Evolving Trends in the Management of Acute Appendicitis During COVID-19 Waves: The ACIE Appy II Study.

BACKGROUND: In 2020, ACIE Appy study showed that COVID-19 pandemic heavily affected the management of patients with acute appendicitis (AA) worldwide, with an increased rate of non-operative management (NOM) strategies and a trend toward open surgery due to concern of virus transmission by laparoscopy and controversial recommendations on this issue. The aim of this study was to survey again the same group of surgeons to assess if any difference in management attitudes of AA had occurred in the later stages of the outbreak. METHODS: From August 15 to September 30, 2021, an online questionnaire was sent to all 709 participants of the ACIE Appy study. The questionnaire included questions on personal protective equipment (PPE), local policies and screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection, NOM, surgical approach and disease presentations in 2021. The results were compared with the results from the previous study. RESULTS: A total of 476 answers were collected (response rate 67.1%). Screening policies were significatively improved with most patients screened regardless of symptoms (89.5% vs. 37.4%) with PCR and antigenic test as the preferred test (74.1% vs. 26.3%). More patients tested positive before surgery and commercial systems were the preferred ones to filter smoke plumes during laparoscopy. Laparoscopic appendicectomy was the first option in the treatment of AA, with a declined use of NOM. CONCLUSION: Management of AA has improved in the last waves of pandemic. Increased evidence regarding SARS-COV-2 infection along with a timely healthcare systems response has been translated into tailored attitudes and a better care for patients with AA worldwide.

Multicentre cohort study of acute cholecystitis management during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: To analyse acute cholecystitis (AC) management during the first pandemic outbreak after the recommendations given by the surgical societies estimating: morbidity, length of hospital stay, mortality and hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection rate. METHODS: Multicentre-combined (retrospective-prospective) cohort study with AC patients in the Community of Madrid between 1st March and 30th May 2020. 257 AC patients were involved in 16 public hospital. Multivariant binomial logistic regression (MBLR) was applied to mortality. RESULTS: Of COVID-19 patients, 30 were diagnosed at admission and 12 patients were diagnosed during de admission or 30 days after discharge. In non-COVID-19 patients, antibiotic therapy was received in 61.3% of grade I AC and 40.6% of grade II AC. 52.4% of grade III AC were treated with percutaneous drainage (PD). Median hospital stay was 5 [3-8] days, which was higher in the non-surgical treatment group with 7.51 days (p < 0.001) and a 3.25% of mortality rate (p < 0.21). 93.3% of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection at admission were treated with non-surgical treatment (p = 0.03), median hospital stay was 11.0 [7.5-27.5] days (p < 0.001) with a 7.5% of mortality rate (p > 0.05). In patients with hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection, 91.7% of grade I-II AC were treated with non-surgical treatment (p = 0.037), with a median hospital stay of 16 [4-21] days and a 18.2% mortality rate (p > 0.05). Hospital-acquired infection risk when hospital stay is > 7 days is OR 4.7, CI 95% (1.3-16.6), p = 0.009. COVID-19 mortality rate was 11.9%, AC severity adjusted OR 5.64 (CI 95% 1.417-22.64). In MBLR analysis, age (OR 1.15, CI 95% 1.02-1.31), SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR 14.49, CI 95% 1.33-157.81), conservative treatment failure (OR 8.2, CI 95% 1.34-50.49) and AC severity were associated with an increased odd of mortality. CONCLUSION: In our population, during COVID-19 pandemic, there was an increase of non-surgical treatment which was accompanied by an increase of conservative treatment failure, morbidity and hospital stay length which may have led to an increased risk hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection. Age, SARS-CoV-2 infection, AC severity and conservative treatment failure were mortality risk factors.

Recommendations on intervention for hepatobiliary oncological surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. / Recomendaciones de actuación en cirugía oncológica hepatobiliopancreática durante la pandemia COVID-19.

The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic requires an analysis in the field of oncological surgery, both on the risk of infection, with very relevant clinical consequences, and on the need to generate plans to minimize the impact on possible restrictions on health resources. The AEC is making a proposal for the management of patients with hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) malignancies in the different pandemic scenarios in order to offer the maximum benefit to patients, minimising the risks of COVID-19 infection, and optimising the healthcare resources available at any time. This requires the coordination of the different treatment options between the departments involved in the management of these patients: medical oncology, radiotherapy oncology, surgery, anaesthesia, radiology, endoscopy department and intensive care. The goal is offer effective treatments, adapted to the available resources, without compromising patients and healthcare professionals safety.

Elective Surgery During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic (COVID-19): A Morbimortality Analysis and Recommendations on Patient Prioritisation and Security Measures

INTRODUCTION: The spread of the SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) has required adaptation by hospitals affected by the pandemic, which has caused a reduction in elective surgical activity. METHODS: Retrospective study of patients operated on in the previous month and during the peak of the pandemic. We analysed the COVID-19 infection rate, the severity of respiratory infection according to the Brescia respiratory COVID-19 severity scale, the adopted therapeutic measures and the overall postoperative complications. RESULTS: From 17(th) February to 31(st) March 2020, there was a progressive decrease in surgical activity, with only 213 patients operated on. This comprised 59 (27.8%) elective operations for oncological diseases, 97 (45.5%) elective operations for benign diseases and 57 (26.7%) as urgent procedures. There was a progressive increase in the rate of infection by COVID-19, with a total of 15 cases (7%). This included 10 patients (16.9%) in the elective group for oncological disease, 1 (1%) in the elective surgery group for benign disease and 4 (7%) in the urgent surgery group (P<.001). Five patients presented with a severe respiratory infection, of which 4 were affected by oncological disease. There were 3 deaths (1.4%), which were all due to the worsening of a respiratory infection. CONCLUSIONS: The patients undergoing the surgical procedures showed high rates of COVID-19 infection and postoperative complications, especially the patients with oncological diseases. Local resumption of surgical activity must be based on the prioritisation of the cases to be operated on, respecting certain premises of security and optimisation of the available resources.