ABSTRACT
During the COVID-19 pandemic, reports of delays and alterations in cancer treatment pathways have emerged. We aim to evaluate the proportional impact of the pandemic over time on standard care delivery in a large tertiary gynaecological cancer centre. Consecutive patient records from weekly multidisciplinary team meetings were collected prospectively between 6 March 2020 and 26 March 2021. In total, 1943 patient discussions were held in our multidisciplinary team meetings during the study period, with 2.1% standard management decisions being altered due to the pandemic, the majority of which occurred during the first wave. Amongst alterations, 87.5% were deferral of surgery, and, in 62.5% of cases, were due to reduced critical care capacity. The majority of patients were offered alternative treatment, and surgery once resources permitted. During subsequent waves of COVID-19, with similar reductions in critical care capacity, we demonstrate avoidance of a second major increase in standard care pathway alterations.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known about the subject? Recent evidence has demonstrated significant delays to cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, few studies have objectively evaluated the quantity and nature of deviations from both surgical and non-surgical standard gynaecological cancer care pathways.What the results of this study add? We examined in detail the effects of the pandemic on tertiary gynaecological cancer service delivery in our centre. The main impact was in the ability to perform major surgery due to reduced critical care capacity. However, with the majority of standard care alterations clustered during the first wave of the pandemic, we demonstrate how the implementation of a COVID-19 mitigation plan minimised service disruption during subsequent waves.What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? This study reinforces the importance of protecting gynaecological cancer services during situations where resources are limited. Having identified several key factors affected by the pandemic, we hope that our results will support others in coordinating responses to similar scenarios in future. Having not examined the effects of the pandemic on primary and secondary level cancer services, further research will be needed to evaluate the overall impact on long term patient outcomes.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Surgery is the cornerstone of gynecological cancer management, but inpatient treatment may expose both patients and healthcare staff to COVID-19 infections. Plans to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic have been implemented widely, but few studies have evaluated the effectiveness of these plans in maintaining safe surgical care delivery. AIM: To evaluate the effects of mitigating plans implemented on the delivery of gynecological cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A comparative cohort study of patients treated in a high-volume tertiary gyneoncological centre in the United Kingdom. Prospectively-recorded consecutive operations performed and early peri-operative outcomes during the same calendar periods (January-August) in 2019 and 2020 were compared. RESULTS: In total, 585 operations were performed (296 in 2019; 289 in 2020). There was no significant difference in patient demographics. Types of surgery performed were different (p = 0.034), with fewer cytoreductive surgeries for ovarian cancer and laparoscopic procedures (p = 0.002) in 2020. There was no difference in intra-operative complication rates, critical care admission rates or length of stay. One patient had confirmed COVID-19 infection (0.4%). The 30-day post-operative complication rates were significantly higher in 2020 than in 2019 (58 [20.1%] versus 32 [10.8%]; p = 0.002) for both minor and major complications. This increase, primarily from March 2020 onwards, coincided with the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. CONCLUSIONS: Maintaining surgical throughput with meticulous and timely planning is feasible during the COVID-19 pandemic but this was associated with an increase in post-operative complications due to a multitude of reasons.