[Surgical emergencies during the COVID-19 pandemic]. / Chirurgische Notfälle während der COVID-19-Pandemie.

BACKGROUND: Within a few months coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spread around the world. Some studies showed a significant reduction in medical consultations. Due to new discussions about restrictions in the case of rising COVID-19 case numbers, this study investigated the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical emergencies at the Rostock University Medical Center and compared the results to the years before. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The aim of the study was to compare the case numbers of the surgical emergency department of the Rostock University Medical Center from the period 2020 and 2021 to the years before (2018, 2019). Furthermore, the consequences of COVID-19 case numbers for the case numbers of the surgical emergency department were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 74,936 patient cases could be included in this study. The results showed a significant reduction of surgical emergencies during the COVID-19 pandemic (p < 0.001). There was a significant negative correlation with the COVID-19 case numbers (p < 0.001). The restrictions of the government showed a direct influence on COVID-19 case numbers and emergency visits. CONCLUSION: The results showed a correlation of COVID-19 case numbers with the case numbers of the surgical emergency department. Due to difficult workforce planning during a pandemic, this can be important information for workforce management in similar future events.

Evaluation of patient specific care needs during treatment for head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Tumorous diseases of the head and neck region annually occur in more than 550.000 cases worldwide. Little is known about patient specific care needs and potential relationships between non-fulfillment of those following therapeutic and especially surgical treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC). OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate potential correlations between patient specific care needs, regarding physiological rehabilitation, family/social support, economic needs, and their impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: A total of 1359 patients were included in this retrospective analysis. Data derived from the exploratory international multicenter rehabilitation study of the German-Austrian-Swiss Cooperative Group on Tumors of the Maxillofacial Region (DÖSAK), including 43 oral and maxillofacial departments in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland using the Bochum patient questionnaire on rehabilitation and a questionnaire on tumor and treatment related data. RESULTS: Results showed a significant correlation of a patient's social bonds and depression, coping with depression, and anxiety. Patients' needs for speech therapy, physiotherapy or respiratory training were hardly ever met and patients had to compensate for financial losses during hospitalization for acute treatment. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this study describes social, physical, and socio-economic care needs. A multidisciplinary approach managing cancer and treatment related side effects is necessary, as well as enhanced awareness of care needs of practitioners during early recovery after surgery.

Sinonasal outcome after endoscopic mononostril transsphenoidal surgery: A single center cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: The endoscopic endonasal approach has been well established for skull base surgery. However, there are only few studies pointing out nasal complaints after surgery. In this study, the authors evaluated postoperative nasal complaints and complications after mononostril endoscopic procedures. METHODS: All patients operated on parasellar and sellar pathologies at our department via an endoscopic mononostril transnasal transsphenoidal approach from January 2011 to May 2015 were analyzed. To assess specific postoperative nasal pathological conditions and complaints, a questionnaire was established. Applicable data of 79 patients with additional ENT follow-up could be included. Endpoints were the quantitative evaluation of complications and correlation of these data. RESULTS: There was no vascular injury or worsening of visual function. Two patients had persisting CSF fistula and one of them meningitis. There was a significant decrease of nasal complaints during follow up after 2 years (p < 0.001). Further surgical treatment by ENT physician was necessary in 11.4%. Resurgery significantly increased the risk of postsurgical complaints (p < 0.005). The use of a tamponade significantly reduced the risk of postsurgical reduced nasal airflow (p = 0.026) and sinusitis (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic endonasal procedures to skull base lesions achieve high radicality with low complication rates. However, they induce temporary and permanent nasal complaints and complications. Thereby, resurgeries increase the risk of nasal complaints and the use of nasal tamponades might increase the sinonasal outcome. Further prospective studies are necessary to objectify the evaluation of postsurgical nasal complications.

Radiotherapy of painful heel spur with two fractionation regimens : Results of a randomized multicenter trial after 48 weeks' follow-up.

BACKGROUND: In this randomized multicenter trial, we compared the effect of a lower single dose of 0.5 Gy vs. a standard single dose of 1 Gy concerning pain relief and quality of life, while maintaining a uniform total dose of 6 Gy. On the basis of laboratory observations, the lower single dose would be expected to be more effective. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 127 patients suffering from painful heel spur were randomized: Patients in the standard group were treated with single fractions of 6 × 1 Gy twice a week, while the experimental group was treated with single fractions of 12 × 0.5 Gy three times a week. Patients who did not show satisfactory pain relief after 12 weeks were offered re-irradiation with the standard dose. The study's primary endpoints were pain relief and quality of life. Therapy results were evaluated and compared based on follow-up examinations after 12 and 48 weeks. RESULTS: The data of 117 patients could be evaluated. There was no significant difference between the groups concerning the results of a visual analogue scale (VAS), Calcaneodynia Score (CS), and the somatic scale of the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey(SF-12). Patients undergoing re-irradiation showed a significant benefit concerning pain relief. Their total outcome was comparable to patients showing a good response from the beginning. No relevant acute or chronic side effects were recorded. CONCLUSION: Both patient groups showed good results concerning pain relief. A fractionation schedule of 12 × 0.5 Gy was not superior to the current standard dose of 6 × 1 Gy. Further trials are necessary to explore the best fractionation schedule.

Randomized multicenter follow-up trial on the effect of radiotherapy on painful heel spur (plantar fasciitis) comparing two fractionation schedules with uniform total dose: first results after three months' follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Our first trial on radiotherapy for painful heel spur published in 2012 comparing the analgesic effect of a standard dose (6 × 1.0 Gy within three weeks) to that of a very low one (6 × 0.1 Gy within three weeks) resulted in a highly significant superiority of the standard dose arm. In the meantime, experimental data have shown that lower single doses in the range of 0.5 - 0.7 Gy might be even more effective than the current standard dose of 1.0 Gy. Therefore, we conducted a second trial comparing the analgesic effect of standard single doses of 1.0 Gy to that of low single doses of 0.5 Gy using uniform total doses of 6 Gy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty-seven patients were randomized to receive radiation therapy either with a total dose of 6.0 Gy applied in 6 fractions of 1.0 Gy twice weekly (standard dose) or with the same total dose applied in 12 fractions of 0.5 Gy three times weekly (experimental dose). In all patients lateral opposing 6MV photon beams were used. The results were measured using Visual analogue scale (VAS), Calcaneodynia score (CS) and SF-12 health survey. The first phase of this trial ended after a three months' follow-up; it will be continued up to 48 weeks. RESULTS: Nine patients had to be excluded after randomization either due to the withdrawal of informed consent to radiotherapy by the patients or radiotherapy with an incorrect dosage. The groups were comparable concerning biographical and disease data. The mean calcaneodynia score (CS) was higher in the experimental group (p = 0.002). After three months' follow-up, we saw a very favorable pain relief in both arms (decline of VAS score: standard arm 42 points, experimental arm 44 points (n.s.), but we did not notice any statistically significant difference between the arms neither concerning the pain parameters nor the quality of life parameters. No relevant acute side effects were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Favorable laboratory results could not be translated into an enhanced pain relief in our patients. This trial was terminated after the interim analysis (127 patients randomized). Further trials will be necessary to explore the best fractionation schedule. This trial has been approved by the expert panel of the DEGRO as well as by the Ethics committee of the Saarland Physicians' chamber. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current trial registration at German Clinical Trials Register with the number DRKS00004458.

Randomized multicenter follow-up trial on the effect of radiotherapy for plantar fasciitis (painful heels spur) depending on dose and fractionation - a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: An actual clinical trial showed the effect of low dose radiotherapy in painful heel spur (plantar fasciitis) with single doses of 1.0 Gy and total doses of 6.0 Gy applied twice weekly. Furthermore, a lot of animal experimental and in vitro data reveals the effect of lower single doses of 0.5 Gy which may be superior in order to ease pain and reduce inflammation in patients with painful heel spur. Our goal is therefore to transfer this experimentally found effect into a randomized multicenter trial. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS: This was a controlled, prospective, two-arm phase III-multicenter trial. The standard arm consisted of single fractions of 1.0 Gy applied two times a week, for a total dose of 6.0 Gy (total therapy time: 3 weeks). The experimental arm consisted of single fractions of 0.5 Gy applied 3 times a week, for a total dose of 6.0 Gy (total therapy time: 4 weeks). Following a statistical power calculation, there were 120 patients for each investigation arm. The main inclusion criteria were: age > = 40 years, clinical and radiologically diagnosed painful heel spur (plantar fasciitis), and current symptoms for at least 6 months. The main exclusion criteria were: former local trauma, surgery or radiotherapy of the heel; pregnant or breastfeeding women; and a pre-existing severe psychiatric or psychosomatic disorder. METHODS: After approving a written informed consent the patients are randomized by a statistician into one of the trial arms. After radiotherapy, the patients are seen after six weeks, after twelve weeks and then every twelve weeks up to 48 weeks. Additionally, they receive a questionnaire every six weeks after the follow-up examinations up to 48 weeks. The effect is measured using the visual analogue scale of pain (VAS), the calcaneodynia score according to Rowe and the SF-12 score. The primary endpoint is the pain relief three months after therapy. Patients of both therapy arms with an insufficient result are offered a second radiotherapy series applying the standard dose (equally in both arms). This trial protocol has been approved by the expert panel of the DEGRO as well as by the Ethics committee of the Saarland Physicians' chamber. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current trial registration at German Clinical Trials Register with the number DRKS00004458.