Mechanical canopy and trunk shaking for the harvesting mechanization of table olive orchards

Table olive harvesting is highly dependent on manual labour and may jeopardize the crop benefit. The introduction of a mechanical harvest system requires a global evaluation of the whole process. A trunk shaker along with shaker combs and a continuous canopy shaker harvester have been tested in two orchards with different tree training and layout to determine their feasibility to mechanical harvesting in table olives. For that purpose, several parameters have been evaluated. Canopy shaker required adapted orchard layout and hedge of canopies for reaching an acceptable harvesting efficiency about 80% and trunk shaker performed a higher efficiency of more than 95% but depended highly on labour. Both systems had a high field capacity about 0.15 ha h-1 but low for the trunk shaker considering the people (0.01 ha h-1 person-1). The vibration pattern that applied on branches was totally different although the quantitative tree damages were no significative different. There were no significant differences in fruit bruising between both systems, but there were between the different sampling points, mainly in the detachment. The fruit bruising index of the remaining fruit on canopy suggests that it is possible to perform a second harvest. Both mechanical systems are suitable for table olive harvesting whilst improving the efficiency of manual systems with bearable damages, but each one has pros and cons that must be considered bearing in mind that require an adaptation of the orchard where there are applied. Highlights Table olives mechanization is possible by integrating with the fruit liquid store. Trunk shaker performed high efficiency in adapted orchards but depended on labour. Canopy shakers require the adaption of orchard and machine for commercial purposes. There were no differences in detached fruit bruising between both mechanical systems. The bruising index of the remaining fruit on trees suggest second harvesting pass.Table olive harvesting is highly dependent on manual labour and may jeopardize the crop benefit. The introduction of a mechanical harvest system requires a global evaluation of the whole process. A trunk shaker along with shaker combs and a continuous canopy shaker harvester have been tested in two orchards with different tree training and layout to determine their feasibility to mechanical harvesting in table olives. For that purpose, several parameters have been evaluated. Canopy shaker required adapted orchard layout and hedge of canopies for reaching an acceptable harvesting efficiency about 80% and trunk shaker performed a higher efficiency of more than 95% but depended highly on labour. Both systems had a high field capacity about 0.15 ha h-1 but low for the trunk shaker considering the people (0.01 ha h-1 person-1). The vibration pattern that applied on branches was totally different although the quantitative tree damages were no significative different. There were no significant differences in fruit bruising between both systems, but there were between the different sampling points, mainly in the detachment. The fruit bruising index of the remaining fruit on canopy suggests that it is possible to perform a second harvest. Both mechanical systems are suitable for table olive harvesting whilst improving the efficiency of manual systems with bearable damages, but each one has pros and cons that must be considered bearing in mind that require an adaptation of the orchard where there are applied. Highlights Table olives mechanization is possible by integrating with the fruit liquid store. Trunk shaker performed high efficiency in adapted orchards but depended on labour. Canopy shakers require the adaption of orchard and machine for commercial purposes. There were no differences in detached fruit bruising between both mechanical systems. The bruising index of the remaining fruit on trees suggest second harvesting pass

Olive Actual “on Year” Yield Forecast Tool Based on the Tree Canopy Geometry Using UAS Imagery

Olive has a notable importance in countries of Mediterranean basin and its profitability depends on several factors such as actual yield, production cost or product price. Actual “on year” Yield (AY) is production (kg tree-1) in “on years”, and this research attempts to relate it with geometrical parameters of the tree canopy. Regression equation to forecast AY based on manual canopy volume was determined based on data acquired from different orchard categories and cultivars during different harvesting seasons in southern Spain. Orthoimages were acquired with unmanned aerial systems (UAS) imagery calculating individual crown for relating to canopy volume and AY. Yield levels did not vary between orchard categories; however, it did between irrigated orchards (7000–17,000 kg ha-1) and rainfed ones (4000–7000 kg ha-1). After that, manual canopy volume was related with the individual crown area of trees that were calculated by orthoimages acquired with UAS imagery. Finally, AY was forecasted using both manual canopy volume and individual tree crown area as main factors for olive productivity. AY forecast only by using individual crown area made it possible to get a simple and cheap forecast tool for a wide range of olive orchards. Finally, the acquired information was introduced in a thematic map describing spatial AY variability obtained from orthoimage analysis that may be a powerful tool for farmers, insurance systems, market forecasts or to detect agronomical problems

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Delaying surgery for patients with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection

Not availabl

Preoperative nasopharyngeal swab testing and postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing elective surgery during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Surgical services are preparing to scale up in areas affected by COVID-19. This study aimed to evaluate the association between preoperative SARS-CoV-2 testing and postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing elective cancer surgery. METHODS: This international cohort study included adult patients undergoing elective surgery for cancer in areas affected by SARS-CoV-2 up to 19 April 2020. Patients suspected of SARS-CoV-2 infection before operation were excluded. The primary outcome measure was postoperative pulmonary complications at 30 days after surgery. Preoperative testing strategies were adjusted for confounding using mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Of 8784 patients (432 hospitals, 53 countries), 2303 patients (26.2 per cent) underwent preoperative testing: 1458 (16.6 per cent) had a swab test, 521 (5.9 per cent) CT only, and 324 (3.7 per cent) swab and CT. Pulmonary complications occurred in 3.9 per cent, whereas SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed in 2.6 per cent. After risk adjustment, having at least one negative preoperative nasopharyngeal swab test (adjusted odds ratio 0.68, 95 per cent confidence interval 0.68 to 0.98; P = 0.040) was associated with a lower rate of pulmonary complications. Swab testing was beneficial before major surgery and in areas with a high 14-day SARS-CoV-2 case notification rate, but not before minor surgery or in low-risk areas. To prevent one pulmonary complication, the number needed to swab test before major or minor surgery was 18 and 48 respectively in high-risk areas, and 73 and 387 in low-risk areas. CONCLUSION: Preoperative nasopharyngeal swab testing was beneficial before major surgery and in high SARS-CoV-2 risk areas. There was no proven benefit of swab testing before minor surgery in low-risk areas

Global attitudes in the management of acute appendicitis during COVID-19 pandemic: ACIE Appy Study

Background: Surgical strategies are being adapted to face the COVID-19 pandemic. Recommendations on the management of acute appendicitis have been based on expert opinion, but very little evidence is available. This study addressed that dearth with a snapshot of worldwide approaches to appendicitis. Methods: The Association of Italian Surgeons in Europe designed an online survey to assess the current attitude of surgeons globally regarding the management of patients with acute appendicitis during the pandemic. Questions were divided into baseline information, hospital organization and screening, personal protective equipment, management and surgical approach, and patient presentation before versus during the pandemic. Results: Of 744 answers, 709 (from 66 countries) were complete and were included in the analysis. Most hospitals were treating both patients with and those without COVID. There was variation in screening indications and modality used, with chest X-ray plus molecular testing (PCR) being the commonest (19\ub78 per cent). Conservative management of complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis was used by 6\ub76 and 2\ub74 per cent respectively before, but 23\ub77 and 5\ub73 per cent, during the pandemic (both P < 0\ub7001). One-third changed their approach from laparoscopic to open surgery owing to the popular (but evidence-lacking) advice from expert groups during the initial phase of the pandemic. No agreement on how to filter surgical smoke plume during laparoscopy was identified. There was an overall reduction in the number of patients admitted with appendicitis and one-third felt that patients who did present had more severe appendicitis than they usually observe. Conclusion: Conservative management of mild appendicitis has been possible during the pandemic. The fact that some surgeons switched to open appendicectomy may reflect the poor guidelines that emanated in the early phase of SARS-CoV-2