RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, patients have continued to present with endocrine (surgical) pathology in an environment depleted of resources. This study investigated how the pandemic affected endocrine surgery practice. METHODS: PanSurg-PREDICT is an international, multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study of emergency and elective surgical patients in secondary/tertiary care during the pandemic. PREDICT-Endocrine collected endocrine-specific data alongside demographics, COVID-19 and outcome data from 11-3-2020 to 13-9-2020. RESULTS: A total of 380 endocrine surgery patients (19 centres, 12 countries) were analysed (224 thyroidectomies, 116 parathyroidectomies, 40 adrenalectomies). Ninety-seven percent were elective, and 63% needed surgery within 4 weeks. Eight percent were initially deferred but had surgery during the pandemic; less than 1% percent was deferred for more than 6 months. Decision-making was affected by capacity, COVID-19 status or the pandemic in 17%, 5% and 7% of cases. Indication was cancer/worrying lesion in 61% of thyroidectomies and 73% of adrenalectomies and calcium 2.80 mmol/l or greater in 50% of parathyroidectomies. COVID-19 status was unknown at presentation in 92% and remained unknown before surgery in 30%. Two-thirds were asked to self-isolate before surgery. There was one COVID-19-related ICU admission and no mortalities. Consultant-delivered care occurred in a majority (anaesthetist 96%, primary surgeon 76%). Post-operative vocal cord check was reported in only 14% of neck endocrine operations. Both of these observations are likely to reflect modification of practice due to the pandemic. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected endocrine surgical decision-making, case mix and personnel delivering care. Significant variation was seen in COVID-19 risk mitigation measures. COVID-19-related complications were uncommon. This analysis demonstrates the safety of endocrine surgery during this pandemic.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemias , Estudios de Cohortes , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION Blunt abdominal trauma (BAT) is a common injury in recent trauma series. The characteristics of patients with BAT have changed following the reconfiguration of UK trauma services. The aim of this study was to build a new profile for BAT patients undergoing immediate or delayed laparotomy. METHODS All 5,401 consecutive adults presenting with major trauma between April 2012 and April 2014 in the 3 major trauma centres in the West Midlands were analysed to identify all patients with BAT. A total of 2,793 patients with a mechanism of injury or symptomatology consistent with BAT were identified (52%). Outcomes were analysed using local electronic clinical results systems and notes. RESULTS Of the 2,793 patients, 179 (6.4%) had a mesenteric or hollow viscus injury, 168 (6.0%) had a hepatobiliary injury, 149 (5.4%) had a splenic injury and 46 (1.6%) had a vascular injury. Overall, 103 patients (3.7%) underwent an early (<12 hours) laparotomy while 30 (1.1%) underwent a delayed (>12 hours) laparotomy. Twenty (66.7%) of those undergoing a delayed laparotomy had a hollow viscus injury. In total, 170 deaths occurred among the BAT patients (6.1%). In the early laparotomy group, 53 patients died (51.5%) whereas in the delayed laparotomy group, 6 patients died (20.0%). CONCLUSIONS This series has attempted to provide the characteristics of patients with BAT in a large contemporary UK cohort. BAT was found to be a common type of injury. Early and delayed laparotomy occurred in 3.7% and 1.1% of these patients respectively, mostly because of hollow viscus injury in both cases. Outcomes were comparable with those in the international literature from regions with mature trauma services.
Asunto(s)
Traumatismos Abdominales/cirugía , Heridas no Penetrantes/cirugía , Traumatismos Abdominales/epidemiología , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Laparotomía/métodos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X , Centros Traumatológicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Heridas no Penetrantes/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: National colorectal cancer screening, utilising a faecal occult blood test (FOBT), is now well established in the UK. The aim of this study was to define the screening characteristics of patients presenting to secondary care with symptoms of colorectal cancer and to assess the effect of screening outcome on subsequent symptomatic presentation. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of all patients of screening age presenting within one calendar year in a tertiary trust via a two-week wait (2WW) pathway owing to suspicion of colorectal cancer. Colorectal cancer related outcomes were compared between patients in the cohort who had previously accepted bowel cancer screening and patients who had previously declined bowel cancer screening. The primary endpoint was overall incidence of colorectal neoplasia. Secondary endpoints included incidence of colorectal malignancy, cancer related mortality, cancer related outcomes and polyp related outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 2,227 patients presented via the 2WW pathway; 955 were aged 60-75 years. Among the latter, 411 (43%) had been screened previously and had a negative FOBT, and 544 (57%) had declined screening. Incidence of colorectal neoplasia did not differ between the two groups (113 [27%] vs 143 [26%], p=0.7). Of those with a negative FOBT and subsequent symptomatic presentation, 16 (3.9%) were diagnosed with a colorectal malignancy compared with 36 (6.6%) of those who declined screening and had subsequent symptomatic presentation (relative risk: 1.7, 95% confidence interval: 0.96-3.02, p=0.08). There were no differences between the two groups with regard to TNM (tumour, lymph nodes, metastasis) stage, Dukes' stage, metastases, number of polyps or cancer related mortality (median follow-up duration: 20 months). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of colorectal neoplasia was similar among patients who previously had a negative FOBT and those who declined screening. There was a higher incidence of colorectal cancer detected among those who declined screening but it did not reach statistical significance. All other cancer and polyp outcomes were similar between the groups.