ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 disease, caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus, has been one of the worst pandemics ever to hit the human mankind. Undoubtedly the start of the second wave of COVID-19 has literally ripped apart the hearts of millions of people. Cancer patients have been left of the beaten track to their fate, with no access to treatments. Intravesical BCG instillation is the standard of care for patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Several patients were in the middle of their treatment regimen when this pandemic struck. As slowly the word is recuperating from concussion effect of this pandemic and routine health services are being restored, uro-oncologist will face a unique scenario with respect to intravesical BCG therapy i.e., whether to restart the course of BCG therapy or to continue course from where it was interrupted. There are no studies in literature to directly answer this peculiar question and to resolve this dilemma. So, we in this review article propose to explore the literature for the most appropriate therapeutic regimen for these patients with interruption of intravesical BCG therapy. We plan to divide the patients with interruption to BCG therapy into the following three groups:Group 1: Patients who had interruption during the induction period.Group 2: Patients who completed the induction course but maintenance course could not be started.Group 3: Patients who had interruption during maintenance phase of BCG therapy. We will compile the recent recommendations by NCCN, AUA, and EAU for the administration of intravesical BCG in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. We herein want to review the literature to propose the most appropriate strategy, its safety profile for these subsets of patients. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13193-023-01742-8.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic with its plenitude of hardships has been a challenge for residents in training. Besides the fear of contracting the disease, the complete reconfiguration of hospital services has severely affected the surgical residency programs across India. The current study highlights the lacunae that have arisen in the residency programs and design appropriate solutions to reframe the remaining part of the surgical training. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study is an observational study based on a questionnaire survey done in November 2020 aimed at gauging the mood and perspective of residents across India pursuing surgical residency programs on how the pandemic has impacted various domains of their residency namely surgical training, clinical skills, research, academic curriculum, and mental health. The analysis was performed using an Internet-based program. RESULTS: Seventy-eight percent of residents felt that they have lost crucial months of surgical training. Impact on clinical skills was reported by 73.9% of residents. Almost half of the residents (49.1%) believed that there has been a definite increase in research activities and 81.7% believed that the academic curriculum was affected during the past 6 months. Furthermore, 86% of respondents admitted to have had a profound impact on their mental health as a result of the pandemic. CONCLUSION: Formulating reform policies in the current residency programs is paramount to train the current and future generation of surgeons. Whereas personal safety and wellness of the residents is paramount during these times, residency training via digital medical education and various other innovative ways needs to continue.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 disease has resulted in an almost complete shutdown of all services worldwide. Hospitals continued to provide emergency services and treatment for COVID-19 disease. Teaching hospitals like ours had another responsibility at hand; training of our surgical residents. Not allowing this pandemic to take away months of training, we resorted to online virtual training programs, for continuing academic activities. After having conducted thirty such sessions, we took feedback from the participating students and faculty members to evaluate the usefulness of this new initiative and identify the lacunae that needed to be addressed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The initial twenty classes were held on the GoTo Meeting ® online platform, whereas the last ten were conducted using the Google Meet application. A 20-item questionnaire covering four broad domains of general perception, feasibility, knowledge gained, and drawbacks was circulated, and 19 responses were registered anonymously. Strength, weakness, opportunity, and threat analysis was done based on the responses received. RESULTS: About 89.5% of the participants believed that online classes were the ideal platform for continuing education and 84.2% of the participants were overall satisfied with the whole exercise. The Achilles' heel was the availability of a good Internet connection, and the major lacunae were the poor quality of video and audio transmission. Seventy-four percent of the participants wanted to continue online training in the future too, whereas 26% wanted to revert to the traditional face-to-face teaching. CONCLUSION: Online virtual training classes are an effective and feasible alternative to traditional teaching in times such as these, which demanded strict social distancing. It naturally lacked the warmth and personal touch of the traditional teaching classes, but it allowed us to continue teaching our residents and also prepare them to face the biggest menace of all times.
ABSTRACT
The Corona Virus Disease-2019 (COVID-19), one of the most devastating pandemics ever, has left thousands of cancer patients to their fate. The future course of this pandemic is still an enigma, but health care services are expected to resume soon in a phased manner. This might be a long drawn process and we need to have policies in place, to be able to fight both, the SARS-CoV-2 virus and cancer, simultaneously, and emerge triumphant. An extensive literature search for impact of delay in management of various urological malignancies was carried out. Expert opinions were sought wherever there was paucity of evidence, in order to reach a consensus and come up with recommendations for directing uro-oncology services in the times of COVID-19. The panel recommends deferring treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma by 3 to 6 months, except for those with ongoing hematuria and/or inferior vena cava thrombus, which warrant immediate surgery. Metastatic renal cell cancers should be started on targeted therapy. Low grade non-muscle invasive bladder cancers can be kept on active surveillance while high risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancers and muscle invasive bladder cancers should be treated within 3 months. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be avoided. Management of low and intermediate risk prostate cancer can be deferred for 3 to 6months while high risk prostate cancer patients can be initiated on neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy. Patients with testicular tumors should undergo high inguinal orchiectomy and be treated according to stage without delay, with stage I patients being offered surveillance. Penile cancers should undergo penectomy, while clinically negative groins can be kept on surveillance. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be avoided and adjuvant therapy should be deferred. We need to tailor our treatment strategies to the prevailing present conditions, so as to fight and defeat both, the SARS-CoV-2 virus and cancer. Protection of health care workers, judicious use of available resources, and a rational and balanced outlook towards different malignancies is the need of the hour.