Dataset Information

A Systematic Review on Guidelines and Recommendations for Urology Standard of Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Context

The first case of the new coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2), was identified in Wuhan, China, in late 2019. Since then, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak was reclassified as a pandemic, and health systems around the world have faced an unprecedented challenge.

Objective

To summarize guidelines and recommendations on the urology standard of care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Evidence acquisition

Guidelines and recommendations published between November 2019 and April 17, 2020 were retrieved using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL. This was supplemented by searching the web pages of international urology societies. Our inclusion criteria were guidelines, recommendations, or best practice statements by international urology organizations and reference centers about urological care in different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Of 366 titles identified, 15 guidelines met our criteria.

Evidence synthesis

Of the 15 guidelines, 14 addressed emergency situations and 12 reported on assessment of elective uro-oncology procedures. There was consensus on postponing radical prostatectomy except for high-risk prostate cancer, and delaying treatment for low-grade bladder cancer, small renal masses up to T2, and stage I seminoma. According to nine guidelines that addressed endourology, obstructed or infected kidneys should be decompressed, whereas nonobstructing stones and stent removal should be rescheduled. Five guidelines/recommendations discussed laparoscopic and robotic surgery, while the remaining recommendations focused on outpatient procedures and consultations. All recommendations represented expert opinions, with three specifically endorsed by professional societies. Only the European Association of Urology guidelines provided evidence-based levels of evidence (mostly level 3 evidence).

Conclusions

To make informed decisions during the COVID-19 pandemic, there are multiple national and international guidelines and recommendations for urologists to prioritize the provision of care. Differences among the guidelines were minimal.

Patient summary

We performed a systematic review of published recommendations on urological practice during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which provide guidance on prioritizing the timing for different types of urological care.

SUBMITTER: Heldwein FL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7274599 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimThe management of urology patient is currently disrupted by the COVID-19 epidemic. In the field of functional urology, there are clinical situations with a high risk of complication if management is delayed and a great heterogeneity of advisable reprogramming times after cancellation. A prioritization of functional urology procedures is necessary to adapt management during the COVID-19 crisis and to better organize post-epidemic recovery.Material and methodsThe advice of AFU scientific committees in the field of functional urology (neuro-urology, female and perineology, male LUTS) was requested and supplemented by a review of the currently available recommendations on the subject of urology and COVID-19. These opinions were combined to draw up temporary recommendations to help reorganize practices during the epidemic and prepare the post-critical phase.ResultsMost of the recommendations available on career-oriented social networks (Twitter, LinkedIn) or in literature concern cancer or general urology. Eight out of ten propose a cancellation of all functional urology procedures without distinction. But the 3 AFU committees covering the field of functional urology have identified three clinical situations in which surgical procedures that can be maintained during the COVID-19 epidemic (priority level A): conclusion of a neuromodulation test in progress (implantation or explantation), botulinum toxin A bladder injections for unbalanced neurologic bladder, cystectomy and ileal conduit for urinary fistula in perineal bedsore or refractory unbalanced neurologic bladder with acute renal failure and vesico-enteric or prostato-pubic fistulas. Management adaptation of the other pathologies are proposed, as well as the application of 3 priority levels (B, C, D) for rescheduled procedures for a better management of the post-crisis activity resumption.ConclusionThe joint functional urology committees indicate that there are specific clinical situations in this field that demand non-delayed care during COVID crisis. They underline the need to establish a hierarchy for the cancelled surgeries, in order to reduce the arm of long reschedule delays and to optimize post-lockdown activity resumption.

Project description:AimsIndividuals taking immunosuppressants are at increased susceptibility to viral infections in general. However, due to the novel nature of the COVID-19, there is a lack of evidence about the specific risks of the disease in this patient group. This systematic review aims to summarize the current international clinical guidelines to highlight areas where research is needed through critical appraisal of the evidence base of these guidelines.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines about the usage of immunosuppressants during the COVID-19 pandemic. Electronic databases including MEDLINE and the websites of relevant professional bodies were searched for English language guidelines that were published or updated between March 2020 and May 2020 in this area. We assessed the quality and consistency of guidelines. The evidence base underpinning these guidelines was critically appraised using GRADE criteria.ResultsTwenty-three guidelines were included. Most guidelines (n = 15, 65.2%) informed and updated evidence based on expert opinion. The methodological quality of the guidelines varied, ranging from 'very low' to 'moderate'. Guidelines consistently recommended that high-risk patients, including those who are taking high doses of steroids for more than a month, or a combination of two or more immunosuppressants, should be shielding during the outbreak. Most guidelines stated that steroids usage should not be stopped abruptly and advised on individualized risk-benefit analysis considering the risk of the effect of COVID-19 infection and the relapse of the autoimmune condition in patients.DiscussionClinical practice guidelines on taking immunosuppressants during the COVID-19 outbreak vary in quality. The level of evidence informing the available guidelines was generally low. Given the novel nature of COVID-19, the guidelines draw on existing knowledge and data, refer to the use of immunosuppressants and risks of serious infections of other aetiologies and have extrapolated these to form their evidence base.

Project description:BackgroundLombardy has been the first and one of the most affected European regions during the first and second waves of the novel coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]).ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on all urologic activities over a 17-wk period in the three largest public hospitals in Lombardy located in the worst hit area in Italy, and to assess the applicability of the authorities' recommendations provided for reorganising urology practice.Design setting and participantsA retrospective analysis of all urologic activities performed at three major public hospitals in Lombardy (Brescia, Bergamo, and Milan), from January 1 to April 28, 2020, was performed.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisJoin-point regression was used to identify significant changes in trends for all urologic activities. Average weekly percentage changes (AWPCs) were estimated to summarise linear trends. Uro-oncologic surgeries performed during the pandemic were tabulated and stratified according to the first preliminary recommendations by Stensland et al (Stensland KD, Morgan TM, Moinzadeh A, et al. Considerations in the triage of urologic surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eur Urol 2020;77:663-6) and according to the level of priority recommended by European Association of Urology guidelines.Results and limitationsThe trend for 2020 urologic activities decreased constantly from weeks 8-9 up to weeks 11-13 (AWPC range -41%, -29.9%; p < 0.001). One-third of uro-oncologic surgeries performed were treatments that could have been postponed, according to the preliminary urologic recommendations. High applicability to recommendations was observed for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) patients with intermediate/emergency level of priority, penile and testicular cancer patients, and upper tract urothelial cell carcinoma (UTUC) and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients with intermediate level of priority. Low applicability was observed for NMIBC patients with low/high level of priority, UTUC patients with high level of priority, prostate cancer patients with intermediate/high level of priority, and RCC patients with low level of priority.ConclusionsDuring COVID-19, we found a reduction in all urologic activities. High-priority surgeries and timing of treatment recommended by the authorities require adaptation according to hospital resources and local incidence.Patient summaryWe assessed the urologic surgeries that were privileged during the first wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the three largest public hospitals in Lombardy, worst hit by the pandemic, to evaluate whether high-priority surgeries and timing of treatment recommended by the authorities are applicable. Pandemic recommendations provided by experts should be tailored according to hospital capacity and different levels of the pandemic.