Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pancreatic surgery. Analysis in a public and a private institution / Impacto de la pandemia COVID-19 en la cirugía pancreática. Análisis en dos instituciones, una pública y otra privada

RESUMEN Antecedentes: la pandemia de COVID-19 ha introducido cambios drásticos en el sistema de salud. Las cirugías electivas son una de las actividades quirúrgicas que más han descendido durante la pandemia. Objetivo: analizar el impacto de la pandemia de COVID-19 en la cirugía pancreática en una institución pública y otra privada. Se comparó, en cada institución, con el número de cirugías en el mismo período del año pasado. Material y métodos: se revisaron en una base prospectiva los pacientes que recibieron una cirugía pancreática en las dos instituciones entre el 10/3/20 y el 24/6/20. Se determinaron los datos epide miológicos, el tipo de resección pancreática, el diagnóstico anatomopatológico, la morbilidad y la mor talidad. Se compararon con los pacientes en ambas instituciones que recibieron cirugía pancreática durante el período 10/3/19 al 24/6/19. Resultados: durante la pandemia se realizaron 23 resecciones pancreáticas (13 duodenopancreatec tomías cefálicas, 9 pancreatectomías izquierdas y 1 pancreatectomía total). El 70% (16/23) fueron adenocarcinomas. La morbilidad alcanzó el 34,7% y no se registró mortalidad. Ningún paciente ni miembro del equipo quirúrgico se infectó con coronavirus. La pandemia no tuvo impacto en el núme ro de cirugías en el centro privado (22 vs. 20, p = 0,88), mientras que en el centro público hubo una reducción significativa en el número de cirugías (14 vs. 3, p = 0,009). Conclusión: la cirugía pancreática se puede hacer con seguridad durante la pandemia. En el centro privado se mantuvo el número de cirugías pancreáticas. En el centro público, con máxima prioridad para pacientes con COVID-19, hubo un descenso significativo.

ABSTRACT Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced dramatic changes in the health system. Elective surgeries are the surgical activities with greater decline during the pandemic. Objective: The aim of this paper is to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in pancreatic sur gery in a public and a private institution. The number of surgeries performed in each institution was compared with those performed in same period of the previous year. Material and methods: Data from a prospective database of all the patients who underwent pancrea tic surgery between March 10, 2020, and June 3, 2020, were analyzed. The epidemiological data, type of pancreatic resection, pathology diagnosis, morbidity and mortality were determined in each insti tution and compared with patients who underwent pancreatic surgery in both institutions between March 3, 2019, and June 24, 2019. Results: 23 pancreatic resections were performed during the pandemic (13 cephalic pancreaticoduo denectomies, 9 left pancreatectomies and 1 total pancreatectomy); 70% (16/23) were adenocarcino mas. There were 34.7% complications and no deaths were reported. None of the patients was infected with coronavirus. The pandemic had no impact on the number of pancreatic resections in the private institution (22 vs. 20, p = 0.88), while the number of pancreatic surgeries was significantly lower in the public center (14 vs. 3, p = 0.009). Conclusion: Pancreatic surgery can be safely performed during the pandemic. The number of pancrea tic surgeries did not decline during the pandemic. The priority for treating patients with COVID-19 at the public center resulted in a significant decrease in pancreatic surgeries.

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on non-elective otolaryngology admissions and a positive change in clinical practice.

As the COVID-19 pandemic progressed across the UK and Northern Ireland in March 2020, our otolaryngology department began to make preparations and changes in practice to accommodate for potentially large numbers of patients with COVID-19 related respiratory illness in the hospital. We retrospectively reviewed the number of non-elective admissions to our department between the months of January and May in 2019 and 2020. A significant reduction in admissions of up to 94% during the months of the pandemic was observed. Our practice shifted to manage patients with epistaxis and peritonsillar abscess on an outpatient basis, and while prospectively collecting data on this, we did not observe any significant adverse events. We view this as a positive learning point and change in our practice as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Safety and feasibility of resuming bariatric surgery under the cloud of COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous bariatric surgical units globally have halted weight loss surgery. Obesity itself has been shown to be a predictor of poor outcome in people infected with the virus. The aim of this study was to report our experience as a high-volume bariatric institution resuming elective weight loss surgery safely amidst emergency admissions of COVID-19-positive patients. METHODS: A standard operating procedure based on national guidance and altered to accommodate local considerations was initiated across the hospital. Data were collected prospectively for 50 consecutive patients undergoing bariatric surgery following recommencement of elective surgery after the first national lockdown in the UK. RESULTS: Between 28 June and 5 August 2020, a total of 50 patients underwent bariatric surgery of whom 94% were female. Median age was 41 years and median body mass index was 43.8 (interquartile range 40.0-48.8)kg/m2. Half of the patients (n = 25/50) underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and half underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Of these 50 patients, 9 (18%) had revisional bariatric surgery. Overall median length of hospital stay was 1 day, with 96% of the study population being discharged within 24h of surgery. The overall rate of readmission was 6% and one patient (2%) returned to theatre with an obstruction proximal to jejuno-jejunal anastomosis. None of the patients exhibited symptoms or tested positive for COVID-19. CONCLUSION: With appropriately implemented measures and precautions, resumption of bariatric surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic appears feasible and safe with no increased risk to patients.

Adapting an emergency general surgery service in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, our emergency general surgery (EGS) service underwent significant restructuring, including establishing an enhanced ambulatory service and undertaking nonoperative management of selected pathologies. The aim of this study was to compare the activity of our EGS service before and after these changes. METHODS: Patients referred by the emergency department were identified prospectively over a 4-week period beginning from the date our EGS service was reconfigured (COVID) and compared with patients identified retrospectively from the same period the previous year (Pre-COVID), and followed up for 30 days. Data were extracted from handover documents and electronic care records. The primary outcomes were the rate of admission, ambulation and discharge. RESULTS: There were 281 and 283 patients during the Pre-COVID and COVID periods respectively. Admission rate decreased from 78.7% to 41.7%, while there were increased rates of ambulation from 7.1% to 17.3% and discharge from 6% to 22.6% (all p<0.001). For inpatients, mean duration of admission decreased (6.9 to 4.8 days), and there were fewer operative or endoscopic interventions (78 to 40). There were increased ambulatory investigations (11 to 39) and telephone reviews (0 to 39), while early computed tomography scan was increasingly used to facilitate discharge (5% vs 34.7%). There were no differences in 30-day readmission or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Restructuring of our EGS service in response to COVID-19 facilitated an increased use of ambulatory services and imaging, achieving a decrease of 952 inpatient bed days in this critical period, while maintaining patient safety.

Resource utilization and outcomes in emergency general surgery during the COVID19 pandemic: An observational cost analysis.

BACKGROUND: Over the course of the COVID19 pandemic, global healthcare delivery has declined. Surgery is one of the most resource-intensive area of medicine; loss of surgical care has had untold health and economic consequences. Herein, we evaluate resource utilization, outcomes, and healthcare costs associated with unplanned surgery admissions during the height of the pandemic in 2020 versus the same period in 2019. METHODS: Retrospective analysis on patients ≥18 years admitted from the emergency department to General & Digestive and Gastrointestinal Surgery Services between February and May 2019 and 2020 at our center; clinical outcomes and unadjusted and adjusted per-person healthcare costs were analyzed. RESULTS: Consults and admissions to surgery declined between February and May 2020 by 37% and 19%, respectively, relative to the same period in 2019, with even greater relative decline during late March and early April. Time between onset of symptoms to diagnosis increased from 2±3 days 2019 to 5±22 days 2020 (P = 0.01). Overall hospital stay was two days less in 2020 (P = 0.19). Complications (Comprehensive Complication Index 10.3±23.7 2019 vs. 13.9±25.5 2020, P = 0.10) and mortality rates (3% vs. 4%, respectively, P = 0.58) did not vary. Mean unadjusted per-person costs for patients in the 2019 and 2020 cohorts were 5,886.72€±12,576.33€ and 5,287.62±7,220.16€, respectively (P = 0.43). Following multivariate analysis, costs remained similar (4,656.89€±390.53€ 2019 vs. 4,938.54±406.55€ 2020, P = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare delivery and spending for unplanned general surgery admissions declined considerably due to COVID19. These results provide a small yet relevant illustration of clinical and economic ramifications of this healthcare crisis.

Challenges in providing surgical procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic: Qualitative study among Operating Department Practitioners in Pakistan.

The surgical theatre is associated with the highest mortality rates since the onslaught of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, Operating Department Practitioners (ODPs) are neglected human resources for health in regards to both professional development and research for patient safety; even though they are key practitioners with respect to infection control during surgeries. Therefore, this study aims to describe challenges faced by ODPs during the pandemic. The secondary aim is to use empirical evidence to inform the public health sector management about both ODP professional development and improvement in surgical procedures, with a specific focus on pandemics. A qualitative study has been conducted. Data collection was based on an interview guide with open-ended questions. Interviews with 39 ODPs in public sector teaching hospitals of Pakistan who have been working during the COVID-19 pandemic were part of the analysis. Content analysis was used to generate themes. Ten themes related to challenges faced by ODPs in delivering services during the pandemic for securing patient safety were identified: (i) Disparity in training for prevention of COVID-19; (ii) Shortcomings in COVID-19 testing; (iii) Supply shortages of personal protective equipment; (iv) Challenges in maintaining physical distance and prevention protocols; (v) Human resource shortages and role burden; (vi) Problems with hospital administration; (vii) Exclusion and hierarchy; (viii) Teamwork limitations and other communication issues; (ix) Error Management; and (x) Anxiety and fear. The public health sector, in Pakistan and other developing regions, needs to invest in the professional development of ODPs and improve resources and structures for surgical procedures, during pandemics and otherwise.

Establishing a South African national framework for COVID-19 surgical prioritisation.

BACKGROUND: Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, surgical operations have been drastically reduced in South Africa (SA). Guidelines on surgical prioritisation during COVID-19 have been published, but are specific to high-income countries. There is a pressing need for context-specific guidelines and a validated tool for prioritising surgical cases during the COVID-19 pandemic. In March 2020, the South African National Surgical Obstetric Anaesthesia Plan Task Team was asked by the National Department of Health to establish a national framework for COVID-19 surgical prioritisation. OBJECTIVES: To develop a national framework for COVID-19 surgical prioritisation, including a set of recommendations and a risk calculatorfor operative care. METHODS: The surgical prioritisation framework was developed in three stages: (i) a literature review of international, national and local recommendations on COVID-19 and surgical care was conducted; (ii) a set of recommendations was drawn up based on the available literature and through consensus of the COVID-19 Task Team; and (iii) a COVID-19 surgical risk calculator was developed and evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 30 documents were identified from which recommendations around prioritisation of surgical care were used to draw up six recommendations for preoperative COVID-19 screening and testing as well as the use of appropriate personal protective equipment. Ninety-nine perioperative practitioners from eight SA provinces evaluated the COVID-19 surgical risk calculator, which had high acceptability and a high level of concordance (81%) with current clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: This national framework on COVID-19 surgical prioritisation can help hospital teams make ethical, equitable and personalised decisions whether to proceed with or delay surgical operations during this unprecedented epidemic.

Impact of lockdown on emergency general surgery during first 2020 COVID-19 outbreak.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and analyze the impact of lockdown strategy due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on emergency general surgery (EGS) in the Milan area at the beginning of pandemic outbreak. METHODS: A survey was distributed to 14 different hospitals of the Milan area to analyze the variation of EGS procedures. Each hospital reported the number of EGS procedures in the same time frame comparing 2019 and 2020. The survey revealed that the number of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak in 2020 was reduced by 19% when compared with 2019. The decrease was statistically significant only for abdominal wall surgery. Interestingly, in 2020, there was an increase of three procedures: surgical intervention for acute mesenteric ischemia (p = 0.002), drainage of perianal abscesses (p = 0.000285), and cholecystostomy for acute cholecystitis (p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: During the first COVID-19 pandemic wave in the metropolitan area of Milan, the number of patients operated for emergency diseases decreased by around 19%. We believe that this decrease is related either to the fear of the population to ask for emergency department (ED) consultation and to a shift towards a more non-operative management in the surgeons 'decision making' process. The increase of acute mesenteric ischaemia and perianal abscess might be related to the modification of dietary habits and reduction of physical activity related to the lockdown.

Antibiotic stewardship in UK surgical departments: challenges and possible solutions.

Antibiotics are one of the most widely used classes of drugs within hospitals in the UK. They have a wide range of uses within all surgical specialties, both as preoperative prophylaxis and for treatment of acute surgical conditions. Antimicrobial resistance has increasingly been seen as a major issue, as the production of new antibiotics has decreased and overall use worldwide has increased. With the COVID-19 pandemic increasing concerns about antimicrobial resistance, there is an ever-increasing need for action. This article examines the particular challenges of antibiotic stewardship in surgical departments within the UK, and outlines possible solutions for improving adherence and reducing the risk of antimicrobial resistance in the future.

Personal protective equipment for reducing the risk of COVID-19 infection among health care workers involved in emergency trauma surgery during the pandemic: An umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: Health care facilities in low- and middle-income countries are inadequately resourced to adhere to current COVID-19 prevention recommendations. Recommendations for surgical emergency trauma care measures need to be adequately informed by available evidence and adapt to particular settings. To inform future recommendations, we set to summarize the effects of different personal protective equipment (PPE) on the risk of COVID-19 infection in health personnel caring for trauma surgery patients. METHODS: We conducted an umbrella review using Living Overview of Evidence platform for COVID-19, which performs regular automated searches in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and more than 30 other sources. Systematic reviews of experimental and observational studies assessing the efficacy of PPE were included. Indirect evidence from other health care settings was also considered. Risk of bias was assessed with the AMSTAR II tool (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews, Ottawa, ON, Canada), and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach for grading the certainty of the evidence is reported (registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, CRD42020198267). RESULTS: Eighteen studies that fulfilled the selection criteria were included. There is high certainty that the use of N95 respirators and surgical masks is associated with a reduced risk of COVID-19 when compared with no mask use. In moderate- to high-risk environments, N95 respirators are associated with a further reduction in risk of COVID-19 infection compared with surgical masks. Eye protection also reduces the risk of contagion in this setting. Decontamination of masks and respirators with ultraviolet germicidal irradiation, vaporous hydrogen peroxide, or dry heat is effective and does not affect PPE performance or fit. CONCLUSION: The use of PPE drastically reduces the risk of COVID-19 compared with no mask use in health care workers. N95 and equivalent respirators provide more protection than surgical masks. Decontamination and reuse appear feasible to overcome PPE shortages and enhance the allocation of limited resources. These effects are applicable to emergency trauma care and should inform future recommendations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Review, level II.

[Management of elective surgical activity in a tertiary hospital during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic]. / Gestión de la actividad quirúrgica electiva de un hospital terciario durante la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2.

INTRODUCTION: During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, elective surgical activity was reduced to a minimum. As both the number of cases and the hospitalization needs for this pathology decreased, we thought it appropriate to progressively recover scheduled surgical activity. This work describes how, even with the current alarm state, we were able to practically normalize this activity in a few weeks. METHODS: Two weeks before the intervention, the patients included in the waiting lists were contacted by telephone. After checking their health status and expressing their desire to undergo surgery, they were provided with recommendations to decrease the risk of coronavirus infection. Likewise, an exclusive circuit was established to carry out, 48 hours before the intervention, the detection of SARS-CoV-2 by means of exudates nasopharyngeal PCR. The results were evaluated by each surgical service and the anesthesiology service. In addition, asymptomatic Surgical Area professionals could undergo weekly screening for the early detection of coronavirus according to the recommendations of Occupational Health. RESULTS: In the midst of a pandemic, scheduled surgical activity was reduced by 85%. From the week of April 13, the operating rooms available were recovered, which allowed practically all surgical activity to be recovered the week of May 25. CONCLUSIONS: The creation of circuits and procedures to streamline surgical activity, still in full force of the state of alarm, has allowed us, in a few weeks, to recover almost all of it.

COVID-19-related absence among surgeons: development of an international surgical workforce prediction model.

BACKGROUND: During the initial COVID-19 outbreak up to 28.4 million elective operations were cancelled worldwide, in part owing to concerns that it would be unsustainable to maintain elective surgery capacity because of COVID-19-related surgeon absence. Although many hospitals are now recovering, surgical teams need strategies to prepare for future outbreaks. This study aimed to develop a framework to predict elective surgery capacity during future COVID-19 outbreaks. METHODS: An international cross-sectional study determined real-world COVID-19-related absence rates among surgeons. COVID-19-related absences included sickness, self-isolation, shielding, and caring for family. To estimate elective surgical capacity during future outbreaks, an expert elicitation study was undertaken with senior surgeons to determine the minimum surgical staff required to provide surgical services while maintaining a range of elective surgery volumes (0, 25, 50 or 75 per cent). RESULTS: Based on data from 364 hospitals across 65 countries, the COVID-19-related absence rate during the initial 6 weeks of the outbreak ranged from 20.5 to 24.7 per cent (mean average fortnightly). In weeks 7-12, this decreased to 9.2-13.8 per cent. At all times during the COVID-19 outbreak there was predicted to be sufficient surgical staff available to maintain at least 75 per cent of regular elective surgical volume. Overall, there was predicted capacity for surgeon redeployment to support the wider hospital response to COVID-19. CONCLUSION: This framework will inform elective surgical service planning during future COVID-19 outbreaks. In most settings, surgeon absence is unlikely to be the factor limiting elective surgery capacity.

Personal protective equipment for reducing the risk of COVID-19 infection among healthcare workers involved in emergency trauma surgery during the pandemic: an umbrella review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Many healthcare facilities in low-income and middle-income countries are inadequately resourced and may lack optimal organisation and governance, especially concerning surgical health systems. COVID-19 has the potential to decimate these already strained surgical healthcare services unless health systems take stringent measures to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) from viral exposure and ensure the continuity of specialised care for patients. The objective of this broad evidence synthesis is to identify and summarise the available literature regarding the efficacy of different personal protective equipment (PPE) in reducing the risk of COVID-19 infection in health personnel caring for patients undergoing trauma surgery in low-resource environments. METHODS: We will conduct several searches in the L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence) platform for COVID-19, a system that performs automated regular searches in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and over 30 other sources. The search results will be presented according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram. This review will preferentially consider systematic reviews of experimental and quasi-experimental studies, as well as individual studies of such designs, evaluating the effect of different PPE on the risk of COVID-19 infection in HCWs involved in emergency trauma surgery. Critical appraisal of eligible studies for methodological quality will be conducted. Data will be extracted using the standardised data extraction tool in Covidence. Studies will, when possible, be pooled in a statistical meta-analysis using JBI SUMARI. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach for grading the certainty of evidence will be followed and a summary of findings will be created. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this review. The plan for dissemination is to publish review findings in a peer-reviewed journal and present findings at high-level conferences that engage the most pertinent stakeholders. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020198267.

How COVID-19 pandemic has changed elective surgery: the experience in a general surgery unit at a COVID-hospital.

Objective Evaluate the impact of Covid-19 in a critical area and analyze the changes in the daily activities in a General Surgery Unit of a tertiary Covid-Hospital.   Methods We report and compared all the surgical procedures performed between two periods (March and April 2019 and March and April 2020) at General Surgery Department of Parma University Hospital, a tertiary Covid-Hospital.   Results Between March and April 2019, a total of 232 surgical procedures were performed. Between March and April 2020 only 61 surgical procedures were performed. In 2019 84 patients underwent surgery for cancer and 171 underwent surgery for benign diseases. In 2020 only 37 patients underwent surgery for oncological reasons and 24 underwent surgery for benign diseases.   Conclusions During pandemic Covid-19 the access to health services was limited and poor. Limited access to health services and the fear of Covid-19 infection can explain the lower number of elective surgical procedures for cancer in 2020 compared to the same period in the 2019.