Search

Malnutrition in cancer patients in both prevalence and degree depends primarily on tumor stage and site. Preoperative malnutrition in surgical patients is a frequent problem and is associated with prolonged hospital stay, a higher rate of postoperative complications, higher re-admission rates, and a higher incidence of postoperative death. Given the focus on the cancer and its cure, nutrition is often neglected or under-evaluated, and this despite the availability of international guidelines for nutritional care in cancer patients and the evidence that nutritional deterioration negatively affects survival. Inadequate nutritional support for cancer patients should be considered ethically unacceptable; prompt nutritional support must be guaranteed to all cancer patients, as it can have many clinical and economic advantages. Patients undergoing multimodal oncological care are at particular risk of progressive nutritional decline, and it is essential to minimize the nutritional/metabolic impact of oncological treatments and to manage each surgical episode within the context of an enhanced recovery pathway. In Europe, enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) and routine nutritional assessment are only partially implemented because of insufficient awareness among health professionals of nutritional problems, a lack of structured collaboration between surgeons and clinical nutrition specialists, old dogmas, and the absence of dedicated resources. Collaboration between opinion leaders dedicated to ERAS from both the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO) and the ERAS Society was born with the aim of promoting nutritional assessment and perioperative nutrition with and without an enhanced recovery program. The goal will be to improve awareness in the surgical oncology community and at institutional level to modify current clinical practice and identify optimal treatment options. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd, BASO similar to The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.

Summary Introduction The term variations of sex development subsumes a large number of congenital conditions including chromosomal mosaics and variations of chromosomal, gonadal, and phenotypic sex. A situation of this nature may cause severe distress to both, parents and affected persons. One of the reasons for this is the binary form of gender classification in the society. In the past, because of a fear of possible stigmatization and an inability to cope with complex situations, it has been medical policy and practice for newborns to undergo early, mostly ‘feminizing’ elective surgery with the aim of achieving an outer genital appearance that is unambiguously male or female. Protests by advocacy groups for the most part as well as the results of outcome studies have shown that the development of affected persons may be very different to what has been expected and often does not result in the intended clear female or male gender identity as had been intended. It, therefore, seemed a matter of urgency to implement this new awareness as well as the ethical and personal human rights perspectives in the recommendations for the medical and psychosocial management of diverse sex development (DSD) in the future. Study design In 2012, an interdisciplinary group of German academics engaged in the field of DSD decided to work on a consensus paper for this topic. It involved the participation of all faculties and non-scientific groups dealing with DSD, in particular advocacy and service-user groups. In a structured consensus, process recommendations were developed based on scientific literature as well as personal experiences of clinicians and affected individuals. Results Finally, 37 recommendations were agreed on. The strength of consensus is reflected in the degree of agreement as expressed in percentages. Conclusion The introduction of the consensus paper reflects on the emerging paradigm shift and the necessity for a more open view of gender within society. The paper is intended to aid the performance of appropriate diagnostics in DSD-affected newborns and especially to help parents and affected persons cope with the biological and social consequences of DSD. With regard to medical or surgical therapy, it gives information about the most recent treatment trends.

Contains fulltext : 96188.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) An increasing number of patients suffering from cardiovascular disease, especially coronary artery disease (CAD), are treated with aspirin and/or clopidogrel for the prevention of major adverse events. Unfortunately, there are no specific, widely accepted recommendations for the perioperative management of patients receiving antiplatelet therapy. Therefore, members of the Perioperative Haemostasis Group of the Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Research (GTH), the Perioperative Coagulation Group of the Austrian Society for Anesthesiology, Reanimation and Intensive Care (OGARI) and the Working Group Thrombosis of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) have created this consensus position paper to provide clear recommendations on the perioperative use of anti-platelet agents (specifically with semi-urgent and urgent surgery), strongly supporting a multidisciplinary approach to optimize the treatment of individual patients with coronary artery disease who need major cardiac and non-cardiac surgery. With planned surgery, drug eluting stents (DES) should not be used unless surgery can be delayed for >/=12 months after DES implantation. If surgery cannot be delayed, surgical revascularisation, bare-metal stents or pure balloon angioplasty should be considered. During ongoing antiplatelet therapy, elective surgery should be delayed for the recommended duration of treatment. In patients with semi-urgent surgery, the decision to prematurely stop one or both antiplatelet agents (at least 5 days pre-operatively) has to be taken after multidisciplinary consultation, evaluating the individual thrombotic and bleeding risk. Urgently needed surgery has to take place under full antiplatelet therapy despite the increased bleeding risk. A multidisciplinary approach for optimal antithrombotic and haemostatic patient management is thus mandatory. 01 mei 2011

Key summary points Aim To assess the feasibility of conducting acute sarcopenia research in complex populations of hospitalised older adults. Findings Recruitment rates were higher in elective surgery patients compared to emergency surgery or medical patients. Drop-out rates were not affected by age or frailty of participants. Completion rates of ultrasound quadriceps were higher than other procedures. Message Acute sarcopenia research represents unique challenges but is feasible provided protocol adaptations are incorporated. Assessment of muscle quantity and quality should be included in early-stage clinical research studies to provide mechanistic insights underpinning interventions, especially where physical performance testing may not be possible or reliable., Purpose To assess feasibility of conducting acute sarcopenia research in complex populations of hospitalised older adults. Methods Patients ≥ 70 years old were recruited to three cohorts: elective colorectal surgery, emergency (abdominal) surgery, medical patients with infections. Participants were recruited to the elective cohort in preoperative assessment clinic, and acutely admitted participants from surgical and medical wards at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham. Serial measures of muscle quantity (ultrasound quadriceps, bioelectrical impedance analysis), muscle function (hand grip strength, physical performance), and questionnaires (mini-nutritional assessment, physical function) were performed at baseline, within 7 (± 2) days of admission/surgery, and 13 (± 1) weeks post-admission/surgery. Feasibility outcomes were assessed across timepoints including recruitment and drop-out rates, and procedure completion rates. Results Eighty-one participants were recruited (mean age 79, 38.3% females). Recruitment rates were higher in elective (75%, 24/32) compared to emergency surgery (37.2%, 16/43), and medical participants (45.1%, 41/91; p = 0.003). Drop-out rates varied from 8.3 to 19.5% at 7 days, and 12.5–43.9% at 13 weeks. Age and gender did not differ between patients assessed for eligibility, approached, or recruited. Completion rates were highest for ultrasound quadriceps (98.8%, 80/81 across all groups at baseline). Gait speed completion rates were lower in medical (70.7%, 29/41) compared to elective participants (100%, 24/24) at baseline. Conclusion Higher participation refusal and drop-out rates should be expected for research involving recruitment of participants from the acute setting. Assessment of muscle quantity/quality through ultrasound is recommended in early-stage trials in the acute setting, where completion rates of physical performance testing are expected to be lower.

Objective: The aim of the study was to design an objective, transparent, pragmatic, and flexible workflow to assist with patient selection during the initial phase of return to elective orthopedic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic with the main purpose of enhancing patient safety. Methods: A multidisciplinary working group was formed consisting of representatives for orthopedics, epidemiology, ethics, infectious diseases, cardiovascular diseases, and intensive care medicine. Preparation for up- coming meetings consisted of reading up on literature and testing of pro- posed methodologies on our own waiting lists. Results: A workflow based on 3 domains, that is, required resources, pa- tient fitness, and time sensitivity of the procedure, was considered most useful. All domains function as standalones, in a specific order, and no sum score is used. The domain of required resources demands input from the surgical team, results in a categorical (yes or no) outcome, and gener- ates a list of potential patients who can be scheduled for surgery under these particular circumstances. The (weighted) items for the domain of pa- tient fitness are the same for every patient, are scored on a numerical scale, but are likely to change during the pandemic as more data become available. Time sensitivity of the procedure is again scored on a numerical scale and becomes increasingly important when returning to elective surgery proves to be acceptably safe. After patient selection, an augmented informed con- sent, screening, and testing according to local guidelines will take place. Conclusions: A workflow is proposed for patient selection aiming for the safest possible return to elective orthopedic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Key Words: elective surgery, risk stratification, patient safety, multidisciplinary, statement paper, orthopedic surgery, COVID-19, pandemic, workflow ispartof: Journal Of Patient Safety vol:16 issue:4 pages:e292-e298 ispartof: location:United States status: Published online

Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the acceptability of 14 days of self-quarantine and the positivity rate of pre-operative severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) screening for patients undergoing elective orthopaedic surgery. Methods The self-quarantine programme and pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 PCR screening were initiated for patients who were scheduled for admission later than 7 May 2020 for elective orthopaedic surgery on admission. On the day of admission, the patients declared compliance with self-quarantine regulations. The admission was refused in cases of non-compliance. After admission, the patients underwent SARS-CoV-2 PCR screening. If PCR results were negative, isolation was terminated. If PCR results were positive, the surgery was postponed. If the patients had symptoms suspicious of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) after surgery, the PCR test was repeated. Results Overall, 308 patients (age: 63.2 ± 18.8 years, 197 female and 111 male) were scheduled for elective orthopaedic surgery. Two patients did not agree with the requirements of self-quarantine, and two other procedures were cancelled. No non-compliance was reported; thus, the completion rate of the self-quarantine programme was 304/308 (98.7%). Finally, 304 patients underwent PCR testing, and there were no positive PCR results. After cancellations of four operations due to reasons other than COVID-19, 300 surgical procedures were performed. No patients developed COVID-19 during hospitalisation. Conclusions Although this system is based on trusting the good behaviour of patients, accompanied by PCR screening, we believe that the results showed the efficacy of the system in safely performing orthopaedic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of general anesthesia on microvascular reactivity and tissue oxygen saturation (StO2) using near-infrared spectroscopy in conjunction with vascular occlusion tests (VOT). Age-related changes of microvascular reactivity, that is, the capacity of capillary recruitment, were examined. Methods: This prospective observational study was performed on 60 patients without comorbidities who underwent elective surgery under general anesthesia. Baseline StO2 on thenar eminence, hemodynamics, and laboratory profile were monitored before (T0) and 30 min after general anesthesia (T1). During VOT, occlusion slope representing oxygen consumption of muscle and recovery slope representing microvascular reactivity were also collected at T0 and T1. Results: Baseline StO2 and minimum / maximum StO2 during VOT increased under general anesthesia. Occlusion slope decreased while the recovery slope increased under general anesthesia. To observe aging effect, Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed and age less than 65 years old showed a fair performance in predicting the increase of microvascular reactivity after the induction of anesthesia (AUC 0.733, 95% CI 0.594-0.845, P= 0.003). For age-related analyses, 27 patients of younger group (< 65 years) and 26 patients of older group (≥ 65 years) were divided. Recovery slope significantly increased under general anesthesia in younger group (2.44 [1.91-2.81] % ∙ sec-1 at T0 and 3.59 [2.58-3.51] % ∙ sec-1 at T1, P

Purpose The primary aim of our study was to investigate elective orthopaedic care during the first wave government-imposed COVID-19 lockdown and at four weeks and 21 weeks after resuming elective care. The secondary aim of our study was to evaluate the implementation of the European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy (ESSKA) COVID-19 Guidelines and Recommendations for Resuming Elective Surgery in the clinical practice of Belgian knee surgeons. Methods We sent three anonymous online surveys to 102 Belgian Knee Society members (BKS) at times mentioned above. Addressed topics were: (1) participant demographics, (2) elective surgeries, (3) outpatient visits, (4) ESSKA Guidelines, (5) patient and surgeon safety. Results During the COVID-19 lockdown, there was a decrease of 97% in elective knee surgeries and 91% in outpatient visits. At four and 21 weeks after resuming elective care, volumes were respectively 67% and 89% for elective surgeries and 81% and 91% for outpatient visits. Regarding ESSKA guidelines, 91% of surgeons had no COVID-19 testing prior to resuming elective care. Ninety-two per cent reported preoperative ( Conclusion Our study shows that elective surgeries and outpatient visits were almost completely interrupted during the COVID-19 lockdown and were still below normal at four and 21 weeks after resuming elective care. Regarding ESSKA COVID-19 guidelines, our study observes good compliance in preoperative patient COVID-19 testing, but lower compliance for preoperative health care personnel testing, patient selection, use of PPE, and locoregional anaesthesia. Level of Evidence V

Aims The purpose of the present study is to analyse clinical data of a series of cases who developed nosocomial infection with SARS-CoV-2 in an orthopaedic and traumatology department. Patients and methods In this non-interventional retrospective study, carried out at a tertiary hospital within the Spanish National Health System, all adult patients who were admitted in the Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology Department between March 9th and May 4th, 2020, were included. Clinical, biological and radiological data, as well as mortality rates, were collected from hospital medical records. Results A total of 293 periods of hospitalization were analysed in 288 patients. Mean age was 66.1 years old and 57.3% were females. Nineteen patients (6.48%) met the inclusion criteria to be categorized as a nosocomial infection with SARS-CoV-2. In a comparison between patients with and without nosocomial infection, age, mortality and hospital length of stay were statistically significant (p

Purpose In order to reduce viral spread, elective surgery was cancelled in most US hospitals for an extended period during the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to estimate national hospital reimbursement and net income losses due to elective orthopaedic surgery cancellation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) and the Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample (NASS) were used to identify all elective orthopaedic and musculoskeletal (MSK) surgery performed in the inpatient setting and in hospital owned outpatient surgery departments throughout the USA. Total cost, reimbursement, and net income were estimated for all elective orthopaedic surgery and were compared with elective operations from other specialties. Results Elective MSK surgery accounted for $65.6–$71.1 billion in reimbursement and $15.6–$21.1 billion in net income per year to the US hospital system, equivalent to $5.5–$5.9 billion in reimbursement and $1.3–$1.8 billion in net income per month. When compared with elective surgery from all other specialties, elective MSK surgery accounted for 39% of hospital reimbursement and 35% of hospital net income. Compared with all hospital encounters for all specialties, elective MSK surgery accounted for 13% of reimbursement and 23% of net income. Estimated hospital losses from cancellation of elective MSK surgery during 8 weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic were $10.9–$11.9 billion in reimbursement and $2.6–3.5 billion in net income. Conclusion Cancellation of elective MSK surgery for 8 weeks during the COVID-19 pandemic has substantial economic implications on the US hospital system.

Background Bispectral index (BIS) has been in practice as an objective tool to measure the depth of conscious sedation. The data on adequate levels for awake fiberoptic nasotracheal intubation (AFNI) is however scarce. We aimed to obtain an optimal level of BIS required for achieving the adequate conscious sedation in AFNI procedure. Methods In a prospective, observational, outcome assessor blinded cohort trial, 94 consecutive patients with anticipated difficult intubation and undergoing AFNI for any elective surgery were enrolled. The topical anesthesia and sedation were induced with lidocaine and dexmedetomidine, while keeping the patient awake. The sedation levels were targeted to BIS ≤90 and Ramsay sedation score (RSS)≥2 to attempt intubation. Propofol bolus were administered if patients get agitated. The primary outcome was “Stable BIS”, the lowest BIS at which intubation could be feasibly performed. A receiver operator characteristic curve, Youden index, and correlation analysis were used. Results The optimal criterion for BIS was obtained as ≤86 (AUC: 0.80, sensitivity 88.30%, specificity 61.45%, Youden index 49.74). The stable BIS ranged from 80 to 88, while RSS varied from 1 to 3. The BIS and RSS correlated significantly (r: 0.83). The stable BIS was independent of any baseline characteristics. Six patients had transient untoward events, none requiring any intervention. Conclusion BIS serves as an effective objective tool for titrating the depth of conscious sedation. We advocate a BIS range of 80–86 for feasibly performing the AFNI procedure.

Purpose The COVID-19 pandemic is importantly affecting the orthopaedic practice all over the world with Northern Italy being the first European area that faced the worst scenario. In this study, the changes in clinical practice occurred in an orthopaedic center in Milan are described. Methods Number and type of admissions, outpatients cancelled and preserved, emergency room, and intensive care unit activities have been analyzed in the timeframe of seven weeks since the beginning of the pandemic (from February 24th to April 10th) and compared with the same period in 2019. Results The planned surgical admissions declined from 2172 in 2019 to 664 in 2020 (69.42%, p

Background After its initial description in China, Covid-19 is hitting nations across the world, with Spain as the third country in number of deaths, after the USA and Italy. Similarly to what is happening in other countries, an important reduction in available operating rooms is affecting our departments. In this study, we aim to know how Covid-19 pandemic is affecting the delivery of plastic surgery services in Spain. Methods A questionnaire addressing some of our concerns about how the Coronavirus crisis might severelyimpact our specialty has been sent to the heads of the divisions of plastic surgery of several hospitals across Spain. Results A total of 12 plastic surgery departments from different hospitals across the country agreed to participate in the survey. Most plastic surgery teams will need to maintain 50–80% of their staff in order to be able to offer emergency and undelayable oncological procedures. The total amount of procedures currently being performed ranged from 0 to 44% of the figures before the coronavirus outbreak, except for one department, with elective surgery mainly affected. Microsurgical cases have been massively discontinued during this crisis. Conclusions Plastic surgery delivery in the Spanish Health System is being severely impacted as a collateral damage from this pandemic. Most of the elective surgery is currently stopped. Our departments seem to be vulnerable regarding their capacity to keep offering emergency care. Level of evidence: not ratable (multi-center survey)

The current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has revolutionized global healthcare in an unprecedented way and with unimaginable repercussions. Resource reallocation, socioeconomic confinement and reorganization of production activities are current challenges being faced both at the national and international levels, in a frame of uncertainty and fear. Hospitals have been restructured to provide the best care to COVID-19 patients while adopting preventive strategies not to spread the infection among healthcare providers and patients affected by other diseases. As a consequence, the concept of urgency and indications for elective treatments have been profoundly reshaped. In addition, several providers have been recruited in COVID-19 departments despite their original occupation, resulting in a profound rearrangement of both inpatient and outpatient care. Orthopaedic daily practice has been significantly affected by the pandemic. Surgical indications have been reformulated, with elective cases being promptly postponed and urgent interventions requiring exceptional attention, especially in suspected or COVID-19+ patients. This has made a strong impact on inpatient management, with the need of a dedicated staff, patient isolation and restrictive visiting hour policies. On the other hand, outpatient visits have been limited to reduce contacts between patients and the hospital personnel, with considerable consequences on post-operative quality of care and the human side of medical practice.In this review, we aim to analyze the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the orthopaedic practice. Particular attention will be dedicated to opportune surgical indication, perioperative care and safe management of both inpatients and outpatients, also considering repercussions of the pandemic on resident education and ethical implications.

Purpose In December 2019, the COVID‐19 pandemic started in China and spread around the World. Operations were postponed in most surgical clinics to reduce the risk of contamination and increase the number of beds available in hospitals. We investigate whether elective gynaecologic surgery is safe or not under safety measures. Methods A total of 765 patients were operated on electively between 15 March and 30 October 2020 at our inpatient gynaecology clinic. We took the SARS‐CoV‐2 Reverse Transcriptase (RT) Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test of the nasopharyngeal swab before and after the surgery. Patients were questioned for COVID‐19 symptoms by phone calls on the 7th, 15th, 30th and 60th days postoperatively. Results The average age of patients was 45.6 ± 11(19‐81). Sixty‐two (8.1%) operations were performed due to gynaecologic malignancies. Three patients (0.39%) were detected as SARS‐CoV‐2 RT PCR positive within 7 days after surgery. The patients did not need ICU admission or any further treatments. Conclusion Our study offers a novel perspective on elective surgery during a pandemic. The risk assessment of patients should be meticulously done and substantiated on objective variables. According to our study, in a carefully selected patient population, operating under appropriate precautions, elective gynaecologic surgical procedures during the two peaks of the COVID‐19 pandemic do not pose a risk to the patients.

Aims To share our experience of maintaining elective surgery, during the 1st wave of COVID-19. Paucity of evidence regarding COVID-19 pathogenicity provided an opportunity for surgical leadership to collaborate with infection control in establishing local guidelines for mitigating Nosocomial transmission. We aim to demonstrate that early engagement with management facilitating an interdepartmental collaborative approach can provide lessons for maintaining clean elective surgical pathways. Methods Retrospective audit April – June 2020 using a digital electronic patient record system (CWS) linked to an operating theatre system (Ormis). Review of published guidelines. Results Mean Age 61 (24-89). Mean ASA 2, Performance Status Conclusions Elective Colorectal/Breast Cancer and urgent Biliary/General surgery was successfully maintained at the peak of the 1st wave in a region with high community transmission. No perioperative COVID-19 infections\mortalities. Our experience of leading collaboration with management\key departments can provide lessons in maintaining elective surgery in the face of repeated waves of COVID-19 or indeed future viral pandemics.

Objective The COVID-19 pandemic caused a major strain on healthcare systems across the globe. As these systems got overwhelmed with the emergency care of the infected patients, widespread cancellations of elective surgery occurred. Our hospital utilised local private hospital as a dedicated cold site (CS) for urgent elective surgery during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. We aim to analyse the outcomes at this dedicated cold site. Method A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of all the cases operated at the CS during a 2-month period (30 March 2020 to 29 May 2020) was carried out. The primary outcome was 30-day COVID-19 related mortality. The secondary outcomes were 30-day non-COVID-19 related mortality, complications, readmission and development of COVID-19 symptoms. Results A total of 153 patients were operated on at the CS over the study period with a median age of 57 years (Interquartile range, IQR 47 – 70). 62% were females and 82% had a Body Mass Index (BMI) less than 30. 73% of the operations were performed for cancer. 59% of the surgeries were graded as intermediate and 26% as major or complex. There was no mortality at 30 days from COVID-19 or non COVID-19 causes. There was only 1 (0.65%) readmission. 7 patients (4.57%) developed complications. 1 (0.65%) patient was diagnosed with COVID-19 in the postoperative period while 3 had COVID-19 symptoms but were tested negative. Conclusion Urgent elective surgery is safe and feasible during the COVID-19 pandemic if a dedicated cold site is available.

Background: Diverticulitis can lead to localized or generalized peritonitis and consequently induce abdominal adhesion formation. If adhesions would lead to abdominal complaints, it might be expected that these would be more prominent after operation for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis than after elective sigmoid resection. Aims: The primary outcome of the study was the incidence of abdominal complaints in the long-term after acute and elective surgery for diverticulitis. Methods: During the period 2003 through 2009, 269 patients were operated for diverticular disease. Two hundred eight of them were invited to fill out a questionnaire composed of the gastrointestinal quality of life index and additional questions and finally 109 were suitable for analysis with a mean follow-up of 7.5 years. Results: Analysis did not reveal any significant differences in the incidence of abdominal complaints or other parameters. Conclusion: This retrospective study on patients after operation for diverticulitis shows that in the long term, the severity of the abdominal complaints is influenced neither by the stage of the disease nor by the fact of whether it was performed in an acute or elective setting.

Background: The impact of public health policy to reduce the spread of COVID-19 on access to surgical care is poorly defined. We aim to quantify the surgical backlog during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Brazilian public health system and determine the relationship between state-level policy response and the degree of state-level delays in public surgical care. Methods: Monthly estimates of surgical procedures performed per state from January 2016 to December 2020 were obtained from Brazil's Unified Health System Informatics Department. Forecasting models using historical surgical volume data before March 2020 (first reported COVID-19 case) were constructed to predict expected monthly operations from March through December 2020. Total, emergency, and elective surgical monthly backlogs were calculated by comparing reported volume to forecasted volume. Linear mixed effects models were used to model the relationship between public surgical delivery and two measures of health policy response: the COVID-19 Stringency Index (SI) and the Containment & Health Index (CHI) by state. Findings: Between March and December 2020, the total surgical backlog included 1,119,433 (95% Confidence Interval 762,663–1,523,995) total operations, 161,321 (95%CI 37,468–395,478) emergent operations, and 928,758 (95%CI 675,202–1,208,769) elective operations. Increased SI and CHI scores were associated with reductions in emergent surgical delays but increases in elective surgical backlogs. The maximum government stringency (score = 100) reduced emergency delays to nearly zero but tripled the elective surgical backlog. Interpretation: Strong health policy efforts to contain COVID-19 ensure minimal reductions in delivery of emergent surgery, but dramatically increase elective backlogs. Additional coordinated government efforts will be necessary to specifically address the increased elective backlogs that accompany stringent responses.

Purpose We previously described the radical changes occurred in an orthopaedic hospital in Milan (Italy) during the first SARS-CoV-2 pandemic outbreak. Currently, during the second wave, the situation is still far from normality. Here we describe the changes that took place, and are still ongoing, in the clinical practice. Methods Number and type of admissions, outpatients activity, ER and urgent procedures in SARS-CoV-2 negative and positive patients have been analyzed over seven weeks (October 26th–December 13th, 2020) and compared with the correspondent period in 2019 and the same timeframe during the first wave (February 24th–April 10th). Results 2019 vs. 2020: Overall admissions decreased by 39.8%; however, while admissions for elective surgery dropped by 42.0%, urgent surgeries increased by 117.0%. Rehabilitation admissions declined by 85.2%. White and green priority ER consultations declined by 41.6% and 52.0%, respectively; yellow and red increased by 766.7% and 400.0%, respectively. Second vs. first wave: Overall admissions increased by 58.6% with a smoother decrement in weekly admissions than during the first wave. Disparity of acute admissions vs. rehabilitation expanded: Acute cases increased by 63.6% while rehabilitation cases decreased by 8.7%. Admissions to triage procedures increased by 72.3%. Conclusions Activity levels are far from normality during the second COVID-19 wave. Elective surgery and outpatients-related activities are still strongly limited compared to 2019 while the number of urgent cases treated increased consistently. SARS-CoV-2 positive emergencies are slightly higher than during the first wave. These important changes are expected to impact on health service and hospital budget for long.

Introduction The aim of this study was to assess the safety of elective urological surgery performed during the pandemic by estimating the prevalence of COVID-19-like symptoms in the postoperative period and its correlation with perioperative and clinical factors. Material and methods In this multicenter, observational study we recorded clinical, surgical and postoperative data of consecutive patients undergoing elective urological surgery in 28 different institutions across Italy during initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (between February 24 and March 30, 2020, inclusive). Results A total of 1943 patients were enrolled. In 12%, 7.1%, 21.3%, 56.7% and 2.6% of cases an open, laparoscopic, robotic, endoscopic or percutaneous surgical approach was performed, respectively. Overall, 166 (8.5%) postoperative complications were registered, 77 (3.9%) surgical and 89 (4.6%) medical. Twenty-eight (1.4%) patients were readmitted to hospital after discharge and 13 (0.7%) died. In the 30 days following discharge, fever and respiratory symptoms were recorded in 101 (5.2%) and 60 (3.1%) patients. At multivariable analysis, not performing nasopharyngeal swab at hospital admission (HR 2.3; CI 95% 1.01-5.19; p = 0.04) was independently associated with risk of developing postoperative medical complications. Number of patients in the facility was confirmed as an independent predictor of experiencing postoperative respiratory symptoms (p = 0.047, HR:1.12; CI95% 1.00-1.05), while COVID-19-free type of hospitalization facility was a strong independent protective factor (p = 0.02, HR:0.23, CI95% 0.07-0.79). Conclusions Performing elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic does not seem to affect perioperative outcomes as long as proper preventive measures are adopted, including nasopharyngeal swab before hospital admission and hospitalization in dedicated COVID-19-free facilities.

PurposeThe long incubation period and asymptomatic spread of COVID-19 present considerable challenges for health care institutions when patients return to elective surgery.MethodsA retrospective review of the first adult elective cases performed between May 18, 2020 and June 14, 2020, after the end of lockdown was analysed in Belgium to answer the following questions: (1) for the 236 cancelled patients during the outbreak, how easy was rescheduling? (2) How useful was universal RT-PCR testing and chest CT scan for the 211 orthopaedic and trauma admissions? (3) How were surgical difficulty category, number of operations and complications different when compared to the pre-COVID period? (4) How would patients balance the benefit of surgery against the unknown risk of developing COVID-19?ResultsBefore surgery, blood tests for anaesthesiology and imaging related to the surgical procedure were scheduled prior to universal testing (COVID-19 PCR and chest CT) performed 72–120 hours before surgery. Among the 211 asymptomatic patients who were tested before surgery, six had positive PCR, while no abnormality was found on the chest CT scan of all the patients. With this timing for tests, the 104 patients included in the current study for elective surgery were free of disease before undergoing surgery and remained without COVID-19 after surgery. Among the 366 cancelled patients during the outbreak, only 12% of the patients accepted to proceed with rescheduling immediately. Therefore, this resulted in a 70% reduction for elective surgery and in a 50% reduction for arthroplasties as compared to pre-COVID period. The rate of complications was not increased during the post-COVID period. A portion of patients have confused idea of screening and have difficulty to perceive the new rules of health organization.ConclusionsResumption of elective surgical procedures appears more difficult for patients than for surgeons with a low percentage of cancelled patients accepting to reschedule surgery. Universal testing allowed securing patients; however, surgeons must explore better patient perceptions regarding COVID-19 to facilitate a fully informed decision in the current period., info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Purpose To provide evidence-based recommendations for patients with severe knee osteoarthritis (OA), who had their knee surgery postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods PubMed/Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Central databases were systematically reviewed for studies reporting outcomes of home-based treatments for knee OA. Due to between-study differences in treatment strategy and reporting methods the results were not pooled and findings of the current review were presented in a narrative manner. Results The comprehensive literature search yielded 33 eligible studies that were included in this review. Management is performed at home and consists of exercise, proper nutrition, physical therapy and use of corrective and assistive orthotics. Virtual education on self-management strategies should be part of coping with knee OA. Initiating an exercise programme involving gymnastics, stretching, home cycling and muscle strengthening is highly recommended. Obese patients are encouraged to set weight loss goals and adopt a healthy diet. Potential benefits but weak evidence has been shown for the use of knee braces, sleeves, foot orthotics or cushioned footwear. Walking aids may be prescribed, when considered necessary, along with the provision of instructions for their use. Conclusion When bridging the time to rescheduled surgery, it is essential to use appropriate home-based tools for the management of knee OA if pain is to be reduced and need for analgesics or opioid use is to be diminished while maintaining or even improving the functioning and avoiding further limitation of range of motion and subsequent muscular atrophies. Finally, none of these treatments may completely substitute for the life-changing effect of a total knee arthroplasty in patients with severe knee OA. Hence, the subsequent goal is to gradually and safely reinstate elective surgery.

Background: Nutritional risk and sarcopenia are both associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality following elective surgery. This study aimed to investigate whether sarcopenia has additional predictive value for postoperative complications and long-term survival besides nutritional screening tools. Methods: Clinical data of patients underwent radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer was prospectively collected. Sarcopenia was diagnosed by grip strength plus muscle quanlity/quality based on preoperative abdominal CT scans. Nutritional screening was performed using 4 common nutritional screening tools, including Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS)-2002, Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST), and Short Nutritional Assessment Questionnaire (SNAQ). Results: A total of 880 patients were analyzed, in which 167 (18.98%) were diagnosed with sarcopenia. The incidence of nutritional risk identified by the 4 tools were 44.66% (MUST ≥1), 35.23% (NRS-2002 ≥3), 29.89% (MST ≥2), and 20.34% (SNAQ ≥2). Multivariate analyses showed that nutritional risk identified by the 4 nutritional screening tools were not independently associated with postoperative complications, overall survival (OS) or disease-free survival (DFS), except for NRS-2002 ≥3 as an independent risk factor of OS. Sarcopenia was always an independent risk factor for postoperative complications, OS, and DFS after adjusting for nutritional risk and the other covariates in the multivariate analyses. Conclusions: MUST, NRS-2002, MST, and SNAQ had low predictive power for postoperative complications and long-term survival in patients underwent radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Sarcopenia had additional predictive value for postoperative complications and long-term survival besides these nutritional screening tools and should be implemented in the preoperative assessments.

A right hemicolectomy is among the most commonly performed operations for colon cancer, but modern high-quality, multination data addressing the morbidity and mortality rates are lacking.This study reports the morbidity and mortality rates for right-sided colon cancer and identifies predictors for unfavorable short-term outcome after right hemicolectomy.This was a snapshot observational prospective study.The study was conducted as a multicenter international study.The 2015 European Society of Coloproctology snapshot study was a prospective multicenter international series that included all patients undergoing elective or emergency right hemicolectomy or ileocecal resection over a 2-month period in early 2015. This is a subanalysis of the colon cancer cohort of patients.Predictors for anastomotic leak and 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality were assessed using multivariable mixed-effect logistic regression models after variables selection with the Lasso method.Of the 2515 included patients, an anastomosis was performed in 97.2% (n = 2444), handsewn in 38.5% (n = 940) and stapled in 61.5% (n = 1504) cases. The overall anastomotic leak rate was 7.4% (180/2444), 30-day morbidity was 38.0% (n = 956), and mortality was 2.6% (n = 66). Patients with anastomotic leak had a significantly increased mortality rate (10.6% vs 1.6% no-leak patients; p0.001). At multivariable analysis the following variables were associated with anastomotic leak: longer duration of surgery (OR = 1.007 per min; p = 0.0037), open approach (OR = 1.9; p = 0.0037), and stapled anastomosis (OR = 1.5; p = 0.041).This is an observational study, and therefore selection bias could be present. For this reason, a multivariable logistic regression model was performed, trying to correct possible confounding factors.Anastomotic leak after oncologic right hemicolectomy is a frequent complication, and it is associated with increased mortality. The key contributing surgical factors for anastomotic leak were anastomotic technique, surgical approach, and duration of surgery. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B165. PREDICTORES DE FUGA ANASTOMóTICA, COMPLICACIONES POSTOPERATORIAS Y MORTALIDAD DESPUéS DE LA COLECTOMíA DERECHA POR CáNCER: RESULTADOS DE UNA AUDITORíA INTERNACIONAL DE CORTO PLAZO: La hemicolectomía derecha se encuentra entre las operaciones más frecuentemente realizadas para cáncer de colon, pero faltan datos modernos multinacionales de alta calidad, que aborden las tasas de morbilidad y mortalidad.Reportar la tasa de morbilidad y mortalidad para cáncer de colon del lado derecho, e identificar predictores de resultados desfavorables a corto plazo, después de la hemicolectomía derecha.Estudio prospectivo observacional de corto plazo.Estudio multicéntrico internacional.El estudio de corto plazo de la Sociedad Europea de Coloproctología de 2015, fue una serie prospectiva multicéntrica internacional, que incluyó a todos los pacientes sometidos a hemicolectomía derecha electiva, de emergencia o resección ileocecal, por un período de dos meses y a principios de 2015. Este es un subanálisis, cohorte de pacientes con cáncer de colon.Los predictores de fuga anastomótica, morbilidad y mortalidad postoperatorias a los 30 días, se evaluaron usando modelos de regresión logística de efectos multivariables mixtos, después de la selección de variables con el método Lasso.De los 2,515 pacientes incluidos, se realizó una anastomosis en el 97,2% (n = 2,444); sutura manual en 38.5% (n = 940) y por engrapadora en 61.5% (n = 1504) casos. La tasa global de fuga anastomótica fue del 7,4% (180/2,444), morbilidad a los 30 días fue del 38,0% (n = 956) y la mortalidad fue del 2,6% (n = 66). Los pacientes con fuga anastomótica tuvieron una tasa de mortalidad significativamente mayor (10,6% frente al 1,6% de pacientes sin fuga, p0,001). En el análisis multivariable, las siguientes variables se asociaron con la fuga anastomótica: mayor duración de la cirugía (OR 1.007 por minuto, p = 0.0037), abordaje abierto (OR 1.9, p = 0.0037) y anastomosis por engrapadora (OR 1.5, p = 0.041).Este es un estudio observacional y por lo tanto podría estar presente el sesgo de selección. Por esta razón, se realizó un modelo de regresión logística multivariable, tratando de corregir posibles factores de confusión.La fuga anastomótica después de la hemicolectomía derecha oncológica, es una complicación frecuente y asociada a mayor mortalidad. Los factores quirúrgicos clave que contribuyeron a la fuga anastomótica, fueron la técnica anastomótica, abordaje quirúrgico y duración de la cirugía. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B165. (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy).

Background Complying with a prehabilitation program is difficult for patients who will undergo surgery, owing to transportation challenges and a limited intervention time window. Mobile health (mHealth) using smartphone apps has the potential to remove barriers and improve the effectiveness of prehabilitation. Objective This study aimed to develop a mobile app as a tool for facilitating a multidisciplinary prehabilitation protocol involving blood flow restriction training and sport nutrition supplementation. Methods The app was developed using “Appy Pie,” a noncoding app development platform. The development process included three stages: (1) determination of principles and requirements of the app through prehabilitation research team meetings; (2) app prototype design using the Appy Pie platform; and (3) app evaluation by clinicians and exercise and fitness specialists, technical professionals from Appy Pie, and non–team-member users. Results We developed a prototype of the app with the core focus on a multidisciplinary prehabilitation program with accessory features to improve engagement and adherence to the mHealth intervention as well as research-focused features to evaluate the effects of the program on frailty status, health-related quality of life, and anxiety level among patients awaiting elective surgery. Evaluations by research members and random users (n=8) were consistently positive. Conclusions This mobile app has great potential for improving and evaluating the effectiveness of the multidisciplinary prehabilitation intervention in the format of mHealth in future.

Bu çalışma, 22-24 Kasım 2012 tarihleri arasında İstanbul[Türkiye]’da düzenlenen 16. Annual Meeting of the European-Society-of-Surgery (ESS)’da bildiri olarak sunulmuştur. Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the gold standard for the treatment of symptomatic gallbladder stones. As infections are rare in uncomplicated LC, it is widely accepted that prophylactic antibiotics need not be administered, and guidelines do not support routine antibiotic prophylaxis during elective LC. However, routine antibiotic prophylaxis for elective LC is still popular in many clinical settings. We investigated this situation in our department. Method: This randomized double-blind controlled study included 570 patients who underwent LC between March 2007 and February 2010. The exclusion criteria were antibiotic intake before surgery, steroid treatment, and the presence of pancreatitis, cholangitis, obstructive jaundice, cephalosporin allergy, or pregnancy. The patients were randomized into three groups. Group 1 (n = 193) received physiologic saline as placebo, Group 2 (n = 191) received a first-generation cephalosporin (cefazolin; 1 g), and Group 3 (n = 186) received a second-generation cephalosporin (cefuroksim aksetil; 750mg). Bile and epigastric and umbilical port tissue samples were harvested for culture. All patients were observed until the end of the fourth week after surgery. Patient age, sex, weight, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, diabetes mellitus, smoking history, history of biliary colic in the past month, length of the hospital stay before the operation, operational findings (acute or chronic cholecystitis), operation duration, use of drainage, type of prophylaxis administered if any, culture results, surgical site infection (SSI) development, and time to SSI development along with associated treatments were evaluated. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the groups with respect to any of the demographic and clinical features analyzed in this study. The SSI rate was 1.2% in total, and in Groups 1, 2, and 3, it was 1.5%, 1.04%, and 1.07%, respectively. There was no statistical difference regarding SSI among the groups (p = 1.00). Superficial SSI was observed in all groups, and in all patients, the site of infection was the entrance to the epigastric port through which the gallbladder had been removed. Conclusions: Surgical site infection is rare after LC, and antibiotic prophylaxis does not appear to affect the outcome significantly. Moreover, factors such as positive bile cultures, history of biliary attack, ASA score, diabetes, obesity, and smoking do not have any effect on SSI development. Thus, we conclude that antibiotic prophylaxis is not needed for elective LC. European Soc Surgery

Background: 1st and 2nd generation cephalosporins used for perioperative prophylaxis in orthopaedic surgery do not cover non-fermenting Gram-negative rods (NFR).Methods: Epidemiological cohort study of adult patients operated for orthopedic infections between 2004 and 2014 with perioperative cefuroxim or vancomycin prophylaxis. Exclusion of polyneuropathic ischemic foot infections and septic bursitis cases.Results: Of the total 1840 surgical procedures in the study, 430 grew Gram-negative pathogens (23%), of which 194 (11%) were due to NFR and 143 (8%) to Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Overall, 634 episodes (35%) involved orthopaedic implants (321 arthroplasties, 135 plates, 53 nails, and others). In multivariate analysis and group comparisons, especially preoperative antibiotic use (124/194 vs. 531/1456; pConclusions: Overall proportion of NFR oscillated between 9% and 13% among our orthopaedic infections. Variables associated with NFR were antibiotic use prior to hospitalization. The low infection rate of NFR following elective surgery and the community-based epidemiology, has led us to keep our standard perioperative prophylaxis unchanged.

Introduction Prevalence and tobacco-related perioperative complications have been largely reported. The impact of vaping (e-cigarette use) on the perioperative period has been rarely evaluated. The purpose of this multicentre cross-sectional survey was to assess the prevalence of vaping and behaviour of patients undergoing elective surgery. Methods After institutional review board committee and patient approvals, patients (aged ≥18 years) scheduled for elective non-cardiac surgery in six French hospitals were assessed preoperatively. Demographic characteristics, and information on vaping, smoking or dual-use status and consumption were reported. Results In six centres, 1712 eligible patients were approached and 1664 patients were included in this study from June 2016 to January 2017. Of these, 62 patients used e-cigarettes in the preoperative period (3%; 95% CI: 2–4), including 24 exclusive e-cigarette users (1%; 95% CI: 1–2), 38 dual-users (2%; 95% CI: 2–3) and 365 smokers (22%; 95% CI: 20–24). Vapers were older than smokers (53 vs 47 years old; p=0.01). During the preoperative period, 12 patients (1%) reported vaping the morning of surgery. Conclusions In the preoperative period, vaping was ten-fold less prevalent than smoking. Although the clinical relevance may be weak, further research is needed to explore the real impact of vaping on patients’ outcomes and to elaborate on clinical recommendations. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinical Trials.gov: NCT03594643

Background As pediatric ambulatory surgeries are rising and existing methods to reduce perioperative anxiety and pain are lacking in this population, a serious game for health (SGH), CliniPup, was developed to address this unmet need. CliniPup was generated using the SERES framework for serious game development. Objective The goal of the research was to clinically evaluate CliniPup as an adjunct therapy to existing pharmacological interventions aimed at reducing perioperative anxiety and pain in children undergoing ambulatory surgery. Methods CliniPup was evaluated in a prospective randomized controlled pilot trial in 20 children aged 6 to 10 years who underwent elective surgery and their parents. Study participants were randomly assigned to the test (n=12) or control group (n=8). Children in the test group played CliniPup 2 days prior to surgery, and children in the control group received standard of care. On the day of surgery, pediatric anxiety was measured with the modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale and parental anxiety was assessed with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Pediatric postoperative pain was assessed by the Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale. Child and parent user experience and satisfaction were also evaluated in the test group using structured questionnaires. Results Despite the small sample, preoperative anxiety scores were significantly lower (P=.01) in children who played CliniPup prior to surgery compared to controls. Parental preoperative anxiety scores were also lower in the test group (P=.10) but did not reach significance. No significant differences were observed in postoperative pain scores between groups (P=.54). The evaluation of user experience and satisfaction revealed that both children and parents were satisfied with CliniPup and would recommend the game to peers. Conclusions Results of the pilot trial introduce CliniPup as a potentially effective and attractive adjunct therapy to reduce preoperative anxiety in children undergoing ambulatory surgery with a trend toward positive impact on parental preoperative anxiety. These results support the use of the SERES framework to generate an evidence-based SGH that results in positive health outcomes for patients. Based on these preliminary findings, we propose a research agenda to further develop and investigate this tool. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03874442; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03874442 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/78KZab8qc)