20 research outputs found

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

    Get PDF
    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

    Outcomes from elective colorectal cancer surgery during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

    Get PDF
    This study aimed to describe the change in surgical practice and the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on mortality after surgical resection of colorectal cancer during the initial phases of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

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

    Get PDF
    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

    The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

    Get PDF
    Aim The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. Methods This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. Results Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. Conclusion One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease

    Guidelines in Emergency Medicine Network (GEMNet):guideline for the use of thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory trauma patients requiring temporary limb immobilisation

    No full text
    The Guidelines in Emergency Medicine Network (GEMNet) has been created to promote best medical practice in a range of conditions presenting to emergency departments (EDs) in the UK. This guideline presents a summary of the best available evidence to guide the use of thromboprophylaxis in adult ambulatory outpatients who present to the ED following acute limb trauma and require temporary immobilisation. The document has been developed following discussion among emergency physicians and collegiate fellows to decide which topics would benefit from the development of clinical guidelines. The document is intended as a guideline for use in the ED by emergency physicians and is based on the review of the best existing evidence for treatments used in this setting. The document is summarised as a Clinical Decision Support Guideline that has been presented as an easy to follow algorithm. The intention is for each guideline to be updated and reviewed as further evidence becomes available. The formal revision date has been set at 5 years from publication, though the guideline is subject to continuous informal review.</p

    A prognostic model for use before elective surgery to estimate the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications (GSU-Pulmonary Score): a development and validation study in three international cohorts

    No full text
    Background: Pulmonary complications are the most common cause of death after surgery. This study aimed to derive and externally validate a novel prognostic model that can be used before elective surgery to estimate the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications and to support resource allocation and prioritisation during pandemic recovery. Methods: Data from an international, prospective cohort study were used to develop a novel prognostic risk model for pulmonary complications after elective surgery in adult patients (aged ≥18 years) across all operation and disease types. The primary outcome measure was postoperative pulmonary complications at 30 days after surgery, which was a composite of pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and unexpected mechanical ventilation. Model development with candidate predictor variables was done in the GlobalSurg-CovidSurg Week dataset (global; October, 2020). Two structured machine learning techniques were explored (XGBoost and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator [LASSO]), and the model with the best performance (GSU-Pulmonary Score) underwent internal validation using bootstrap resampling. The discrimination and calibration of the score were externally validated in two further prospective cohorts: CovidSurg-Cancer (worldwide; February to August, 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic) and RECON (UK and Australasia; January to October, 2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic). The model was deployed as an online web application. The GlobalSurg-CovidSurg Week and CovidSurg-Cancer studies were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04509986 and NCT04384926. Findings: Prognostic models were developed from 13 candidate predictor variables in data from 86 231 patients (1158 hospitals in 114 countries). External validation included 30 492 patients from CovidSurg-Cancer (726 hospitals in 75 countries) and 6789 from RECON (150 hospitals in three countries). The overall rates of pulmonary complications were 2·0% in derivation data, and 3·9% (CovidSurg-Cancer) and 4·7% (RECON) in the validation datasets. Penalised regression using LASSO had similar discrimination to XGBoost (area under the receiver operating curve [AUROC] 0·786, 95% CI 0·774-0·798 vs 0·785, 0·772-0·797), was more explainable, and required fewer covariables. The final GSU-Pulmonary Score included ten predictor variables and showed good discrimination and calibration upon internal validation (AUROC 0·773, 95% CI 0·751-0·795; Brier score 0·020, calibration in the large [CITL] 0·034, slope 0·954). The model performance was acceptable on external validation in CovidSurg-Cancer (AUROC 0·746, 95% CI 0·733-0·760; Brier score 0·036, CITL 0·109, slope 1·056), but with some miscalibration in RECON data (AUROC 0·716, 95% CI 0·689-0·744; Brier score 0·045, CITL 1·040, slope 1·009). Interpretation: This novel prognostic risk score uses simple predictor variables available at the time of a decision for elective surgery that can accurately stratify patients' risk of postoperative pulmonary complications, including during SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks. It could inform surgical consent, resource allocation, and hospital-level prioritisation as elective surgery is upscaled to address global backlogs. Funding: National Institute for Health Research

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

    No full text

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

    Full text link

    The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

    Get PDF
    Aim The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. Methods This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. Results Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P &lt; 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. Conclusion One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease
    corecore