Recent COVID-19 infection is associated with increased mortality in the ambulatory surgery population.

BACKGROUND: The effect of COVID-19 infection on post-operative mortality and the optimal timing to perform ambulatory surgery from diagnosis date remains unclear in this population. Our study was to determine whether a history of COVID-19 diagnosis leads to a higher risk of all-cause mortality following ambulatory surgery. METHODS: This cohort constitutes retrospective data obtained from the Optum dataset containing 44,976 US adults who were tested for COVID-19 up to 6 months before surgery and underwent ambulatory surgery between March 2020 to March 2021. The primary outcome was the risk of all-cause mortality between the COVID-19 positive and negative patients grouped according to the time interval from COVID-19 testing to ambulatory surgery, called the Testing to Surgery Interval Mortality (TSIM) of up to 6 months. Secondary outcome included determining all-cause mortality (TSIM) in time intervals of 0-15 days, 16-30 days, 31-45 days, and 46-180 days in COVID-19 positive and negative patients. RESULTS: 44,934 patients (4297 COVID-19 positive, 40,637 COVID-19 negative) were included in our analysis. COVID-19 positive patients undergoing ambulatory surgery had higher risk of all-cause mortality compared to COVID-19 negative patients (OR = 2.51, p < 0.001). The increased risk of mortality in COVID-19 positive patients remained high amongst patients who had surgery 0-45 days from date of COVID-19 testing. In addition, COVID-19 positive patients who underwent colonoscopy (OR = 0.21, p = 0.01) and plastic and orthopedic surgery (OR = 0.27, p = 0.01) had lower mortality than those underwent other surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: A COVID-19 positive diagnosis is associated with significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality following ambulatory surgery. This mortality risk is greatest in patients that undergo ambulatory surgery within 45 days of testing positive for COVID-19. Postponing elective ambulatory surgeries in patients that test positive for COVID-19 infection within 45 days of surgery date should be considered, although prospective studies are needed to assess this.

Making lemonade with lemons: a multicenter effort to improve outpatient sleeve gastrectomy amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted healthcare delivery worldwide. Resource limitations prompted a multicenter quality initiative to enhance outpatient sleeve gastrectomy workflow and reduce the inpatient hospital burden. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the efficacy of this initiative, as well as the safety of outpatient sleeve gastrectomy and potential risk factors for inpatient admission. SETTING: A retrospective analysis of sleeve gastrectomy patients was conducted from February 2020 to August 2021. METHODS: Inclusion criteria were adult patients discharged on postoperative day 0, 1, or 2. Exclusion criteria were body mass index ≥60 kg/m2 and age ≥65 years. Patients were divided into outpatient and inpatient cohorts. Demographic, operative, and postoperative variables were compared, as well as monthly trends in outpatient versus inpatient admission. Potential risk factors for inpatient admission were assessed, as well as early Clavien-Dindo complications. RESULTS: Analysis included 638 sleeve gastrectomy surgeries (427 outpatient, 211 inpatient). Significant differences between cohorts were age, co-morbidities, surgery date, facility, operative duration, and 30-day emergency department (ED) readmission. Monthly frequency of outpatient sleeve gastrectomy rose as high as 71% regionally. An increased number of 30-day ED readmissions was found for the inpatient cohort (P = .022). Potential risk factors for inpatient admission included age, diabetes, hypertension, obstructive sleep apnea, pre-COVID-19 surgery date, and operative duration. CONCLUSION: Outpatient sleeve gastrectomy is safe and efficacious. Administrative support for extended postanesthesia care unit recovery was critical to successful protocol implementation for outpatient sleeve gastrectomy within this large multicenter healthcare system, demonstrating potential applicability nationwide.

Day-case unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a literature review and development of a novel hospital pathway.

INTRODUCTION: We have seen unparalleled changes in our healthcare systems globally as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. As we strive to regenerate our full capacity elective services in order to contest the increasing demand for lower limb arthroplasty, this pandemic has allowed us a rare opportunity to revise and develop novel elective arthroplasty pathways intended to improve patient care and advance healthcare efficiency. We present an extensive evidence-based review of the approaches used to achieve day-case unicompartmental arthroplasty (UKA) as well as the development of a day-case UKA care pathway in a UK NHS institution based on the evidence provided in the literature. METHODS: An extensive search of the literature was performed for articles that reported on readmission or complication rates ≥30 days postoperatively following day-case UKA. FINDINGS: Fifteen manuscripts reporting the results of day-case UKA, defined as discharged on the same calendar day of surgery, were included in our review. Mean reported complication rates for day-case and inpatient UKA within the follow-up periods were 4.05% and 6.52%, respectively. Mean readmission rates were 2.71% and 4.36% for day-case and inpatient UKA, respectively. The mean rate of successful same-day discharge was 92.45%. CONCLUSION: We introduce our institutional Elective Day Surgery Arthroplasty Pathway (EDSAP) founded upon the evidence presented in the literature. Stringent patient selection complimented by a well-defined day-case arthroplasty pathway is fundamental for successful commencement of day-case UKA in the NHS.

Is Office Laryngoscopy an Aerosol-Generating Procedure?

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The aims of this work were 1) to investigate whether office laryngoscopy is an aerosol-generating procedure with an optical particle sizer (OPS) during clinical simulation on healthy volunteers, and 2) to critically discuss methods for assessment of aerosolizing potentials in invasive interventions. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective quantification of aerosol and droplet generation during clinical simulation of rigid and flexible laryngoscopy. METHODS: Two healthy volunteers were recruited to undergo both flexible and rigid laryngoscopy. An OPS was used to quantify aerosols and droplets generated for four positive controls relative to ambient particles (speech, breathing, /e/ phonation, and /ae/ phonation) and for five test interventions relative to breathing and phonation (flexible laryngoscopy, flexible laryngoscopy with humming, flexible laryngoscopy with /e/ phonation, rigid laryngoscopy, and rigid laryngoscopy with /ae/ phonation). Particle counts in mean diameter size range from 0.3 to >10 µm were measured with OPS placed at 12 cm from the subject's nose/mouth. RESULTS: None of the laryngoscopy interventions (n = 10 each) generated aerosols above that produced by breathing or phonation. Breathing (n = 40, 1-3 µm, P = .016) and /ae/ phonation (n = 10, 1-3 µm, P = .022; 3-5 µm. P = .083; >5 µm, P = .012) were statistically significant producers of aerosols and droplets. Neither speech nor /e/ phonation (n = 10 each) were associated with statistically significant aerosols and droplet generation. CONCLUSIONS: Using OPS to detect droplets and aerosols, we found that office laryngoscopy is likely not an aerosol-generating procedure. Despite its prior use in otolaryngological literature, an OPS has intrinsic limitations. Our study should be complemented with more sophisticated methods of droplet distribution measurement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 130:2637-2642, 2020.

Safety and cost-effectiveness of same-day complex left atrial ablation.

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation for complex left-atrial arrhythmia is increasing worldwide with many centres admitting patients overnight. Same-day procedures using conscious sedation carry significant benefits to patients/healthcare providers but data are limited. We evaluated the safety and cost-effectiveness of same-day complex left-atrial arrhythmia ablation. METHOD: Multi-centre retrospective cohort study of all consecutive complex elective left-atrial ablation procedures performed between January 2011 and December 2019. Data were collected on planned same-day discharge versus overnight stay, baseline parameters, procedure details/success, ablation technology, post-operative complications, unplanned overnight admissions/outcomes at 4-months and mortality up to April 2020. A cost analysis of potential savings was also performed. RESULTS: A total of 967 consecutive patients underwent complex left-ablation using radiofrequency (point-by-point ablation aided by 3D-mapping or PVAC catheter ablation with fluoroscopic screening) or cryoballoon-ablation (mean age: 60.9 ± 11.6 years, range 23-83 yrs., 572 [59%] females). The majority of patients had isolation of pulmonary veins alone (n = 846, 87%) and most using conscious-sedation alone (n = 921, 95%). Of the total cohort, 414 (43%) had planned same-day procedure with 35 (8%) admitted overnight due to major (n = 5) or minor (n = 30) complications. Overall acute procedural success-rate was 96% (n = 932). Complications in planned overnight-stay/same-day cohorts were low. At 4-month follow-up there were 62 (6.4%) readmissions (femoral haematomas, palpitation, other reasons); there were 3 deaths at mean follow-up of 42.0 ± 27.6 months, none related to the procedure. Overnight stay costs £350; the same-day ablation policy over this period would have saved £310,450. CONCLUSIONS: Same-day complex left-atrial catheter ablation using conscious sedation is safe and cost-effective with significant benefits for patients and healthcare providers. This is especially important in the current financial climate and Covid-19 pandemic.

Evaluating Postoperative Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Elective Procedures in an Ambulatory Surgery Center During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Despite the rapid increase in the number of publications pertaining to COVID-19, there is a lack of data examining patient outcomes following elective procedures performed during this pandemic. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this investigation was to examine the postoperative outcomes of patients who underwent elective procedures in an ambulatory surgery center during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to share the preoperative screening and patient selection protocol implemented in our center. METHODS: Elective procedures performed in an ambulatory surgery center between March 1, 2020 and April 16, 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. The primary outcomes were occurrence of COVID-19-related postoperative complications. These complications include pneumonia, stroke, myocardial infarction, and clotting disorders. The predictive variables analyzed in this study were age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, specialty conducting the procedure, operating time, and the type of plastic and reconstructive surgery procedure being performed. RESULTS: A total of 300 consecutive electives cases were included in the study. The most common procedures were pain management (43.0%), gastrointestinal (26.0%), aesthetic (14.0%), orthopedic (10.3%), reconstructive (4.0%), otorhinolaryngology (2.0%), and gynecology (0.67%). The median age of the cohort was 54.6 years (range, 1-90 years) and the median procedure time was 47 minutes (range, 11-304 minutes). COVID-19-related symptoms or complications following the procedures were not observed in any of the patients or in the healthcare care personnel. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of 300 elective cases, we found no patients with COVID-19-related symptoms postoperatively. This suggests that with proper preoperative screening and patient selection, elective procedures can be safely performed in an ambulatory surgery center during this pandemic.