Impact of Intensive Care Unit bed shortage on the short-term outcomes of major liver surgery during the pandemic: better safe than sorry?

BACKGROUND: Preoperative criteria to establish the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission after major liver surgery have not been yet precisely defined and are often left to the anesthesiologist's judgment. The ICU bed shortage during the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged healthcare systems around the world. We sought to determine its impact on early outcomes of elective major liver surgery. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing major oncological liver surgery from a single institution. Two time periods were compared considering a complete ban on ICU beds during the pandemic (index period, from November 2020 to May 2021), and the smoothly running ICU facility before the pandemic (control period, from November 2018 to October 2020). The main outcomes were 30-day morbidity and mortality, length-of-stay, and 30-day readmission rates. RESULTS: Overall, 57 consecutive patients were identified, of whom 18 (32%) in the index period, and 39 (68%) in the control period, with 24 (62%) patients in the latter group admitted to ICU. No significant differences were found in terms of ASA score, P-POSSUM morbidity and mortality, operative times, and red blood cells transfusions between groups. The morbidity rate, as classified by the Clavien-Dindo system, was also similar. A slightly longer length-of-stay has been observed in the index period (mean difference of 1.12 [95%CI, -9.19;11.42] days; P=0.829) after controlling for age, gender, ASA score, and P-POSSUM. The 30-day readmission rate was comparable between the index and control periods (5.0% vs. 4.8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The ICU bed shortage in response to the COVID-19 emergency did not negatively impact on the early postoperative outcomes of major liver surgery.

First-line steroid treatment for spontaneous intracranial hypotension.

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous intracranial hypotension (SIH) is a syndrome characterized by low cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pressure and postural headaches, and affects 1 per 20,000 individuals every year. CASE REPORT: We report an otherwise healthy 38-year-old man admitted to the hospital with orthostatic headache that developed 48 h after a short-haul flight during which he sustained a neck injury due to turbulence. Neurological examination, blood analysis and computed tomography scan performed at the emergency service were normal. Brain and spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed diffuse pachymeningeal enhancement and contrast medium egress from the subarachnoid space into the epidural space at the level of C2. The patient was treated with bed rest, hydration and 1 mg/kg/day oral prednisone for 5 days, with a gradual withdrawal in the following 7 days. Complete symptomatic relief was observed after 16 days, with resolution of the pathological findings on brain and spinal MRI after 1 month, except for localized pachymeningeal enhancement. Clinical relief was maintained over time until last follow-up visit 9 months later. CONCLUSION: Successful conservative treatment barely exceeds one quarter of cases of SIH. The clinical benefits of steroids may result from several mechanisms of action, for example, improving brain oedema and inflammation, determining fluid retention, and facilitating reabsorption of the CSF from extradural space. Notwithstanding that epidural blood patch remains the most successful treatment for SIH, future studies should explore the effectiveness of steroids as first-line therapy in addition to the most commonly suggested measures of bed rest and hydration.

Impact of Hypogammaglobulinemia on the Course of COVID-19 in a Non-Intensive Care Setting: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background: Severity and mortality of COVID-19 largely depends on the ability of the immune system to clear the virus. Among various comorbidities potentially impacting on this process, the weight and the consequences of an antibody deficiency have not yet been clarified. Methods: We used serum protein electrophoresis to screen for hypogammaglobulinemia in a cohort of consecutive adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, hospitalized in non-intensive care setting between December 2020 and January 2021. The disease severity, measured by a validated score and by the need for semi intensive (sICU) or intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and the 30-day mortality was compared between patients presenting hypogammaglobulinemia (HYPO) and without hypogammaglobulinemia (no-HYPO). Demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 specific treatment during the hospital stay, disease duration, complications and laboratory parameters were also evaluated in both groups. Results: We enrolled 374 patients, of which 39 represented the HYPO cohort (10.4%). In 10/39 the condition was previously neglected, while in the other 29/39 hematologic malignancies were common (61.5%); 2/39 were on regular immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IgRT). Patients belonging to the HYPO group more frequently developed a severe COVID-19 and more often required sICU/ICU admission than no-HYPO patients. IgRT were administered in 8/39 during hospitalization; none of them died or needed sICU/ICU. Among HYPO cohort, we observed a significantly higher prevalence of neoplastic affections, of active oncologic treatment and bronchiectasis, together with higher prevalence of viral and bacterial superinfections, mechanical ventilation, convalescent plasma and SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies administration during hospital stay, and longer disease duration. Multivariate logistic regression analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression confirmed the impact of hypogammaglobulinemia on the COVID-19 severity and the probability of sICU/ICU admission. The analysis of the mortality rate in the whole cohort showed no significant difference between HYPO and no-HYPO. Conclusions: Hypogammaglobulinemia, regardless of its cause, in COVID-19 patients hospitalized in a non-intensive care setting was associated to a more severe disease course and more frequent admission to s-ICU/ICU, particularly in absence of IgRT. Our findings emphasize the add-value of routine serum protein electrophoresis evaluation in patients admitted with COVID-19 to support clinicians in patient care and to consider IgRT initiation during hospitalization.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on a tertiary referral proctology center: no one should be left behind.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has disrupted healthcare delivery. We aimed to describe a novel strategy to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on a tertiary referral proctology center during the first wave of infection in Italy. METHODS: All patients booked appointments at the Proctology Unit between March 9th and May 4th, 2020 were identified. Patients booked for a first visit underwent a structured remote consultation. Patients with perianal or sacrococcygeal abscesses, major anorectal bleeding, incoercible anal pain and red flags for malignancy were labelled as "non-deferrable." A flowchart was designed to comply with adequate assistance of proctologic patients. Demographics, clinical data and outcomes of in-office procedures were collected. RESULTS: On a total of 548 booked visits, 198 (36.1%) were cancelled before remote consultation. Of the remaining 350, 112 (32.0%) attended a follow-up visit. Among 238 (68.0%) patients undergoing remote consultation, 88 (25.1%) were deemed "deferrable" and 148 (42.3%) "non-deferrable." Two (0.6%) were hospitalized for COVID-19 while waiting for an outpatient visit. Twenty-five of 88 (28.4%) deferrable patients cancelled their appointment as felt no longer necessary. A total of 45 of 148 (30.4%) non deferrable patients (mean age, 46 years; 31% females) underwent in-office procedures, most often related to anal abscess and/or fistula (48.9%). Final diagnosis of malignancy occurred in four cases. A 55% increase in the number of in-office procedures was noted compared to the previous year. None of the attending patients nor staff members resulted COVID-19 positive during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the uncertainties accompanying the use of remote consultations in proctology, the results of this study may inform the development of strategies for restructuring activities in response to future emergencies of this magnitude.

Changes in hospital admissions and complications of acute appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Acute appendicitis (AA) is one of the most common emergencies in general surgery worldwide. During the pandemic, a significant decrease in the number of accesses to the emergency department for AA has been recorded in different countries. A systematic review of the current literature sought to determine the impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) on hospital admissions and complications of AA. Method: A systematic search was undertaken to identify repeated cross-sectional studies reporting the management of AA during the COVID-19 pandemic (index period) as compared to the previous year, or at the turn of lockdown (reference period). Data were abstracted on article (country of origin) and patients characteristics (adults, children [i.e. non adults, <18-year-old]), or mixed population) within the two given timeframes, including demographics, number of admissions for AA, number of appendectomies, and complicated appendectomies. Results: Of 201 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 54 studies from 22 world countries were included. In total, 27 (50%) were conducted on adults, 12 (22%) on children, and 15 (28%) on a mixed patients population. The overall rate ratio of admissions for AA between the two periods was 0.94 (95%CI, 0.75-1.17), with significant differences between studies on adults (0.90 [0.74-1.09]), mixed population (0.50 [0.27-0.90]), and children (1.50 [1.01-2.22]). The overall risk ratio of complicated AA was 1.65 (1.32-2.07), ranging from 1.32 in studies on children, to 2.45 in mixed population. Conclusion: The pandemic has altered the rate of admissions for AA and appendectomy, with parallel increased incidence of complicated cases in all age groups.

Comparison between Dexamethasone and Methylprednisolone Therapy in Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia Admitted to Non-Intensive Medical Units.

(1) Background: Data on different steroid compounds for the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) patients are still limited. The aim of this study was to compare COVID-19 patients admitted to non-intensive units and treated with methylprednisolone or dexamethasone. (2) Methods: This was a single-center retrospective study that included consecutive patients with COVID-19 hospitalized in medical wards during the second wave of the pandemic. Thirty-day mortality and the need for intensive or semi-intensive care were the main clinical outcomes analyzed in patients receiving methylprednisolone (60 mg/day) compared with dexamethasone (6 mg/day). Secondary outcomes included complication rates, length of hospital stay, and time to viral clearance. (3) Results: Two-hundred-forty-six patients were included in the analysis, 110 treated with dexamethasone and 136 with methylprednisolone. No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups of patients regarding 30-day mortality (OR 1.35, CI95% 0.71-2.56, p = 0.351) and the need for intensive or semi-intensive care (OR 1.94, CI95% 0.81-4.66, p = 0.136). The complication rates, length of hospital stay, and time to viral clearance did not significantly differ between the two groups. (4) Conclusions: In patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in non-intensive units, the choice of different steroid compounds, such as dexamethasone or methylprednisolone, did not affect the main clinical outcomes.

What paradigm shifts occurred in the management of acute diverticulitis during the COVID-19 pandemic? A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Acute colonic diverticulitis (ACD) is common in Western countries, with its prevalence increasing throughout the world. As a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), elective surgery and in-patients' visits have been cancelled or postponed worldwide. AIM: To systematically explore the impact of the pandemic in the management of ACD. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, MedxRiv, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched to 22 December 2020. Studies which reported on the management of patients with ACD during the COVID-19 pandemic were eligible. For cross sectional studies, outcomes of interest included the number of hospital admission for ACD, as well as key features of disease severity (complicated or not) across two time periods (pre- and during lockdown). RESULTS: A total of 69 papers were inspected, and 21 were eligible for inclusion. Ten papers were cross sectional studies from seven world countries; six were case reports; three were qualitative studies, and two review articles. A 56% overall decrease in admissions for ACD was observed during lockdown, peaking 67% in the largest series. A 4%-8% decrease in the rate of uncomplicated diverticulitis was also noted during the lockdown phase. An initial non-operative management was recommended for complicated diverticulitis, and encouraged to an out-of-hospital regimen. Despite initial concerns on the use of laparoscopy for Hinchey 3 and 4 patients to avoid aerosolized contamination, societal bodies have progressively mitigated their initial recommendations as actual risks are yet to be ascertained. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, fewer patients presented and were diagnosed with ACD. Such decline may have likely affected the spectrum of uncomplicated disease. Established outpatient management and follow up for selected cases may unburden healthcare resources in time of crisis.

E-consensus on telemedicine in colorectal surgery: a RAND/UCLA-modified study.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is revolutionizing healthcare delivery. The aim of the study was to reach consensus among experts on the possible applications of telemedicine in colorectal surgery. A group of 48 clinical practice recommendations (CPRs) was developed by a clinical guidance group based on coalescence of evidence and expert opinion. The Telemedicine in Colorectal Surgery Italian Working Group included 54 colorectal surgeons affiliated to the Italian Society of Colo-Rectal Surgery (SICCR) who were involved in the evaluation of the appropriateness of each CPR, based on published RAND/UCLA methodology, in two rounds. Stakeholders' median age was 44.5 (IQR 36-60) years, and 44 (81%) were males. Agreement was obtained on the applicability of telemonitoring and telemedicine for multidisciplinary pre-operative evaluation. The panel voted against the use of telemedicine for a first consultation. 15/48 statements deemed uncertain on round 1 and were re-elaborated and assessed by 51/54 (94%) panelists on round 2. Consensus was achieved in all but one statement concerning the cost of a teleconsultation. There was strong agreement on the usefulness of teleconsultation during follow-up of patients with diverticular disease after an in-person visit. This e-consensus provides the boundaries of telemedicine in colorectal surgery in Italy. Standardization of infrastructures and costs remains to be better elucidated.

E-consensus on telemedicine in proctology: A RAND/UCLA-modified study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 is revolutionizing healthcare delivery. The aim of this study was to reach a consensus among experts as to the possible applications of telemedicine in the proctologic field. METHODS: A group of 55 clinical practice recommendations was developed by a clinical guidance group based on coalescence of evidence and expert opinion. The Telemedicine in Proctology Italian Working Group included 47 Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery nominated experts evaluating the appropriateness of each clinical practice recommendations based on published RAND/UCLA methodology in 2 rounds. RESULTS: Stakeholder median age was 53 years (interquartile range limits 40-60), and 38 (81%) were men. Nine (19%) panelists reported no experience with telemedicine before the pandemic. Agreement was obtained on a minimum of 3 to 5 years of practice in the proctologic field before starting teleconsultations, which should be regularly paid, with advice and prescriptions incorporated into a formal report sent to the patient by e-mail along with a receipt. Of the panelists, 35 of 47 (74%) agreed that teleconsultation carries the risk of misdiagnosis of cancer, thus recommending an in-person assessment before scheduling any surgery. Fifteen additional clinical practice recommendations were re-elaborated in the second round and assessed by 44 of 47 (93.6%) panelists. The application of telemedicine for the diagnosis of common proctologic conditions (eg, hemorrhoidal disease, anal abscess and fistula, anal condylomas, and anal fissure) and functional pelvic floor disorders was generally considered inappropriate. Teleconsultation was instead deemed appropriate for the diagnosis and management of pilonidal disease. CONCLUSION: This e-consensus revealed the boundaries of telemedicine in Italy. Standardization of infrastructures, logistics, and legality remain to be better elucidated.

DElayed COloRectal cancer care during COVID-19 Pandemic (DECOR-19): Global perspective from an international survey.

BACKGROUND: The widespread nature of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been unprecedented. We sought to analyze its global impact with a survey on colorectal cancer care during the pandemic. METHODS: The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on preoperative assessment, elective surgery, and postoperative management of colorectal cancer patients was explored by a 35-item survey, which was distributed worldwide to members of surgical societies with an interest in colorectal cancer care. Respondents were divided into 2 comparator groups: (1) "delay" group: colorectal cancer care affected by the pandemic and (2) "no delay" group: unaltered colorectal cancer practice. RESULTS: A total of 1,051 respondents from 84 countries completed the survey. No substantial differences in demographics were found between the delay (745, 70.9%) and no delay (306, 29.1%) groups. Suspension of multidisciplinary team meetings, staff members quarantined or relocated to coronavirus disease 2019 units, units fully dedicated to coronavirus disease 2019 care, and personal protective equipment not readily available were factors significantly associated to delays in endoscopy, radiology, surgery, histopathology, and prolonged chemoradiation therapy-to-surgery intervals. In the delay group, 48.9% of respondents reported a change in the initial surgical plan, and 26.3% reported a shift from elective to urgent operations. Recovery of colorectal cancer care was associated with the status of the outbreak. Practicing in coronavirus disease-free units, no change in operative slots and staff members not relocated to coronavirus disease 2019 units were statistically associated with unaltered colorectal cancer care in the no delay group, while the geographic distribution was not. CONCLUSION: Global changes in diagnostic and therapeutic colorectal cancer practices were evident. Changes were associated with differences in health care delivery systems, hospital's preparedness, resource availability, and local coronavirus disease 2019 prevalence rather than geographic factors. Strategic planning is required to optimize colorectal cancer care.

A worldwide survey on proctological practice during COVID-19 lockdown (ProctoLock 2020): a cross-sectional analysis.

AIM: Proctology is one of the surgical specialties that has suffered the most during COVID-19 pandemic. Using a cross-sectional non-incentivised World Wide Web survey, we aimed to snapshot the current status of proctological practice in six world regions. METHOD: Surgeons affiliated to renowned scientific societies with an interest in coloproctology were invited to join the survey. Members of the ProctoLock Working Group enhanced recruitment by direct invitation. The predictive power of respondents' and hospitals' demographics on the change of status of surgical and outpatient activities was calculated. RESULTS: Respondents (n = 1050) were mostly men (79%), with a mean age of 46.9 years, at consultant level (79%), practising in academic hospitals (53%) offering a dedicated proctology service (68%). A total of 119 (11%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The majority (54%) came from Europe. Participants from Asia reported a higher proportion of unaltered practice (17%), while those from Europe had the highest proportion of fully stopped practice (20%). The likelihood of ongoing surgical practice was higher in men (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.13-2.09; P = 0.006), in those reporting readily availability of personal protective equipment (PPE) (OR 1.40, 1.08-1.42; P = 0.012) and in centres that were partially or not at all involved in COVID-19 care (OR 2.95, 2.14-4.09; P < 0.001). This chance decreased by 2% per year of respondent's age (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Several factors including different screening policies and resource capacity affected the current status of proctological practice. This information may help health authorities to formulate effective preventive strategies to limit curtailment of care of these patients during the pandemic.

Deadlock of proctologic practice in Italy during COVID-19 pandemic: a national report from ProctoLock2020.

Proctology is one of the surgical specialties that suffered the most during COVID-19 pandemic. Using data from a cross-sectional worldwide web survey, we aimed to snapshot the current status of proctologic practice in Italy with differences between three macro areas (North, Centre, South). Specialists affiliated to renowned scientific societies with an interest in coloproctology were invited to join a 27-item survey. Predictive power of respondents' and hospitals' demographics on the change of status of surgical activities was calculated. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04392245). Of 299 respondents from Italy, 94 (40%) practiced in the North, 60 (25%) in the Centrer and 82 (35%) in the South and Islands. The majority were men (79%), at consultant level (70%), with a mean age of 46.5 years, practicing in academic hospitals (39%), where a dedicated proctologist was readily available (68%). Southern respondents were more at risk of infection compared to those from the Center (OR, 3.30; 95%CI 1.46; 7.47, P = 0.004), as were males (OR, 2.64; 95%CI 1.09; 6.37, P = 0.031) and those who routinely tested patients prior to surgery (OR, 3.02; 95%CI 1.39; 6.53, P = 0.005). The likelihood of ongoing surgical practice was higher in the South (OR 1.36, 95%CI 0.75; 2.46, P = 0.304) and in centers that were not fully dedicated to COVID-19 care (OR 4.00, 95%CI 1.88; 8.50, P < 0.001). The results of this survey highlight important factors contributing to the deadlock of proctologic practice in Italy and may inform the development of future management strategies.

Use of RAAS Inhibitors and Risk of Clinical Deterioration in COVID-19: Results From an Italian Cohort of 133 Hypertensives.

BACKGROUND: The effect of chronic use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors on the severity of COVID-19 infection is still unclear in patients with hypertension. We aimed to investigate the association between chronic use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and COVID-19-related outcomes in hypertensive patients. METHODS: A single-center study was conducted on 133 consecutive hypertensive subjects presenting to the emergency department with acute respiratory symptoms and/or fever who were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection between 9 and 31 March 2020. RESULTS: All patients were grouped according to their chronic antihypertensive medications (ACEIs, N = 40; ARBs, N = 42; not on RAAS inhibitors, N = 51). There was no statistical difference between ACEIs and ARBs groups in terms of hospital admission rate, oxygen therapy, and need for noninvasive ventilation. Patients chronically treated with RAAS inhibitors showed a significantly lower rate of admission to semi-intensive/intensive care units, when compared with the non-RAAS population (odds ratio (OR) 0.25, confidence interval (CI) 95% 0.09-0.66, P = 0.006). Similarly, the risk of mortality was lower in the former group, although not reaching statistical significance (OR 0.56, CI 95% 0.17-1.83, P = 0.341). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that chronic use of RAAS inhibitors does not negatively affect clinical course of COVID-19 in hypertensive patients. Further studies are needed to confirm this finding and determine whether RAAS inhibitors may have a protective effect on COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality.

Impact of COVID-19 Outbreak on Healthcare Workers in Italy: Results from a National E-Survey.

Italy has been the first-hit European country to face the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Aim of this survey was to assess in depth the impact of the outbreak on healthcare workers (HCW). A 40-item online survey was disseminated via social media inviting Italian HCW, with questions exploring demographics, health status and work environment of respondents. A total of 527 were invited to take part in March 2020, of whom 74% (n = 388) responded to the survey. Of these, 235 (61%) were women. HCW were mostly physicians (74%), from high-prevalence regions (52%). 25% experienced typical symptoms during the last 14 days prior to survey completion, with only 45% of them being tested for COVID-19. Among the tested population, 18 (18%) resulted positive for COVID-19, with 33% being asymptomatic. Only 22% of HCW considered personal protective equipment adequate for quality and quantity. Females and respondents working in high-risk sectors were more likely to rate psychological support as useful (OR, 1.78 [CI 95% 1.14-2.78] P = 0.012, and 2.02 [1.12-3.65] P = 0.020, respectively) and workload as increased (mean increase, 0.38 [0.06-0.69] P = 0.018; and 0.54 [0.16-0.92] P = 0.005, respectively). The insights from this survey may help authorities in countries where COVID-19 epidemic has not yet broken out. Management strategies should be promptly undertaken in order to enhance safety and optimise resource allocation.