Radiological and clinicopathological findings of breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: a comparative study with the pre-pandemic era.

PURPOSE: The diagnosis and surgical treatment delays that occurred during the coronavirus disease-2019- (COVID-19) pandemic may have affected breast cancer presentation. This study aimed to determine whether there was a difference in the clinicopathological characteristics of breast cancers during the pandemic by comparing them with similar cases from the previous year. The study also aimed to determine the radiological findings of breast cancers during the pandemic. METHODS: A retrospective review was made of patients who underwent surgery for breast cancer between March 11, 2020, and December 11, 2020 (the pandemic group). These patients were compared with similar patients from the previous year (the pre-pandemic group). The postoperative histopathology results of both groups were compared, and the preoperative radiological findings of the pandemic group were defined. RESULTS: There were 71 patients in the pandemic group and 219 patients in the pre-pandemic group. The tumor size was significantly greater, lymph node involvement was more frequent, and waiting time for surgery was longer in the pandemic group (P < 0.001, P = 0.044, P = 0.001, respectively). There was no significant difference between the groups in respect of in situ/invasive tumor distribution, histological type and histological grade of tumor, the presence of lymphovascular/perineural invasion, multifocal/multicentric focus, and Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Classification (P > 0.15). The radiologic findings of breast cancer during the pandemic typically showed characteristics of malignancy. CONCLUSION: Patients diagnosed with breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic had larger tumor sizes, more frequent lymph node involvement and longer waiting time for surgical treatment. Screening programs should be continued as soon as possible by taking necessary precautions.

Elective operations delay and emergency department visits and inpatient admissions during COVID-19.

Introduction: At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, many hospitals postponed elective operations for a 12-week period in early 2020. During this time, there was concern that the delay would lead to worse health outcomes. The objective of this study is to analyze the effect of delaying operations during this period on ED (Emergency Department) visits and/or urgent IP (Inpatient) admissions. Methods: Electronic Health Record (EHR) data on canceled elective operations between 3/17/20 to 6/8/20 was extracted and a descriptive analysis was performed looking at patient demographics, delay time (days), procedure type, and procedure on rescheduled, completed elective operations with and without a related ED visit and/or IP admission during the delay period. Results: Only 4 out of 197 (2.0%) operations among 4 patients out of 186 patients (2.0%) had an ED visit or IP admission diagnosis related to the postponed operation. When comparing the two groups, the 4 patients were older and had a longer median delay time compared to the 186 patients without an ED visit or IP admission. Conclusion: Postponement of certain elective operations may be done with minimal risk to the patient during times of crisis. However, this minimal risk may be due to the study site's selection of elective operations to postpone. For example, none of the elective operations canceled or postponed were cardiovascular operations, which have worse health outcomes when delayed.

Outcomes of COVID-19 Negative Hip Fracture Patients During the Acute and Subacute Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To better elucidate how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the operatively treated geriatric hip fracture population and how the health care system adapted to pandemic dictated procedures. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A community hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals ≥65 years of age presented with a proximal femoral fracture from a low-energy mechanism undergoing operative treatment from January 17, 2020 to July 2, 2020 (N = 125). MEASUREMENTS: We defined 3 phases of healthcare system response: pre-COVID-19, acute phase, and subacute phase. Thirty-day mortality, time to operating room (OR), length of stay, time to start physical therapy, perioperative complications, delirium rate, hospice admission rate, discharge dispositions, readmission rate, and the reason of surgery delay were assessed. RESULTS: The number of hip fractures has remained constant during the pandemic. The 30-day mortality rate, time to OR, and length of stay were higher in the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic. Those who had a longer wait time to OR (≥ 24 hours) had more complications and increased 30-day mortality rates. Some of the surgery delays were related to OR unavailability as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Surgery was delayed in 3 patients who were on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in pandemic but none for pre-pandemic period. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to compare the effect of the acute and subacute phases of the pandemic on uninfected hip fracture patients. In the age of COVID-19, to provide the best care for the vulnerable geriatric orthopedic populations, the healthcare system must adopt new protocols. We should still aim to promote prompt surgical care when indicated. It is important to ensure adequate resource availability, such as OR time and staff so that hip fracture patients may continue to receive rapid access to surgery. A multidisciplinary approach remains the key to the management of fragility hip fracture patients during the pandemic.

Minimizing Population Health Loss in Times of Scarce Surgical Capacity During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Crisis and Beyond: A Modeling Study.

OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease 2019 has put unprecedented pressure on healthcare systems worldwide, leading to a reduction of the available healthcare capacity. Our objective was to develop a decision model to estimate the impact of postponing semielective surgical procedures on health, to support prioritization of care from a utilitarian perspective. METHODS: A cohort state-transition model was developed and applied to 43 semielective nonpediatric surgical procedures commonly performed in academic hospitals. Scenarios of delaying surgery from 2 weeks were compared with delaying up to 1 year and no surgery at all. Model parameters were based on registries, scientific literature, and the World Health Organization Global Burden of Disease study. For each surgical procedure, the model estimated the average expected disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) per month of delay. RESULTS: Given the best available evidence, the 2 surgical procedures associated with most DALYs owing to delay were bypass surgery for Fontaine III/IV peripheral arterial disease (0.23 DALY/month, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.36) and transaortic valve implantation (0.15 DALY/month, 95% CI: 0.09-0.24). The 2 surgical procedures with the least DALYs were placing a shunt for dialysis (0.01, 95% CI: 0.005-0.01) and thyroid carcinoma resection (0.01, 95% CI: 0.01-0.02). CONCLUSION: Expected health loss owing to surgical delay can be objectively calculated with our decision model based on best available evidence, which can guide prioritization of surgical procedures to minimize population health loss in times of scarcity. The model results should be placed in the context of different ethical perspectives and combined with capacity management tools to facilitate large-scale implementation.

Breast cancer progression when definitive surgery is delayed.

Deferment of definitive surgery for some breast cancers has been proposed as a way to conserve hospital resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it is currently unknown which, if any, breast cancers are capable of progressing during a few to several months of observation. The difference between clinical size at diagnosis and final pathology size was assessed in 315 stage I-III primary invasive breast cancer patients who were divided into three groups based on the time between diagnosis and definitive surgery. Size differences over time were used to estimate specific growth rates. Compared with the group with ≤60 days between diagnosis and surgery, tumor growth was observed for 12% of tumors in the 61- to 120-day group and 17% of tumors in the >120-day group (p for trend = 0.032). Significantly greater specific growth rates were observed for tumors >2 cm by pathology measurement and for pathology node-positive patients (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.006, respectively). Specific growth rates were significantly greater for luminal B breast cancers than for luminal A breast cancers (p = 0.029) but not for triple-negative or HER2-positive breast cancers not selected for neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. There was no evidence of nodal progression with surgery delay. Fewer than 20% of stage I-III breast cancers not selected for neo-adjuvant chemotherapy evidence size progression during follow-up periods ranging from 61 to 294 days. Clinical-pathological features cannot reliably predict which tumors will grow. Luminal B phenotype was the only clinical variable known at the time of diagnosis that strongly predicted growth. If resource limitations mandate prioritization schemes for breast cancer surgery, luminal B breast cancer may be the highest priority.