Streamlining brain tumor surgery care during the COVID-19 pandemic: A case-control study

Patient outcomes after implementation of transitional care protocols in elective neurosurgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

30-day readmissions are a significant burden on the healthcare system. Postoperative transitional care protocols (TCPs) for safe and efficient discharge planning are being more widely adopted to reduce readmission rates. Currently, little evidence exists to justify the utility of TCPs for improving patient outcomes in elective neurosurgery. The objective of this systematic review was to determine the extent to which TCPs reduce adverse outcomes in patients undergoing elective neurosurgical procedures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted after PROSPERO registration. Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane review databases were searched through February 1, 2024. Keywords included: "transitional care AND neurosurgery", "Discharge planning AND neurosurgery". Articles were included if they assessed postoperative TCPs in an adult population undergoing elective neurosurgeries. Exclusion criteria were pediatric patients, implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols, or non-elective neurosurgical procedures. The primary outcome was readmission rates after implementation of TCPs.

RESULTS

16 articles were included in this review. 2 articles found that patients treated with TCPs had significantly higher chances of home discharge. 7 articles found a significant association between implementation of TCP and reduced length of stay and intensive care unit stay. 3 articles reported an increase in patient satisfaction after implementation of TCPs. 3 found that TCP led to a significant decrease in readmissions. After meta-analysis, TCPs were associated with significantly decreased readmission rates (OR: 0.68, p < 0.0001), length of stay (mean difference: -0.57, p < 0.00001), and emergency department visits (OR: 0.33, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis found that an overwhelming majority of the available literature supports the effectiveness of discharge planning on at least one measure of patient outcomes. However, the extent to which each facet of the TCP affects outcomes in elective neurosurgery remains unclear. Future efforts should be made to compare the effectiveness of different TCPs.

Changes in pituitary adenoma patient presentation and outcomes during the COVID pandemic at a Pituitary Center of Excellence

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant disruption to the surgical care of patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of the pandemic on endoscopic endonasal surgery (EES) for patients with a pituitary adenoma.

METHODS

Patients from 2015 to 2022 that had EES for a pituitary adenoma were included in this study. Patients were separated into pre-COVID (January 2015-March 2020) and COVID (March 2020-September 2022) groups. Univariate analysis was done using chi-square, fisher exact tests, and t-tests to compare groups.

RESULTS

This study included 492 patients that had EES for their pituitary adenoma. There were 314 patients in the pre-COVID group and 178 patients in the COVID group. Patients in the COVID group had a higher risk analysis index (RAI) frailty score (15 ± 10 pre-COVID vs. 20 ± 9 COVID, P < 0.001) and a higher American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical status score (3 or 4) (72.0% pre-COVID vs. 81.9% COVID, P = 0.02). There were significantly more macroadenoma cases (87.6% pre-COVID vs. 94.4% COVID, P = 0.02) and extrasellar surgical approaches (45.2% pre-COVID vs. 61.2% COVID, P < 0.001) during COVID. There was no significant difference in length of stay (LOS) and readmission rates between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients that presented during the pandemic tended to be more frail, have more comorbidities, and require additional extrasellar surgical approaches. Despite changes in clinical presentation and operative management, the LOS and readmission rate remained stable during COVID, supporting the safety of this procedure during the recent pandemic.

Pituitary surgery and COVID

An effect of the COVID-19 pandemic was the disruption of healthcare systems, especially surgical services provided to the community. Pituitary surgery was especially impacted, given the majority of cases were deemed non-urgent with very few exceptions, and the high risk of viral transmission conferred by the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach. Patients suffering from pituitary lesions with resultant endocrinopathy or visual symptoms saw their treatment delayed or altered, which had implications on their outcomes and care. This disruption extended to surgical training and the usual functioning of academic units, necessitating changes to curricula and implementation of novel methods of progressing surgical education. This review will explore the effect of the COVID pandemic on pituitary surgery, the experiences of various surgeons as well as the adaptations implemented on the frontlines. The lessons learned from the experience of the pandemic may assist specialists in gleaning insights regarding the care of patients in the future.

Trends in degenerative lumbar spinal surgery during the early COVID-19 pandemic in Republic of Korea: A national study utilizing the national health insurance database

During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Republic of Korea (ROK) experienced three epidemic waves in February, August, and November 2020. These waves, combined with the overarching pandemic, significantly influenced trends in spinal surgery. This study aimed to investigate the trends in degenerative lumbar spinal surgery in ROK during the early COVID-19 pandemic, especially in relation to specific epidemic waves. Using the National Health Information Database in ROK, we identified all patients who underwent surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal diseases between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2020. A joinpoint regression was used to assess temporal trends in spinal surgeries over the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of surgeries decreased following the first and second epidemic waves (p<0.01 and p = 0.34, respectively), but these were offset by compensatory increases later on (p<0.01 and p = 0.05, respectively). However, the third epidemic wave did not lead to a decrease in surgical volume, and the total number of surgeries remained comparable to the period before the pandemic. When compared to the pre-COVID-19 period, average LOH was reduced by 1 day during the COVID-19 period (p<0.01), while mean hospital costs increased significantly from 3,511 to 4,061 USD (p<0.01). Additionally, the transfer rate and the 30-day readmission rate significantly decreased (both p<0.01), while the reoperation rate remained stable (p = 0.36). Despite the impact of epidemic waves on monthly surgery numbers, a subsequent compensatory increase was observed, indicating that surgical care has adapted to the challenges of the pandemic. This adaptability, along with the stable total number of operations, highlights the potential for healthcare systems to continue elective spine surgery during public health crises with strategic resource allocation and patient triage. Policies should ensure that surgeries for degenerative spinal diseases, particularly those not requiring urgent care but crucial for patient quality of life, are not unnecessarily halted.

Current trends and challenges: The landscape of perioperative mortality in intracranial surgeries in low- and middle-income settings: A narrative review

Background and Aims

Intracranial surgeries are pivotal in treating cerebral pathologies, particularly in resource-limited contexts, utilizing techniques such as craniotomy, transsphenoidal approaches, and endoscopy. However, challenges in low and middle income countries (LMICs), including resource scarcity, diagnostic delays, and a lack of skilled neurosurgeons, lead to elevated perioperative mortality (POM). This review seeks to identify major contributors to these challenges and recommend solutions for improved patient outcomes in neurosurgical care within LMICs.

Methods

This review examines POM in LMICs using a detailed literature search, focusing on studies from these regions. Databases like PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were utilized using specific terms related to "intracranial surgery," "perioperative mortality," "traumatic brain injuries," and "LMICs." Inclusion criteria covered various study designs and both pediatric and adult populations while excluding stand-alone abstracts and case reports.

Results

POM rates for intracranial surgeries differ widely across many low and middle-income regions: Africa sees rates from 2.5% to 39.1%, Asia between 3.6% and 34.8%, and Latin America and the Caribbean have figures ranging from 1.3% to 12%. The POM rates in LMICs were relatively higher compared to most first-world countries. The high POM rates in LMICs can be attributed to considerable delays and compromises in neurosurgical care delivery, exacerbated by late diagnoses and presentations of neurosurgical pathologies. This, coupled with limited resources, underdeveloped infrastructure, and training gaps, complicates intracranial disease management, leading to elevated POM.

Conclusion

Intracranial POM is a pronounced disparity within the neurosurgical field in LMICs. To mitigate intracranial POM, it is imperative to bolster healthcare infrastructure, amplify personnel training, foster global partnerships, and harness technologies like telemedicine. Tackling socioeconomic obstacles and prioritizing early detection through sustained funding and policy shifts can substantially enhance patient outcomes.

The impact of COVID-19 on clinical outcomes in people undergoing neurosurgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created a global crisis unique to the healthcare system around the world. It also had a profound impact on the management of neurosurgical patients. In our research, we investigated the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical outcomes in people undergoing neurosurgery, particularly vascular and oncological neurosurgery.

METHOD

Two investigators independently and systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ClinicalTrail.Gov, and Web of Science to identify relevant studies respecting the criteria for inclusion and exclusion published up to June 30, 2022. The outcomes of our research included mortality rate, length of stay, modified Rankin Score, delay in care, Glasgow outcome scale, and major complications. The risk of bias was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) checklist.

RESULTS

Two investigators independently and systematically searched 1378 results from MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane database, ClinicalTrail.Gov, and Web of Science and extracted the detailed data from 13 studies that met the review's eligibility criteria. Two articles reported on patients with intracerebral hemorrhages, five on patients with subarachnoid hemorrhages, four on patients undergoing surgery for neuro-oncology, and in two studies the patients' conditions were unspecified. A total of 26,831 patients were included in our research. The number who died was significantly increased in the COVID-19 pandemic group (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.36-1.69, P < 0.001). No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of length of stay (SMD - 0.88, 95% CI - 0.18-0.02, P = 0.111), but it differed between regions, according to our subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSION

Compared to the pre-pandemic group, the number who died was significantly increased in the COVID-19 pandemic group. Meanwhile, the effect of the pandemic on clinical outcomes in people undergoing neurosurgery might differ in different regions, according to our subgroup analysis.

POST-OPERATIVE INTENSIVE CARE UNIT ADMISSION FOR ELECTIVE BRAIN TUMOUR SURGERIES: A NIGERIAN NEUROSURGICAL UNIT EXPERIENCE

Background

Patients, post elective brain tumour surgeries, are usually admitted into the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) for quick identification of life-threatening complications or for elective ventilation. The Covid-19 pandemic exerted additional strain on the limited ICU spaces. This study was to probe the need for ICU admission following elective surgery for brain tumour in our environment on the background of enormous constraints.

Methods

Data was collected prospectively from patients who had elective brain tumour surgery over 12-months at the University College Hospital, Ibadan. Data included the indications for ICU admission and outcome. Chi-square test and Student t-test were used for analysis at α ≤ 0.05.

Results

There were 56 patients with a mean age of 44.6 years and M:F ratio of 1:1. 61.8% of the patients were admitted into the ICU for observation. Patients who had open surgeries were 2 times more likely to be admitted (p<0.01; OR = 2.2, CI: 2.0 - 36.8) than those who had endoscopic surgeries. Awake craniotomy patients did not require ICU care compared with the 63% of the patients who had General Anaesthesia + Endo Tracheal Tube (GA+ETT). Patients with skull base and posterior fossa tumours were more likely to be admitted into the ICU (p=0.036). Of the 34 patients admitted into the ICU, 11(19.6%) had prolonged ICU stay and were 2 times more likely to die compared with those with short admissions (p<0.01; OR = 2.5, CI: 2.29 - 70.02).

Conclusion

Observation is the main reason patients are admitted into the ICU. The endoscopic and awake surgery approaches appear to preclude the need for ICU admission, thus capable of cutting costs.

Impact of Covid-19 pandemic on neuro-oncology multidisciplinary tumor board in the pre-vaccine era: the Normandy experience

INTRODUCTION

The COVID19 pandemic had a strong impact on the healthcare system, particularly in oncology. Brain tumor are usually revealed by acute and life threatening symptoms. We wanted to evaluate the possible consequences of the COVID19 pandemic in 2020 on the activity of neuro-oncology multidisciplinary tumor board in a Normandy region (France).

METHODS

A descriptive, retrospective, multicenter study was conducted in the four referent centers (two universitary hospitals and two cancer centers). The main objective was to compare the average number of neuro-oncology patients presented per multidisciplinary tumor board per week between a pre-COVID19 reference period (period 1 from December 2018 to December 2019) and the pre-vaccination period (period 2 from December 2019 to November 2020).

RESULTS

Across Normandy, 1540 cases were presented in neuro-oncology multidisciplinary tumor board in 2019 and 2020. No difference was observed between period 1 and 2: respectively 9.8 per week versus 10.7, P=0.36. The number of cases per week also did not significantly differ during the lockdown periods: 9.1/week versus 10.4 during the non-lockdown periods, P=0.26. The only difference observed was a higher proportion of tumor resection during the lockdown periods: 81.4% (n=79/174) versus 64.5% (n=408/1366), P=0.001.

CONCLUSION

The pre-vaccination era of the COVID19 pandemic did not impact the activity of neuro-oncology multidisciplinary tumor board in the Normandy region. The possible consequences in terms of public health (excess mortality) due to this tumor location should now be investigated.

Postoperative surveillance in cranial and spinal tumor neurosurgery: when is this warranted?

OBJECTIVE

The outbreak of COVID-19 and the sudden increase in the number of patients requiring mechanical ventilation significantly affected the management of neurooncological patients. Hospitals were forced to reallocate already scarce human resources to maximize intensive care unit (ICU) capacities, resulting in a significant postponement of elective procedures for patients with brain and spinal tumors, who traditionally require elective postoperative surveillance on ICU or intermediate care wards. This study aimed to characterize those patients in whom postoperative monitoring is required by analyzing early postoperative complications and associated risk factors.

METHODS

All patients included in the analysis experienced benign or malignant cerebral or intradural tumors and underwent surgery between September 2017 and May 2019 at University Hospital Münster, Germany. Patient data were generated from a semiautomatic, prospectively designed database. The occurrence of adverse events within 24 hours and 30 days postoperatively-including unplanned reoperation, postoperative hemorrhage, CSF leakage, and pulmonary embolism-was chosen as the primary outcome measure. Furthermore, reasons and risk factors that led to a prolonged stay on the ICU were investigated. By performing multivariable logistic regression modeling, a risk score for early postoperative adverse events was calculated by assigning points based on beta coefficients.

RESULTS

Eight hundred eleven patients were included in the study. Eleven patients (1.4%) had an early adverse event within 24 hours, which was either an unplanned reoperation (0.9%, n = 7) or a pulmonary embolism (0.5%, n = 4) within 24 hours. To predict the incidence of early postoperative complications, a score was developed including the number of secondary diagnoses, BMI, and incision closure time, termed the SOS score. According to this score, 0.3% of the patients were at low risk, 2.5% at intermediate risk, and 12% at high risk (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative surveillance in cranial and spinal tumor neurosurgery might only be required in a distinct patient collective. In this study, the authors present a new score allowing efficient prediction of the likelihood of early adverse events in patients undergoing neurooncological procedures, thus helping to stratify the necessity for ICU or intermediate care unit beds. Nevertheless, validation of the score in a multicenter prospective setting is needed.

How has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted clinical care and research in Neuro-Oncology?

The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged the continued delivery of healthcare globally. Due to disease risk, clinicians were forced to re-evaluate the safety and priorities of pre-pandemic care. Neuro-oncology presents unique challenges, as patients can deteriorate rapidly without intervention. These challenges were also observed in countries with reduced COVID-19 burden with centres required to rapidly develop strategies to maintain efficient and equitable care. This review aims to summarise the impact of the pandemic on clinical care and research within the practice of Neuro-oncology. A narrative review of the literature was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASS and results screened using PRISMA guidelines with relevant inclusion and exclusion criteria. Search strategies included variations of ‘Neuro-oncology’ combined with COVID-19 and other clinical-related terms. Most adult and paediatric neurosurgical centres experienced reductions in new referrals and operations for brain malignancies, and those who did present for treatment frequently had operations cancelled or delayed. Many radiation therapy and medical oncology centres altered treatment plans to mitigate COVID-19 risk for patients and staff. New protocols were developed that aimed to reduce in-person visits and reduce the risk of developing severe complications from COVID-19. The COVID-19 pandemic has presented many challenges to the provision of safe and accessible healthcare. Despite these challenges, some benefits to healthcare provision such as the use of telemedicine are likely to remain in future practice. Neuro-oncology staff must remain vigilant to ensure patient and staff safety.

Critical appraisal of minimally invasive keyhole surgery for intracranial meningioma in a large case series

Background

Meningioma surgery has evolved over the last 20 years with increased use of minimally invasive approaches including the endoscopic endonasal route and endoscope-assisted and gravity-assisted transcranial approaches. As the “keyhole” concept remains controversial, we present detailed outcomes in a cohort series.

Methods

Retrospective analysis was done for all patients undergoing meningioma removal at a tertiary brain tumor referral center from 2008–2021. Keyhole approaches were defined as: use of a minimally invasive “retractorless” approach for a given meningioma in which a traditional larger approach is often used instead. The surgical goal was maximal safe removal including conservative (subtotal) removal for some invasive locations. Primary outcomes were resection rates, complications, length of stay and Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS). Secondary outcomes were endoscopy use, perioperative treatments, tumor control and acute MRI FLAIR/T2 changes to assess for brain manipulation and retraction injury.

Results

Of 329 patients, keyhole approaches were utilized in 193(59%) patients (mean age 59±13; 30 (15.5%) had prior surgery) who underwent 213 operations; 205(96%) were skull base location. Approaches included: endoscopic endonasal (n = 74,35%), supraorbital (n = 73,34%), retromastoid (n = 38,18%), mini-pterional (n = 20,9%), suboccipital (n = 4,2%), and contralateral transfalcine (n = 4,2%). Primary outcomes: Gross total/near total (>90%) resection was achieved in 125(59%) (5% for petroclival, cavernous sinus/Meckel’s cave, spheno-cavernous locations vs 77% for all other locations). Major complications included: permanent neurological worsening 12(6%), CSF leak 2(1%) meningitis 2(1%). There were no DVTs, PEs, MIs or 30-day mortality. Median LOS decreased from 3 to 2 days in the last 2 years; 94% were discharged to home with favorable 90-day KPS in 176(96%) patients. Secondary outcomes: Increased FLAIR/T2 changes were noted on POD#1/2 MRI in 36/213(17%) cases, resolving in all but 11 (5.2%). Endoscopy was used in 87/139(63%) craniotomies, facilitating additional tumor removal in 55%. Tumor progression occurred in 26(13%) patients, mean follow-up 42±36 months.

Conclusions & relevance

Our experience suggests minimally invasive keyhole transcranial and endoscopic endonasal meningioma removal is associated with comparable resection rates and low complication rates, short hospitalizations and high 90-day performance scores in comparison to prior reports using traditional skull base approaches. Subtotal removal may be appropriate for invasive/adherent meningiomas to avoid neurological deficits and other post-operative complications, although longer follow-up is needed. With careful patient selection and requisite experience, these approaches may be considered reasonable alternatives to traditional transcranial approaches.

Reexamining the Role of Postoperative ICU Admission for Patients Undergoing Elective Craniotomy: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

The standard-of-care for postoperative care following elective craniotomy has historically been ICU admission. However, recent literature interrogating complications and interventions during this postoperative ICU stay suggests that all patients may not require this level of care. Thus, hospitals began implementing non-ICU postoperative care pathways for elective craniotomy. This systematic review aims to summarize and evaluate the existing literature regarding outcomes and costs for patients receiving non-ICU care after elective craniotomy.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of the PubMed database was performed following PRISMA guidelines from database inception to August 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Included studies were published in peer-reviewed journals, in English, and described outcomes for patients undergoing elective craniotomies without postoperative ICU care.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data regarding study design, patient characteristics, and postoperative care pathways were extracted independently by two authors. Quality and risk of bias were evaluated using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence tool and Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies-of Interventions tool, respectively.

DATA SYNTHESIS

In total, 1,131 unique articles were identified through the database search, with 27 meeting inclusion criteria. Included articles were published from 2001 to 2021 and included non-ICU inpatient care and same-day discharge pathways. Overall, the studies demonstrated that postoperative non-ICU care for elective craniotomies led to length of stay reduction ranging from 6 hours to 4 days and notable cost reductions. Across 13 studies, 53 of the 2,469 patients (2.1%) intended for postoperative management in a non-ICU setting required subsequent care escalation.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, these studies suggest that non-ICU care pathways for appropriately selected postcraniotomy patients may represent a meaningful opportunity to improve care value. However, included studies varied greatly in patient selection, postoperative care protocol, and outcomes reporting. Standardization and multi-institutional collaboration are needed to draw definitive conclusions regarding non-ICU postoperative care for elective craniotomy.

COVID-19 and rhinological surgery

The Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused disruptions in the normal patient care workflow, necessitating adaptations within the healthcare profession. The objective of this article is to outline some of these adaptations and considerations necessitated by COVID-19 within the subspeciality of rhinology and endoscopic skull base surgery.

Practice Patterns in Surgical Neuro-Oncology Among Low- and Middle-Income Countries During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Scoping Review and Situational Report from the Philippines

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has negatively affected the outcomes of surgical neuro-oncology patients worldwide. We aimed to review the practice patterns in surgical neuro-oncology in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We also present a situational report from our own country.

METHODS

A scoping review was performed following the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included in the review. Most of the studies were from Asia (India, China, Iran, and Turkey), and 1 was from Brazil. Quantitative reports showed a decrease in the number of surgical neuro-oncology operations between pre-COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 time frames, but similar proportions of neuro-oncology procedures. Qualitative review showed similar practice patterns between LMICs and high-income countries, except for limitations in resources such as negative-pressure operating rooms and intensive care units, and maintenance of face-to-face consults despite the adoption of telemedicine. Limited data on adjuvant therapy were available in LMICs.

CONCLUSIONS

In our review, we found that the practice patterns in surgical neuro-oncology in LMICs during the COVID-19 pandemic are similar to those in high-income countries, except for a few modifications because of resource limitation and patient preferences.