Timing of elective surgery and risk assessment after SARS-CoV-2 infection: 2023 update: A multidisciplinary consensus statement on behalf of the Association of Anaesthetists, Federation of Surgical Specialty Associations, Royal College of Anaesthetists and Royal College of Surgeons of England.

Guidance for the timing of surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection needed reassessment given widespread vaccination, less virulent variants, contemporary evidence and a need to increase access to safe surgery. We, therefore, updated previous recommendations to assist policymakers, administrative staff, clinicians and, most importantly, patients. Patients who develop symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection within 7 weeks of planned surgery, including on the day of surgery, should be screened for SARS-CoV-2. Elective surgery should not usually be undertaken within 2 weeks of diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. For patients who have recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection and who are low risk or having low-risk surgery, most elective surgery can proceed 2 weeks following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test. For patients who are not low risk or having anything other than low-risk surgery between 2 and 7 weeks following infection, an individual risk assessment must be performed. This should consider: patient factors (age; comorbid and functional status); infection factors (severity; ongoing symptoms; vaccination); and surgical factors (clinical priority; risk of disease progression; grade of surgery). This assessment should include the use of an objective and validated risk prediction tool and shared decision-making, taking into account the patient's own attitude to risk. In most circumstances, surgery should proceed unless risk assessment indicates that the risk of proceeding exceeds the risk of delay. There is currently no evidence to support delaying surgery beyond 7 weeks for patients who have fully recovered from or have had mild SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Timing of elective surgery and risk assessment after SARS-CoV-2 infection: an update: A multidisciplinary consensus statement on behalf of the Association of Anaesthetists, Centre for Perioperative Care, Federation of Surgical Specialty Associations, Royal College of Anaesthetists, Royal College of Surgeons of England.

The impact of vaccination and new SARS-CoV-2 variants on peri-operative outcomes is unclear. We aimed to update previously published consensus recommendations on timing of elective surgery after SARS-CoV-2 infection to assist policymakers, administrative staff, clinicians and patients. The guidance remains that patients should avoid elective surgery within 7 weeks of infection, unless the benefits of doing so exceed the risk of waiting. We recommend individualised multidisciplinary risk assessment for patients requiring elective surgery within 7 weeks of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This should include baseline mortality risk calculation and assessment of risk modifiers (patient factors; SARS-CoV-2 infection; surgical factors). Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection with previous variants increased peri-operative mortality risk three-fold throughout the 6 weeks after infection, and assumptions that asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection does not add risk are currently unfounded. Patients with persistent symptoms and those with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 may require a longer delay than 7 weeks. Elective surgery should not take place within 10 days of diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, predominantly because the patient may be infectious, which is a risk to surgical pathways, staff and other patients. We now emphasise that timing of surgery should include the assessment of baseline and increased risk, optimising vaccination and functional status, and shared decision-making. While these recommendations focus on the omicron variant and current evidence, the principles may also be of relevance to future variants. As further data emerge, these recommendations may be revised.

Dual surgeon operating to improve patient safety.

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an unprecedented reduction in the delivery of surgical services worldwide, especially in non-urgent, non-cancer procedures. A prolonged period without operating (or 'layoff period') can result in surgeons experiencing skill fade (both technical and non-technical) and a loss of confidence. While senior surgeons in the UK may be General Medical Council (GMC) validated and capable of performing a procedure, a loss of 'currency' may increase the risk of error and intraoperative patient harm, particularly if unexpected or adverse events are encountered. Dual surgeon operating may mitigate risks to patient safety as surgeons regain currency while returning to non-urgent operating and may also be beneficial after the greatly reduced activity observed during the COVID-19 pandemic for low-volume complex operations. In addition, it could be a useful tool for annual appraisal, sharing updated surgical techniques and helping team cohesion. This paper explores lessons from aviation, a leading industry in human factors principles, for regaining surgical skills currency. We discuss real and perceived barriers to dual surgeon operating including finance, training, substantial patient waiting lists, and intraoperative power dynamics.

SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 and timing of elective surgery: A multidisciplinary consensus statement on behalf of the Association of Anaesthetists, the Centre for Peri-operative Care, the Federation of Surgical Specialty Associations, the Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Royal College of Surgeons of England.

The scale of the COVID-19 pandemic means that a significant number of patients who have previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2 will require surgery. Given the potential for multisystem involvement, timing of surgery needs to be carefully considered to plan for safe surgery. This consensus statement uses evidence from a systematic review and expert opinion to highlight key principles in the timing of surgery. Shared decision-making regarding timing of surgery after SARS-CoV-2 infection must account for severity of the initial infection; ongoing symptoms of COVID-19; comorbid and functional status; clinical priority and risk of disease progression; and complexity of surgery. For the protection of staff, other patients and the public, planned surgery should not be considered during the period that a patient may be infectious. Precautions should be undertaken to prevent pre- and peri-operative infection, especially in higher risk patients. Elective surgery should not be scheduled within 7 weeks of a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection unless the risks of deferring surgery outweigh the risk of postoperative morbidity or mortality associated with COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 causes either transient or asymptomatic disease for most patients, who require no additional precautions beyond a 7-week delay, but those who have persistent symptoms or have been hospitalised require special attention. Patients with persistent symptoms of COVID-19 are at increased risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality even after 7 weeks. The time before surgery should be used for functional assessment, prehabilitation and multidisciplinary optimisation. Vaccination several weeks before surgery will reduce risk to patients and might lessen the risk of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection of other patients and staff. National vaccine committees should consider whether such patients can be prioritised for vaccination. As further data emerge, these recommendations may need to be revised, but the principles presented should be considered to ensure safety of patients, the public and staff.

The development of a supraregional network for the management of penile cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Although its incidence is increasing, penile cancer remains a rare disease in the UK. In view of this low volume, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence recommended that treatment is centralised in a limited number of centres arranged as supraregional networks. The aim of this centralisation is to allow the best standardised treatment for the primary tumours and nodal disease, thereby avoiding under or overtreatment. In this paper we review the formation and functioning of our network in the East Midlands. METHODS: Data were collected up to August 2010 from our prospective penile network database since its inception in 2005. These data were analysed to see our workload, patterns of referral and surgeries performed over this time period. RESULTS: The structure and function of the East Midlands network are described. There has been an increase in the number of cases discussed since its formation. There has also been a trend towards more conservative surgery, both of the primary tumour and of nodal management. Between September 2009 and August 2010, 16 glansectomies were performed versus 5 total and 9 partial penectomies. The same period saw 18 dynamic sentinel lymph node biopsies against 7 bilateral and 3 unilateral superficial groin dissections. There was a very high patient satisfaction rate, with patients feeling they had good support and information. CONCLUSIONS: On reviewing the literature it can be clearly seen that supraregional networks have led to a decrease in overtreatment and better recognition of the need to manage lymph node status optimally. Our network has demonstrated the trend toward conservative surgery and sentinel node biopsy. The formation of supraregional networks with a multidisciplinary approach will facilitate high volume centres that will offer optimal surgical therapy and also allow recruitment into studies and new chemotherapeutic regimens. It will also allow better data collection to aid clinical studies that hopefully will also demonstrate better outcomes.

Testicular prostheses: development and modern usage.

INTRODUCTION: Testicular prostheses produced from various materials have been in use since 1941. The absence of a testicle has been shown to be a psychologically traumatic experience for males of all ages. The indications for insertion of a prosthesis include absence or following orchidectomy from a number of causes such as malignancy, torsion and orchitis. The most common substance used around the world in the manufacture of these implants is silicone; however, in the US, this material is currently banned because of theoretical health risks. This has led to the development of saline-filled prostheses as an alternative. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A Medline search was carried out on all articles on testicular prosthesis between 1966 and 2006. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the controversies regarding prosthetic materials, the complications of insertion and the potential benefits of this commonly performed procedure.

The type of urethroplasty for a pelvic fracture urethral distraction defect cannot be predicted preoperatively.

PURPOSE: Pelvic fracture urethral distraction defects (PFUDDs) are generally treated surgically by a so-called progression approach consisting of 4 steps to achieve a tension-free bulboprostatic anastomosis. Implicitly the need for each step in turn is predictable according to the length of the defect on preoperative x-ray. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 62 evaluable patients with PFUDD the length of the radiological defect was compared with the surgical steps that subsequently proved necessary to achieve a tension-free bulboprostatic anastomosis. RESULTS: Except at the extremes of length there was no association between defect length and the scale of the surgery performed. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons preparing to repair an apparently short PFUDD cannot assume that simple repair is all that is necessary.

Congenital megaprepuce: an emerging condition--how to recognize and treat it.

OBJECTIVE: To highlight the clinical presentation, pathological anatomy and surgical management of an emerging condition, the congenital megaprepuce (CM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients with CM treated at Southampton between 1994 and 1998 were reviewed retrospectively; 20 patients underwent surgery (mean age at operation 16 months, range 6-43). Surgical correction developed over this period and variations on a basic technique are now used, depending on the precise pathological anatomy. These techniques are described and illustrated. Cosmetic and functional success, and parental satisfaction, were assessed by a review of the case-notes. RESULTS: After a follow-up of >/= 6 months, the cosmetic and functional outcome was very successful, with the parents of 19 of the 20 patients satisfied. Five patients underwent re-operation, all requiring excision of redundant penile skin. CONCLUSIONS: CM is a striking condition which cannot be easily missed or hidden; we propose that it is a newly emerging and distinct condition which should not be confused with a buried, concealed, webbed, trapped or micropenis. Early surgical correction is recommended and circumcision should be avoided.

The early morbidity of varicose vein surgery.

The early outcome and morbidity associated with varicose vein surgery were assessed at six months post operation by postal questionnaire. Most cases underwent sapheno-femoral ligation, above-knee stripping of the long saphenous vein and multiple stab avulsions. A 73.8% response rate resulted in 155 replies, and revealed a high incidence (65.8%) of perceived complications within the first two weeks after surgery. The commonest of these were bruising, pain and numbness. Over a third of patients consulted their general practitioner (GP) postoperatively. Half of these required further management or treatment and the rest, reassurance alone. At six months 79.4% were satisfied with the outcome of their surgery, although some still claimed problems with residual veins, skin discoloration, numbness, and ankle or foot discoloration. Eleven percent were referred to hospital for further opinion, mostly because of perceived residual varicose veins. The difference between residual and recurrent varicose veins is discussed. No patient felt that the standard 2.5 day admission was too long, and 12.9% thought it too short. Day case surgery is not a popular option in this population group. Despite high satisfaction rates, there is a considerable morbidity attached to varicose vein surgery. We believe that good pre- and perioperative communication, augmented by a comprehensive information sheet, is important to prepare patients for those postoperative problems and thus reduces their perceived importance.