Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among asymptomatic patients undergoing preoperative COVID testing prior to cancer surgery: ASPECT study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic, with high rate of asymptomatic infections and increased perioperative complications, prompted widespread adoption of screening methods. We analyzed the incidence of asymptomatic infection and perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing cancer surgery. We also studied the impact on subsequent cancer treatment in those with COVID-19. METHODS: All patients who underwent elective and emergency cancer surgery from April to September 2020 were included. After screening for symptoms, a preoperative test was performed from nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs before the procedure. Patients were followed up for 30 days postoperatively and complications were noted. RESULTS: 2108 asymptomatic patients were tested, of which 200 (9.5%) tested positive. Of those who tested positive, 140 (70%) underwent the planned surgery at a median of 30 days from testing positive, and 20 (14.3%) had ≥ Grade III complications. Forty (20%) patients did not receive the intended treatment; 110 patients were retested in the Postoperative period, and 41 (37.3%) tested positive and 9(22%) patients died of COVID-related complications. CONCLUSION: Routine preoperative testing for COVID-19 helps to segregate patients with asymptomatic infection. Higher complications occur in those who develop COVID-19 in postoperative period. Prolonged delay in surgery after COVID infection may influence planned treatment.

Surgical Site Infections in patients undergoing major oncological surgery during the COVID-19 paNdemic (SCION): A propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There are reports of outcomes of elective major cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated if reinforcement of hand hygiene, universal masking, and distancing as a part of pandemic precautions led to a decrease in the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs) in major oncologic resections. METHODS: Propensity score matching using the nearest neighbor algorithm was performed on 3123 patients over seven covariates (age, comorbidities, surgery duration, prior treatment, disease stage, reconstruction, and surgical wound type) yielding 2614 matched (pre-COVID 1612 and COVID 1002) patients. Conditional logistic regression was used to identify if SSI incidence was lower amongst patients operated during the pandemic. RESULTS: There was a 4.2% (p = 0.006) decrease in SSI in patients operated during the pandemic. On multivariate regression, surgery during the COVID-19 period (odds ratio [OR] = 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.61-0.98; p = 0.03), prior chemoradiation (OR = 2.46; CI = 1.45-4.17; p < 0.001), duration of surgery >4 h (OR = 2.17; 95%CI = 1.55-3.05; p < 0.001) and clean contaminated wounds (OR = 2.50; 95% CI = 1.09-2.18; p = 0.012) were significantly associated with SSI. CONCLUSION: Increased compliance with hand hygiene, near-universal mask usage, and social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic possibly led to a 23% decreased odds of SSI in major oncologic resections. Extending these low-cost interventions in the post-pandemic era can decrease morbidity associated with SSI in cancer surgery.

The effect of COVID-19: Adopted changes and their impact on management of musculoskeletal oncology care at a tertiary referral centre.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted access to healthcare. Delay in diagnosis and onset of care increases cancer related mortality. We aim to analyse its impact on patient profile, hospital visits, morbidity in surgically treated patients and process outcomes. METHODS: We analysed an ambi-directional cohort from 16th March to June 30, 2020 (Pandemic cohort, PC) as compared to 2019 (Pre-pandemic cohort, PPC). We measured, new patient registrations, proportion of 'within state' patients vs 'rest of India', median time to treatment decision, proportion of patients seeking 'second opinions', modality of initial treatment (surgery/radiotherapy/chemotherapy), 30-day post-operative morbidity/mortality and conversion of inpatient-to 'teleconsult' in the PC. RESULTS: Between the 2 cohorts, new registrations declined from 235 to 69 (70% reduction). The percentage of 'within state' patients increased from 41.7% to 53.6% (11.9% increase). There was a decline in second opinion consults from 25% to 16%. The median time to decision-making decreased to 16 days in PC vs 20 days in PPC (20% reduction). Surgery was the first line of treatment in 40% as compared to 34% in the PPC with a mean time to surgery of 24 days in PC compared to 36 days in PPC (33% reduction). 66 surgeries were performed in the PC compared to 132 in the PPC. Thirty day post operative morbidity needing readmission remained similar (18% PC, vs 17% PPC). Perioperative intensive care remained similar in both cohorts. Teleconsultation was deemed medically safe in 92.8% (439/473 patients). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID 19 pandemic has substantially reduced access and onset to cancer care. Post operative morbidity and mortality did not seem to worsen with triage. Teleconsultation is an effective tool in optimizing follow up strategy.

Life or limb: an international qualitative study on decision making in sarcoma surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic is unprecedented as a global crisis over the last century. How do specialist surgeons make decisions about patient care in these unprecedent times? DESIGN: Between April and May 2020, we conducted an international qualitative study. Sarcoma surgeons from diverse global settings participated in 60 min interviews exploring surgical decision making during COVID-19. Interview data were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. SETTING: Participants represented public and private hospitals in 14 countries, in different phases of the first wave of the pandemic: Australia, Argentina, Canada, India, Italy, Japan, Nigeria, Singapore, Spain, South Africa, Switzerland, Turkey, UK and USA. PARTICIPANTS: From 22 invited sarcoma surgeons, 18 surgeons participated. Participants had an average of 19 years experience as a sarcoma surgeon. RESULTS: 17/18 participants described a decision they had made about patient care since the start of the pandemic that was unique to them, that is, without precedence. Common to 'unique' decisions about patient care was uncertainty about what was going on and what would happen in the future (theme 1: the context of uncertainty), the impact of the pandemic on resources or threat of the pandemic to overwhelm resources (theme 2: limited resources), perceived increased risk to self (theme 3: duty of care) and least-worst decision making, in which none of the options were perceived as ideal and participants settled on the least-worst option at that point in time (theme 4: least-worst decision making). CONCLUSIONS: In the context of rapidly changing standards of justice and beneficence in patient care, traditional decision-making frameworks may no longer apply. Based on the experiences of surgeons in this study, we describe a framework of least-worst decision making. This framework gives rise to actionable strategies that can support decision making in sarcoma and other specialised fields of surgery, both during the current crisis and beyond.

A Survey of Personnel Protective equipment's (PPE) Use and Comfort Levels Among Surgeons During Routine Cancer Surgery in the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Personnel protective equipment (PPE) are recommended during surgery even in COVID-19 negative patients especially in a high-prevalence region due to its higher false-negative rates. However, the use of PPE has not been universal mainly due to the perception of discomfort and associated stress and fatigue. This study was done to understand the pattern of PPE use by cancer surgeons during the pandemic and the associated discomfort, stress, and fatigue with its use. The survey, consisting of 29 questions, was circulated widely across the country by email and chat groups among cancer surgeons. The study was registered with the Clinical Trials Registry of India (CTRI/2020/08/027050). We received a total of 342 evaluable responses that could be included for analysis. All the respondents used appropriate PPE in different combinations. N-95 mask and the face shield were the two components of the PPE that gave rise to a lot of discomforts. Fogging (of face shields) (p < 0.001,OR 3.61), dryness of mouth (p < 0.001,OR 3.35), and breathing difficulty/feeling of suffocation (p = 0.034,OR 1.68) contributed to the stress, whereas headache (p < 0.001,OR 11.34) and breathing difficulty/feeling of suffocation (p < 0.001,OR 4.24) contributed to the fatigue associated with PPE use the most. PPE was routinely used during cancer surgery in COVID-19 negative patients during the pandemic. However, most surgeons experienced different degrees of discomfort, especially with the N-95 masks and eye protection. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13193-021-01316-6.

Outcomes of Elective Major Cancer Surgery During COVID 19 at Tata Memorial Centre: Implications for Cancer Care Policy.

BACKGROUND: Overburdened systems and concerns of adverse outcomes have resulted in deferred cancer surgeries with devastating consequences. In this COVID pandemic, the decision to continue elective cancer surgeries, and their subsequent outcomes, are sparsely reported from hotspots. METHODS: A prospective database of the Department of Surgical Oncology was analysed from March 23rd to April 30th, 2020. FINDINGS: Four hundred ninety-four elective surgeries were performed (377 untested and 117 tested for Covid 19 before surgery). Median age was 48 years with 13% (n = 64) above the age of 60 years. Sixty-eight percent patients were American Society of Anaesthesiology (ASA) grade I. As per surgical complexity grading, 71 (14·4%) cases were lower grade (I-III) and 423 (85.6%) were higher grade complex surgeries (IV - VI).Clavien-Dindo ≥ grade III complications were 5.6% (n = 28) and there were no postoperative deaths. Patients >60 years documented 9.3% major complications compared to 5.2% in <60 years (P = 0.169). The median hospital stay was 1 to 9 days across specialties.Postoperatively, 26 patients were tested for COVID 19 and 6 tested positive. They all had higher grade surgeries but none required escalated or intensive care treatment related to COVID infection. INTERPRETATION: A combination of scientific and administrative rationale contributed to favorable outcomes after major elective cancer surgeries. These results support the continuation of elective major cancer surgery in regions with Covid 19 trends similar to India.

Compliance and perception about personal protective equipment among health care workers involved in the surgery of COVID-19 negative cancer patients during the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Health care workers (HCWs) are at risk of getting infected while at work, for example, operating room (OR), hence it is pertinent that they don all the appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) to minimize the chance of getting infected. METHODS: A COVID-19 specific briefing and debriefing form was created and used in the OR along with the World Health Organization surgical safety checklist to reinforce the use of appropriate PPE. An audit was subsequently done to understand the compliance to PPE use, followed by a survey based on the findings of the audit to understand the issues related to noncompliance. RESULTS: The form was used in 183 out of the 238 (77%) surgeries performed during a months' time. The overall compliance for PPE usage was 96.3%. Noncompliance was seen most often for eye protection (45/567) (P = .01). The survey revealed that this was mostly among surgeons mainly due to discomfort, poor visibility, and frequent fogging. CONCLUSIONS: Our HCW were adapting well to the new normal of donning appropriate PPE in the OR, except for the eye protection due to discomfort and visibility related issues. This is important to know so that necessary changes could be introduced to better the compliance.