Life or limb: an international qualitative study on decision making in sarcoma surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic is unprecedented as a global crisis over the last century. How do specialist surgeons make decisions about patient care in these unprecedent times? DESIGN: Between April and May 2020, we conducted an international qualitative study. Sarcoma surgeons from diverse global settings participated in 60 min interviews exploring surgical decision making during COVID-19. Interview data were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. SETTING: Participants represented public and private hospitals in 14 countries, in different phases of the first wave of the pandemic: Australia, Argentina, Canada, India, Italy, Japan, Nigeria, Singapore, Spain, South Africa, Switzerland, Turkey, UK and USA. PARTICIPANTS: From 22 invited sarcoma surgeons, 18 surgeons participated. Participants had an average of 19 years experience as a sarcoma surgeon. RESULTS: 17/18 participants described a decision they had made about patient care since the start of the pandemic that was unique to them, that is, without precedence. Common to 'unique' decisions about patient care was uncertainty about what was going on and what would happen in the future (theme 1: the context of uncertainty), the impact of the pandemic on resources or threat of the pandemic to overwhelm resources (theme 2: limited resources), perceived increased risk to self (theme 3: duty of care) and least-worst decision making, in which none of the options were perceived as ideal and participants settled on the least-worst option at that point in time (theme 4: least-worst decision making). CONCLUSIONS: In the context of rapidly changing standards of justice and beneficence in patient care, traditional decision-making frameworks may no longer apply. Based on the experiences of surgeons in this study, we describe a framework of least-worst decision making. This framework gives rise to actionable strategies that can support decision making in sarcoma and other specialised fields of surgery, both during the current crisis and beyond.

Outcomes of Patients with Sarcoma and COVID-19 Infection: A Single Institution Cohort Analysis.

Outcomes for patients (pts) with sarcoma and COVID-19 are unknown. This is a single institution retrospective study of adults with sarcoma and COVID-19. Ten pts [median age 60 (range 24-69)] were identified. Five were hospitalized; two died from COVID-19 complications; another died from sarcoma. Time between last systemic treatment dose and COVID-19 diagnosis was 6-41 days in pts who died. 5 underwent prior radiation (RT); time between RT and COVID-19 diagnosis was 20-62 days for pts who died. All three pts with WBC differential data (two died) were lymphopenic. Efforts to capture outcomes for a larger cohort are urgently needed.

Patient safety associated with the surgical treatment of bone and soft tissue tumours during the COVID-19 pandemic-results from an observational study at the Oxford Sarcoma Service.

PURPOSE: Deferring cancer surgery can have profound adverse effects including patient mortality. During the COVID-19 pandemic, departmental reorganisation and adherence to evolving guidelines enabled provision of uninterrupted surgical care to patients with bone and soft tissue tumours (BST) in need of surgery. We reviewed the outcomes of surgeries on BST during the first two months of the pandemic at one of the tertiary BST centres in the UK. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 12 March 2020 and 12 May 2020, 56 patients of a median age of 57 years (18-87) underwent surgery across two sites: index hospital (n = 27) and COVID-free facility (n = 29). Twenty-five (44.6%) patients were above the age of 60 years and 20 (35.7%) patients were in ASA III and ASA IV category. The decision to offer surgery was made in adherence with the guidelines issued by the NHS, BOOS and BSG. RESULTS: At a minimum follow-up of 30 days post-surgery, 54 (96.4%) patients were recovering well. Thirteen patients (23.2%) had post-operative complications which included four (7.1%) patients developing pulmonary embolism. The majority of complications (12/13 = 92.7%) occurred in ASA III and IV category patients. Four (7.1%) patients contracted COVID-19, of which three required escalation of care due to pulmonary complications and two (3.6%) died. Patients < 60 years of age had significantly less complications than those > 60 years (p < 0.001). Patients operated on in the COVID-free facility had fewer complications compared with those operated on at the index hospital (p < 0.027). CONCLUSION: In spite of the favourable results in majority of our patients, our study shows that patients with sarcoma operated at the height of the pandemic are at a risk of contracting COVID-19 and also having associated with mortality. The use of a COVID-free facility, surgery in patients < 60 60 years and in ASA I & II category are associated with better outcomes. If a second wave occurs, a serious consideration should be given to ways of minimising the risk of contracting COVID-19 in these vulnerable patients either by using COVID-free facilities or delaying treatment until peak of infection has passed.

Bone sarcoma surgery in times of COVID-19 pandemic lockdown-early experience from a tertiary centre in India.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown has presented a unique challenge for sarcoma care. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the early results and feasibility of surgeries for bone sarcomas during the COVID-19 lockdown. METHODS: Our prospectively collected orthopaedic oncological database was reviewed to include two groups of patients- those who underwent surgery in the immediate 4 weeks before lockdown (non-lockdown group) and those operated in the first 4 weeks of lockdown (lockdown group). All patients were followed-up clinically and telephonically to collect the outcome data. RESULTS: Out of the 91 patients who qualified for inclusion, fifty were classified into the non-lockdown group while 41 patients formed the lockdown group. Both the groups were comparable with respect to baseline demographic parameters. However, during the lockdown period 37 patients (90%) had undergone a major surgical intervention as against 24 patients (48%) in the non-lockdown group (P < .001). There was no significant difference in type of anaesthesia, median estimated blood loss and procedure duration. None of the patients/health care workers had evidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 infection at 15 days follow-up. CONCLUSION: Our study results suggest that appendicular bone tumours can be safely operated with adequate precautions during the lockdown period.

Surgical decision-making and prioritization for cancer patients at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic: A multidisciplinary approach.

In the midst of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, governmental agencies, state medical boards, and healthcare organizations have called for restricting "elective" operations to mitigate the risk of transmission of the virus amongst patients and healthcare providers and to preserve essential resources for potential regional surges of COVID patients. While the fear of delaying surgical care for many of our patients is deeply challenging for us as cancer care providers, we must balance our personal commitment to providing timely and appropriate oncologic care to our cancer patients with our societal responsibility to protect our patients (including those on whom we are operating), co-workers, trainees, families, and community, from undue risks of contracting and propagating COVID-19. Herein, we present guidelines for surgical decision-making and case prioritization developed among all adult disease specialties in the MD Anderson Cancer Center Departments of Surgical Oncology and Breast Surgical Oncology in Houston, Texas.