Impact of COVID-19 on Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Practice in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed the delivery of medical and surgical services globally. Subsequently, all elective and aesthetic procedures have been cancelled or deferred in accordance with government-mandated quarantine measures. The Cosmetic Surgery Governance Forum (CSGF) is a network of aesthetic plastic surgery consultants which has enabled a sharing of expertise during challenging times. We conducted a cross-sectional survey to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on aesthetic plastic surgeons and their practice in the UK. METHODS: On 15 June 2020, 131 respondents from the CSGF and wider aesthetic plastic surgeons in the UK were invited to respond to an online survey. An anonymised questionnaire was created using SmartSurveyTM and distributed at the end of the quarantine period. Questions regarding their current scope of practice, willingness to recommence face-to-face consultations, financial loss and psychological impact were asked. RESULTS: A total of 101 Consultant Plastic surgeons (76%) completed the questionnaire. If strict protocols and adequate personal protective equipment were available, 50-55% of respondents would consider offering non-surgical treatments as soon as the private clinic was open. Furthermore, 51% would consider procedures under general anaesthetic, whilst 89% of respondents would offer local anaesthetic only in the initial phase. Moreover, 66% reported experiencing a psychological impact and 100% of respondents reported a significant financial impact. CONCLUSIONS: This survey aims to give an account of the current state (May-July 2020) of aesthetic plastic surgery in the UK. There is ongoing uncertainty and deliberation regarding the timing and organisational changes required for aesthetic practice to restart.

National survey on the treatment of acute appendicitis in Spain during the initial period of the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on Spanish hospitals, which have had to allocate all available resources to treat these patients, reducing the ability to attend other common pathologies. The aim of this study is to analyze how the treatment of acute appendicitis has been affected. METHOD: A national descriptive study was carried out by an online voluntary specific questionnaire with Google Drive™ distributed by email by the Spanish Association of Surgeons (AEC) to all affiliated surgeons currently working in Spain (5203), opened from April 14th to April 24th. RESULTS: We received 337 responses from 170 centers. During the first month of the pandemic, the incidence of acute appendicitis decreased. Although conservative management increased, the surgical option has been the most used in both simple and complicated appendicitis. Despite the fact that the laparoscopic approach continues to be the most widely used in our services, the open approach has increased during this pandemic period. CONCLUSION: Highlight the contribution of this study in terms of knowledge of the status of the treatment of acute appendicitis during this first month of the pandemic, being able to serve for a better possible organization in future waves of the pandemic and a reorganization of current protocols and management of acute appendicitis in a pandemic situation.

World Society of Emergency Surgery-American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Guidelines for management of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile infection in surgical patients: An executive summary.

ABSTRACT: In the last three decades, the dramatic worldwide increase in incidence and severity of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) (formerly Clostridium difficile infection) has made CDI a global public health challenge. Surgery is a known risk factor for development of CDI yet surgery is also a treatment option in severe cases of CDI. The World Society of Emergency Surgery guidelines for management of CDI in surgical patients were published in 2015. In 2019, the guidelines were revised and updated according to the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation methodology. This executive summary is intended to consolidate knowledge on the management of CDI focusing on aspects that a general and emergency surgeon should know about the prevention and the management of CDI, by providing a practical and concise version of the original guidelines.

After the first wave and beyond lockdown: long-lasting changes in emergency department visit number, characteristics, diagnoses, and hospital admissions.

The first wave (FW) of COVID-19 led to a rapid reduction in total emergency department (ED) visits and hospital admissions for other diseases. Whether this represented a transient "lockdown and fear" phenomenon, or a more persisting trend, is unknown. We divided acute from post-wave changes in ED flows, diagnoses, and hospital admissions, in an Italian city experiencing a FW peak followed by nadir. This multicenter, retrospective, cross-sectional study involved five general EDs of a large Italian city (January-August 2020). Percent changes were calculated versus 2019, using four 14-day periods (FW peak, early/mid/late post-wave). ED visits were 147,446 in 2020, versus 214,868 in 2019. During the FW peak, visits were reduced by 66.4% (P < 0.001). The drop was maximum during daytime (69.8%) and for pediatric patients (89.4%). Critical triage codes were unchanged. Reductions were found for all non-COVID-19 diagnoses. Non-COVID-19 hospital admissions were reduced by 39.5% (P < 0.001), involving all conditions except hematologic, metabolic/endocrine, respiratory diseases, and traumas. In the early, mid, and late post-wave periods, visits were reduced by 25.4%, 25.3% and 23.5% (all P < 0.001) respectively. In the late period, reduction was greater for female (27.9%) and pediatric patients (44.6%). Most critical triage codes were unchanged. Oncological, metabolic/endocrine, and hematological diagnoses were unchanged, while other diagnoses had persistent reductions. Non-COVID-19 hospital admissions were reduced by 12.8% (P = 0.001), 6.3% (P = 0.1) and 12.2% (P = 0.001), respectively. Reductions in ED flows, led by non-critical codes, persisted throughout the summer nadir of COVID-19. Hospital admissions for non-COVID-19 diseases had transient changes.

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.

The challenge of maintaining necessary vascular and endovascular services at a referral center in Northern Italy during the COVID-19 outbreak.

OBJECTIVES: The Padova Hospital Vascular Surgery Division is located in Veneto, one of the area of the Northern Italy most hit by the Coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak. The aim of this paper is to describe the protocols adopted and to evaluate their impact during the acute phase of Coronavirus spread, focusing on the management of elective and urgent/emergent surgery, outpatients activity, and also health staff preservation from intra-hospital Coronavirus disease 2019 infection. METHODS: Several measures were progressively adopted in the Padova University Hospital to front the Coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak, with a clear strong asset established by 9 March 2020, after the Northern Italy lockdown. Since this date, the Vascular Surgery Unit started a "scaled-down" activity, both for elective surgical procedures and for the outpatient Clinical activities; different protocols were developed for health preservation of staff and patients. We compared a two months period, 30 days before and 30 days after this time point. In particular, emergent vascular surgery was regularly guaranteed as well as urgent surgery (to be performed within 24 h). Elective cases were scheduled for "non-deferrable" pathology. A swab test protocol for COVID-19 was applied to health-care professionals and hospitalized patients. RESULTS: The number of urgent or emergent aortic cases remained stable during the two months period, while the number of Hospital admissions via Emergency Room related to critical limb ischemia decreased after national lockdown by about 20%. Elective vascular surgery was scaled down by 50% starting from 9 March; 35% of scheduled elective cases refused hospitalization during the lockdown period and 20% of those contacted for hospitalization where postponed due to fever, respiratory symptoms, or close contacts with Coronavirus disease 2019 suspected cases. Elective surgery reduction did not negatively influence overall carotid or aortic outcomes, while we reported a higher major limb amputation rate for critical limb ischemia (about 10%, compared to 4% for the standard practice period). We found that 4 out of 98 (4%) health-care providers on the floor had an asymptomatic positive swab test. Among 22 vascular doctors, 3 had a confirmed Coronavirus disease 2019 infection (asymptomatic); a total of 72 swab were performed (mean = 3.4 swab/person/month) during this period; no cases of severe Coronavirus disease 2019 (deaths or requiring intensive care treatment) infection were reported within this period for the staff or hospitalized patients. CONCLUSIONS: Elective vascular surgery needs to be guaranteed as possible during Coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak. The number of truly emergent cases did not reduce, on the other side, Emergency Room accesses for non-emergent cases decreased. Our preliminary results seem to describe a scenario where, if the curve of the outbreak in the regional population is flattened, in association with appropriate hospitals containment rules, it may be possible to continue the activity of the Vascular Surgery Units and guarantee the minimal standard of care.

How Did the Number and Type of Injuries in Patients Presenting to a Regional Level I Trauma Center Change During the COVID-19 Pandemic with a Stay-at-home Order?

BACKGROUND: During a pandemic, it is paramount to understand volume changes in Level I trauma so that with appropriate planning and reallocation of resources, these facilities can maintain and even improve life-saving capabilities. Evaluating nonaccidental and accidental trauma can highlight potential areas of improvement in societal behavior and hospital preparedness. These critical questions were proposed to better understand how healthcare leaders might adjust surgeon and team coverage of trauma services as well as prepare from a system standpoint what resources will be needed during a pandemic or similar crisis to maintain services. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) How did the total observed number of trauma activations, defined as patients who meet mechanism of injury requirements which trigger the notification and aggregation of the trauma team upon entering the emergency department, change during a pandemic and stay-at-home order? (2) How did the proportion of major mechanisms of traumatic injury change during this time period? (3) How did the proportion and absolute numbers of accidental versus nonaccidental traumatic injury in children and adults change during this time period? METHODS: This was a retrospective study of trauma activations at a Level I trauma center in New Orleans, LA, USA, using trauma registry data of all patients presenting to the trauma center from 2017 to 2020. The number of trauma activations during a government mandated coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) stay-at-home order (from March 20, 2020 to May 14, 2020) was compared with the expected number of activations for the same time period from 2017 to 2019, called "predicted period". The expected number (predicted period) was assumed based on the linear trend of trauma activations seen in the prior 3 years (2017 to 2019) for the same date range (March 20, 2020 to May 14, 2020). To define the total number of traumatic injuries, account for proportion changes, and evaluate fluctuation in accidental verses nonaccidental trauma, variables including type of traumatic injury (blunt, penetrating, and thermal), and mechanism of injury (gunshot wound, fall, knife wound, motor vehicle collision, assault, burns) were collected for each patient. RESULTS: There were fewer total trauma activations during the stay-at-home period than during the predicted period (372 versus 532 [95% CI 77 to 122]; p = 0.016). The proportion of penetrating trauma among total activations was greater during the stay-at-home period than during the predicted period (35% [129 of 372] versus 26% [141 of 532]; p = 0.01), while the proportion of blunt trauma was lower during the stay-at-home period than during the predicted period (63 % [236 of 372] versus 71% [376 of 532]; p = 0.02). The proportion of gunshot wounds in relation to total activations was greater during the stay-at-home period than expected (26% [97 of 372] versus 18% [96 of 532]; p = 0.004). There were fewer motor vehicle collisions in relation to total activations during the stay-at-home period than expected (42% [156 of 372] versus 49% [263 of 532]; p = 0.03). Among total trauma activations, the stay-at-home period had a lower proportion of accidental injuries than the predicted period (55% [203 of 372] versus 61% [326 of 532]; p = 0.05), and there was a greater proportion of nonaccidental injuries than the predicted period (37% [137 of 372] versus 27% [143 of 532]; p < 0.001). In adults, the stay-at-home period had a greater proportion of nonaccidental injuries than the predicted period (38% [123 of 328] versus 26% [123 of 466]; p < 0.001). There was no difference between the stay-at-home period and predicted period in nonaccidental and accidental injuries among children. CONCLUSION: Data from the trauma registry at our region's only Level I trauma center indicate that a stay-at-home order during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a 70% reduction in the number of traumatic injuries, and the types of injuries shifted from more accidental blunt trauma to more nonaccidental penetrating trauma. Non-accidental trauma, including gunshot wounds, increased during this period, which suggest community awareness, crisis de-escalation strategies, and programs need to be created to address violence in the community. Understanding these changes allows for adjustments in staffing schedules. Surgeons and trauma teams could allow for longer shifts between changeover, decreasing viral exposure because the volume of work would be lower. Understanding the shift in injury could also lead to a change in specialists covering call. With the often limited availability of orthopaedic trauma-trained surgeons who can perform life-saving pelvis and acetabular surgery, this data may be used to mitigate exposure of these surgeons during pandemic situations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Prevenção e controle de infecções relacionadas à assistência à saúde em unidades / Prevention and control of infections related with health care in neonatal units / Prevención y control de infecciones relacionadas a la asistencia de la salud en unidades neonatales

Objetivo: Realizar uma busca sistemática na literatura sobre a assistência de enfermagem no desenvolvimento das estratégias para prevenção e controle das infecções relacionadas à assistência à saúde nas Unidades Neonatais. Método: Trata-se de uma revisão sistemática da literatura, que seguiu os procedimentos metodológicos descritos na literatura, a qual utiliza uma metodologia sistemática e explícita para identificar, selecionar e avaliar criticamente as pesquisas já publicadas acerca da temática, entre os anos de 2008 a 2018, nos idiomas português e inglês. Resultados: A amostra final da revisão foi composta por 07 artigos. Os principais resultados encontrados foram classificados em fatores extrínsecos que contribuem e dificultam a redução das infecções relacionadas a assistência à saúde. Conclusão: As infecções relacionadas à assistência à saúde que acometem os recém-nascidos em Unidades Neonatais, podem ser prevenidas e controladas através de estratégias simples, relacionadas a medidas administrativas, assistenciais e educativas

Objective: To carry out a systematic search in the literature on nursing care in the development of strategies to prevent and control the Infections Related to Health Care at Neonatal Units. Methods: It is about a systematic literature review using original articles published between 2008 and 2018, in Portuguese and in English, available at BVC. This review covered the following data bases: LILACS, BDENF and MEDLINE. Results: the final sample of the review was composed of seven articles. The studies aimed to cover newborn babies who are in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, nurses and the nursing team. The main results found were classified in extrinsic factors which contribute and make it difficult to reduce IRAS. Conclusion: the infections related to health care, which affected the newborn babies in Neonatal Units, can be prevented and controlled through simple strategies related to administrative, caring and educational measures

Objetivo: Realizar una búsqueda sistemática en la literatura sobre cuidados de enfermería en el desarrollo de estrategias para la prevención y el control de infecciones relacionadas con la salud en unidades neonatales. Métodos: Esta es una revisión sistemática de la literatura, que siguió los procedimientos metodológicos descritos en la literatura, que utiliza una metodología sistemática y explícita para identificar, seleccionar y evaluar críticamente la investigación publicada sobre el tema, desde 2008 hasta 2018, en los idiomas portugués e inglés. Resultados: La muestra de revisión final consistió en 07 artículos. Los principales resultados encontrados se clasificaron en factores extrínsecos que contribuyen y dificultan la reducción de las infecciones relacionadas con la atención médica. Conclusión: Las infecciones relacionadas con la atención médica que afectan a los recién nacidos en las unidades neonatales se pueden prevenir y controlar mediante estrategias simples relacionadas con medidas administrativas, de atención y educativas

Evaluation of endoscopy requests in the resumption of activity during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: denial of nonindicated requests and prioritization of accepted requests.

INTRODUCTION: the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic forced the closure of endoscopy units. Before resuming endoscopic activity, we designed a protocol to evaluate gastroscopies and colonoscopies cancelled during the pandemic, denying inappropriate requests and prioritizing appropriate ones. METHODS: two types of inappropriate request were established: a) COVID-19 context, people aged ≤ 50 years without alarm symptoms and a low probability of relevant endoscopic findings; and b) inappropriate context, requests not in line with clinical guidelines or protocols. Denials were filed in the medical record. Appropriate requests were classified into priority, conventional and follow-up. Requests denied by specialty were compared and the findings of priority requests were evaluated. RESULTS: between March 16th and June 30th 2020, 1,658 requests (44 % gastroscopies and 56 % colonoscopies) were evaluated, of which 1,164 (70 %) were considered as appropriate (priority 8.5 %, conventional 48 %, follow-up 43 % and non-evaluable 0.5 %) and 494 (30 %) as inappropriate (20 % COVID-19 context, 80 % inappropriate context). The reasons for denial of gastroscopy were follow-up of lesions (33 %), insufficiently studied symptoms (20 %) and relapsing symptoms after a previous gastroscopy (18 %). The reasons for denial of colonoscopies were post-polypectomy surveillance (25 %), colorectal cancer after surgery (21 %) and a family history of cancer (13 %). There were significant differences in denied requests according to specialty: General Surgery (52 %), Hematology (37 %) and Primary Care (29 %); 31 % of priority cases showed relevant findings. CONCLUSIONS: according to our study, 24 % of endoscopies were discordant with scientific recommendations. Therefore, their denial and the prioritization of appropriate ones optimize the use of resources.

The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on the practice of thoracic oncology surgery: a survey of members of the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS).

OBJECTIVES: There is widespread acknowledgement that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has disrupted surgical services. The European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) sent out a survey to assess what impact the COVID-19 pandemic has had on the practice of thoracic oncology surgery. METHODS: All ESTS members were invited (13-20 April 2020) to complete an online questionnaire of 26 questions, designed by the ESTS learning affairs committee. RESULTS: The response rate was 23.0% and the completeness rate was 91.2%. The number of treated COVID-positive cases per hospital varied from fewer than 20 cases (30.6%) to more than 200 cases (22.7%) per hospital. Most hospitals (89.1%) postponed surgical procedures. All hospitals performed patient screening with a nasopharyngeal swab, but only 6.7% routinely tested health care workers. A total of 20% of respondents reported that multidisciplinary meetings were completely cancelled and 66%, that multidisciplinary decisions were not different from normal practice. Trends were recognized in prioritizing surgical patients based on age (younger than 70), type of surgery (lobectomy or less), size of tumour (T1-2) and lymph node involvement (N1). Sixty-three percent of respondents reported that surgeons were involved in daily care of COVID-19-positive patients. Fifty-three percent mentioned that full personal protective equipment was available to them when treating a COVID-19-positive patient. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has created issues for the safety of health care workers, and surgeons have been forced to change their routine practice. However, there was no consensus about surgical priorities in lung cancer patients, demonstrating the need for the production of specific guidelines.

Pediatric transplantation in Europe during the COVID-19 pandemic: Early impact on activity and healthcare.

The current pandemic SARS-CoV-2 has required an unusual allocation of resources that can negatively impact chronically ill patients and high-complexity procedures. Across the European Reference Network on Pediatric Transplantation (ERN TransplantChild), we conducted a survey to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on pediatric transplant activity and healthcare practices in both solid organ transplantation (SOT) and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). The replies of 30 professionals from 18 centers in Europe were collected. Twelve of 18 centers (67%) showed a reduction in their usual transplant activity. Additionally, outpatient visits have been modified and restricted to selected ones, and the use of telemedicine tools has increased. Additionally, a total of 14 COVID-19 pediatric transplanted patients were identified at the time of the survey, including eight transplant recipients and six candidates for transplantation. Only two moderate-severe cases were reported, both in HSCT setting. These survey results demonstrate the limitations in healthcare resources for pediatric transplantation patients during early stages of this pandemic. COVID-19 disease is a major worldwide challenge for the field of pediatric transplantation, where there will be a need for systematic data collection, encouraging regular discussions to address the long-term consequences for pediatric transplantation candidates, recipients, and their families.

Robotic surgery during the COVID pandemic: why now and why for the future.

Health care has changed in unprecedented ways since the first reported cases of COVID-19. With global case rates continuing to rise and government restrictions beginning to loosen, many worry that a second wave in our future. In many hospitals around the world, non-emergent surgeries were put on hold as hospitals were transformed into COVID centers. As surgeons and administrators do their best to reinstate non-emergent procedures, guidance is sought from any and all reliable sources. Robotic surgery has many known and demonstrated benefits over open surgery and often over conventional laparoscopy. In this commentary, we aim to highlight some of the advantages robotic surgery may offer during this uniquely challenging time in health care.

CAR T-cell treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic: Management strategies and challenges.

The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is spreading rapidly across the world. Currently, the COVID-19 pandemic is affecting the continuity of essential routine healthcare services and procedures, including chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy, a life-saving option for patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) hematologic malignancies. Due to the rapid disease progression of hematological malignancies, there is an urgent need to manufacture and utilize CAR T-cells. However, CAR-T treatment has become extraordinarily challenging during this COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, many medical and technical factors must now be taken into consideration before, during, and after CAR-T therapy. The purpose of this review is to provide brief suggestions for rational decision-making strategies in evaluating and selecting CAR T-cell treatment and appropriate CAR T-cell products, and protective strategies for medical staff and patients to prevent infection in the midst of the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Change in practice in gynecologic oncology during the COVID-19 pandemic: a social media survey.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 has affected gynecologic cancer management. The goal of this survey was to evaluate changes that occurred in gynecologic oncology practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A anonymous survey consisting of 33 questions (https://sites.google.com/view/gyncacovidfmartinelli) regarding interaction between gynecologic cancers and COVID-19 was distributed online via social media from April 9 to April 30, 2020. Basic descriptive statistics were applied. Analytics of survey-diffusion and generated-interest (visualizations, engagement rates, response rate) were analyzed. RESULTS: The survey received 20 836 visualizations, generating an average engagement rates by reach of 4.7%. The response rate was 30%. A total of 86% of respondents completed the survey, for a total of 187 physicians surveyed across 49 countries. The majority (143/187; 76%) were gynecologic oncologists, and most were ≤50 years old (146/187; 78%). A total of 49.7% (93/187) were facing the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, while 26.7% (50/187) and 23.5% (44/187) were in the peak and plateau phases, respectively. For 97.3% (182/187) of respondents COVID-19 affected or changed their respective clinical practice. Between 16% (27/165) (before surgery) and 25% (26/102) (before medical treatment) did not perform any tests to rule out COVID-19 infection among patients. The majority of respondents did not alter indications of treatment if patients were COVID-19-negative, while treatments were generally postponed in COVID-19-positive patients. Treatments were considered priority for: early stage high-risk uterine cancers (85/187; 45%), newly diagnosed epithelial ovarian cancer (76/187; 41%), and locally advanced cervical cancer (76/187; 41%). Treatment of early stage low-grade endometrioid endometrial cancer was deferred according to 49% (91/187) of respondents, with hormonal treatment as the option of therapy (31%; 56/178). A total of 77% (136/177) of respondents reported no changes in (surgical) treatment for early stage cervical cancer in COVID-19-negative patients, while treatment was postponed by 54% (96/177) of respondent, if the patient tested COVID-19-positive. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancers was considered by over one-third of respondents as well as hypofractionation of radiation treatment for locally advanced cervical cancers. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 affected the treatment of gynecologic cancers patients, both in terms of prioritization and identification of strategies to reduce hospital access and length of stay. Social media is a reliable tool to perform fast-tracking, worldwide surveys.

COVID-19 Pandemic and Surgical Oncology: Preserving the Academic Mission.

BACKGROUND: The global pandemic of respiratory disease cause by the novel human coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has caused untold suffering, loss of life and upheaval in society. The pandemic has lead to massive redirection of health care resources to treat the surge of COVID-19 patients, and enforcement of social distancing to reduce the rate of transmission. METHODS: Editorial Board members provided observations of the implications of the pandemic on academic surgical oncology. RESULTS: Delivery of health care to other populations including cancer patients has been significantly disrupted. The implications both short term and long term threaten preservation of the academic mission in medicine at large, and certainly in the field of surgical oncology. CONCLUSIONS: The effects on surgical oncology training, research and clinical trials are major.