Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
BJU International ; 09:09, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2019160

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine if management of ureteric stones in the United Kingdom changed during the COVID-19 pandemic and whether this affected patient outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a multicentre retrospective study of adults with CT-proven ureteric stone disease at 39 UK hospitals during a pre-pandemic period (23/3/19 to 22/6/19) and a period during the pandemic (the 3-month period after the first SARS-CoV-2 case at individual sites). The primary outcome was success of primary treatment modality, defined as no further treatment required for the index ureteric stone. Our study protocol was published prior to data collection. RESULTS: A total of 3735 patients were included (pre-pandemic=1956 patients;pandemic=1779 patients). Stone size was similar between groups (p>0.05). During the pandemic, patients had lower hospital admission rates (pre-pandemic=54.0% vs pandemic=46.5%, p<0.001), shorter length of stay (mean=4.1 vs. 3.3 days, p=0.02), and higher rates of use of medical expulsive therapy (17.4% vs. 25.4%, p<0.001). In patients who received interventional management (pre-pandemic n=787 vs. pandemic n=685), rates of ESWL (22.7% vs. 34.1%, p<0.001) and nephrostomy were higher (7.1% vs. 10.5%, p=0.03);and rates of ureteroscopy (57.2% vs. 47.5%, p<0.001), stent insertion (68.4% vs. 54.6%, p<0.001), and general anaesthetic (92.2% vs. 76.2%, p<0.001) were lower. There was no difference in success of primary treatment modality between patient cohorts (pre-pandemic=73.8% vs. pandemic=76.1%, P=0.11), nor when patients were stratified by treatment modality or stone size. Rates of operative complications, 30-day mortality, and readmission and renal function at 6 months did not differ between the data collection periods. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there were lower admission rates and fewer invasive procedures performed. Despite this, there were no differences in treatment success or outcomes. Our findings indicate that clinicians can safely adopt management strategies developed during the pandemic to treat more patients conservatively and in the community.

2.
Journal of Clinical Urology ; 15(1):8-9, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1957015

ABSTRACT

Introduction: In the COVIDStones study, we aimed to determine how management of ureteric stones changed during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom. Materials and Methods: The COVID Stones study was a multi-centre retrospective study of consecutive adults diagnosed with CT-proven ureteric stone disease at 19 UK sites. We compared a pre-pandemic period (23/3/19 to 22/6/19) to a period during the pandemic (the 3-month period after the first SARS-CoV-2 case at individual sites). Results: 3755 patients were included (pre-pandemic = 1963 patients;pandemic = 1792 patients). Patients during the pandemic had significantly lower hospital admission rates (pre-pandemic = 54.2% vs pandemic = 46.6%, p<0.001), shorter length of stay (mean = 4.0 vs. 3.2 days, p=0.01), and higher rates of use of alpha-blockers (16.1% vs. 23.3%, p<0.001). In the cohort of patients who received interventional management (n=790 [44.1%] vs. n=686 [34.9%]), rates of ESWL (22.8% vs. 33.9%, p<0.001) were significantly higher;rates of ureteroscopy (56.7% vs. 47.7%, p<0.01) and stent insertion (67.9% vs. 54.5%, p>0.001) were lower;and there was no difference in rates of nephrostomy (p=0.76) during the pandemic. During the pandemic, there was no difference in success of primary treatment overall, including both non-interventional and interventional modalities (prepandemic= 73.8% vs. pandemic=76.2%, p=0.467), nor when stratified by treatment modality or stone size. Conclusions: Despite fewer invasive procedures performed during the pandemic, we demonstrated no difference in success of treatment, without an increase in adverse outcomes. This leads us to question whether the management of ureteric stones can be optimised further.

5.
British Journal of Surgery ; 108:1, 2021.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-1539337
6.
British Journal of Surgery ; 108:148-148, 2021.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-1535314
7.
BJS Open ; 5(SUPPL 1):i6, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1493696

ABSTRACT

Background: During the Covid-19 pandemic, non-operative management for acute appendicitis (AA) was implemented in the UK. Aim of this study was to determine the efficacy and outcomes of conservative versus surgical management of AA during the pandemic. Materials & Methods: We conducted an observational study in a tertiary referral centre. Data was collected from patients (≥16 years) with a diagnosis of AA between 1st November 2019 to 10th March 2020 (pre-COVID period) and 10th March 2020 to 5th July 2020 (COVID period). Results: A total of 116 patients in the pre-COVID period were included versus 91 in the COVID period. 43.1% (n=50) of patients pre-COVID were classified as ASA 2 compared to 26.4% (n=24) during the COVID period (p-value =0.042). 72.5% (n=66) of the patients during the COVID period scored as high risk using the Alvarado score compared to 24.1% (n=28) in the pre-COVID period (p-value<0.001).We observed a significant increase in radiological evaluation, 69.8% versus 87.5% of patients had a CT in the pre-COVID and COVID periods respectively (p-value=0.008). 94.9% of patients were managed operatively in the pre-COVID period compared to 60.4% in the COVID period (p-value<0.001). We observed more open appendicectomies (37.3% versus 0.9%;p-value<0.001) during the COVID period compared to the pre-COVID period. More abscess formation and free fluid were found intraoperatively in the COVID period (p-value= 0.021 and 0.023 respectively). Re-attendance rate due to appendicitis-related issues was significantly higher in the COVID period (p=0.027). Conclusion: Radiological diagnosis of AA was more frequent during the COVID period. More conservative management for AA was employed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and for those managed operatively an open approach was preferred. Intra-operative findings were suggestive of delayed presentation during the COVID period without this affecting the length of hospital stay.

8.
Journal of Endoluminal Endourology ; 3(3):e22-e28, 2020.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1042090

ABSTRACT

Background and objectives The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a significant impact on healthcare delivery. As a result, management of patients with ureteric stones has likely been affected. We report our study protocol for the investigation of ureteric stone management during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Material and methods The COVID Stones study is a multicenter national cohort study of the management and outcomes of patients with ureteric stones before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom. The study will consist of three data collection periods, pre-pandemic (“pre-COVID”), pandemic (“COVID”), and postpandemic (“post-COVID”). This will allow quantification of what “normal” was, how this has changed, and to capture any persisting changes in management. The primary outcome evaluating the success rate of the initial treatment decision will be assessed following a 6-month follow-up from the time of first presentation and will be performed for each recruited patient from each of the three data collection periods. This will allow comparison between both management and outcomes before, during, and after the pandemic. Conclusions We anticipate that this study will lead to an increased understanding of the impact of the outcomes of emergency management of ureteric stones following changes in clinical practice due to the COVID-19 pandemic health provision restrictions.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL