Methods: A systematic review was performed in keeping with PRISMA guidelines. This study was registered on Open Science Framework. Databases were searched using the following search terms: ‘robotic surgery’, ‘robotics’, ‘COVID-19’, and ‘SARS-CoV-2’. Firstly, articles describing any outcome from or reference to robotic surgery during the COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 pandemic were considered for inclusion. Guidelines or review articles that outlined recommendations were included if published in a peer-reviewed journal and incorporating direct reference to RAS practice during the pandemic. The ROBINS-I (Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Intervention) tool was used to assess the quality of surgical practice articles and guidelines and recommendation publications were assessed using the AGREE-II reporting tool. Publication trends, median time from submission to acceptance were reported along with clinical outcomes and practice recommendations. Results: Twenty-nine articles were included: 15 reporting RAS practice and 14 comprising peer-reviewed guidelines or review recommendations related to RAS during the pandemic, with multiple specialities (i.e., urology, colorectal, digestive surgery, and general minimally invasive surgery) covered. Included articles were published April 2020—December 2021, and the median interval from first submission to acceptance was 92 days. All surgical practice studies scored ‘low’ or ‘moderate’ risk of bias on the ROBINS-I assessment. All guidelines and recommendations scored ‘moderately well’ on the AGREE-II assessment; however, all underperformed in the domain of public and patient involvement. Overall, there were no increases in perioperative complication rates or mortalities in patients who underwent RAS compared to that expected in non-COVID practice. RAS was deemed safe, with recommendations for mitigation of risk of viral transmission. Conclusions: Continuation of RAS was feasible and safe during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic where resources permitted. Post-pandemic reflections upon published robotic data and publication patterns allows us to better prepare for future events and to enhance urgent guideline design processes.

Postoperative complications in adult patients undergoing surgery with confirmed infection by SARS-CoV-2: An integrative review

OBJECTIVE

to analyze the evidence available in the literature about postoperative complications in adult patients undergoing surgical procedures with confirmed infection by SARS-CoV-2.

METHOD

an integrative literature review conducted in the CINAHL, EMBASE, LILACS, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases, as well as in the gray literature. The references identified were exported to the EndNote manager and, subsequently, to the Rayyan web application for study selection. The stages of sampling, categorization of studies, evaluation of the studies included, interpretation of the results and knowledge synthesis were performed by two reviewers independently and in a masked manner. The data were analyzed descriptively.

RESULTS

of the 247 articles identified, 15 were selected to comprise this review. The prevalent postoperative complications in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 were the following: cough, dyspnea and hypoxia, need for invasive mechanical ventilation or not, admission to the intensive care unit and death.

CONCLUSION

the most reported postoperative complications in the studies evaluated were respiratory-related, followed by cardiovascular complications. The importance of preoperative screening for COVID-19 is highlighted, as well as of the monitoring and tracking of confirmed cases in the postoperative period, as these actions exert an impact on reducing the occurrence of complications related to SARS-CoV-2.

Special surgical approaches during peri-COVID-19 pandemic: Robotic and transanal minimally invasive surgery

During the peri-coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the need of special care has raised, not only for our patients but also for health care workers. These needs are different regarding the procedure and the approach performed. This is a dynamic review in the use of robotics and transanal approaches for colorectal diseases. We searched PubMed and KSREvidence.com for studies related to coronavirus disease and robotic surgery/transanal mesorectal excision/transanal surgery (primary and systematic reviews). From 147 results in PubMed, 11 were selected for full text screening, and 11 were included in this paper. From 3 results in KSREvidence, no relevant systematic reviews were identified. We also checked the references in identified papers for further relevant studies. European Society of Coloproctology guidelines were including as part of the recommendations available. Robotic and transanal MIS can be performed safely during the pandemic, but particular characteristics of these procedure need to be taken into consideration.

Crisis management for surgical teams and their leaders, lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic; A structured approach to developing resilience or natural organisational responses

BACKGROUND

Multiple industries and organisations are afflicted by and respond to institutional crises daily. As surgeons, we respond to crisis frequently and individually such as with critically unwell patients or in mass casualty scenarios; but rarely, do we encounter institutional or multi-institutional crisis with multiple actors as we have seen with the COVID-19 pan-demic. Businesses, private industry and the financial sector have been in a more precar-ious position regarding crisis and consequently have developed rapid response strate-gies employing foresight to reduce risk to assets and financial liquidity. Moreover, large nationalised governmental organisations such as the military have strategies in place ow-ing to a rapidly evolving geopolitical climate with the expectation of immediate new chal-lenges either in the negotiating room or indeed the field of conflict. Despite both nation-alised and privatised healthcare systems existing, both appeared ill-prepared for the COVID-19 global crisis.

METHODS

A narrative review of the literature was undertaken exploring the approach to crisis man-agement and models used in organisations exposed to institutional crises outside the field of medicine.

RESULTS

There are many parallels between the organisational management of private business institutions, large military organisations and surgical organisational management in healthcare. Models from management consultancies and the armed forces were ex-plored discussed and adapted for the surgical leader providing a framework through which the surgical leader can bring about an successful response to an institutional crisis and ensure future resilience.

CONCLUSION

We believe that healthcare, and surgeons (as leaders) in particular, can learn from these other organisations and industries to engage appropriate generic operational plans and contingencies in preparation for whatever further crises may arise in the future, both near and distant. As such, following a review of the literature, we have explored a number of models we believe are adaptable for the surgical community to ensure we remain a dy-namically responsive and ever prepared profession.

Surgical Treatment and Outcomes of Colorectal Cancer Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A National Population-based Study in England

To compare the management and outcomes of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients during the first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic with the preceding 6 months.

BACKGROUND

The pandemic has affected the diagnosis and treatment of CRC patients worldwide. Little is known about the safety of major resection and whether creating "cold" sites (COVID-free hospitals) is effective.

METHODS

A national study in England used administrative hospital data for 14,930 CRC patients undergoing surgery between October 1, 2019, and May 31, 2020. Mortality of CRC resection was compared before and after March 23, 2020 ("lockdown" start).

RESULTS

The number of elective CRC procedures dropped sharply during the pandemic (from average 386 to 214 per week), whereas emergency procedures were hardly affected (from 88 to 84 per week). There was little change in characteristics of surgical patients during the pandemic. Laparoscopic surgery decreased from 62.5% to 35.9% for elective and from 17.7% to 9.7% for emergency resections. Surgical mortality increased slightly (from 0.9% to 1.2%, P = 0.06) after elective and markedly (from 5.6% to 8.9%, P = 0.003) after emergency resections. The observed increase in mortality during the first phase of the pandemic was similar in "cold" and "hot" sites (P > 0.5 elective and emergency procedures).

CONCLUSIONS

The pandemic resulted in a 50% reduction in elective CRC procedures during the initial surge and a substantial increase in mortality after emergency resection. There was no evidence that surgery in COVID-free "cold" sites led to better outcomes in the first 2 months.

Continuity of Cancer Care: The Surgical Experience of Two Large Cancer Hubs in London and Milan

The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a large effect on the management of cancer patients. This study reports on the approach and outcomes of cancer patients receiving radical surgery with curative intent between March and September 2020 (in comparison to 2019) in the European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS (IEO) in Milan and the South East London Cancer Alliance (SELCA). Both institutions implemented a COVID-19 minimal pathway where patients were required to self-isolate prior to admission and were swabbed for COVID-19 within 72 h of surgery. Positive patients had surgery deferred until a negative swab. At IEO, radical surgeries declined by 6% as compared to the same period in 2019 (n = 1477 vs. 1560, respectively). Readmissions were required for 3% (n = 41), and <1% (n = 9) developed COVID-19, of which only one had severe disease and died. At SELCA, radical surgeries declined by 34% (n = 1553 vs. 2336). Readmissions were required for 11% (n = 36), <1% (n = 7) developed COVID-19, and none died from it. Whilst a decline in number of surgeries was observed in both centres, the implemented COVID-19 minimal pathways have shown to be safe for cancer patients requiring radical treatment, with limited complications and almost no COVID-19 infections.

A Comprehensive Overview of the COVID-19 Literature: Machine Learning–Based Bibliometric Analysis (Preprint).. [DOI: 10.2196/preprints.23703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

BACKGROUND

Shortly after the emergence of COVID-19, researchers rapidly mobilized to study numerous aspects of the disease such as its evolution, clinical manifestations, effects, treatments, and vaccinations. This led to a rapid increase in the number of COVID-19–related publications. Identifying trends and areas of interest using traditional review methods (eg, scoping and systematic reviews) for such a large domain area is challenging.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to conduct an extensive bibliometric analysis to provide a comprehensive overview of the COVID-19 literature.

METHODS

We used the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19) that consists of a large number of research articles related to all coronaviruses. We used a machine learning–based method to analyze the most relevant COVID-19–related articles and extracted the most prominent topics. Specifically, we used a clustering algorithm to group published articles based on the similarity of their abstracts to identify research hotspots and current research directions. We have made our software accessible to the community via GitHub.

RESULTS

Of the 196,630 publications retrieved from the database, we included 28,904 in our analysis. The mean number of weekly publications was 990 (SD 789.3). The country that published the highest number of COVID-19–related articles was China (2950/17,270, 17.08%). The highest number of articles were published in bioRxiv. Lei Liu affiliated with the Southern University of Science and Technology in China published the highest number of articles (n=46). Based on titles and abstracts alone, we were able to identify 1515 surveys, 733 systematic reviews, 512 cohort studies, 480 meta-analyses, and 362 randomized control trials. We identified 19 different topics covered among the publications reviewed. The most dominant topic was public health response, followed by clinical care practices during the COVID-19 pandemic, clinical characteristics and risk factors, and epidemic models for its spread.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide an overview of the COVID-19 literature and have identified current hotspots and research directions. Our findings can be useful for the research community to help prioritize research needs and recognize leading COVID-19 researchers, institutes, countries, and publishers. Our study shows that an AI-based bibliometric analysis has the potential to rapidly explore a large corpus of academic publications during a public health crisis. We believe that this work can be used to analyze other eHealth-related literature to help clinicians, administrators, and policy makers to obtain a holistic view of the literature and be able to categorize different topics of the existing research for further analyses. It can be further scaled (for instance, in time) to clinical summary documentation. Publishers should avoid noise in the data by developing a way to trace the evolution of individual publications and unique authors.