12 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

    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

    P2-15-07: The Need for Additional Surgeries to Adequately Excise Early Breast Cancers May Have a Negative Impact on Local Recurrence.

    Full text link
    Abstract Background: Breast conservation surgery (BCS) is considered the standard of care for the treatment of early stage breast cancer (ESBC, AJCC stage 1 and 2). 20 to 50% of patients will require further surgery for positive or close margins. There is recent data suggesting that re-operation can have a negative impact on local and distant recurrences. Our aim is to examine the effects of multiple surgeries to obtain adequate margins on breast cancer recurrence, metastatic disease and survival. Methods: We reviewed a prospectively maintained breast cancer database at the University Health Network and included all women who had BCS for their first diagnosis of ESBC between January 2004 and December 2007. Patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were excluded. We collected patient demographics, surgical pathology, adjuvant therapy and follow up outcome data, which included local recurrence, distant recurrence, cancer-specific survival and overall survival. Clinical and pathologic features were compared using chi-square analyses. Patients who had one lumpectomy were compared to those who had multiple surgeries by using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and log rank test. Results: Of a total of 744 patients (8 patients had bilateral cancer) 577 (77.6%) had one lumpectomy only (Group 1). 167 (22.4%) patients required further surgery (group 2 = LR+LM+LRM): 83 (11.1%) had a re-excision (LR), 69 (9.3%) had mastectomy (LM) and 15 (2%) had a re-excision followed by a mastectomy (LRM). Thus, a total of 85 (11.4%) patients had mastectomy to achieve adequate margins. All clinicopathologic factors and adjuvant systemic treatments were similar between the two groups except for age and use of adjuvant radiotherapy, which was related to that fact that many of those in group 2 had mastectomy. We observed a difference in disease-free survival favoring patients with lumpectomy only (group 1–3.4% vs. group 2–8.1%, p= 0.01) but there was no difference in distant metastasis (4.5% vs. 5.6%, p=0.56), cancer-specific survival (97.6% vs. 95.6%, p=0.20) and overall survival (6.9% vs 6.3%, p= 0.76) at a median follow up of 4.54 years. Conclusion: Despite having similar stage, grade, receptor status and adjuvant systemic therapies, having multiple surgeries for primary breast cancer appeared to be associated with decreased disease-free survival but had no difference in rates of distant metastatic disease, cancer-specific survival and overall survival. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2011;71(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-15-07.</jats:p

    Supplementary Material for: Antibiotic Prophylaxis against Surgical Site Infection after Open Hernia Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

    No full text
    Objective: The role of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) in the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) after hernia repair is debated. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the evidence on the value of prophylactic antibiotics in reducing the risks of SSI after open hernia surgery. Methods: We ran an online and manual search to identify relevant randomized controlled trials that compared prophylactic antibiotics to nonantibiotic controls in patients undergoing open surgical hernia repair. Data on SSI risk were extracted and pooled as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), using RevMan software. We further used the Cochrane risk of bias tool and GRADE assessment to evaluate the quality of generated evidence. Results: Twenty-nine studies (N = 8,616 patients) were included in the current analysis. Antibiotic prophylaxis reduced the risk of SSI in open hernia repair patients (RR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.53, 0.79). Subgroup analysis showed a significant benefit for antibiotics in mesh repair patients (RR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.48, 0.76) yet no significant difference in SSI risk after herniorrhaphy (RR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.54, 1.36). In addition, AP was associated with a significant reduction in superficial SSI risk (RR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.43, 0.72) but not deep SSI (RR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.30, 1.62). Further analysis showed a significant reduction in SSI risk with amoxicillin/clavulanic acid and cefazolin but not with cefuroxime. Conclusion: The present meta-analysis suggests that AP is beneficial prior to open mesh hernia repair. However, the quality of evidence was low, and further well-designed trials are needed

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

    Full text link

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

    Get PDF
    With at least 28 elective million operations delayed during the first three months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of patients who will require surgery after a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection is likely to increase rapidly. Operating on patients with an active perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection is now known to carry a very high pulmonary complication and mortality rate. Urgent information is needed to guide whether postponing surgery in patients with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection leads to a clinical benefit, and the optimal length of delay.no abstract availabl

    Death following pulmonary complications of surgery before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

    No full text
    Abstract Background This study aimed to determine the impact of pulmonary complications on death after surgery both before and during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Methods This was a patient-level, comparative analysis of two, international prospective cohort studies: one before the pandemic (January–October 2019) and the second during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (local emergence of COVID-19 up to 19 April 2020). Both included patients undergoing elective resection of an intra-abdominal cancer with curative intent across five surgical oncology disciplines. Patient selection and rates of 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications were compared. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality. Mediation analysis using a natural-effects model was used to estimate the proportion of deaths during the pandemic attributable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results This study included 7402 patients from 50 countries; 3031 (40.9 per cent) underwent surgery before and 4371 (59.1 per cent) during the pandemic. Overall, 4.3 per cent (187 of 4371) developed postoperative SARS-CoV-2 in the pandemic cohort. The pulmonary complication rate was similar (7.1 per cent (216 of 3031) versus 6.3 per cent (274 of 4371); P = 0.158) but the mortality rate was significantly higher (0.7 per cent (20 of 3031) versus 2.0 per cent (87 of 4371); P &amp;lt; 0.001) among patients who had surgery during the pandemic. The adjusted odds of death were higher during than before the pandemic (odds ratio (OR) 2.72, 95 per cent c.i. 1.58 to 4.67; P &amp;lt; 0.001). In mediation analysis, 54.8 per cent of excess postoperative deaths during the pandemic were estimated to be attributable to SARS-CoV-2 (OR 1.73, 1.40 to 2.13; P &amp;lt; 0.001). Conclusion Although providers may have selected patients with a lower risk profile for surgery during the pandemic, this did not mitigate the likelihood of death through SARS-CoV-2 infection. Care providers must act urgently to protect surgical patients from SARS-CoV-2 infection. </jats:sec

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

    No full text

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

    Full text link
    PURPOSEAs 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 METHODSThis 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).RESULTSOf 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).CONCLUSIONWithin 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.</jats:sec

    1013 Preoperative Nasopharyngeal Swab Testing and Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Patients Undergoing Elective Surgery During The SARS-Cov-2 Pandemic

    Get PDF
    Abstract Introduction This study aimed to evaluate the association between preoperative SARS-CoV-2 testing and postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing elective cancer surgery. Method International cohort study including adult patients undergoing elective surgery for cancer in areas affected by SARS-CoV-2 up to 19 April 2020 (NCT04384926). Patients suspected preoperatively of SARS-CoV-2 infection were excluded. The primary outcome measure was postoperative pulmonary complications at 30 days after surgery. Results Of 8784 patients (432 hospitals, 53 countries), 2303 patients (26.2%) underwent preoperative testing: 1458 (16.6%) had a swab test, 521 (5.9%) CT only, and 324 (3.7%) swab and CT. The overall pulmonary complication rate was 3.9% and SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was 2.6%. After risk adjustment, only a nasopharyngeal swab test (adjusted odds ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.68-0.98, p = 0.040) was associated with lower rates of pulmonary complications. Swab testing remained beneficial before major surgery and in high SARS-CoV-2 population risk areas but not before minor surgery in low incidence areas. Conclusions Preoperative nasopharyngeal swab testing was beneficial before major surgery and in high SARS-CoV-2 incidence areas. There was no proven benefit of swab testing before minor surgery in low incidence areas. </jats:sec
    corecore