Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
Surg Endosc ; 36(5): 2723-2733, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1782805

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 has changed global healthcare since the pandemic began in 2020. The safety of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) utilizing insufflation from the standpoint of safety to the operating room personnel is currently being explored. The aims of this guideline are to examine the existing evidence to provide guidance regarding MIS for the patient with, or suspecting of having, the SARS-CoV-2 as well as the healthcare team involved. METHODS: Systematic literature reviews were conducted for 2 key questions (KQ) regarding the safety of MIS in the setting of COVID-19 pandemic. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis criteria. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using a narrative synthesis of the literature by subject experts. Recommendations for future research were also proposed. RESULTS: In KQ1, a total of 1361 articles were reviewed, with 2 articles meeting inclusion. In KQ2, a total of 977 articles were reviewed, with 4 articles met inclusions criteria, of which 2 studies reported on the SARS-CoV2 virus specifically. Despite many publications in the field, very little well-controlled and unbiased data exist to inform the recommendations. Of that which is available, it shows that both laparoscopic and open operations in Covid-positive patients had similar rates of OR staff positivity rates; however, patients who underwent laparoscopic procedures had a lower perioperative mortality than open procedures. Also, SARS-CoV-2 particles have been detected in the surgical plume at laparoscopy. CONCLUSION: With demonstrated equivalence of operating room staff exposure, and noninferiority of laparoscopic access with respect to mortality, either laparoscopic or open approaches to abdominal operations may be used in patients with SARS-CoV-2. Measures should be employed for all laparoscopic or open cases to prevent exposure of operating room staff to the surgical plume, as virus can be present in this plume.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Laparoscopy , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Laparoscopy/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , RNA, Viral , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Obes Surg ; 32(2): 391-397, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1530389

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a widely accepted risk factor for the development of severe COVID-19. We sought to determine the survival benefit of early initiation of aggressive anticoagulation in obese critically ill COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 237 intubated patients at a single academic accredited bariatric center and stratified them based on their BMI into 2 groups, obese (BMI > 30) and non-obese (BMI ≤ 30). We used chi-square tests to compare categorical variables such as age and sex, and two-sample t-tests or Mann Whitney U-tests for continuous variables, including important laboratory values. Cox proportional-hazards regression models were utilized to determine whether obesity was an independent predictor of survival and multivariable analysis was performed to compare risk factors that were deemed significant in the univariable analysis. Survival with respect to BMI and its association with level of anticoagulation in the obese cohort was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier models. RESULTS: The overall mortality in the obese and non-obese groups was similar at 47% and 44%, respectively (p = 0.65). Further analysis based on the level of AC showed that obese patients placed on early aggressive AC protocol had improved survival compared to obese patients who did not receive protocol based aggressive AC (ON-aggressive AC protocol 26% versus OFF-aggressive AC protocol 61%, p = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of early aggressive anticoagulation may balance the negative effects of obesity on the overall mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Obesity, Morbid , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Body Mass Index , Critical Illness , Humans , Obesity/complications , Obesity, Morbid/surgery , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
3.
J Gastrointest Surg ; 26(1): 181-190, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1202825

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Although acute gastrointestinal injury (AGI) and feeding intolerance (FI) are known independent determinants of worse outcomes and high mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, the incidence of AGI and FI in critically ill COVID-19 patients and their prognostic importance have not been thoroughly studied. METHODS: We reviewed 218 intubated patients at Stony Brook University Hospital and stratified them into three groups based on AGI severity, according to data collected in the first 10 days of ICU course. We used chi-square test to compare categorical variables such as age and sex and two-sample t-test or Mann-Whitney U-tests for continuous variables, including important laboratory values. Cox proportional hazards regression models were utilized to determine whether AGI score was an independent predictor of survival, and multivariable analysis was performed to compare risk factors that were deemed significant in the univariable analysis. We performed Kaplan-Meier survival analysis based on the AGI score and the presence of FI. RESULTS: The overall incidence of AGI was 95% (45% AGI I/II, 50% AGI III/IV), and FI incidence was 63%. Patients with AGI III/IV were more likely to have prolonged mechanical ventilation (22 days vs 16 days, P-value <0.002) and higher mortality rate (58% vs 28%, P-value <0.001) compared to patients with AGI 0/I/II. This was confirmed with multivariable analysis which showed that AGI score III/IV was an independent predictor of higher mortality (AGI III/IV vs AGI 0/I/II hazard ratio (HR), 2.68; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.69-4.25; P-value <0.0001). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that both AGI III/IV and FI (P-value <0.001) were associated with worse outcomes. Patients with AGI III/IV had higher daily and mean D-dimer and CRP levels compared to AGI 0/I/II (P-value <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of AGI and FI among critically ill COVID-19 patients was high. AGI grades III/IV were associated with higher risk for prolonged mechanical ventilation and mortality compared to AGI 0/I/II, while it also correlated with higher D-dimer and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels. FI was independently associated with higher mortality. The development of high-grade AGI and FI during the first days of ICU stay can serve as prognostic tools to predict outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Gastrointestinal Diseases , Critical Illness , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Intensive Care Units , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Ann Surg ; 274(1): 50-56, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1101932

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work is to formulate recommendations based on global expert consensus to guide the surgical community on the safe resumption of surgical and endoscopic activities. BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused marked disruptions in the delivery of surgical care worldwide. A thoughtful, structured approach to resuming surgical services is necessary as the impact of COVID-19 becomes better controlled. The Coronavirus Global Surgical Collaborative sought to formulate, through rigorous scientific methodology, consensus-based recommendations in collaboration with a multidisciplinary group of international experts and policymakers. METHODS: Recommendations were developed following a Delphi process. Domain topics were formulated and subsequently subdivided into questions pertinent to different aspects of surgical care in the COVID-19 crisis. Forty-four experts from 15 countries across 4 continents drafted statements based on the specific questions. Anonymous Delphi voting on the statements was performed in 2 rounds, as well as in a telepresence meeting. RESULTS: One hundred statements were formulated across 10 domains. The statements addressed terminology, impact on procedural services, patient/staff safety, managing a backlog of surgeries, methods to restart and sustain surgical services, education, and research. Eighty-three of the statements were approved during the first round of Delphi voting, and 11 during the second round. A final telepresence meeting and discussion yielded acceptance of 5 other statements. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi process resulted in 99 recommendations. These consensus statements provide expert guidance, based on scientific methodology, for the safe resumption of surgical activities during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Elective Surgical Procedures , Endoscopy , Infection Control/organization & administration , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Humans , Internationality , Intersectoral Collaboration , Triage
5.
Ann Surg ; 272(6): e306-e310, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-885722

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to show how full-time telemedicine adoption has impacted patient visit volume and attendance in a comprehensive metabolic and weight loss center. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Elective surgical practices have been profoundly impacted by the global COVID-19 pandemic, leading to a rapid increase in the utilization of telemedicine. The abrupt initiation of audio-video telehealth visits for all providers of a multidisciplinary clinic on March 19 2020 provided unique circumstances to assess the impact of telemedicine. METHODS: Data from the clinical booking system (new patient and follow-up visits) for all clinical provider types of the multidisciplinary metabolic center from the pre-telehealth, post-telehealth, and a 2019 comparative period were retrospectively reviewed and compared. The primary outcome is the change in patient visit volume for all clinical providers from before to after the initiation of telemedicine for both new patient, and follow-up visits. RESULTS: There were a total of 506 visits (162 new patient visits, and 344 follow-ups) in the pre-telehealth period, versus 413 visits (77 new patient visits, and 336 follow-ups) during the post-telehealth period. After telehealth implementation, new visits for surgeons decreased by 75%. Although follow-up visits decreased by 55.06% for surgeons, there was an increase by 27.36% for advanced practitioners. When surgeons were separated from other practitioners, their follow-up visit rate decrease by 55.06%, compared to a 16.08% increase for the group of all other practitioners (P < 0.0001). Dietitians experienced higher rates of absenteeism with new patient visits (10.00% vs 31.42%, P = 0.0128), whereas bariatricians experienced a decrease in follow-up visit absenteeism (33.33% vs 0%, P = 0.0093). CONCLUSIONS: Although new patient visit volume fell across the board, follow-up visits increased for certain nonsurgical providers. This provides a template for adoption of a multidisciplinary telehealth clinic in a post-pandemic world.


Subject(s)
Bariatric Surgery/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Patient Care Team , Retrospective Studies
7.
Surg Endosc ; 35(7): 3430-3436, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-647075

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Surgeons are trained as "internists that also operate," bringing an important skillset to patient management during the current COVID-19 pandemic. A review was performed to illustrate the response of surgical staff during the pandemic with regard to patient care and residency training. METHODS: The evaluation and assessment of the changes enacted at Stony Brook Medicine's Department of Surgery is illustrated through the unique perspective of surgical residents. No IRB approval or written consent was obtained nor it was necessary for the purposes of this paper. RESULTS: Hospital policy was enacted to hinder transmission of COVID-19 and included limited gatherings of people, restricted travel, quarantined symptomatic staff, and careful surveillance for disease incidence. Surgical residency transformed as residents were diverted from traditional surgical services to staff new COVID-19 ICUs. Education transitioned to an online-based platform for lectures and reviews. New skills sets were acquired such as PICC line placement and complex ventilator management. CONCLUSIONS: The viral surge impacted surgical training while also providing unique lessons regarding preparedness and strategic planning for future pandemic and disaster management.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Infection Control/methods , Internship and Residency , Surgeons/education , COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Care , Hospitals , Humans , Infection Control/organization & administration , Quarantine , Travel
8.
Surg Endosc ; 34(7): 2856-2862, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-327241

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 is a pandemic which has affected almost every aspect of our life since starting globally in November 2019. Given the rapidity of spread and inadequate time to prepare for record numbers of sick patients, our surgical community faces an unforeseen challenge. SAGES is committed to the protection and care of patients, their surgeons and staff, and all who are served by the medical community at large. This includes physical health, mental health, and well-being of all involved. The fear of the unknown ahead can be paralyzing. International news media have chronicled the unthinkable situations that physicians and other health care providers have been thrust into as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. These situations include making life or death decisions for patients and their families regarding use of limited health care resources. It includes caring for patients with quickly deteriorating conditions and limited treatments available. Until recently, these situations seemed far from home, and now they are in our own hospitals. As the pandemic broadened its reach, the reality that we as surgeons may be joining the front line is real. It may be happening to you now; it may be on the horizon in the coming weeks. In this context, SAGES put together this document addressing concerns on clinician stressors in these times of uncertainty. We chose to focus on the emotional toll of the situation on the clinician, protecting vulnerable persons, reckoning with social isolation, and promoting wellness during this crisis. At the same time, the last part of this document deals with the "light at the end of the tunnel," discussing potential opportunities, lessons learned, and the positives that can come out of this crisis.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Stress, Psychological , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Delivery of Health Care/economics , Fear , Forecasting , Guidelines as Topic , Health Personnel/psychology , Health Promotion , Humans , Occupational Stress/prevention & control , Occupational Stress/psychology , Pandemics , Quarantine/psychology , SARS-CoV-2 , Stress, Psychological/prevention & control , Stress, Psychological/psychology , Surgeons/psychology , Vulnerable Populations/psychology
9.
Surg Endosc ; 34(6): 2327-2331, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-101929

ABSTRACT

The unprecedented pandemic of COVID-19 has impacted many lives and affects the whole healthcare systems globally. In addition to the considerable workload challenges, surgeons are faced with a number of uncertainties regarding their own safety, practice, and overall patient care. This guide has been drafted at short notice to advise on specific issues related to surgical service provision and the safety of minimally invasive surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although laparoscopy can theoretically lead to aerosolization of blood borne viruses, there is no evidence available to confirm this is the case with COVID-19. The ultimate decision on the approach should be made after considering the proven benefits of laparoscopic techniques versus the potential theoretical risks of aerosolization. Nevertheless, erring on the side of safety would warrant treating the coronavirus as exhibiting similar aerosolization properties and all members of the OR staff should use personal protective equipment (PPE) in all surgical procedures during the pandemic regardless of known or suspected COVID status. Pneumoperitoneum should be safely evacuated via a filtration system before closure, trocar removal, specimen extraction, or conversion to open. All emergent endoscopic procedures performed during the pandemic should be considered as high risk and PPE must be used by all endoscopy staff.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Endoscopy/standards , Infection Control/standards , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Aerosols/adverse effects , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Endoscopy/adverse effects , Humans , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/standards , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL