Academic surgery amid the COVID-19 pandemic: A perspective of the present and future challenges.

This narrative review describes the trials and tribulations of academic surgeons in four major cities of their respective countries and the solutions they retained to keep academia alive in their practice. The four pillars of an "academic surgeon" _teaching, producing scientific works presented in meetings, publications and research_ are dealt with bearing in mind the modifications brought about by the pandemic and the solutions to keep academia active. Throughout the pandemic, the ultimate goal has been and will be to improve care and train the next generation of surgeons and encourage and monitor researchers, guide the mentees through the tasks of leadership, and foster good sound presentations at scientific meetings and encourage innovative and fruitful publications. The pros and cons of the alternatives imposed by the pandemic for the above-mentioned academic components, based on the literature, are reviewed and analyzed as they are taking place today in Shanghai, Milan, Graz, TaiChung and Hsinchu. Our perspective for the future is that teaching will take a new aspect and make wide use of electronic platforms, but also, the face-to-face modality will surface again. According to local needs and funding, many will most likely choose the hybrid solution (electronic and presential). Production of scientific works in meetings has gained momentum, again with the hybrid solution being preferred. Scientific publications have already increased on topics that are no longer related to COVID-19, and both clinical and experimental research are flourishing. This review can provide insight to guide young and accomplished academic surgeons through these difficult times and beyond, promoting a renaissance of clinical research and relevant publications, teaching of surgery and scientific meetings with a hybrid approach, and, finally, contribute to the training and formation of a new generation of surgeons for the future post-COVID-19 era.

Enhancing safety of laparoscopic surgery in COVID-19 era: clinical experience with low-cost filtration devices.

BACKGROUND: Surgery in the era of the current COVID-19 pandemic has been curtailed and restricted to emergency and certain oncological indications, and requires special attention concerning the safety of patients and health care personnel. Desufflation during or after laparoscopic surgery has been reported to entail a potential risk of contamination from 2019-nCoV through the aerosol generated during dissection and/or use of energy-driven devices. In order to protect the operating room staff, it is vital to filter the released aerosol. METHODS: The assemblage of two easily available and low-cost filter systems to prevent potential dissemination of Coronavirus via the aerosol is described. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients underwent laparoscopic surgeries with the use of one of the two described tools, both of which proved to be effective in smoke evacuation, without affecting laparoscopic visualization. CONCLUSION: The proposed systems are cost-effective, easily assembled and reproducible, and provide complete viral filtration during intra- and postoperative release of CO2.

The risk of COVID-19 transmission by laparoscopic smoke may be lower than for laparotomy: a narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Surgical smoke is a well-recognized hazard in the operating room. At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, surgical societies quickly published guidelines recommending avoiding laparoscopy or to consider open surgery because of the fear of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 through surgical smoke or aerosol. This narrative review of the literature aimed to determine whether there are any differences in the creation of surgical smoke/aerosol between laparoscopy and laparotomy and if laparoscopy may be safer than laparotomy. METHODS: A literature search was performed using the Pubmed, Embase and Google scholar search engines, as well as manual search of the major journals with specific COVID-19 sections for ahead-of-print publications. RESULTS: Of 1098 identified articles, we critically appraised 50. Surgical smoke created by electrosurgical and ultrasonic devices has the same composition both in laparoscopy and laparotomy. SARS-CoV-2 has never been found in surgical smoke and there is currently no data to support its virulence if ever it could be transmitted through surgical smoke/aerosol. CONCLUSION: If laparoscopy is performed in a closed cavity enabling containment of surgical smoke/aerosol, and proper evacuation of smoke with simple measures is respected, and as long as laparoscopy is not contraindicated, we believe that this surgical approach may be safer for the operating team while the patient has the benefits of minimally invasive surgery. Evidence-based research in this field is needed for definitive determination of safety.