Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Urol Oncol ; 39(5): 258-267, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-894253

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic-related constraints on healthcare access have raised concerns about adverse outcomes from delayed treatment, including the risk of cancer progression and other complications. Further, concerns were raised about a potentially significant backlog of patients in need of cancer care due to the pandemic-related delays in healthcare, further exacerbating any potential adverse outcomes. Delayed access to surgery is particularly relevant to urologic oncology since one-third of new cancers in men (20% overall) arise from the genitourinary (GU) tract and surgery is often the primary treatment. Herein, we summarize the prepandemic literature on deferred surgery for GU cancers and risk of disease progression. The aforementioned data on delayed surgery were gathered in the context of systemic delays present in certain healthcare systems, or occasionally, due to planned deferral in suboptimal surgical candidates. These data provide indirect, but sufficient insight to develop triage schemas for prioritization of uro-oncological cases. Herein, we outline the extent to which the pandemic-related triage guidelines had influenced urologic practice in various regions. To study the adverse outcomes in the pandemic-era, a survey of urologic oncologists was conducted regarding modifications in their initial management of urologic cancers and any delay-related adverse outcomes. While the adverse effects directly from COVID-19 related delays will become apparent in the coming years, the results showing short-term outcomes are quite instructive. Since cancer care was assigned a higher priority at most centers, this strategy may have avoided significant delays in care and limited the anticipated negative impact of pandemic-related constraints.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Medical Oncology/methods , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Urogenital Neoplasms/surgery , Urologic Neoplasms/surgery , Urologic Surgical Procedures/methods , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Male , Medical Oncology/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Penile Neoplasms/pathology , Penile Neoplasms/surgery , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Testicular Neoplasms/pathology , Testicular Neoplasms/surgery , Time-to-Treatment , Urogenital Neoplasms/pathology , Urologic Neoplasms/pathology
2.
Eur Urol Focus ; 6(5): 1104-1110, 2020 Sep 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-598746

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Determining whether members follow guidelines, including guidelines prepared to help direct practice management during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, is an important goal for medical associations. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether practice of urologists is in line with guidelines for the management of common urological conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic produced by leading (inter)national urological associations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Self-selected urologists completed a voluntary survey available online from March 27 to April 11, 2020 and distributed globally by the Société Internationale d'Urologie. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Responses to two survey questions on the (1) management of 14 common urological procedures and (2) priority scoring of 10 common urological procedures were evaluated by practice setting and geographical region using chi-square and one-way analysis of variance analyses, respectively. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: There were 2494 respondents from 76 countries. Oncological conditions were prioritised over benign conditions, and benign conditions were deferred when feasible and safe. Oncological conditions with the greatest malignant potential were prioritised over less aggressive cancers. Respondents from Europe were least likely to postpone and most likely to prioritise conditions identified by guidelines as being of the highest priority. Respondents' priority scoring of urological procedures closely matched the priorities assigned by guidelines. The main limitation of this study is that respondents were self-selected, and access to the survey was limited by language and technology barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Prioritisation and management of urological procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic are in line with current guidelines. The greatest agreement was reported in Europe. Observed differences may be related to limited resources in some settings. PATIENT SUMMARY: When deciding how best to treat patients during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, urologists are taking into account both expert recommendations and the availability of important local resources.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Guideline Adherence/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Urogenital Neoplasms/surgery , Urologic Diseases/surgery , Urologic Surgical Procedures/methods , Urologists , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Humans , Pandemics , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , SARS-CoV-2 , Societies, Medical , Surveys and Questionnaires , Triage , Urogenital Neoplasms/pathology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL