Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Ann Thorac Surg ; 112(5): 1707-1715, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1347031

ABSTRACT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Cardiothoracic surgical patients are at risk of increased coronavirus disease severity. Several important factors influence the administration of the coronavirus disease vaccine in the perioperative period. This guidance statement outlines current information regarding vaccine types, summarizes recommendations regarding appropriate timing of administration, and provides information regarding side effects in the perioperative period for cardiac and thoracic surgical patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/pharmacology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cardiovascular Diseases/surgery , Perioperative Care/methods , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Thoracic Surgical Procedures , Vaccination/standards , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Humans , Pandemics
2.
J Emerg Crit Care Med ; 52021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1285625

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has overwhelmed hospital systems in multiple countries and necessitated caring for patients in atypical healthcare settings. The goal of this study was to ascertain if the conventional critical care severity scores qSOFA, SOFA, APACHE-II, and SAPS-II could predict which patients admitted to the hospital from an emergency department would eventually require intensive care. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective cohort study enrolled patients admitted to Vanderbilt University Hospital from the emergency room with symptomatic, confirmed COVID-19 infection between March 8, 2020 through May 15, 2020. Clinical phenotyping was performed by chart abstraction, and the correlation of the qSOFA, SOFA, APACHE-II, and SAPS-II scores for the primary endpoint of ICU admission and secondary endpoint of in-hospital mortality was evaluated. RESULTS: During the study period, 128 patients were admitted to Vanderbilt University Hospital from the emergency room with COVID-19. Of these, 39 patients eventually required intensive care; the remaining 89 were discharged from the medical ward. All severity of illness scores demonstrated at least moderate ability to identify patients who would die or require ICU admission. Of the three severity of illness scores assessed, the APACHE-II score performed best with an AUC of 0.851 (95% CI: 0.786 to 0.917) for identifying patient that would require ICU admission. No patient with an APACHE-II score at the time of presentation less than 8 or qSOFA of 0 required intensive care unit (ICU) admission. All patients with an APACHE-II score less than 10 or qSOFA score of 0 survived to hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: The APACHE-II score accurately predicts the eventual need for ICU admission. This may allow for risk-stratification of patients safe to treat in alternative health care settings and prognostic enrichment to accelerate clinical trials of COVID-19 therapies.

3.
Surg Endosc ; 35(11): 6081-6088, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-898015

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Surgical society guidelines have recommended changing the treatment strategy for early esophageal cancer during the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Delaying resection can allow for interim disease progression, but the impact of this delay on mortality is unknown. The COVID-19 infection rate at which immediate operative risk exceeds benefit is unknown. We sought to model immediate versus delayed surgical resection in a T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: A decision analysis model was developed, and sensitivity analyses performed. The base case was a 65-year-old male smoker presenting with cT1b esophageal adenocarcinoma scheduled for esophagectomy during the COVID-19 pandemic. We compared immediate surgical resection to delayed resection after 3 months. The likelihood of key outcomes was derived from the literature where available. The outcome was 5-year overall survival. RESULTS: Proceeding with immediate esophagectomy for the base case scenario resulted in slightly improved 5-year overall survival when compared to delaying surgery by 3 months (5-year overall survival 0.74 for immediate and 0.73 for delayed resection). In sensitivity analyses, a delayed approach became preferred when the probability of perioperative COVID-19 infection increased above 7%. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate resection of early esophageal cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic did not decrease 5-year survival when compared to resection after 3 months for the base case scenario. However, as the risk of perioperative COVID-19 infection increases above 7%, a delayed approach has improved 5-year survival. This balance should be frequently re-examined by surgeons as infection risk changes in each hospital and community throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Esophageal Neoplasms , Aged , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophagectomy , Humans , Male , Neoplasm Staging , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL