Perioperative Primary Care Utilization and Postoperative Readmission, Emergency Department Use, and Mortality in Older Surgical Patients.

BACKGROUND: Postdischarge primary care follow-up is associated with lower readmission rates after medical hospitalizations. However, the effect of primary care utilization on readmission has not been studied in surgical patients. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older undergoing major inpatient diagnostic or therapeutic procedures (n = 3,552,906) from 2017 through 2018, examining the association between postdischarge primary care visits within 14 days of discharge (primary exposure), and Annual Wellness Visits in the year prior (secondary exposure), with 30-day unplanned readmission (primary outcome), emergency department visits, and mortality (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: Overall, 9.5% (n = 336,837) had postdischarge visits within 14 days, 2.9% (n = 104,571) had Annual Wellness Visits in the year preceding the procedure, 9.5% (n = 336,401) were readmitted, 9% (n = 319,054) had emergency department visits, and 0.6% (n = 22,103) of the cohort died within 30 days. Our fully adjusted propensity-matched proportional hazards Cox regression analysis showed that postdischarge visits were associated with a 5% lower risk of readmission (hazard ratio [HR], 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-0.97), 43% higher risk of emergency department use (HR, 1.43, 95% CI, 1.40-1.46) and no difference in mortality risk (HR, 0.98, 95% CI, 0.90-1.06), compared with not having a visit within 14 days of discharge. In a separate set of regression models, Annual Wellness Visits were associated with a 9% lower risk of readmission (HR, 0.91, 95% CI, 0.88-0.95), 45% higher risk of emergency department utilization (HR, 1.45, 95% CI, 1.40-1.49) and an 18% lower mortality risk (HR, 0.82, 95% CI, 0.75-0.89) compared with no Annual Wellness Visit in the year before the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Both postdischarge visits and the Medicare Annual Wellness Visit appear to be extremely underutilized among the older surgical population. In those patients who do utilize primary care, compared with propensity-matched patients who do not, our study suggests primary care use is associated with modestly lower readmission rates. Prospective studies are needed to determine whether targeted primary care involvement can reduce readmission.

Advances in pediatric perioperative care using artificial intelligence.

PURPOSE OF THIS REVIEW: This article explores how artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to evaluate risks in pediatric perioperative care. It will also describe potential future applications of AI, such as models for airway device selection, controlling anesthetic depth and nociception during surgery, and contributing to the training of pediatric anesthesia providers. RECENT FINDINGS: The use of AI in healthcare has increased in recent years, largely due to the accessibility of large datasets, such as those gathered from electronic health records. Although there has been less focus on pediatric anesthesia compared to adult anesthesia, research is on- going, especially for applications focused on risk factor identification for adverse perioperative events. Despite these advances, the lack of formal external validation or feasibility testing results in uncertainty surrounding the clinical applicability of these tools. SUMMARY: The goal of using AI in pediatric anesthesia is to assist clinicians in providing safe and efficient care. Given that children are a vulnerable population, it is crucial to ensure that both clinicians and families have confidence in the clinical tools used to inform medical decision- making. While not yet a reality, the eventual incorporation of AI-based tools holds great potential to contribute to the safe and efficient care of our patients.

Pro-Con Debate: Anesthesiologist- Versus Hospitalist- Run Preoperative Clinics and Perioperative Care.

In this Pro-Con commentary article, we discuss the models, value propositions, and opportunities of preoperative clinics run by anesthesiologists versus hospitalists and their role in perioperative care. The medical and anesthesia evaluation before surgery has pivoted from the model of "clearance" to the model of risk assessment, preparation, and optimization of medical and psychosocial risk factors. Assessment of these risk factors, optimization, and care coordination in the preoperative period has expanded the roles of anesthesiologists and hospitalists as members of the perioperative care team. There is ongoing debate regarding which model of preoperative assessment provides the most optimal preparation for the patient undergoing surgery. This article hopes to shed light on this debate with the data and perspectives on these care models.

Perioperative Pulmonary Atelectasis: Part II. Clinical Implications.

The development of pulmonary atelectasis is common in the surgical patient. Pulmonary atelectasis can cause various degrees of gas exchange and respiratory mechanics impairment during and after surgery. In its most serious presentations, lung collapse could contribute to postoperative respiratory insufficiency, pneumonia, and worse overall clinical outcomes. A specific risk assessment is critical to allow clinicians to optimally choose the anesthetic technique, prepare appropriate monitoring, adapt the perioperative plan, and ensure the patient's safety. Bedside diagnosis and management have benefited from recent imaging advancements such as lung ultrasound and electrical impedance tomography, and monitoring such as esophageal manometry. Therapeutic management includes a broad range of interventions aimed at promoting lung recruitment. During general anesthesia, these strategies have consistently demonstrated their effectiveness in improving intraoperative oxygenation and respiratory compliance. Yet these same intraoperative strategies may fail to affect additional postoperative pulmonary outcomes. Specific attention to the postoperative period may be key for such outcome impact of lung expansion. Interventions such as noninvasive positive pressure ventilatory support may be beneficial in specific patients at high risk for pulmonary atelectasis (e.g., obese) or those with clinical presentations consistent with lung collapse (e.g., postoperative hypoxemia after abdominal and cardiothoracic surgeries). Preoperative interventions may open new opportunities to minimize perioperative lung collapse and prevent pulmonary complications. Knowledge of pathophysiologic mechanisms of atelectasis and their consequences in the healthy and diseased lung should provide the basis for current practice and help to stratify and match the intensity of selected interventions to clinical conditions.

Enhancing the Biopsychosocial Approach to Perioperative Care: A Pilot Randomized Trial of the Perioperative Pain Self-management (PePS) Intervention.

OBJECTIVE: The current study aimed to pilot the PePS intervention, based on principles of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), to determine feasibility and preliminary efficacy for preventing chronic pain and long-term opioid use. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Surgery can precipitate the development of both chronic pain and long-term opioid use. CBT can reduce distress and improve functioning among patients with chronic pain. Adapting CBT to target acute pain management in the postoperative period may impact longer-term postoperative outcomes. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods randomized controlled trial in a mixed surgical sample with assignment to standard care or PePS, with primary outcomes at 3-months postsurgery. The sample consisted of rural-dwelling United States Military Veterans. RESULTS: Logistic regression analyses found a significant effect of PePS on odds of moderate-severe pain (on average over the last week) at 3-months postsurgery, controlling for preoperative moderate-severe pain: Adjusted odds ratio = 0.25 (95% CI: 0.07-0.95, P < 0.05). At 3-months postsurgery, 15% (6/39) of standard care participants and 2% (1/45) of PePS participants used opioids in the prior seven days: Adjusted Odds ratio = 0.10 (95% CI: 0.01-1.29, P = .08). Changes in depression, anxiety, and pain catastrophizing were not significantly different between arms. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study support the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of the PePS intervention.

Determinants of hospital variability in perioperative red blood cell transfusions during coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To identify to what extent distinguishing patient and procedural characteristics can explain center-level transfusion variation during coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. METHODS: Observational cohort study using the Perfusion Measures and Outcomes Registry from 43 adult cardiac surgical programs from July 1, 2011, to July 1, 2017. Iterative multilevel logistic regression models were constructed using patient demographic characteristics, preoperative risk factors, and intraoperative conservation strategies to progressively explain center-level transfusion variation. RESULTS: Of the 22,272 adult patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass, 7241 (32.5%) received at least 1 U allogeneic red blood cells (range, 10.9%-59.9%). When compared with patients who were not transfused, patients who received at least 1 U red blood cells were older (68 vs 64 years; P < .001), were women (41.5% vs 15.9%; P < .001), and had a lower body surface area (1.93 m2 vs 2.07 m2; P < .001), respectively. Among the models explaining center-level transfusion variability, the intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.07 for model 1 (random intercepts), 0.12 for model 2 (patient factors), 0.14 for model 3 (intraoperative factors), and 0.11 for model 4 (combined). The coefficient of variation for center-level transfusion rates were 0.31, 0.29, 0.40, and 0.30 for models 1 through 4, respectively. The majority of center-level variation could not be explained through models containing both patient and intraoperative factors. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that variation in center-level red blood cells transfusion cannot be explained by patient and procedural factors alone. Investigating organizational culture and programmatic infrastructure may be necessary to better understand variation in transfusion practices.

BJS commission on surgery and perioperative care post-COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic by the WHO on 11 March 2020 and global surgical practice was compromised. This Commission aimed to document and reflect on the changes seen in the surgical environment during the pandemic, by reviewing colleagues' experiences and published evidence. METHODS: In late 2020, BJS contacted colleagues across the global surgical community and asked them to describe how severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had affected their practice. In addition to this, the Commission undertook a literature review on the impact of COVID-19 on surgery and perioperative care. A thematic analysis was performed to identify the issues most frequently encountered by the correspondents, as well as the solutions and ideas suggested to address them. RESULTS: BJS received communications for this Commission from leading clinicians and academics across a variety of surgical specialties in every inhabited continent. The responses from all over the world provided insights into multiple facets of surgical practice from a governmental level to individual clinical practice and training. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has uncovered a variety of problems in healthcare systems, including negative impacts on surgical practice. Global surgical multidisciplinary teams are working collaboratively to address research questions about the future of surgery in the post-COVID-19 era. The COVID-19 pandemic is severely damaging surgical training. The establishment of a multidisciplinary ethics committee should be encouraged at all surgical oncology centres. Innovative leadership and collaboration is vital in the post-COVID-19 era.

Providing safe perioperative care in cardiac surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has potentiated the need for implementation of strict safety measures in the medical care of surgical patients - and especially in cardiac surgery patients, who are at a higher risk of COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality. Such measures not only require minimization of patients' exposure to COVID-19 but also careful balancing of the risks of postponing nonemergent surgical procedures and providing appropriate and timely surgical care. We provide an overview of current evidence for preoperative strategies used in cardiac surgery patients, including risk stratification, telemedicine, logistical challenges during inpatient care, appropriate screening capacity, and decision-making on when to safely operate on COVID-19 patients. Further, we focus on perioperative measures such as safe operating room management and address the dilemma over when to perform cardiovascular surgical procedures in patients at risk.

Variation in perioperative cerebral and hemodynamic monitoring during carotid endarterectomy.

BACKGROUND: Hemodynamic disturbances cause half of the perioperative strokes following carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Guidelines strongly recommend strict pre- and postoperative blood pressure (BP) monitoring in CEA patients, but do not provide firm practical recommendations. Although in the Netherlands 50 centres perform CEA, no national protocol on perioperative hemodynamic, and cerebral monitoring exists. To assess current monitoring policies of all Dutch CEA-centres, a national survey was conducted. METHODS: Between May and July 2017 all 50 Dutch CEA-centres were invited to complete a 42-question survey addressing perioperative hemodynamic and cerebral monitoring during CEA. Nonresponders received a reminder after 1 and 2 months. By November 2017 the survey was completed by all centres. RESULTS: Preoperative baseline BP was based on a single bilateral BP-measurement at the outpatient-clinic in the majority of centres (n = 28). In 43 centres (86%) pre-operative monitoring (transcranial Doppler (TCD, n = 6), electroencephalography (EEG, n = 11), or TCD + EEG (n = 26)) was performed as a baseline reference. Intraoperatively, large diversity for type of anaesthesia (general: 45 vs. local [LA]:5) and target systolic BP (>100 mm hg - 160 mm hg [n = 12], based on preoperative outpatient-clinic or admission BP [n = 18], other [n = 20]) was reported. Intraoperative cerebral monitoring included EEG + TCD (n = 28), EEG alone (n = 13), clinical neurological examination with LA (n = 5), near-infrared spectroscopy with stump pressure (n = 1), and none due to standard shunting (n = 3). Postoperatively, significant variation was reported in standard duration of admission at a recovery or high-care unit (range 3-48 hr, mean:12 hr), maximum accepted systolic BP (range >100 mm hg - 180 mm Hg [n = 32]), postoperative cerebral monitoring (standard TCD [n = 16], TCD on indication [n = 5] or none [n = 24]) and in timing of postoperative cerebral monitoring (range directly postoperative - 24 hr postoperative; median 3 hr). CONCLUSIONS: In Dutch centres performing CEA the perioperative hemodynamic and cerebral monitoring policies are widely diverse. Diverse policies may theoretically lead to over- or under treatment. The results of this national audit may serve as the baseline dataset for development of a standardized and detailed (inter)national protocol on perioperative hemodynamic and cerebral monitoring during CEA.

Nutritional Support Indications in Gastroesophageal Cancer Patients: From Perioperative to Palliative Systemic Therapy. A Comprehensive Review of the Last Decade.

Gastric cancer treatments are rapidly evolving, leading to significant survival benefit. Recent evidence provided by clinical trials strongly encouraged the use of perioperative chemotherapy as standard treatment for the localized disease, whereas in the advanced disease setting, molecular characterization has improved patients' selection for tailored therapeutic approaches, including molecular targeted therapy and immunotherapy. The role of nutritional therapy is widely recognized, with oncologic treatment's tolerance and response being better in well-nourished patients. In this review, literature data on strategies or nutritional interventions will be critically examined, with particular regard to different treatment phases (perioperative, metastatic, and palliative settings), with the aim to draw practical indications for an adequate nutritional support of gastric cancer patients and provide an insight on future directions in nutritional strategies. We extensively analyzed the last 10 years of literature, in order to provide evidence that may fit current clinical practice both in terms of nutritional interventions and oncological treatment. Overall, 137 works were selected: 34 Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs), 12 meta-analysis, 9 reviews, and the most relevant prospective, retrospective and cross-sectional studies in this setting. Eleven ongoing trials have been selected from clinicaltrial.gov as representative of current research. One limitation of our work lies in the heterogeneity of the described studies, in terms of sample size, study procedures, and both nutritional and clinical outcomes. Indeed, to date, there are no specific evidence-based guidelines in this fields, therefore we proposed a clinical algorithm with the aim to indicate an appropriate nutritional strategy for gastric cancer patients.

Perioperative Systemic Treatment for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.

Radical cystectomy is the primary treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer; however, approximately 50% of patients develop metastatic disease within 2 years of diagnosis, which results in dismal prognosis. Therefore, systemic treatment is important to improve the prognosis of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Currently, several guidelines recommend cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy before radical cystectomy, and adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended in patients who have not received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have recently become the standard treatment option for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Owing to their clinical benefits, several immune checkpoint inhibitors, with or without other agents (including other immunotherapy, cytotoxic chemotherapy, and emerging agents such as antibody drug conjugates), are being extensively investigated in perioperative settings. Several studies for perioperative immunotherapy have shown that immune checkpoint inhibitors have promising efficacy with relatively low toxicity, and have explored the predictive molecular biomarkers. Herein, we review the current evidence and discuss the future perspectives of perioperative systemic treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

Perioperative clinical trials for glioma: Raising the bar.

Gliomas are a heterogeneous group of primary brain cancers with poor survival despite multimodality therapy that includes surgery, radiation and chemotherapy. Numerous clinical trials have investigated systemic therapies in glioma, but have largely been negative. Multiple factors have contributed to the lack of progress including tumour heterogeneity, the tumour micro-environment and presence of the blood-brain barrier, as well as extrinsic factors relating to trial design, such as the lack of a contemporaneous biopsy at the time of treatment. A number of strategies have been proposed to progress new agents into the clinic. Here, we review the progress of perioperative, including phase 0 and 'window of opportunity', studies and provide recommendations for trial design in the development of new agents for glioma. The incorporation of pre- and post-treatment biopsies in glioma early phase trials will provide valuable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data and also determine the target or biomarker effect, which will guide further development of new agents. Perioperative 'window of opportunity' studies must use drugs with a recommended-phase-2-dose, known safety profile and adequate blood-brain barrier penetration. Drugs shown to have on-target effects in perioperative trials can then be evaluated further in a larger cohort of patients in an adaptive trial to increase the efficiency of drug development.

Novel associations between CYP2B6 polymorphisms, perioperative methadone metabolism and clinical outcomes in children.

Aim: Methadone exhibits significant variability in clinical response. This study explores the genetic influence of variable methadone pharmacokinetics. Methods: This is a prospective study of methadone in children undergoing major surgery. CYP2B6 genotyping, plasma methadone and metabolite levels were obtained. Clinical outcomes include pain scores and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Results:CYP2B6 poor metabolizers (*6/*6) had >twofold lower methadone metabolism compared with normal/rapid metabolizers. The incidence of PONV was 4.7× greater with CYP2B6 rs1038376 variant. AG/GG variants of rs2279343 SNP had 2.86-fold higher incidence of PONV compared with the wild variant (AA). Nominal associations between rs10500282, rs11882424, rs4803419 and pain scores were observed. Conclusion: We have described novel associations between CYP2B6 genetic variants and perioperative methadone metabolism, and associations with pain scores and PONV.

Association Between Antifibrinolytic Therapy and Perioperative Outcomes in Patients With Coronary Artery Stents Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Patients with existing coronary artery stents are at an increased risk for major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) when undergoing noncardiac surgery (NCS). Although the use of antifibrinolytic (AF) therapy in NCS has significantly increased in the past decade, the relationship between perioperative AF use and its association with MACEs among patients with existing coronary artery stents has yet to be assessed. In this study, we aim to evaluate the association of MACEs in patients with existing coronary artery stents who receive perioperative AF therapy during orthopedic surgery. METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted in adult patients with existing coronary artery stents who underwent orthopedic surgery from 2008 to 2018. Two cohorts were established: patients with existing coronary artery stents who did not receive perioperative AF and patients with coronary artery stents who received perioperative AF. Associations between AF use and the primary outcome of MACEs within 30 days postoperatively and the secondary outcomes of thrombotic complications, excessive surgical bleeding, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions were analyzed using logistic regression models. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control for confounding. Secondary analyses examining the association between coronary stent type/timing and the outcomes of interest were performed using unadjusted logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 473 patients met study criteria, including 294 who did not receive AF and 179 patients who received AF. MACEs occurred in 15 (5.1%) patients who did not receive AF and 1 (0.6%) who received AF (P = .007). In weighted analyses, no significant difference was found in patients who received AF with regard to MACEs (odds ratio [OR] = 0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-1.74, P = .12), thrombotic complications (OR = 1.19, 95% CI, 0.53-2.68, P = .68), or excessive surgical bleeding (OR = 0.13, 95% CI, 0.01-2.23, P = .16) compared to patients who did not receive AF. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study are inconclusive whether an association exists between perioperative AF use in patients with coronary artery stents and the outcome of MACEs compared to patients who did not receive perioperative AF therapy. The authors acknowledge that the imprecise CI hinders the ability to definitively determine whether an association exists in the study population. Further large prospective studies, powered to detect differences in MACEs, are needed to assess the safety of perioperative AF in patients with existing coronary artery stents and to clarify the mechanism of perioperative MACEs in this high-risk population.

Association between sex and perioperative opioid prescribing for total joint arthroplasty: a retrospective population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Scarce data exist on differential opioid prescribing between men and women in the pre-, peri-, and postoperative phases of care among patients undergoing total hip/knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA). METHODS: In this retrospective population-based study, Truven Health MarketScan claims data were used to establish differences between men and women in (1) opioid prescribing in the year before THA/TKA surgery, (2) the amount of opioids prescribed at discharge, and (3) chronic opioid prescribing (3-12 months after surgery). Multivariable regression models measured odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Among 29 038 THAs (42% men) and 48 523 TKAs (52% men) men (compared with women) were less likely to receive an opioid prescription in the year before surgery (54% vs 60%, and 54% vs 60% for THA and TKA, respectively); P<0.001. However, in multivariable analyses male sex was associated with higher total opioid dosages prescribed at discharge after THA (OR=1.04; 95% CI 1.03, 1.06) and TKA (OR=1.05; 95% CI 1.04, 1.06); both P<0.001. Chronic opioid prescribing was found in 10% of the cohort (THA: n=2333; TKA: n=5365). Here, men demonstrated lower odds of persistent opioid prescribing specifically after THA (OR=0.90; 95% CI 0.82, 0.99) but not TKA (OR=0.96; 95% CI 0.90, 1.02); P=0.026 and P=0.207, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We found sex-based differences in opioid prescribing across all phases of care for THA/TKA. The results highlight temporal opportunities for targeted interventions to improve outcomes after total joint arthroplasty, particularly for women, and to decrease chronic opioid prescribing.

Evolving trends in peri-operative management of pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction: working towards quicker recovery and day surgery pyeloplasty.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the evolution of practice patterns for pediatric pyeloplasty and determine how these changes have impacted length of stay (LOS), reoperation rates and return emergency department (ER) visits. METHODS: We reviewed our pyeloplasty database from 2008 to 2020 at a quaternary pediatric referral center and we included children 0-18 years undergoing pyeloplasty. Variables captured included: age, sex, baseline and follow-up anteroposterior diameter (APD) and differential renal function (DRF). We also collected data on the use of drains, catheters and/or stents, nausea and vomiting prophylaxis, opioids, regional anesthesia, and non-opioid analgesia. Outcomes were LOS, reoperation rates and ER visits. RESULTS: A total of 554 patients (565 kidneys) were included. Reoperation rate was 7%, redo rate 4% and ER visits 17%. There was a trend towards less opioids, indwelling catheters and internal stents and increasing non-opioid analgesia, externalized stents, and regional anesthesia during the study period. Same-day discharge (SDD) was possible for 88 (16%) children with no differences in reoperation or readmission rates between SDD and admitted (ADM). There was a difference in ER visits (21 [24%] vs. 26 [6%]; p = 0.04) for SDD vs. ADM, respectively. On multivariate analysis, the only predictor of ER visits was younger age. Patients < 7 months were more likely to present to ER (15/41; 37% vs. 6/47, 13%; p = 0.009). Multivariate analysis determined indwelling catheters and opioids were associated with ADM while dexamethasone and ketorolac with SDD. CONCLUSION: Progressive changes in care have contributed to a shorter LOS and increasing rates of SDD for pyeloplasty patients. SDD appears to be feasible and does not result in higher complication rates. These data support the development of a pediatric pyeloplasty ERAS protocol to maximize quicker recovery and foster SDD as a goal.

Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer: A Perspective from Central Europe.

BACKGROUND: This survey aimed to register changes determined by the COVID-19 pandemic on pancreatic surgery in a specific geographic area (Germany, Austria, and Switzerland) to evaluate the impact of the pandemic and obtain interesting cues for the future. METHODS: An online survey was designed using Google Forms focusing on the local impact of the pandemic on pancreatic surgery. The survey was conducted at 2 different time points, during and after the lockdown. RESULTS: Twenty-five respondents (25/56) completed the survey. Many aspects of oncological care have been affected with restrictions and delays: staging, tumor board, treatment selection, postoperative course, adjuvant treatments, outpatient care, and follow-up. Overall, 60% of respondents have prioritized pancreatic cancer patients according to stage, age, and comorbidities, and 40% opted not to operate high-risk patients. However, for 96% of participants, the standards of care were guaranteed. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had an important impact on pancreatic cancer surgery in central Europe. Guidelines for prompt interventions and prevention of the spread of viral infections in the surgical environment are needed to avoid a deterioration of care in cancer patients in the event of a second wave or a new pandemic. High-volume centers for pancreatic surgery should be preferred and their activity maintained. Virtual conferences have proven to be efficient during this pandemic and should be implemented in the near future.