Systematic review and meta-analysis determining the effect of implemented COVID-19 guidelines on surgical oncology volumes and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: To provide for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) healthcare capacity, (surgical oncology) guidelines were established, forcing to alter the timing of performing surgical procedures. It is essential to determine whether these guidelines have led to disease progression. This study aims to give an insight into the number of surgical oncology procedures performed during the pandemic and provide information on short-term clinical outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed on all COVID-19 articles including operated patients, published before March 21, 2022. Meta-analysis was performed to visualize the number of performed surgical oncology procedures during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period. Random effects models were used for evaluating short-term clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies containing 6762 patients who underwent a surgical oncology procedure during the pandemic were included. The number of performed surgical procedures for an oncological pathology decreased (-26.4%) during the pandemic. The number of performed surgical procedures for breast cancer remained stable (+0.3%). Moreover, no difference was identified in the number of ≥T2 (OR 1.00, P = 0.989), ≥T3 (OR 0.95, P = 0.778), ≥N1 (OR 1.01, P = 0.964) and major postoperative complications (OR 1.55, P = 0.134) during the pandemic. CONCLUSION: The number of performed surgical oncology procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic decreased. In addition, the number of performed surgical breast cancer procedures remained stable. Oncological staging and major postoperative complications showed no significant difference compared to pre-pandemic practice. During future pandemics, the performed surgical oncology practice during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic seems appropriate for short-term results.

Telehealth Utilization Among Surgical Oncology Patients at a Large Academic Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic increased the use of telehealth within medicine. Data on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics associated with telehealth utilization among cancer surgical patients have not been well-defined. METHODS: Cancer patients who had a surgical oncology visit at the James Cancer Hospital in March 2020-May 2021 were included. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were recorded; access to modern information technology was measured using the Digital Divide Index (DDI). A logistic regression model was used to assess odds of receiving a telehealth. RESULTS: Among 2942 patients, median DDI was 18.2 (interquartile range 17.4-22.1). Patients were most often insured through managed care (n = 1459, 49.6%), followed by Medicare (n = 1109, 37.7%) and Medicaid (n = 267, 9.1%). Overall, 722 patients (24.5%) received at least one telehealth visit over the study period. On multivariable analysis, age (odds ratio [OR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-0.98 per 10-year increase), sex (male vs. female: OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.45-2.32), cancer type (pancreatic vs. breast: OR 9.19, 95% CI 6.38-13.23; colorectal vs. breast: OR 5.31, 95% CI 3.71-7.58), insurance type (Medicare vs. Medicaid: OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.04-2.41) and county of residence (distant vs. neighboring: OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.06-1.66) were associated with increased odds of receiving a telehealth visit. Patients from high DDI counties were not less likely to receive telehealth visits versus patients from low DDI counties (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.85-1.57). CONCLUSIONS: Several patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics had an impact on the likelihood of receiving a telehealth visit versus an in-person visit, suggesting that telehealth may not be equally accessible to all surgical oncology patients.

Global Forum of Cancer Surgeons: Cancer Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Impact and Lessons Learned.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this article is to summarize the opinions of the surgical oncology leaders from the Global Forum of Cancer Surgeons (GFCS) about the global impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cancer surgery. METHODS: A panel session (virtual) was held at the annual Society of Surgical Oncology 2021 International Conference on Surgical Cancer Care to address the impact of COVID-19 on cancer surgery globally. Following the virtual meeting, a questionnaire was sent to all the leaders to gather additional opinions. The input obtained from all the leaders was collated and analyzed to understand how cancer surgeons from across the world adapted in real-time to the impact of COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: The surgical oncology leaders noted that the COVID-19 pandemic led to severe disruptions in surgical cancer care across all domains of clinical care, education, and research. Several new changes/protocols associated with increased costs were implemented to deliver safe care. Leaders also noted that preexisting disparities in care were exacerbated, and the pandemic had a detrimental effect on well-being and financial status. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to severe disruptions in surgical cancer care globally. Leaders of the GFCS opined that new strategies need to be implemented to prepare for any future catastrophic events based on the lessons learned from the current events. The GFCS will embark on developing such a roadmap to ensure that surgical cancer care is preserved in the future regardless of any catastrophic global events.

Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical oncology practice-Results of an SSO survey.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly affected healthcare delivery, shifting focus away from nonurgent care. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of the pandemic on the practice of surgical oncology. METHODS: A web-based survey of questions about changes in practice during the COVID-19 pandemic was approved by the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) Research and Executive Committees and sent by SSO to its members. RESULTS: A total of 121 SSO members completed the survey, 77.7% (94/121) of whom were based in the United States. Breast surgeons were more likely than their peers to refer patients to neoadjuvant therapy (p = 0.000171). Head and neck surgeons were more likely to refer patients to definitive nonoperative treatment (p = 0.044), while melanoma surgeons were less likely to do so (p = 0.029). In all, 79.2% (95/120) of respondents are currently using telemedicine. US surgeons were more likely to use telemedicine (p = 0.004). Surgeons believed telemedicine is useful for long-term/surveillance visits (70.2%, 80/114) but inappropriate (50.4%, 57/113) for new patient visits. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 pandemic resulted in increased use of neoadjuvant therapy, delays in operative procedures, and increased use of telemedicine. Telemedicine is perceived to be most efficacious for long-term/surveillance visits or postoperative visits.

Perspectives of Gynecologic Oncologists on Minimally Invasive Surgery During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Turkish Society of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Oncology (MIJOD) Survey.

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.

Redistribution of Outpatient Oncologic Surgical Specialty Referrals During COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Initial reports of significantly worse outcomes for cancer patients with COVID-19 led to guidelines for triaging surgical cancer treatment. We sought to evaluate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on oncologic surgical specialty referrals. METHODS: We compared referrals to oncologic surgical specialty clinics at an academic tertiary care institution following implementation of stay-at-home orders in California (3/19/20-7/31/20, "COVID") to the same time period the year prior (3/19/19-7/31/19, "Pre-COVID"). The number of appointments, consulted surgical services, insurance types, acuity of diagnoses, and times from referral to first appointment (TRFA) were assessed. RESULTS: The overall number of patients seen in matched time periods decreased by 21.6% from 900 (pre-COVID) to 705 (COVID). Proportions of patients with malignant and suspicious diagnoses, surgical and thoracic oncology visits, and Medicaid insurance differed from comparison groups during the COVID period (P < .05). Overall median (interquartile range) TRFA decreased from 14 (20) to 12 (19) days (P = .001) during COVID. CONCLUSION: After implementation of stay-at-home orders, higher acuity and vulnerable patients were appropriately seen in oncologic surgical specialty clinics. While the long-term effects of decreased clinic visits during COVID remain uncertain, further examination of scheduling practices that led to shorter referral times may identify methods to improve timeliness of care and surgical oncologic outcomes in non-pandemic settings.

Challenges of virtual interviewing for surgical fellowships: a qualitative analysis of applicant experiences.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic forced surgical fellowship programs to transition from in-person to remote applicant interviews; the virtual interviewing format presented new and unique challenges. We sought to understand applicants' perceived challenges to virtual interviewing for a surgical fellowship program. METHOD: A grounded theory-based qualitative study was performed utilizing semi-structured interviews with fellowship applicants from the 2020 fellowship match. All Fellowship Council-registered applicants were eligible. We purposefully sampled participants to balance across gender, specialty-choice, and academic versus community-program affiliation. Interviews were inductively analyzed by two researchers for prominent themes. RESULTS: Fifteen interviews were conducted. Participants were 60% male (n = 9), with 33% (n = 5) from non-academic institutions. They applied for the following fellowships: Advanced Gastrointestinal/Minimal Invasive (55%), Bariatric (30%), Hepatopancreatobiliary (10%) and Surgical Oncology (5%). Four main themes emerged to describe virtual interview process challenges: (1) perceived data deficiency, (2) superficial personal connections, (3) magnification of non-professionalism, and (4) logistical frustrations. Applicants recommend program directors provide more information about the fellowship prior to interview day and offer informal independent interactions with current and previous fellows. CONCLUSIONS: According to fellowship applicants, virtual interviews resulted in a lack of information for rank-list decision making ultimately requiring them to rely on other information avenues to base their decisions. These applicants have offered advice to fellowship program directors and future applicants to better optimize this process.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 on training and mental well-being of surgical gynecological oncology trainees.

INTRODUCTION: The SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic has caused a crisis disrupting health systems worldwide. While efforts are being made to determine the extent of the disruption, the impact on gynecological oncology trainees/training has not been explored. We conducted an international survey of the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on clinical practice, medical education, and mental well-being of surgical gynecological oncology trainees. METHODS: In our cross-sectional study, a customized web-based survey was circulated to surgical gynecological oncology trainees from national/international organizations from May to November 2020. Validated questionnaires assessed mental well-being. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test and Fisher's exact test were used to analyse differences in means and proportions. Multiple linear regression was used to evaluate the effect of variables on psychological/mental well-being outcomes. Outcomes included clinical practice, medical education, anxiety and depression, distress, and mental well-being. RESULTS: A total of 127 trainees from 34 countries responded. Of these, 52% (66/127) were from countries with national training programs (UK/USA/Netherlands/Canada/Australia) and 48% (61/127) from countries with no national training programs. Altogether, 28% (35/125) had suspected/confirmed COVID-19, 28% (35/125) experienced a fall in household income, 20% (18/90) were self-isolated from households, 45% (57/126) had to re-use personal protective equipment, and 22% (28/126) purchased their own. In total, 32.3% (41/127) of trainees (16.6% (11/66) from countries with a national training program vs 49.1% (30/61) from countries with no national training program, p=0.02) perceived they would require additional time to complete their training fellowship. The additional training time anticipated did not differ between trainees from countries with or without national training programs (p=0.11) or trainees at the beginning or end of their fellowship (p=0.12). Surgical exposure was reduced for 50% of trainees. Departmental teaching continued throughout the pandemic for 69% (87/126) of trainees, although at reduced frequency for 16.1% (14/87), and virtually for 88.5% (77/87). Trainees reporting adequate pastoral support (defined as allocation of a dedicated mentor/access to occupational health support services) had better mental well-being with lower levels of anxiety/depression (p=0.02) and distress (p<0.001). Trainees from countries with a national training program experienced higher levels of distress (p=0.01). Mean (SD) pre-pandemic mental well-being scores were significantly higher than post-pandemic scores (8.3 (1.6) vs 7 (1.8); p<0.01). CONCLUSION: SARS-CoV-2 has negatively impacted the surgical training, household income, and psychological/mental well-being of surgical gynecological oncology trainees. The overall clinical impact was worse for trainees in countries with no national training program than for those in countries with a national training program, although national training program trainees reported greater distress. COVID-19 sickness increased anxiety/depression. The recovery phase must focus on improving mental well-being and addressing lost training opportunities.

Impact of the early COVID-19 pandemic on Breast Surgical Oncology fellow education.

INTRODUCTION: The early COVID-19 pandemic rapidly transformed healthcare and medical education. We sought to evaluate the professional and personal impact of the pandemic on 2019-2020 Breast Surgical Oncology (BSO) fellows in Society of Surgical Oncology approved programs to capture the experience and direct future changes. METHODS: From July 15, 2020 to August 4, 2020 a survey was administered to the American Society of Breast Surgeons' fellow members. The survey assessed the impact of the pandemic on clinical experience, education/research opportunities, personal health/well-being, and future career. Responses were collected and aggregated to quantify the collective experience of respondents. RESULTS: Twenty-eight of fifty-seven (54%) eligible fellows responded. Twenty-one (75%) indicated the clinical experience changed. Twenty-seven (96%) reported less time spent caring for ambulatory breast patients and sixteen (57%) reported the same/more time spent in the operating room. Fourteen (50%) stated their future job was impacted and eight (29%) delayed general surgery board examinations. Stress was increased in 26 (93%). Personal health was unaffected in 20 (71%), and 3 (10%) quarantined for COVID-19 exposure/infection. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic altered the clinical experience of BSO fellows; however, the operative experience was generally unaffected. The creation of frameworks and support mechanisms to mitigate potential challenges for fellows and fellowship programs in the ongoing pandemic and other times of national crisis should be considered.

Covid-19 negatively impacted on small oncology surgery but none on major procedures: Regional experience.

AIM: To understand the impact of COVID pandemic on the activity and patients' care of the Head and Neck regional Unit, temporary moved in a COVID-free hospital. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the yearly activity of the "Head & Neck Cancer Unit" at the Azienda Ospedali Riuniti Marche Nord (Italy) during 2020 (COVID-19 pandemic) and we compared it with the one performed in 2019. Statistical analyses were performed using Chi-square. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed comparing the total number of patients treated for H&N squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) in 2019 with the ones in 2020. Moreover, no differences were identified in term of cancer stage at the moment of the surgery between 2019 and 2020. On the contrary, a significant reduction in the number of surgical procedures carried out for thyroid (p < 0.05) and skin (p < 0.001) malignancies was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Despite Covid-19 limitations, our institution was able to preserve the number of major oncologic procedures without negative impact on patients' care. We believe that the creation of specific COVID-free hospital can be the key preserve quality of care in epidemic emergency.

Surgical oncology operative experience at a high-volume safety-net hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic led to disruptions in operative and hospital capabilities as the country triaged resources and canceled elective procedures. This study details the operative experience of a safety-net hospital for cancer-related operations during a 3-month period at the height of the pandemic. METHODS: Patients operated on for or diagnosed with malignancies of the abdomen, breast, skin, or soft-tissue (September 3, 2020-September 6, 2020) were identified from operative/clinic schedules. Sociodemographics, tumor and treatment characteristics, and COVID-19 information was identified through retrospective chart review of a prospectively maintained database. Descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: Fifty patients evaluated within this window underwent oncologic surgery. Median age was 61 (interquartile range: 53-68), 56% were female, 86% were White, and 66% were Hispanic. The majority (28%) were for colon cancer. Only two patients tested positive for COVID-19 preoperatively or within 30 days of their operation. There were no mortalities during the 1-year study period. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many hospitals and operative centers limited interventions to preserve resources, but oncologic procedures continued at many large-volume academic cancer centers. This study underscores the importance of continuing to offer surgery during the pandemic for surgical oncology cases at safety-net hospitals to minimize delays in time-sensitive oncologic treatment.

Urologic surgery in a safe hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic scenario.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic induced a global emergency that overwhelmed most hospitals around the world. Access to hospitals has been restricted to selective oncological and urgent patients to minimize surgeries requiring Intensive Care Unit care. All other kind of non-urgent and benign surgeries have been rescheduled. The burden of oncological and urgent cases on the healthcare system has increased. METHODS: We have been asked to become the referral center for major oncological and urgent urological surgeries, increasing our surgical volume. Through meticulous hospital protocols on PPE, use of nasopharyngeal swabs, controlled hospital access and the prompt management of suspected/positive cases, we were able to perform 31% more urological surgical procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the same period in 2019. RESULTS: We observed a 72% increase in oncological surgical procedures and 150% in urgent procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience shows how the management of oncological and urgent cases can be maintained during unexpected, global emergencies, such as COVID-19.

Assessing the quality of life of head and neck healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic-A self-reported global cross-sectional questionnaire study by the International Federation of Head and Neck Oncologic Societies.

BACKGROUND: Considering the pandemic's mode of transmission, the impact on quality of life (QOL) is likely to be exaggerated among healthcare workers (HCWs) who treat head and neck diseases (hHCWs). METHODS: A cross-sectional self-reported QOL assessment was undertaken between July and September 2020 using the World Health Organization Quality of Life instrument sent out to hHCWs. Factors that predicted a poorer QOL were identified using regression models and mediation analysis. RESULTS: Responses from 979 individuals across 53 countries were analyzed with 62.4% participation from low- and middle-income countries. The physical domain had the highest mean scores of 15 ± 2.51, while the environmental domain was the lowest (14.17 ± 2.42). Participants from low- and middle-income countries had a significantly worse physical (p < 0.001) and environmental (p < 0.001) domains, while a low coronavirus disease 2019-related mortality significantly impacted the environmental domain (p-0.034). CONCLUSION: QOL-related issues among hHCWs are a vexing problem and need intervention at an individual and systems level in all parts of the world.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Surgical Oncology in Europe: Results of a European Survey.

BACKGROUND: The first COVID-19 pandemic wave hit most of the health-care systems worldwide. The present survey aimed to provide a European overview on the COVID-19 impact on surgical oncology. METHODS: This anonymous online survey was accessible from April 24 to May 11, 2020, for surgeons (n = 298) who were contacted by the surgical society European Digestive Surgery. The survey was completed by 88 surgeons (29.2%) from 69 different departments. The responses per department were evaluated. RESULTS: Of the departments, 88.4% (n = 61/69) reported a lower volume of patients in the outpatient clinic; 69.1% (n = 47/68) and 75.0% (n = 51/68) reported a reduction in hospital bed and the operating room capacity, respectively. As a result, the participants reported an average reduction of 29.3% for all types of oncological resections surveyed in this questionnaire. The strongest reduction was observed for oncological resections of hepato-pancreatico-biliary (HPB) cancers. Of the interviewed surgeons, 68.7% (n = 46/67) agreed that survival outcomes will be negatively impacted by the pandemic. CONCLUSION: The first COVID-19 pandemic wave had a significant impact on surgical oncology in Europe. The surveyed surgeons expect an increase in the number of unresectable cancers as well as poorer survival outcomes due to cancellations of follow-ups and postponements of surgeries.

Impact of the Novel Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic on Head and Neck Cancer Care.

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to assess the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on head and neck oncologic care at a tertiary care facility. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study conducted between March 18, 2020, and May 20, 2020. The primary planned outcome was the rate of treatment modifications during the study period. Secondary outcome measures were tumor conference volume, operative volume, and outpatient patient procedure and clinic volumes. SETTING: This single-center study was conducted at a tertiary care academic hospital in a large metropolitan area. METHODS: The study included a consecutive sample of adult subjects who were presented at a head and neck interdepartmental tumor conference during the study period. Patients were compared to historical controls based on review of operative data, outpatient procedures, and clinic volumes. RESULTS: In total, 117 patients were presented during the review period in 2020, compared to 69 in 2019. There was an 8.4% treatment modification rate among cases presented at the tumor conference. There was a 61.3% (347 from 898) reduction in outpatient clinic visits and a 63.4% (84 from 230) reduction in procedural volume compared to the prior year. Similarly, the operative volume decreased by 27.0% (224 from 307) compared to the previous year. CONCLUSION: Restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in limited treatment modifications. Transition to virtual tumor board format observed an increase in case presentations. While there were reductions in operative volume, there was a larger proportion of surgical cases for malignancy, reflecting the prioritization of oncologic care during the pandemic.