Dataset Information

Impact on clinical practice of the preoperative screening of Covid-19 infection in surgical oncological patients. Prospective cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In the oncological patient, an COVID-19-Infection, whether symptomatic or asymptomatic, a surgical procedure may carry a higher postoperative morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to describe the impact on clinical practice of sequential preoperative screening for COVID-19-infection in deciding whether to proceed or postpone surgery.

Methods

Prospective, cohort study, based on consecutive patients' candidates for an oncological surgical intervention. Sequential preoperative screening for COVID-19-infection: two-time medical history (telematic and face-to-face), PCR and chest CT, 48 h before of surgical intervention. COVID-19-infection was considered positive if the patient had a suggestive medical history and/or PCR-positive and/or CT of pneumonia.

Results

Between April 15th and May 4th, 2020, 179 patients were studied, 97 were male (54%), mean (sd) age 66.7 (13,6). Sequential preoperative screening was performed within 48 h before to surgical intervention. The prevalence of preoperative COVID-19-infection was 4.5%, 95%CI:2.3-8.6% (8 patients). Of the operated patients (171), all had a negative medical history, PCR and chest CT. The complications was 14.8% (I-II) and 2.5% (III-IV). There was no mortality. The hospital stay was 3.1 (sd 2.7) days.In the 8 patients with COVID-19-infection, the medical history was suggestive in all of them, 7 presented PCR-positive and 5 had a chest CT suggestive of pneumonia. The surgical intervention was postponed between 15 and 21 days.

Conclusion

Preoperative screening for COVID-19-infection using medical history and PCR helped the surgeon to decide whether to go ahead or postpone surgery in oncological patients. The chest CT may be useful in unclear cases.

SUBMITTER: Castellvi J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7417291 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a global health crisis, and surgeons are at increased occupational risk of contracting COVID-19. The impact of the disease on prevalent general surgical practice is uncertain and continues to evolve. The study aimed to study the impact of COVID-19 on general surgical practice in India and the future implications of the pandemic. A survey questionnaire was designed and electronically circulated 1 month after India entered a national lockdown during COVID-19 pandemic, amongst members of Indian Association of Gastro-intestinal Endo-surgeons (IAGES), a surgical association with nearly eight thousand members from across the country. Survey questions pertaining to pre-COVID era surgical practices, impact on current practice, and financial implications were asked. Responses were collected and statistically analyzed. One hundred fifty-three surgeons completed the survey, of which only 9.2% were women. Majority (41%) were into practice for more than 20 years; 36.6% were into private practice at multiple hospitals (free-lancers). Amongst the respondents, 41.8% had mainly laparoscopic practice with mean outpatient consultation of 26 patients/day and elective surgeries of 43 cases/month prior to lockdown. Post-lockdown, daily outpatient consults reduced to 4 patients per day, and 77% had not performed a single elective procedure. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) chemoprophylaxis was reported by 52% surgeons. Personal protective equipment (PPE) was used by 52% for all cases, while 71.5% stated there are insufficient guidelines for future surgical practice in terms of safety. A drop of more than 75% of their monthly income was experienced by 52% surgeons, while 22% faced 50-75% reduction. One third (33%) of respondents own a hospital and are expecting a monthly financial liability of 2.25 million rupees (nearly 30,000 US dollars). COVID-19 has led to a drastic reduction in outpatient and elective surgical practices. There is a definite need for guidelines regarding safety for future surgical practices and solutions to overcome the financial liabilities in the near future.

Project description:BackgroundFindings of observational studies investigating the impact of transfusions are at odds with those of randomised controlled trials, raising concern that observational studies may be inappropriate to inform transfusion decisions. We examined whether observational data could replicate evidence from randomised controlled trials on restrictive transfusion in cardiac and orthopaedic surgery, and be generalised to broader specialties as well as to a lower haemoglobin transfusion threshold (7 g/dL).Material and methodsA multicentre, prospective cohort study was performed at three representative regional hospitals in China between 2015 and 2016. Participants were surgical inpatients (≥18 years; hospital stay ≥24 h) in six specialties: cardiac, cerebral, vascular (CCV), and orthopaedic, general, thoracic (non-CCV). Patients with a stable haemoglobin (7-10 g/dL) constituted the primary analytic sample, while patients with ≥500 mL intra-operative bleeding were analysed separately to avoid haemoglobin instability. The association of transfusion with surgical outcomes (death, in-hospital complications) was evaluated.ResultsThe transfusion rate was 10.7% in 36,607 patients (mean age, 52.5±14.3 years; 52.3% female). After restriction, stratification, and propensity score matching to reduce patients' heterogeneity, transfusion was unrelated to death (CCV: odds ratio [OR]=0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.16-3.39; non-CCV: OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.36-1.94) and the composite complication (CCV: OR 1.31, 95% CI: 0.63-2.72; non-CCV: OR=1.24, 95% CI: 0.81-1.90). The results were consistent in subgroups (elderly, coronary heart disease, malignant tumour, severe illness) and applicable to patients with significant bleeding after restoration of a stable haemoglobin.DiscussionTransfusion at a stable haemoglobin concentration of 7-10 g/dL did not alter surgical outcomes. Our results show the feasibility of observational data to expand restrictive transfusion to broader specialties and a lower transfusion threshold in surgical practice.