SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on the activity and professionals of a General Surgery and Digestive Surgery Service in a tertiary hospital. / Impacto de la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2 sobre la actividad y profesionales de un Servicio de Cirugía General y del Aparato Digestivo en un hospital terciario.

INTRODUCTION: The rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection has led to a radical reorganization of healthcare resources. Surgical Departments need to adapt to this change. METHODS: We performed a prospective descriptive observational study of the incidence of COVID-19 in patients and surgeons of a General Surgical Department in a high prevalence area, between the 1st and 31st of March 2020. RESULTS: Patients: The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in elective surgery patients was 7% (mean age 59.5 years). All survived. Of 36 patients who underwent emergency surgery, two of them were SARS-CoV-2 positive and one was clinically highly suspicious of COVID-19 (11.1%). All three patients died of respiratory failure (mean age 81 years). Surgeons: There were a total of 12 confirmed SARS-CoV-2+ cases among the surgical department staff (24.4%) (8 out of 34 consultants and 4 out of 15 residents). Healthcare activity: The average number of daily emergency surgical interventions declined from 3.6 in February to 1.16 in March. 42% of the patients who underwent emergency surgery had peritonitis upon presentation. CONCLUSIONS: The fast pace of COVID-19 pandemia should alert surgical departments of the need of adopting early measures to ensure the safety of patients and staff.

Negative-Pressure Therapy to Reduce the Risk of Wound Infection Following Diverting Loop Ileostomy Reversal: An Initial Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if the application of a negative-pressure therapy system (Prevena Incision Management System, Kinetics Concepts Inc, [KCI] an Acelity Company, San Antonio, Texas) on ileostomy-closure surgical wounds would reduce surgical site infections (SSIs) in comparison with conventional closure and dressing. DESIGN: Prospective interventional pilot study. SETTING: La Paz University Hospital, tertiary care academic hospital in Madrid, Spain. PATIENTS: The Prevena device was applied on the wounds of 17 consecutive patients undergoing ileostomy reversal. Control subjects were 43 patients undergoing the same procedure, in which conventional dressings were used for the wound. INTERVENTION: The device was applied on the wound immediately after surgery (under sterile conditions) and maintained for 5 to 7 days. Patients were evaluated daily, and on the seventh postoperative day, the device was removed and wounds carefully inspected. Another evaluation was performed a month after the surgical intervention in the outpatient clinic. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary end point of the study was the detection of SSI (defined according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definitions). Other intervention-related complications were also registered. MAIN RESULTS: There were no significant differences in demographic variables between groups. In the control group, 9 patients (21%) presented SSI, with statistical significance (P < .038) when compared with the intervention group (0%). There were no complications associated with the application of the Prevena device. Other complications (for example, ileus or obstruction) occurred in 30% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The negative-pressure Prevena System was safe and easy to use and may prevent SSIs in dirty wounds, such as those from ileostomy closure.

Increased postoperative complications after protective ileostomy closure delay: An institutional study.

AIM: To study the morbidity and complications associated to ileostomy reversal in colorectal surgery patients, and if these are related to the time of closure. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 93 patients, who had undergone elective ileostomy closure between 2009 and 2013 was performed. Demographic, clinical and surgical variables were reviewed for analysis. All complications were recorded, and classified according to the Clavien-Dindo Classification. Statistical univariate and multivariate analysis was performed, setting a P value of 0.05 for significance. RESULTS: The patients had a mean age of 60.3 years, 58% male. The main procedure for ileostomy creation was rectal cancer (56%), and 37% had received preoperative chemo-radiotherapy. The average delay from creation to closure of the ileostomy was 10.3 mo. Postoperative complications occurred in 40% of the patients, with 1% mortality. The most frequent were ileus (13%) and wound infection (13%). Pseudomembranous colitis appeared in 4%. Increased postoperative complications were associated with delay in ileostomy closure (P = 0.041). Male patients had more complications (P = 0.042), mainly wound infections (P = 0.007). Pseudomembranous colitis was also associated with the delay in ileostomy closure (P = 0.003). End-to-end intestinal anastomosis without resection was significantly associated with postoperative ileus (P = 0.037). CONCLUSION: Although closure of a protective ileostomy is a fairly common surgical procedure, it has a high rate of complications, and this must be taken into account when the indication is made. The delay in stoma closure can increase the rate of complications in general, and specifically wound infections and colitis.