Perioperative management of non-deferrable oncologic surgeries during COVID-19 pandemic in Madrid, Spain. Is it safe?

INTRODUCTION: Surgical treatment during Covid-19 pandemic is controversial. Currently, most clinical guidelines advise to defer surgical patients during the Covid-19 pandemic, although the supporting data is sparse. We assumed that a Covid-19-free hospital, on the back of strong isolation measures and targeted screening, could reduce complications and enable us to continue treating high-risk patients. METHODS: Prospective study with retrospective analysis of 355 patients who had undergone nondeferrable oncological surgery between March 16th, 2020, and April 14th, 2020, at our institution. The aim of the study was to assess the hospital restructuring and surgical protocols to be able to safely handle non-deferrable surgeries during the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic. We implemented structural changes and an updated surgical-anesthetic protocol in order to isolate Covid-19 patients from other surgical patients. Comprehensive targeted screening for Covid-19 patients was made. PCR tests were requested for suspected Covid-19 patients. We analyzed mortality and complications related to both surgery and Covid-19 during hospital admission and also 15 and 30 days after surgery. We compared it with a sample of similar patients in the pre-pandemic period. RESULTS: Of the 355 patients enrolled in our study, 21 were removed due to Covid-19 infection, leaving a total of 334 patients in our final analysis. Post-operative complications were found in 37 patients (11.07%). Two patients died after surgery (0.6%). At the end of the study, Covid-19-related adverse outcomes were detected in six patients (1.79%). When comparing the complications of our original sample with the complications that occurred in the pre-covid era, we found no statistically significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the surgical treatment of oncologic patients during the Covid-19 pandemic is safe, as long as the hospital performs surgeries under strict isolation measures and a robust screening method. It is necessary to select Covid-19 free hospitals for this matter in this and future pandemics.

Perioperative management of non-deferrable oncologic surgeries during COVID-19 pandemic in Madrid, Spain. Is it safe? / Manejo perioperatorio de cirugías oncológicas no diferibles durante la pandemia de covid-19 en Madrid, España ¿Es seguro?

INTRODUCTION: Surgical treatment during COVID-19 pandemic is controversial. Currently, most clinical guidelines advise to defer surgical patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, although the supporting data is sparse. We assumed that a COVID-19-free hospital, on the back of strong isolation measures and targeted screening, could reduce complications and enable us to continue treating high-risk patients. METHODS: Prospective study with retrospective analysis of 355 patients who had undergone nondeferrable oncological surgery between March 16th, 2020, and April 14th, 2020, at our institution. The aim of the study was to assess the hospital restructuring and surgical protocols to be able to safely handle non-deferrable surgeries during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We implemented structural changes and an updated surgical-anesthetic protocol in order to isolate COVID-19 patients from other surgical patients. Comprehensive targeted screening for COVID-19 patients was made. PCR tests were requested for suspected COVID-19 patients. We analyzed mortality and complications related to both surgery and COVID-19 during hospital admission and also 15 and 30 days after surgery. We compared it with a sample of similar patients in the pre-pandemic period. RESULTS: Of the 355 patients enrolled in our study, 21 were removed due to COVID-19 infection, leaving a total of 334 patients in our final analysis. Post-operative complications were found in 37 patients (11.07%). Two patients died after surgery (0.6%). At the end of the study, COVID-19-related adverse outcomes were detected in six patients (1.79%). When comparing the complications of our original sample with the complications that occurred in the pre-COVID era, we found no statistically significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the surgical treatment of oncologic patients during the COVID-19 pandemic is safe, as long as the hospital performs surgeries under strict isolation measures and a robust screening method. It is necessary to select COVID-19 free hospitals for this matter in this and future pandemics.

Manejo perioperatorio de cirugías oncológicas no diferibles durante la pandemia de covid-19 en Madrid, España ¿Es seguro? / Perioperative management of non-deferrable oncologic surgeries during COVID-19 pandemic in Madrid, Spain. Is it safe?

Introducción: El tratamiento quirúrgico durante la pandemia de COVID-19 es controvertido. Actualmente, la mayoría de las guías clínicas recomiendan posponer la cirugía a los pacientes durante la pandemia de COVID-19, aunque los datos de apoyo son escasos. Asumimos que un hospital sin COVID-19, apoyado en fuertes medidas de aislamiento y exámenes de detección específicos, podría reducir las complicaciones y nos permitiría continuar tratando a pacientes de alto riesgo. Métodos: Estudio prospectivo con análisis retrospectivo de 355 pacientes sometidos a cirugía oncológica no diferible entre el 16 de marzo de 2020 y el 14 de abril de 2020 en nuestra institución. El objetivo del estudio fue valorar la reestructuración hospitalaria y de los protocolos quirúrgicos para poder manejar con seguridad las cirugías no diferibles durante la primera ola de pandemia por COVID-19. Implementamos cambios estructurales y un protocolo anestésico-quirúrgico actualizado para aislar a los pacientes con COVID-19 de otros pacientes quirúrgicos. Se realizó una evaluación exhaustiva dirigida a detectar pacientes con COVID-19. Se solicitaron pruebas de PCR para pacientes sospechosos de COVID-19. Analizamos la mortalidad y las complicaciones relacionadas tanto con la cirugía como con la COVID-19 durante el ingreso hospitalario y también a los 15 días y al mes de la cirugía. Comparamos nuestros resultados con una muestra de pacientes similar en el periodo pre-pandemia. Resultados: De los 355 pacientes incluidos en nuestro estudio, 21 fueron eliminados debido a la infección por COVID-19, lo que deja un total de 334 pacientes en nuestro análisis final. Se encontraron complicaciones postoperatorias en 37 pacientes (11,07%). Dos pacientes fallecieron tras la cirugía (0,6%).(AU)

Introduction: Surgical treatment during COVID-19 pandemic is controversial. Currently, most clinical guidelines advise to defer surgical patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, although the supporting data is sparse. We assumed that a COVID-19-free hospital, on the back of strong isolation measures and targeted screening, could reduce complications and enable us to continue treating high-risk patients. Methods: Prospective study with retrospective analysis of 355 patients who had undergone nondeferrable oncological surgery between March 16th, 2020, and April 14th, 2020, at our institution. The aim of the study was to assess the hospital restructuring and surgical protocols to be able to safely handle non-deferrable surgeries during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We implemented structural changes and an updated surgical-anesthetic protocol in order to isolate COVID-19 patients from other surgical patients. Comprehensive targeted screening for COVID-19 patients was made. PCR tests were requested for suspected COVID-19 patients. We analyzed mortality and complications related to both surgery and COVID-19 during hospital admission and also 15 and 30 days after surgery. We compared it with a sample of similar patients in the pre-pandemic period. Results: Of the 355 patients enrolled in our study, 21 were removed due to COVID-19 infection, leaving a total of 334 patients in our final analysis. Post-operative complications were found in 37 patients (11.07%). Two patients died after surgery (0.6%). At the end of the study, COVID-19-related adverse outcomes were detected in six patients (1.79%). When comparing the complications of our original sample with the complications that occurred in the pre-COVID era, we found no statistically significant differences.(AU)

Oblitoma en la cirugía ginecoobstétrica: un problema creciente. Reporte de un caso / Oblitoma in obstetric and gynecologic surgery: a growing problem

Resumen ANTECEDENTES: Los oblitomas, u objetos extraños retenidos en el abdomen posterior a una cirugía, son consecuencia de una iatrogenia que causa morbilidad, dificultad diagnóstica, problemas médico-legales, y complicaciones para las pacientes, el médico y la institución hospitalaria. CASO CLINICO: Paciente de 27 años de edad, con un cuerpo extraño retenido en la cavidad abdominal (bulbo de la cánula de Yankauer), olvidado durante una cesárea de urgencia. El diagnóstico y tratamiento fueron expeditos, con reintervención quirúrgica para extraer el cuerpo extraño, sin complicaciones y con evolución satisfactoria de la paciente. CONCLUSIONES: El estudio actual de los oblitomas u objetos extraños retenidos es un problema creciente, con estadísticas en contra, sobre todo asociadas con elevada frecuencia de cesáreas y alta prevalencia de obesidad materna durante el embarazo, esto debe alertar a los ginecoobstetras a conducirse con más cuidado para evitar este tipo de accidentes.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Oblitomas or retained surgical items (RSI) in the abdominal cavity after surgery are cause of iatrogenic medical problems, that origin high morbidity, difficult diagnosis and medical malpractice claims to may lead complications to patients, physicians included to hospital. CLINICAL CASE: We report an exceptional case, in a 27-year-old women, with a bulb of Yankahuer cannula retained in abdominal cavity, Forgotten during an emergency cesarean section. The diagnosis and management was realized with opportunity, avoiding complications. CONCLUSION: Actually, the study of oblitoma or foreign objects retained that's considered a growing problem, with statistics against it, mainly associated with high frequency of cesarean sections and high prevalence of maternal obesity during pregnancy. In fact, that situation place the gynecologists and obstetricians at a latent risk for this event. It is important to know the predisposing factors for its prevention and to implement institutional programs to reduce complications.

Mejora de la calidad del proceso quirúrgico en el Servicio de Cirugía General en el Hospital Aeronáutico Central mediante la realización de un AMFE / Improvement of the quality of the surgical process in the General Surgery Service at the Hospital Aeronáutico Central by means of an AMFE

Introducción: Se deben identificar y analizar los fallos existentes en el sistema para detectar los errores cometidos y aprender de ellos buscando así las causas que los originan y rediseñando los procesos en función de los resultados del análisis. El Análisis Modal de Fallos y Efectos (AMFE) es un estudio prospectivo de los riesgos y tiene por objetivo analizar áreas y servicios de alto riesgo con el fin de detectar dónde se pueden producir incidentes y establecer sistemas para evitar que ocurran. Objetivos: Optimizar la calidad del proceso quirúrgico en el Servicio de Cirugía General del Hospital Aeronáutico Central mediante la realización de un AMFE. Identificar y eliminar precozmente los fallos potenciales del proceso quirúrgico y desarrollar un Plan de Mejora de la Calidad del mismo.Material y Método: Estudio prospectivo de tipo AMFE realizado en el Servicio de Cirugía General del Hospital Aeronáutico Central durante el período enero -abril de 2016. Resultados: Se identificaron como posibles fallos críticos con mayor índice probabilístico de riesgo a: caída del paciente de la mesa-camilla (IPR 423), falta de CO2 (IPR 280), reacción alérgica medicamentosa (IPR 160), paso incorrecto de camilla-mesa, mesa-camilla (IPR 90), quemaduras por electrobisturí (IPR 80), no controlar / cuantificar diuresis (IPR 80), no iniciar tolerancia digestiva en su debido momento (IPR 72) y falta de materiales laparoscópicos, protésicos o materiales inadecuados (IPR 40).Conclusiones: Los fallos en los procesos ocurren en todos los niveles de la organización, y su impacto es mayor cuanto más tardía es su detección. La aplicación de esta metodología fue de gran utilidad para la confección de un "Plan de mejora" con el fin de lograr

Introduction: Should be identified and analyzed the faults in the system to detect the commited mistakes and learn from them, looking for de causes that originate them and redesigning the processes in function of the analysis results. The Failure Mode and Effects Analys is (FMEA) is a prospective study about the risks and its objective is to analyze high risk areas and services with the porpouse of dectecting where the failures can be made and establish systems to avoid them. Objectives: Optimize the quality of surgical process in the General Surgery Department from Hospital Aeronáutico Central through an FMEA. Identify and eliminate in an early time the potential faults of the surgical process and develop a Quality Improvement Plan. Material and method: A FMEA prospective study carried out in the General Surgery Department from Hospital Aeronáutico Central during January-April 2017. Results: They were identified as possible critical failures with greater probabilistic index: patient ́s fall from table-stretcher (IPR 423), lack of CO2 (IPR 280), allergic drug reaction (IPR 160), wrong tranfer table-stretcher, stretcher-table (IPR 90), electrocautery burn (IPR 80), not controlling / quantifying diuresis (IPR 80), do not start digestive tolerance in due time (IPR 72) and lack of laparoscopic, prosthetic materials, or inadequate materials. Conclusions: The failures in the processes occur at all organization levels, and its repercussion is bigger the later its detection. The application of this methodology was of great utility for an "improvement plan" confection, in order to achieve a proper quality culture in the surgical process in our department.

Análisis de las quejas derivadas de las prácticas quirúrgicas / Complaint analysis derived from surgical practice

Se analizan los asuntos presentados ante la Comisión Nacional de Arbitraje Médico desde junio de 1996 hasta diciembre de 2007, para difundir su magnitud e identificar los problemas de seguridad en la atención médica. De 182 407 asuntos, 87 % lo resolvió el Área de Orientación y Gestión. Las restantes 18 443 quejas fueron derivadas a la Dirección de Conciliación; de ellas, en 48 % se logró la conciliación entre promoventes y médicos y en 31 % esto no fue factible; 3 % se trató de quejas irresolubles. La mayor frecuencia de quejas se registró en el Distrito Federal y Estado de México, principalmente correspondientes a instituciones de seguridad social y hospitales privados. Entre las nueve especialidades involucradas con mayor frecuencia, existieron seis quirúrgicas. Se identificó mala práctica en 25 % de los casos. Las principales pretensiones de los promoventes de las quejas fueron reintegro de los gastos erogados por atención médica en 51 % de los casos e indemnización en 40 %; en estos últimos el monto promedio de lo pagado por caso fue 4.6 veces mayor. El conocimiento de las quejas médicas permite investigar sus causas y generar acciones preventivas y correctivas, para su abatimiento. Se propone que la Academia Mexicana de Cirugía, por su liderazgo académico y docente, asuma la vanguardia en la difusión y promoción del plan “Las prácticas quirúrgicas seguras salvan vidas”, de la Organización Mundial de la Salud, y la implantación en nuestro país de la “Lista de verificación de la seguridad quirúrgica”.

This study reports on the analysis of medical complaints presented to the National Commission on Medical Arbitration (Comisión Nacional de Arbitraje Médico, CONAMED) between June 1996 and December 2007 to determine its magnitude and to identify the causes of safety problems in medical care. Out of 182,407 complaints presented to CONAMED, 87% were resolved by the Office of Orientation and Management. The remaining 18,443 complaints were presented to the Council Directorate. Of those cases, 48% were resolved by an agreement between the complainants and the physicians, 31% were not resolved by this method, and 3% were irresolute complaints. The highest frequency of complaints was registered in the Federal District (Distrito Federal) and the State of México (Estado de México), mainly corresponding to social security institutions and private hospitals. Among the nine most frequently involved specialties, six were surgical specialties. Malpractice was identified in 25% of all cases. The principal demands of those making complaints were the refunding of expenses in patient medical care (51%) and indemnification (40%) and, in those, the average amount of payments was 4.6 times greater. Due to the incidence of medical complaints, it was reasonable to investigate the causes and to take preventive and corrective actions required for its decrease. It was proposed to the Mexican Academy of Surgery that this organization should use their educational leadership and assume the vanguard in the dissemination and promotion of the WHO plan "Safe Surgery Saves Lives" and the implementation in Mexico of the "Surgical Safety Checklist."