Machine learning risk prediction of mortality for patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2: the COVIDSurg mortality score.

To support the global restart of elective surgery, data from an international prospective cohort study of 8492 patients (69 countries) was analysed using artificial intelligence (machine learning techniques) to develop a predictive score for mortality in surgical patients with SARS-CoV-2. We found that patient rather than operation factors were the best predictors and used these to create the COVIDsurg Mortality Score (https://covidsurgrisk.app). Our data demonstrates that it is safe to restart a wide range of surgical services for selected patients

Machine learning risk prediction of mortality for patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2: the COVIDSurg mortality score

To support the global restart of elective surgery, data from an international prospective cohort study of 8492 patients (69 countries) was analysed using artificial intelligence (machine learning techniques) to develop a predictive score for mortality in surgical patients with SARS-CoV-2. We found that patient rather than operation factors were the best predictors and used these to create the COVIDsurg Mortality Score (https://covidsurgrisk.app). Our data demonstrates that it is safe to restart a wide range of surgical services for selected patients.Laura Bravo ... COVIDSurg Collaborative : (Royal Adelaide Hospital, N. N. Dudi-Venkata, H. M. Kroon, T. Sammour) ... et al.

COVID-19 and the Global Impact on Colorectal Practice and Surgery

Background: The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus that emerged in December 2019 causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to the sudden national reorganization of health care systems and changes in the delivery of health care globally. The purpose of our study was to use a survey to assess the global effects of COVID-19 on colorectal practice and surgery. Materials and Methods: A panel of International Society of University Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ISUCRS) selected 22 questions, which were included in the questionnaire. The questionnaire was distributed electronically to ISUCRS fellows and other surgeons included in the ISUCRS database and was advertised on social media sites. The questionnaire remained open from April 16 to 28, 2020. Results: A total of 287 surgeons completed the survey. Of the 287 respondents, 90% were colorectal specialists or general surgeons with an interest in colorectal disease. COVID-19 had affected the practice of 96% of the surgeons, and 52% were now using telemedicine. Also, 66% reported that elective colorectal cancer surgery could proceed but with perioperative precautions. Of the 287 respondents, 19.5% reported that the use of personal protective equipment was the most important perioperative precaution. However, personal protective equipment was only provided by 9.1% of hospitals. In addition, 64% of surgeons were offering minimally invasive surgery. However, 44% reported that enough information was not available regarding the safety of the loss of intra-abdominal carbon dioxide gas during the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, 61% of the surgeons were prepared to defer elective colorectal cancer surgery, with 29% willing to defer for ≤ 8 weeks. Conclusion: The results from our survey have demonstrated that, globally, COVID-19 has affected the ability of colorectal surgeons to offer care to their patients. We have also discussed suggestions for various practical adaptation strategies for use during the recovery period. We have presented the results of a survey used to assess the global impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the delivery of colorectal surgery. Despite accessible guidance information, our results have demonstrated that COVID-19 has significantly affected the ability of colorectal surgeons to offer care to patients. We have also discussed practical adaptation strategies for use during the recovery phase

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Machine learning risk prediction of mortality for patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 the COVIDSurg mortality score

To support the global restart of elective surgery, data from an international prospective cohort study of 8492 patients (69 countries) was analysed using artificial intelligence (machine learning techniques) to develop a predictive score for mortality in surgical patients with SARS-CoV-2. We found that patient rather than operation factors were the best predictors and used these to create the COVIDsurg Mortality Score (https://covidsurgrisk.app). Our data demonstrates that it is safe to restart a wide range of surgical services for selected patients

Clinical impact of sarcopenia assessment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing treatments

Changes in body composition are associated with poor outcomes in cancer patients including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Sarcopenia, defined as the loss of skeletal muscle mass, quality and function, has been associated with a higher rate of complications and recurrences in patients with cirrhosis and HCC. The assessment of patient general status before HCC treatment, including the presence of sarcopenia, is a key-point for achieving therapy tolerability and to avoid short- and long-term complications leading to poor patients’ survival. Thus, we aimed to review the current literature evaluating the role of sarcopenia assessment related to HCC treatments and to critically provide the clinicians with the most recent and valuable evidence. As a result, sarcopenia can be predictive of poor outcomes in patients undergoing liver resection, transplantation and systemic therapies, offering the chance to clinicians to improve the muscular status of these patients, especially those with high-grade sarcopenia at high risk of mortality. Further studies are needed to clarify the predictive value of sarcopenia in other HCC treatment settings and to evaluate its role as an additional staging tool for identifying the most appropriate treatment. Besides, interventional studies aiming at increasing the skeletal muscle mass for reducing complications and increasing the survival in patients with HCC are needed

Accuracy of spleen stiffness measurement for the diagnosis of clinically significant portal hypertension in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis

Background: The diagnosis of clinically significant portal hypertension is crucial for prognosis and treatment guidance in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD). Spleen stiffness measurement (SSM) might improve the non-invasive diagnosis of clinically significant portal hypertension, but previous studies have reported heterogeneous SSM cutoffs. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of SSM and SSM-based algorithms in this setting. Methods: In this systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from database inception to Dec 31, 2022, for articles, abstracts, and letters, with no restrictions on language. Cross-sectional studies reporting hepatic venous pressure gradient and SSM by different techniques (transient elastography; two-dimensional shear-wave elastography [2D-SWE]; point shear-wave elastography [p-SWE]) in adults (≥18 years) with compensated ACLD were eligible for inclusion. The main outcome was the diagnostic performance of two SSM-based algorithms, with the Baveno VII model as a reference, evaluating sensitivity and specificity, as well as summary negative predictive values (NPVs) and positive predictive values (PPVs). In the Baveno VII model, clinically significant portal hypertension was ruled out if patients had a liver stiffness measurement (LSM) of 15 kPa or less and a platelet count of 150 × 109 platelets per L or higher and ruled in if they had an LSM of greater than 25 kPa. The two SSM-based models combined these same cutoffs with additional criteria. In the Baveno VII-SSM single cutoff model, clinically significant portal hypertension was ruled out if at least two of the following were present: LSM of 15 kPa or less, platelet count of 150 × 109 platelets per L or higher, and SSM of 40 kPa or less; and ruled in if at least two were present: LSM of greater than 25 kPa, platelet count of less than 150 × 109 platelets per L, and SSM of greater than 40 kPa. The Baveno VII-SSM dual cutoff model used the same criteria, but with a cutoff of SSM of less than 21 kPa to rule out, and greater than 50 kPa to rule in, clinically significant portal hypertension. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019127164. Findings: Of the 44 records assessed for eligibility, 17 studies (with 1245 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. In the transient elastography cohort (n=600), the Baveno VII algorithm was validated for both ruling out (NPV 100%, 95% CI 64–100; sensitivity 100%, 95% CI 70–100) and ruling in (PPV 95%, 85–98; specificity 94%, 95% CI 87–97) clinically significant portal hypertension, but the proportion of patients with indeterminate results (grey zone) was 48% (95% CI 44–52); 57% (95% CI 52–62) of patients with clinically significant portal hypertension were included in the rule-in zone. The Baveno VII-SSM dual cutoff model had adequate NPV (98%, 95% CI 58–100; sensitivity 100%, 95% CI 91–100) and PPV (93%, 95% CI 84–97; specificity 89%, 95% CI 84–93), with 32% (95% CI 28–36) of patients in the grey zone; 76% (95% CI 72–80) of the patients with clinically significant portal hypertension were in the rule-in zone. The Baveno VII-SSM single cutoff model had a sensitivity of 93% (95% CI 85–97) and a NPV of 85% (95% CI 60–96) for ruling out, and a specificity of 86% (95% CI 80–91) and a PPV of 92% (95% CI 83–95) for ruling in, clinically significant portal hypertension. 88% (95% CI 84–91) of patients with clinically significant portal hypertension were included in the rule-in zone and 9% (95% CI 7–12) of patients were in the grey zone. In the 2D-SWE cohort (n=225), all three algorithms could safely rule in clinically significant portal hypertension with adequate PPV (≥90%), but NPV was inadequate for ruling out clinically significant portal hypertension. Insufficient data were available to evaluate the performance of SSM assessed by p-SWE. Heterogeneity was low (I2<25%) for most estimates. Interpretation: Algorithms combining Baveno VII criteria with SSM showed good performance and reduced the diagnostic grey zone for clinically significant portal hypertension compared with Baveno VII criteria alone. Future studies should evaluate whether SSM-based diagnosis allows for the identification of patients who would benefit from non-selective β-blocker treatment. Funding: None

SARS-CoV-2 infection and venous thromboembolism after surgery: an international prospective cohort study

SARS-CoV-2 has been associated with an increased rate of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients. Since surgical patients are already at higher risk of venous thromboembolism than general populations, this study aimed to determine if patients with peri-operative or prior SARS-CoV-2 were at further increased risk of venous thromboembolism. We conducted a planned sub-study and analysis from an international, multicentre, prospective cohort study of elective and emergency patients undergoing surgery during October 2020. Patients from all surgical specialties were included. The primary outcome measure was venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis) within 30 days of surgery. SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was defined as peri-operative (7 days before to 30 days after surgery); recent (1–6 weeks before surgery); previous (≥7 weeks before surgery); or none. Information on prophylaxis regimens or pre-operative anti-coagulation for baseline comorbidities was not available. Postoperative venous thromboembolism rate was 0.5% (666/123,591) in patients without SARS-CoV-2; 2.2% (50/2317) in patients with peri-operative SARS-CoV-2; 1.6% (15/953) in patients with recent SARS-CoV-2; and 1.0% (11/1148) in patients with previous SARS-CoV-2. After adjustment for confounding factors, patients with peri-operative (adjusted odds ratio 1.5 (95%CI 1.1–2.0)) and recent SARS-CoV-2 (1.9 (95%CI 1.2–3.3)) remained at higher risk of venous thromboembolism, with a borderline finding in previous SARS-CoV-2 (1.7 (95%CI 0.9–3.0)). Overall, venous thromboembolism was independently associated with 30-day mortality (5.4 (95%CI 4.3–6.7)). In patients with SARS-CoV-2, mortality without venous thromboembolism was 7.4% (319/4342) and with venous thromboembolism was 40.8% (31/76). Patients undergoing surgery with peri-operative or recent SARS-CoV-2 appear to be at increased risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism compared with patients with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Optimal venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment are unknown in this cohort of patients, and these data should be interpreted accordingly