Sudden Occurrence of Pacemaker Capture Failure during Irreversible Electroporation Ablation for Prostate Cancer in Post-COVID-19 Patient: A Case Report.

Irreversible electroporation (IRE) ablation is a novel treatment option for localized prostate cancer. Here, we present a case of an abrupt and fatal arrhythmia during the IRE procedure in a prostate cancer patient with an implanted permanent pacemaker. A 78-year-old male patient with a pacemaker due to sick sinus syndrome and syncope was scheduled for IRE prostate ablation surgery under general anesthesia. He had a history of recovering from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) after having been vaccinated against it and recovered without sequalae. Pacemaker interrogation and reprogramming to asynchronous AOO mode was carried out before surgery, however, sinus pause occurred repeatedly during ablation pulse delivery. After the first sinus pause of 2.25 s there was a decrease in continuous arterial blood pressure (ABP). During the delivery of the second and third pulses, identical sinus pauses were observed due to failure to capture. However, the atrial-paced rhythm recovered instantly, and vital signs became acceptable. Although sinus pause recovered gradually, the duration thereof was increased by the delivery of more IRE pulses, with a subsequent abrupt decrease seen in blood pressure. The pacemaker was urgently reprogrammed to DOO mode, after which there were no further pacing failures and no hemodynamic adverse events. For patients with pacemakers, close cardiac monitoring in addition to the interrogation of the pacemaker during the electromagnetic interference (EMI) procedure is recommended, especially in the case of having a disease that may aggravate cardiac vulnerability, such as COVID-19.

The Impact of the Ongoing COVID-19 Epidemic on the Increasing Risk of Adverse Pathology in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy.

We aimed to assess whether the ongoing course of the COVID-19 epidemic has been associated with an increased risk of adverse pathology (AP) findings in prostate cancer (PC) patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). We performed a retrospective data analysis which included 408 consecutive, non-metastatic, previously untreated PC patients who underwent RP in our institution between March 2020 and September 2021. Patients were divided into two equally numbered groups in regard to the median surgery date (Early Epidemic [EE] and Late Epidemic [LE]) and compared. Adverse pathology was defined as either grade group (GG) ≥ 4, pT ≥ 3a or pN+ at RP. Patients in the LE group demonstrated significantly higher rates of AP than in the EE group (61 vs. 43% overall and 50 vs. 27% in preoperative non-high-risk subgroup, both p < 0.001), mainly due to higher rates of upgrading. On multivariable analysis, consecutive epidemic week (odds ratio: 1.02, 95% confidence interval: 1.00-1.03, p = 0.009) as well as biopsy GG ≥ 2 and a larger prostate volume (mL) were associated with AP in non-high-risk patients. The study serves as a warning call for increased awareness of risk underassessment in contemporarily treated PC patients.

COVID-19 Vaccination Manifesting as Unilateral Lymphadenopathies Detected by 18F-Choline PET/CT.

ABSTRACT: A 79-year-old man with a history of prostate adenocarcinoma treated with prostatectomy underwent 18F-FCH PET/CT for restaging purpose, which was negative for relapse but showed the presence of choline-positive lymph nodes in the left axilla. The patient underwent a COVID-19 vaccination in the left arm 6 days prior. Thus, PET/CT findings were considered as inflammatory lymph nodes. With the current drive of global COVID-19 immunization, this case underlines the importance of knowing vaccination history to interpret correctly the findings and to avoid false-positive reports.

The impact of COVID-19 on surgical volume and surgical training at a high-volume pelvic oncology centre.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has overwhelmed most health services. As a result, many surgeries have been deferred and diagnoses delayed. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic at a high-volume pelvic oncology centre. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of clinical activity from 2017 to 2020. We compared caseload for index procedures 2017-2019 (period 1) versus 2020 (period 2) to see the effect of the COVID pandemic. We then compared the activity during the first lockdown (March 23rd) to the rest of the year when we increased our theatre access by utilising a 'clean' site. RESULTS: The average annual number of robotic assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) performed during period 1 was 82 and 352 respectively. This reduced to 68 (17.1% reduction) and 262 (25.6% reduction) during period 2. The number of patients who underwent prostate brachytherapy decreased from 308 to 243 (21% reduction). The number of prostate biopsies decreased from 420 to 234 (44.3% reduction). The number of radical orchidectomies decreased from 18 to 11 (39% reduction). The mean number of RARC and RARP per month during period 2 was 5.5 and 22. This decreased to 4 and 9 per month during the first national lockdown but was maintained thereafter despite two further lockdowns. CONCLUSION: There has been a substantial decrease in urological oncology caseload during the COVID pandemic. The use of alternate pathways such as 'clean' sites can ensure continuity of care for cancer surgery and training needs.

Indirect impact of Covid-19 on hospital care pathways in Italy.

Earlier in 2020, seven Italian regions, which cover 62% of the Italian population, set up the Mimico-19 network to monitor the side effects of the restrictive measures against Covid-19 on volumes and quality of care. To this aim, we retrospectively analysed hospital discharges data, computing twelve indicators of volume and performance in three clinical areas: cardiology, oncology, and orthopaedics. Weekly indicators for the period January-July 2020 were compared with the corresponding average for 2018-2019; comparisons were performed within 3 sub-periods: pre-lockdown, lockdown, and post-lockdown. The weekly trend of hospitalisations for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) showed a 40% reduction, but the proportion of STEMI patients with a primary PTCA did not significantly change from previous years. Malignant neoplasms surgery volumes differed substantially by site, with a limited reduction for lung cancer (< 20%) and greater declines (30-40%) for breast and prostate cancers. The percentage of timely surgery for femoral neck in the elderly remained constantly higher than the previous 2 years whereas hip and knee replacements fell dramatically. Hospitalisations have generally decreased, but the capacity of a timely and effective response in time-dependent pathways of care was not jeopardized throughout the period. General trends did not show important differences across regions, regardless of the different burden of Covid-19. Preventive and primary care services should adopt a pro-active approach, moving towards the identification of at-risk conditions that were neglected during the pandemic and timely addressing patients to the secondary care system.

COVID-19 pandemic impact on uro-oncological disease outcomes at an Italian tertiary referral center.

PURPOSE: To assess differences in referral and pathologic outcomes for uro-oncology cases prior to and during the COVID pandemic, comparing clinical and pathological data of cancer surgeries performed at an academic referral center between 2019 and 2020. METHODS: We collected data of 880 prostate biopsies, 393 robot-assisted radical prostatectomies (RARP) for prostate cancer (PCa), 767 trans-urethral resections of bladder tumor (TURB) and 134 radical cystectomies (RC) for bladder cancer (BCa), 29 radical nephro-ureterectomies (RNU) for upper tract urothelial carcinoma, 130 partial nephrectomies (PN) and 12 radical nephrectomies (RN) for renal cancer, and 41 orchifunicolectomies for testicular cancer. Data of patients treated in 2019 (before COVID-19 pandemic) were compared to patients treated in 2020 (during pandemic). RESULTS: No significant decline in uro-oncological surgical activity was seen between 2019 and 2020. No significant increase in time between diagnosis and surgery was observed for all considered cancers. No differences in terms of main pathologic features were observed in patients undergoing RARP, TURB, RNU, RN/PN, or orchifunicolectomy. A higher proportion of ISUP grade 3 and 4 PCa were diagnosed in 2020 at biopsy (p = 0.001), but this did not translate into worse pathological grade/stage at RARP. In 2020, more advanced disease features were seen after RC, including lymph node involvement (p = 0.01) and non-organ confined disease (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Neither decline in uro-oncologic activity nor delay between diagnosis and treatment was observed at our institution during the first year of COVID-19 pandemic. No significant worsening of cancer disease features was found in 2020 except for muscle-invasive BCa.

Assessment of Prostate Cancer Treatment Among Black and White Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, racial/ethnic minority communities disproportionately experienced poor outcomes; however, the association of the pandemic with prostate cancer (PCa) care is unknown. Objective: To assess the association between race and PCa care delivery for Black and White patients during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, regional, collaborative, retrospective cohort study compared prostatectomy rates between Black and White patients with untreated nonmetastatic PCa during the COVID-19 pandemic (269 patients from March 16 to May 15, 2020) and prior (378 patients from March 11 to May 10, 2019). Main Outcomes and Measures: Prostatectomy rates. Results: Of the 647 men with nonmetastatic PCa, 172 (26.6%) were non-Hispanic Black men, and 475 (73.4%) were non-Hispanic White men. Black men were significantly less likely to undergo prostatectomy during the pandemic compared with White patients (1 of 76 [1.3%] vs 50 of 193 [25.9%]; P < .001), despite similar COVID-19 risk factors, biopsy Gleason grade groups, and comparable prostatectomy rates prior to the pandemic (17 of 96 [17.7%] vs 54 of 282 [19.1%]; P = .75). Black men had higher median prostate-specific antigen levels prior to biopsy (8.8 ng/mL [interquartile range, 5.3-15.2 ng/mL] vs 7.2 ng/mL [interquartile range, 5.1-11.1 ng/mL]; P = .04). A linear combination of regression coefficients with an interaction term for year demonstrated an odds ratio for likelihood of surgery of 0.06 (95% CI, 0.01-0.35; P = .002) for Black patients and 1.41 (95% CI, 0.81-2.44; P = .23) for White patients during the pandemic compared with prior to the pandemic. Changes in surgical volume varied by site (from a 33% increase to complete shutdown), with sites that experienced the largest reduction in cancer surgery caring for a greater proportion of Black patients. Conclusions and Relevance: In this large multi-institutional regional collaborative cohort study, the odds of PCa surgery were lower among Black patients compared with White patients during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although localized PCa does not require immediate treatment, the lessons from this study suggest systemic inequities within health care and are likely applicable across medical specialties. Public health efforts are needed to fully recognize the unintended consequence of diversion of cancer resources to the COVID-19 pandemic to develop balanced mitigation strategies as viral rates continue to fluctuate.

Evaluating the anxiety and depression status of prostate cancer patients whose operations were postponed because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIM: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the anxiety and depression status of prostate cancer (PCa) patients whose planned operations in the urology clinic of our hospital, which is serving as a pandemic hospital in Turkey have been postponed because of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. METHODS: This survey study was conducted at urology clinic of Ankara City Hospital between March 1 and June 1, 2020, and included 24 male patients who agreed to answer the questionnaires (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory [STAI] I and II and Beck Depression Inventory [BDI]). Demographical and clinical data (age, time since diagnosis, total serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, risk groups according to the D'Amico classification system, smoking, alcohol habitus, major surgical history and comorbidities) of the patients were collected from hospital software. RESULTS: The mean STAI-I score of the patients (46.7 ± 1.4 [44-49]) was significantly higher than their STAI-II score (41.7 ± 2.4 [39-47]) (P < .001). The negative correlation between the decrease in age and STAI-I score was found to be statistically significant (r = 0.439, P < .05). The mean BDI score of the patients was 4.3 ± 3.2 (0-13), which was compatible with mild depression. There was no statistically significant difference among the time elapsed from diagnosis, PSA levels, smoking and alcohol habitus, major surgical history and comorbidity status and STAI-I, STAI-II and BDI scores (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Prostate cancer patients with postponed operations should be guided properly in order to manage their anxiety status especially young patients.

Cancer in the Shadow of COVID: Early-Stage Breast and Prostate Cancer Patient Perspectives on Surgical Delays Due to COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: During the height of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, elective surgeries, including oncologic surgeries, were delayed. Little prospective data existed to guide practice, and professional surgical societies issued recommendations grounded mainly in common sense and expert consensus, such as medical therapy for early-stage breast and prostate cancer patients. To understand the patient experience of delay in cancer surgery during the pandemic, we interviewed breast and prostate cancer patients whose surgeries were delayed due to the pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with early-stage breast or prostate cancer who suffered surgical postponement at Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) were invited to participate. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 21 breast and prostate cancer patients. Interviews were transcribed, and qualitative analysis using ground-theory approach was performed. RESULTS: Most patients reported significant distress due to cancer and COVID. Key themes that emerged included the lack of surprise and acceptance of the surgical delays but endorsed persistent cancer- and delay-related worries. Satisfaction with patient-physician communication and the availability of a delay strategy were key factors in patients' acceptance of the situation; perceived lack of communication prompted a few patients to seek care elsewhere. DISCUSSION: The clinical effect of delay in cancer surgery will take years to fully understand, but there are immediate steps that can be taken to improve the patient experience of delays in care, including elicitation of individual patient perspectives and ongoing communication. More work is needed to understand the wider experiences of patients, especially minority, socioeconomically disadvantaged, and uninsured patients, who encounter delays in oncologic care.

Management of patients who opt for radical prostatectomy during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: an international accelerated consensus statement.

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic caused delays in definitive treatment of patients with prostate cancer. Beyond the immediate delay a backlog for future patients is expected. The objective of this work is to develop guidance on criteria for prioritisation of surgery and reconfiguring management pathways for patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer who opt for surgical treatment. A second aim was to identify the infection prevention and control (IPC) measures to achieve a low likelihood of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hazard if radical prostatectomy (RP) was to be carried out during the outbreak and whilst the disease is endemic. METHODS: We conducted an accelerated consensus process and systematic review of the evidence on COVID-19 and reviewed international guidance on prostate cancer. These were presented to an international prostate cancer expert panel (n = 34) through an online meeting. The consensus process underwent three rounds of survey in total. Additions to the second- and third-round surveys were formulated based on the answers and comments from the previous rounds. The Consensus opinion was defined as ≥80% agreement and this was used to reconfigure the prostate cancer pathways. RESULTS: Evidence on the delayed management of patients with prostate cancer is scarce. There was 100% agreement that prostate cancer pathways should be reconfigured and measures developed to prevent nosocomial COVID-19 for patients treated surgically. Consensus was reached on prioritisation criteria of patients for surgery and management pathways for those who have delayed treatment. IPC measures to achieve a low likelihood of nosocomial COVID-19 were coined as 'COVID-19 cold' sites. CONCLUSION: Reconfiguring management pathways for patients with prostate cancer is recommended if significant delay (>3-6 months) in surgical management is unavoidable. The mapped pathways provide guidance for such patients. The IPC processes proposed provide a framework for providing RP within an environment with low COVID-19 risk during the outbreak or when the disease remains endemic. The broader concepts could be adapted to other indications beyond prostate cancer surgery.

How uro-oncology has been affected by COVID-19 emergency? Data from Piedmont/Valle d'Aosta Oncological Network, Italy.

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has dramatically hit all Europe and Northern Italy in particular. The reallocation of medical resources has caused a sharp reduction in the activity of many medical disciplines, including urology. The restricted availability of resources is expected to cause a delay in the treatment of urological cancers and to negatively influence the clinical history of many cancer patients. In this study, we describe COVID-19 impact on uro-oncological management in Piedmont/Valle d'Aosta, estimating its future impact. METHODS: We performed an online survey in 12 urological centers, belonging to the Oncological Network of Piedmont/Valle d'Aosta, to estimate the impact of COVID-19 emergency on their practice. On this basis, we then estimated the medical working capacity needed to absorb all postponed uro-oncological procedures. RESULTS: Most centers (77%) declared to be "much"/"very much" affected by COVID-19 emergency. If uro-oncological consultations for newly diagnosed cancers were often maintained, follow-up consultations were more than halved or even suspended in around two out of three centers. In-office and day-hospital procedures were generally only mildly reduced, whereas major uro-oncological procedures were more than halved or even suspended in 60% of centers. To clear waiting list backlog, the urological working capacity should dramatically increase in the next months; delays greater than 1 month are expected for more than 50% of uro-oncological procedures. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 emergency has dramatically slowed down uro-oncological activity in Piedmont and Valle d'Aosta. Ideally, uro-oncological patients should be referred to COVID-19-free tertiary urological centers to ensure a timely management.

Urgent and elective proctologic/anorectal interventions in the COVID-19 pandemic: A practical guideline for treatment safety.

BACKGROUND: This article aims to give practical information and concrete suggestions on what should be considered in emergency, semi-urgent and elective settings for common anorectal diseases in the hectic period of the COVID-19 pandemic, based on early results of a series of anorectal interventions. METHODS: Referring to other related guidelines, general considerations specific to the diagnosis and treatment of highly prevalent anorectal diseases were developed to target the correct patients, evaluate and orientate by telemedicine, adapt the Proctology Unit to the new pandemic, and control contamination and infection. Specific considerations for common anorectal diseases were cited, and our initial results were retrospectively documented. RESULTS: From March 1 to April 10, 2020, we contacted 240 patients with anorectal diseases in two centers. We evaluated the results retrospectively on 16-17 April. At the end of this survey, 14 patients (5.8%) were lost for further contact and follow-up. Thirty-one patients (12.9%) were evaluated as nondeferrable cases and invited to the Proctology Unit. Twenty-eight patients required interventions at the same session. Adhering to the principles described here, more than 90 percent of benign anorectal disorders could be treated successfully, with 2.1 percent of suspected contamination and no confirmed cases. None of the Proctology personnel or their close contacts developed COVID-19, either. CONCLUSION: By adhering to the principles outlined in this practical guide, it was possible to treat most of the benign anorectal diseases safely in the initial, hectic period of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the surgical activity of Pediatric Urology: analysis of postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. / Repercusión de la pandemia COVID-19 sobre la actividad quirúrgica de Urología Pediátrica: análisis de las complicaciones posquirúrgicas según la clasificación de Clavien-Dindo.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a pandemic of global impact that forced social-political measures to be taken, such as the declaration of the state of alarm in Spain. At the same time, the reorganization of the pediatric medical-surgical activities and infrastructures was carried out, with the consequent suspension of the non-urgent surgical activity of Pediatric Urology. We analyzed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical activity in a Pediatric Urology division, as well as surgical complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of epidemiological, clinical and surgical data was carried out, including complications and readmissions of all patients operated on in the division of Pediatric Urology within the duration of the state of alarm. Five time periods have been created according to the de-escalation phases. RESULTS: Forty-nine surgical procedures were carried out on 45 patients (8 prior to the implementation of the de-escalation phases). High priority pathologies were the most frequent in the first phases, being the ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction the most prevalent. Four complications were recorded (8.8%), none of them were respiratory. CONCLUSIONS: The EAU recommendations for the resumption of surgical activity have allowed a correct, safe and gradual transition to the routine surgical activity in Pediatric Urology. The Clavien-Dindo classification is useful and valid for application in this division. No respiratory complications have been reported that could be attributable to the pandemic situation.

Surgical Delay and Pathological Outcomes for Clinically Localized High-Risk Prostate Cancer.

Importance: There is a lack of data evaluating the association of surgical delay time (SDT) with outcomes in patients with localized, high-risk prostate cancer. Objective: To investigate the association of SDT of radical prostatectomy and final pathological and survival outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data from the US National Cancer Database (NCDB) and identified all patients with clinically localized (cT1-2cN0cM0) high-risk prostate adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 2006 and 2016 who underwent radical prostatectomy. Data analyses were performed from April 1 to April 12, 2020. Exposures: SDT was defined as the number of days between the initial cancer diagnosis and radical prostatectomy. SDT was categorized into 5 groups: 31 to 60, 61 to 90, 91 to 120, 121 to 150, and 151 to 180 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were predetermined as adverse pathological outcomes after radical prostatectomy, including pT3-T4 disease, pN-positive disease, and positive surgical margin. The adverse pathological score (APS) was defined as an accumulated score of the 3 outcomes (0-3). An APS of 2 or higher was considered a separate outcome to capture cases with more aggressive pathological features. The secondary outcome was overall survival. Results: Of the 32 184 patients included in the study, the median (interquartile range) age was 64 (59-68) years, and 25 548 (79.4%) were non-Hispanic White. Compared with an SDT of 31 to 60 days, longer SDTs were not associated with higher risks of having any adverse pathological outcomes (odds ratio [OR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.80-1.12; P = .53), pT3-T4 disease (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.83-1.17; P = .87), pN-positive disease (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.59-1.06; P = .12), positive surgical margin (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74-1.05; P = .17), or APS greater than or equal to 2 (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.74-1.05; P = .17). Longer SDT was also not associated with worse overall survival (for SDT of 151-180 days, hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.79-1.59, P = .53). Subgroup analyses performed for patients with very high-risk disease (primary Gleason score 5) and sensitivity analyses with SDT considered as a continuous variable yielded similar results. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients who underwent radical prostatectomy within 180 days of diagnosis for high-risk prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer could be safely delayed up to 6 months after diagnosis.