Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 65
Filter
1.
Medicina (Kaunas) ; 59(4)2023 Apr 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2304788

ABSTRACT

Introduction: the COVID-19 pandemic has had a considerable impact on healthcare systems worldwide. Since the actual influence of the pandemic on gynecological care is still unclear, we aim to evaluate the effect of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on gynecological procedures compared to the pre-pandemic period in Romania. Materials and Methods: this is a single-center retrospective observational study, involving patients hospitalized in the year before the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (PP), in the first year of the pandemic (P1), and in the second year of the pandemic until February 2022 (P2). The percentages of interventions were analyzed globally but also according to the type of surgery applied on the female genital organs. Results: during pandemic, the number of gynecological surgeries dropped considerably, by more than 50% in some cases, or even decreased by up to 100%, having a major impact on women's health, especially in the first year of the pandemic (P1), before slightly increasing in the post-vaccination period (PV). Surgically treated cancer cases dropped by over 80% during the pandemic, and the consequences of this will be seen in the future. Conclusions: the COVID-19 pandemic played an important part in gynecological care management in the Romanian public health care system, and the effect will have to be investigated in the future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Genital Neoplasms, Female , Female , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures
2.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 33(4): 528-533, 2023 04 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2272272

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) and prehabilitation programs are multidisciplinary care pathways that aim to reduce stress response and improve perioperative outcomes. However, literature is limited regarding the impact of ERAS and prehabilitation in gynecologic oncology surgery. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of implementing an ERAS and prehabilitation program on post-operative outcomes of endometrial cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: We evaluated consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopy for endometrial cancer that followed ERAS and the prehabilitation program at a single center. A pre-intervention cohort that followed the ERAS program alone was identified. The primary outcome was length of stay, and secondary outcomes were normal oral diet restart, post-operative complications and readmissions. RESULTS: A total of 128 patients were included: 60 patients in the ERAS group and 68 patients in the prehabilitation group. The prehabilitation group had a shorter length of hospital stay of 1 day (p<0.001) and earlier normal oral diet restart of 3.6 hours (p=0.005) in comparison with the ERAS group. The rate of post-operative complications (5% in the ERAS group and 7.4% in the prehabilitation group, p=0.58) and readmissions (1.7% in the ERAS group and 2.9% in the prehabilitation group, p=0.63) were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The integration of ERAS and a prehabilitation program in endometrial cancer patients undergoing laparoscopy significantly reduced hospital stay and time to first oral diet as compared with ERAS alone, without increasing overall complications or the readmissions rate.


Subject(s)
Endometrial Neoplasms , Enhanced Recovery After Surgery , Humans , Female , Preoperative Exercise , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures , Length of Stay , Endometrial Neoplasms/surgery
3.
Neurourol Urodyn ; 40(7): 1834-1844, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1338049

ABSTRACT

AIM: To evaluate patient satisfaction and savings, and compare visit outcomes based on chief complaint (CC) of women presenting for a televisit to a female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery (FPMRS) clinic at an urban academic center. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of women completing a televisit with an FPMRS specialist at our institution from June 19, 2020 to July 17, 2020 was conducted. A telephone questionnaire was administered to patients to assess satisfaction and savings (travel costs/time avoided). Electronic medical records were reviewed to collect patient demographics and comorbidities, CC, and televisit outcomes (e.g., face-to-face (F2F) exam scheduled, orders placed). Logistic regression was used to analyze predictors of satisfaction and need for F2F follow-up. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-seven of 290 (64.5%) women called completed the survey, of whom 168 (89.8%) were satisfied with their televisit. Eighty-eight (48.1%) saved at least an hour and 54 (28.9%) saved more than $25 on transportation. There were no significant associations between patient characteristics, CC, or televisit outcomes and satisfaction. Ninety-nine (52.9%) televisits resulted in F2F follow-up, with CC of prolapse (odds ratio [OR] = 4.2 (1.7-10.3); p = 0.002), new patient (OR = 2.2 (1.2-4.2); p = 0.01), and Hispanic ethnicity (OR = 3.9 (1.2-13.6); p=.03) as significant predictors. CONCLUSION: Most patients were satisfied with FPMRS televisits at our urban academic center. Televisits resulted in patient travel time and cost savings. Women presenting with prolapse and for new patient visits would likely benefit from initial F2F visits instead of televisits. Televisits are an important mode of health care and in some cases can replace F2F visits.


Subject(s)
Gynecologic Surgical Procedures , Patient Satisfaction , Plastic Surgery Procedures , Telemedicine , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Telephone
4.
J Minim Invasive Gynecol ; 29(9): 1110-1118, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1907328

ABSTRACT

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient characteristics that affect access to minimally invasive gynecologic surgery (MIGS) subspecialty care and identify changes during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of patients referred to MIGS from 2014 to 2016 (historic cohort) compared with those referred to MIGS in 2020 (pandemic cohort). Primary outcome was the interval between referral and first appointment. SETTING: Single-institution academic MIGS division. PATIENTS: Historic cohort (n = 1082) and pandemic cohort (n = 770). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Demographics and socioeconomic variables (race, ethnicity, language, insurance, employment, and socioeconomic factors by census tract) and distance from hospital were compared between historic and pandemic cohorts with respect to referral interval using the chi-square, Fisher exact tests, and logistic regression. After adjusting for referral indication, being unemployed and living in an area with less population density, less education, and higher percentage of poverty were associated with a referral interval >30 days in the historic cohort. In the pandemic cohort, only unemployment persisted as a covariate associated with prolonged referral interval and new associated variables were primary language other than English (odds ratio, 3.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.60-6.40) and "other" race (odds ratio, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.34-3.68). The odds of waiting >30 days increased by 6% with the addition of 1 demographic risk factor (95% CI, 1.01-1.10) and by 17% for 3 risk factors (95% CI, 1.03-1.34) in the historic cohort whereas no significant intersectionality was identified in the pandemic cohort. Average referral intervals were significantly shorter during the pandemic (31 vs 50 days, p <.01). Telemedicine appointments had a significantly shorter referral interval than in-person appointments (27 vs 47 days, p <.01). Of patients using telemedicine, a greater proportion were non-Hispanic, English speaking, employed, privately insured, and lived further from the hospital (p <.05). CONCLUSION: Time from referral to first appointment at a tertiary-care MIGS practice during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic was shorter than that before the pandemic, likely owing to the adoption of telemedicine. Differences in socioeconomic and demographic factors suggest that telemedicine improved access to care and decreased access disparities for many populations, but not for non-English-speaking patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures , Humans , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies
5.
Arch Gynecol Obstet ; 306(4): 1063-1068, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1826456

ABSTRACT

PURPUSE: The paracervical block (PCB) is a local anesthesia procedure that can be used to perform gynecological surgeries without the need for further anesthesia. With the PCB, surgeries can be moved from the central operating room to outpatient operating rooms, where they can be performed without the presence of an anesthesia team. METHODS: In this paper, the indications, implementation and limitations of the procedure are discussed. CONCLUSION: Especially in times of scarce staff and OR resources during the Corona pandemic, OR capacity can be expanded in this way.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Local , Anesthesia, Obstetrical , Anesthesia, Obstetrical/methods , Female , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures , Humans , Pandemics
7.
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev ; 23(2): 573-581, 2022 Feb 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1716438

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To evaluate gynecologic oncologists' trends and attitudes towards the use of Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in active period of the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey. METHODS: Online national survey sent to members of Turkish Endoscopy Platform consisting of six sections and 45 questions between the dates 1-15 June 2020 in Turkey to explore their surgical practice during the pandemic in three hospital types: Education and research hospital/university hospital, state hospital and private Hospital. Participants were gynecologic oncologists who are members of Turkish Endoscopy Platform. RESULTS: Fifty-eight percent of participants canceled all operations except for cancer surgeries and emergent operations. About a quarter of participants (28%) continued to operate laparoscopically and/or robotically. For the evaluation of the suspected adnexial mass (SAM) 64% used laparotomy and only 13 % operated by laparoscopy (L/S). For the management of low-risk early-stage endometrial cancer only fifth of the participants preferred to perform L/S. For endometrial cancer with high-intermediate risk factors more than half of participants preferred complete staging with laparotomy. For advanced stage ovarian cancer, one-fifth of the participants preferred to perform an explorative laparotomy, whilst 15 % preferred diagnostic laparoscopy to triage the patients for either NACT or cytoreductive surgery. On the contrary 41 % of participants chose to have cytology by paracentesis for neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Gynecologic oncologists with >10 years L/S experience used MIS more for SAM. Furthermore, experienced surgeons used L/S more for endometrial cancer patients. In busy COVID hospitals, more participants preferred laparotomy over L/S. CONCLUSION: Use of MIS decreased during the pandemic in Turkey. More experienced surgeons continued to perform MIS. Surgical treatment was the preferred approach for SAM, early-stage endometrial cancer.  However, NACT was more popular compared to radical surgery.


Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , COVID-19 , Genital Neoplasms, Female/surgery , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/methods , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/methods , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Adult , Aged , Female , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/trends , Gynecology , Humans , Laparoscopy/methods , Laparoscopy/trends , Laparotomy/methods , Laparotomy/trends , Male , Middle Aged , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/trends , Robotic Surgical Procedures/methods , Robotic Surgical Procedures/trends , SARS-CoV-2 , Societies, Medical , Surgical Oncology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Turkey
8.
J Robot Surg ; 16(5): 1193-1198, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1661726

ABSTRACT

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic the use of telehealth has burgeoned. Numerous surgical specialties have already adopted the use of virtual postoperative visits, but there is data lacking in both robotics and gynecology. In this single-institution prospective cohort study we sought to evaluate the patient satisfaction, feasibility and safety of postoperative telehealth visits following robotic gynecologic surgery. Thirty-three patients undergoing robotic gynecologic procedures participated in a postoperative telehealth visit approximately 2 weeks following surgery, of which 27 completed a survey which assessed participant satisfaction with the telehealth visit, overall health-related quality of life following surgery, exposure to telehealth visits, and social determinants of health. The mean satisfaction score was just below 'excellent'. Only 2 participants (6.3%) required an in-person visit. Postoperative telehealth visit satisfaction score was significantly associated only with BMI (Pearson r = 0.45, p = 0.018). These data suggest that telehealth visits following robotic gynecologic procedures appear to be safe and feasible, and are associated with a high level of patient satisfaction.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Robotic Surgical Procedures , COVID-19/prevention & control , Feasibility Studies , Female , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/methods , Humans , Pandemics , Patient Satisfaction , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Robotic Surgical Procedures/methods
10.
JSLS ; 25(4)2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1528971

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically impacted gynecologic surgery. In March 2020, the American College of Surgeons recommended delay of all nonessential invasive procedures. This study characterizes the number and types of procedures performed during the peak pandemic. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed. All patients undergoing gynecological surgery at a large academic hospital system from March 16, 2019 to July 31, 2019 and from March 16, 2020 to July 31, 2020 were evaluated. Data was stratified by three time periods corresponding to state and hospital policy changes. During period 1, no nonessential procedures were advised. During period 2, urgent procedures resumed. During period 3, full surgical reopening was achieved. RESULTS: In 2019, 1,545 gynecologic cases were performed compared with 942 cases in 2020 (39.0% decrease). There was a 73.6% decrease in cases over period 1, a 20.1% decrease over period 2, and a 2.9% increase over period 3. Cases performed by gynecologic oncologists in 2020 accounted for 58.1% of all gynecologic cases over period 1, 29.4% of cases over period 2, and 33.3% of cases over period 3. In 2020, hysterectomy was the most commonly performed procedure, while surgery for endometriosis and uterine fibroids had the greatest decrease in volume. Among emergency procedures, more surgery for ectopic pregnancy was performed in 2020 compared with 2019. CONCLUSION: Many patients had significant delays in receiving gynecologic surgical care during the peak pandemic period. Further studies are indicated to determine the impact of delayed care on patients' quality of life and disease process.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Female , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures , Hospitals , Humans , Pregnancy , Quality of Life , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
11.
BMJ Open ; 11(10): e053679, 2021 10 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511477

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is the descent of pelvic organs into the vagina resulting in bulge symptoms and occurs in approximately 50% of women. Almost 20% of women will elect surgical correction of this condition by age 85. Removal of the uterus (hysterectomy) with concomitant vaginal vault suspension is a long-standing practice in POP surgery to address apical (uterine) prolapse. Yet, contemporary evidence on the merits of this approach relative to preservation of the uterus through suspension is needed to better inform surgical decision making by patients and their healthcare providers. The objective of this study is to evaluate POP-specific health outcomes and service utilisation of women electing uterine suspension compared with those electing hysterectomy and vaginal vault suspension for POP surgery up to 1-year postsurgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a prospective cohort study planning to enrol 321 adult women with stage ≥2 POP from multiple sites in Alberta, Canada. Following standardised counselling from study surgeons, participants self-select either a hysterectomy based or uterine preservation surgical group. Data are being collected through participant questionnaires, medical records and administrative data linkage at four time points spanning from the presurgical consultation to 1-year postsurgery. The primary outcome is anatomic failure to correct POP, and secondary outcomes include changes in positioning of pelvic structures, retreatment, subjective report of bulge symptoms, pelvic floor distress and impact, sexual function and health service use. Data will be analysed using inverse probability weighting of propensity scores and generalised linear models. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is approved by the Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board at the University of Calgary (REB19-2134). Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, presentations at national and international conferences, and educational handouts for patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04890951.


Subject(s)
Pelvic Organ Prolapse , Uterine Prolapse , Aged, 80 and over , Alberta , Cohort Studies , Female , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures , Humans , Hysterectomy , Pelvic Organ Prolapse/surgery , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Uterine Prolapse/surgery , Vagina/surgery
12.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 31(7): 1052-1060, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1504094

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare discharge opioid refills, prescribed morphine equivalent dose and quantity, and longitudinal patient-reported outcomes before and after implementation of a tiered opioid prescribing algorithm among women undergoing open gynecologic surgery within an enhanced recovery after surgery program. METHODS: We compared opioid prescriptions, clinical outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes among 273 women. Post-discharge symptom burden was collected up to 42 days after discharge using the validated 27-item MD Anderson Symptom Inventory and analyzed using linear mixed effects models and Kaplan-Meier curves for symptom recovery. RESULTS: Among 113 pre-implementation and 160 post-implementation patients there was no difference in opioid refills (9.7% vs 11.3%, p=0.84). The post-implementation cohort had a significant reduction in median morphine equivalent dose (112.5 mg vs 225 mg, p<0.01), with no difference in median hospital length of stay (3 days vs 3 days, p=1.0) or 30-day readmission rate (9.4% vs 7.1%, p=0.66). There was no difference in patient-reported pain between the pre- and post-implementation cohorts on the day of discharge (severity 4.93 vs 5.14, p=0.53) or in any patient-reported symptoms, interference measures, or composite scores by post-discharge day 7. The median recovery time for most symptoms was 7 days, except for pain (14 days), fatigue (18 days), and physical interference (21 days), with no differences between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: After implementation of a tiered opioid prescribing algorithm, the quantity and dose of discharge opioids prescribed decreased with no change in post-operative refills and without negatively impacting patient-reported symptom burden or interference, which can be used to educate and reassure patients and providers.


Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/methods , Pain, Postoperative/drug therapy , Patient Discharge/standards , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Algorithms , Analgesics, Opioid/pharmacology , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
13.
J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod ; 51(1): 102255, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1487857

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study focuses on changes in gynecologic surgical activity at Hospital Foch, Paris, France during the first French COVID lockdown in 2020. Additional goals include the evaluation the extent of the postponement suffered for each type of surgery and estimate the possible negative impact for patients. STUDY DESIGN: Single-center, retrospective, chart-review cohort study in the gynecology department of Hospital Foch. Comparison of all patients scheduled, postponed and operated during the first COVID lockdown (March 14, to May 11, 2020) versus the same period in 2019. Postponed surgeries were classified into 4 scheduling interval categories according to the Society of Gynecology Oncology (SGO) recommendations: urgent (without delay), semi-urgent (1-4 weeks), non-urgent (>4-12 weeks) and elective (>3 months) and evaluated to determine whether COVID-19-related delays of surgeries fell within guidelines. The potential "loss of chance" or medical risk associated with postponed surgeries was estimated according to a composite criterion including death, aggravation of expected tumor stages/grades in cancers, increase in surgical complexity compared to that initially planned, need for preoperative transfusions, start of morphine consumption during preoperative treatment for opiate-naive patients, additional hospitalization or consultations in emergency room and delay in treatment when surgery was urgent. RESULTS: During the 2020 French COVID lockdown, 61 patients had a surgical procedure and 114 were postponed; in the comparator 2019 group, 232 patients underwent surgical procedures, indicating an overall decrease of 65% of activity. Analysis of differences between the two years revealed a reduction of 64% in emergency procedures, 90% of functional pathologies, and 13% of cancers. According to SGO guidelines, the only type of surgical procedures that had excessive delay was the semi-urgent group, where time to surgery was 6.7 weeks [range 5.4-10 weeks] instead of the recommended interval of 1-4 weeks. Among postponed surgeries there were 10 patients (8.7%) with a potential "loss of chance" according to the composite criteria, all included in the semi-urgent group. CONCLUSION: The COVID 19 pandemic was responsible for a significant decrease of activity in the surgical department of Hospital Foch. Difficulty of rescheduling surgeries was responsible for an increased delay in semi-urgent operations. In almost 9% of postponed surgeries, there was a potential "loss of chance", which likely represents only the tip of iceberg of collateral damages due to COVID 19 pandemic in this surgical unit. These data show the importance of continuing to treat pathologies requiring urgent or semi-urgent surgery during pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/trends , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cohort Studies , Female , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/methods , Hospital Departments/organization & administration , Hospital Departments/trends , Humans , Middle Aged , Paris , Retrospective Studies
14.
J Minim Invasive Gynecol ; 28(11): 1951-1952, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1397500

ABSTRACT

An abundance of literature has demonstrated that coronavirus disease (COVID-19) contributes to a hypercoagulable state that is associated with venous thromboembolic events. Data on postoperative complications after a mild COVID-19 infection are limited. We report a case of ovarian vein thrombosis after pelvic surgery in a patient with a recent mild COVID-19 infection. The patient presented with complaints of fever and worsening right-sided abdominal pain postoperatively and was found to have a right ovarian vein thrombosis. Thrombophilia workup was negative. The hypercoagulable state of patients with COVID-19 may have implications on postoperative complications after gynecologic surgery even in cases of mild infection. Further research is needed to determine the optimal thromboembolic prophylaxis for patients undergoing pelvic surgery after a COVID-19 infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Thrombosis , Venous Thrombosis , Female , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Venous Thrombosis/diagnostic imaging , Venous Thrombosis/etiology
15.
Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol ; 2021: 5528334, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1371915

ABSTRACT

This study is aimed at evaluating the results of the universal preoperative screening for COVID-19 in gynecologic cases operated on during its outbreak in a tertiary care hospital in Bangkok, Thailand. A retrospective descriptive study was done on all patients who underwent elective or emergency gynecologic surgeries during the pandemic period in Thailand (April 15 to June 5, 2020). The COVID-19 screening results by symptom-based screening, risk-based screening, and RT-PCR for COVID-19 were collected from the electronic medical records. Among 129 patients who underwent gynecologic surgeries, none had a positive RT-PCR for COVID-19. Symptom-based screening found no patients with positive symptoms for COVID-19. Risk-based screening found 4 patients (3.1%) who were in contact with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases and 4 patients (3.1%) who were healthcare personnel. In conclusion, routine preoperative RT-PCR for COVID-19 may need to be reconsidered among asymptomatic individuals in a low-prevalence country during the well-controlled COVID-19 situation. Larger studies are required to ascertain the benefit of universal preoperative COVID-19 testing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Asymptomatic Infections/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Elective Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Mass Screening , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Preoperative Care , Prevalence , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Thailand/epidemiology
16.
J Minim Invasive Gynecol ; 29(2): 274-283.e1, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1370604

ABSTRACT

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of perioperative coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in women undergoing benign gynecologic surgery and to evaluate perioperative complication rates in patients with active, previous, or no previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. DESIGN: A multicenter prospective cohort study. SETTING: Ten institutions in the United States. PATIENTS: Patients aged >18 years who underwent benign gynecologic surgery from July 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020, were included. All patients were followed up from the time of surgery to 10 weeks postoperatively. Those with intrauterine pregnancy or known gynecologic malignancy were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: Benign gynecologic surgery. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the incidence of perioperative COVID-19 infections, which was stratified as (1) previous COVID-19 infection, (2) preoperative COVID-19 infection, and (3) postoperative COVID-19 infection. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and mortality after surgery and predictors for postoperative COVID-19 infection. If surgery was delayed because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the reason for postponement and any subsequent adverse event was recorded. Of 3423 patients included for final analysis, 189 (5.5%) postponed their gynecologic surgery during the pandemic. Forty-three patients (1.3% of total cases) had a history of COVID-19. The majority (182, 96.3%) had no sequelae attributed to surgical postponement. After hospital discharge to 10 weeks postoperatively, 39 patients (1.1%) became infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. The mean duration of time between hospital discharge and the follow-up positive COVID-19 test was 22.1 ± 12.3 days (range, 4-50 days). Eleven (31.4% of postoperative COVID-19 infections, 0.3% of total cases) of the newly diagnosed COVID-19 infections occurred within 14 days of hospital discharge. On multivariable logistic regression, living in the Southwest (adjusted odds ratio, 6.8) and single-unit increase in age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index (adjusted odds ratio, 1.2) increased the odds of postoperative COVID-19 infection. Perioperative complications were not significantly higher in patients with a history of positive COVID-19 than those without a history of COVID-19, although the mean duration of time between previous COVID-19 diagnosis and surgery was 97 days (14 weeks). CONCLUSION: In this large multicenter prospective cohort study of benign gynecologic surgeries, only 1.1% of patients developed a postoperative COVID-19 infection, with 0.3% of infection in the immediate 14 days after surgery. The incidence of postoperative complications was not different in those with and without previous COVID-19 infections.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Adolescent , COVID-19 Testing , Female , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Humans , Pregnancy , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology
17.
J Obstet Gynaecol Can ; 43(11): 1296-1300, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1349530

ABSTRACT

In response to the coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic, the McGill University Health Centre introduced protocols to protect health care workers during emergency surgeries. These included waiting for a COVID-19 test result or waiting 20 minutes after aerosol-inducing procedures before proceeding with surgery. The following brief communication describes the impact of surgical delay on the outcomes of 3 emergency gynaecologic procedures: dilatation and curettage, laparoscopic salpingectomy, and laparoscopic cystectomy and detorsion. Our results show that delays associated with COVID-19 protocols did not negatively impact patients undergoing these surgeries.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergencies , Female , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
19.
J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod ; 50(10): 102199, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1333599

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 pandemic caused a dramatic decline in the gynecology emergency department (ED) visits. The Israeli government took a determined step of quarantine to suppress and control the spread. This study evaluates the effect of the COVID -19 quarantine on gynecology emergency department (ED) visits compared to the previous year. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective case-control study was conducted during the first half-year of the COVID-19 pandemic and focused on the quarantine during April. In order to identify differences in the population's epidemiology and changes in the amount and type of emergency gynecological visits and surgeries, we compared patients during April 2020 (COVID-19 quarantine) to those who visited the gynecology ED during April 2019. RESULTS: During January-June 2020 period, there was an overall 3707 patient visits in the gynecology ED, which represents a 22.8% decrease in patient visits compared to the previous year (2019, 4803 patients). There was a 36% decrease in the gynecology ED visits during the quarantine period. Patient demographics were similar between groups. Visits of nulliparous women were more common in the study group (p = .0001) and self-referral (p = .017). More post-operative complications and fewer patients with abdominal pain were admitted to the study group (p = .034 and p = .054, respectively). During the study, the hospitalization rate did not change 18.2% vs. 17.5% (p = 0.768). Hospitalization duration was significantly longer in the COVID-19 quarantine (2.8 ± 1.3 vs. 3.1 ± 1.5, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference among surgical procedure incidents. CONCLUSION: Visits in the gynecology ED service decreased during the COVID-19 quarantine without compromising the treatment of gynecology emergencies. Many gynecologic complaints can be managed in community care settings without referral to an ED.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Quarantine , Adult , Case-Control Studies , Cohort Studies , Female , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Israel/epidemiology , Laparoscopy , Parity , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies
20.
J Minim Invasive Gynecol ; 28(7): 1411-1419.e1, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1322221

ABSTRACT

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on surgical volume and emergency department (ED) consults across obstetrics-gynecology (OB-GYN) services at a New York City hospital. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary care academic medical center in New York City. PATIENTS: Women undergoing OB-GYN ED consults or surgeries between February 1, 2020 and April 15, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: March 16 institutional moratorium on elective surgeries. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The volume and types of surgeries and ED consults were compared before and after the COVID-19 moratorium. During the pandemic, the average weekly volume of ED consults and gynecology (GYN) surgeries decreased, whereas obstetric (OB) surgeries remained stable. The proportions of OB-GYN ED consults, GYN surgeries, and OB surgeries relative to all ED consults, all surgeries, and all labor and delivery patients were 1.87%, 13.8%, 54.6% in the pre-COVID-19 time frame (February 1-March 15) vs 1.53%, 21.3%, 79.7% in the COVID-19 time frame (March 16-April 15), representing no significant difference in proportions of OB-GYN ED consults (p = .464) and GYN surgeries (p = .310) before and during COVID-19, with a proportionate increase in OB surgeries (p <.002). The distribution of GYN surgical case types changed significantly during the pandemic with higher proportions of emergent surgeries for ectopic pregnancies, miscarriages, and concern for cancer (p <.001). Alternatively, the OB surgery distribution of case types remained relatively constant. CONCLUSION: This study highlights how the pandemic has affected the ways that patients in OB-GYN access and receive care. Institutional policies suspending elective surgeries during the pandemic decreased GYN surgical volume and affected the types of cases performed. This decrease was not appreciated for OB surgical volume, reflecting the nonelective and time-sensitive nature of obstetric care. A decrease in ED consults was noted during the pandemic begging the question "Where have all the emergencies gone?" Although the moratorium on elective procedures was necessary, "elective" GYN surgeries remain medically indicated to address symptoms such as pain and bleeding and to prevent serious medical sequelae such as severe anemia requiring transfusion. As we continue to battle COVID-19, we must not lose sight of those patients whose care has been deferred.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergencies/epidemiology , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Obstetric Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , New York City/epidemiology , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Pregnancy , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL