Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Urological Care Delivery in the United States.

PURPOSE: We examined changes in urological care delivery due to COVID-19 in the U.S. based on patient, practice, and local/regional demographic and pandemic response features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed real-world data from the American Urological Association Quality (AQUA) Registry collected from electronic health record systems. Data represented 157 outpatient urological practices and 3,165 providers across 48 U.S. states and territories, including 3,297,721 unique patients, 12,488,831 total outpatient visits and 2,194,456 procedures. The primary outcome measure was the number of outpatient visits and procedures performed (inpatient or outpatient) per practice per week, measured from January 2019 to February 2021. RESULTS: We found large (>50%) declines in outpatient visits from March 2020 to April 2020 across patient demographic groups and states, regardless of timing of state stay-at-home orders. Nonurgent outpatient visits decreased more across various nonurgent procedures (49%-59%) than for procedures performed for potentially urgent diagnoses (38%-52%); surgical procedures for nonurgent conditions also decreased more (43%-79%) than those for potentially urgent conditions (43%-53%). African American patients had similar decreases in outpatient visits compared with Asians and Caucasians, but also slower recoveries back to baseline. Medicare-insured patients had the steepest declines (55%), while those on Medicaid and government insurance had the lowest percentage of recovery to baseline (73% and 69%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides real-world evidence on the decline in urological care across demographic groups and practice settings, and demonstrates a differential impact on the utilization of urological health services by demographics and procedure type.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on functional urology procedures in France: a prospective study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on functional urology procedures in France. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted within 11 secondary and tertiary referral centers in France. Patients aged > 18 years who were diagnosed with a functional urology disease before the national lockdown (March 17th, 2020) and who required a surgery were included. Study period went from March 17th to September 30th 2020. The included interventions were listed according to the guidelines for functional urology enacted by the French Association of Urology and delay of reoperation was compared to the guidelines' delay. The primary outcome was the number of procedures left unscheduled at the end of the study period. Descriptive statistics were performed. RESULTS: From March 17th 2020 to September 3 rd 2020, 1246 patients with a previous diagnosis of a functional urological disease requiring a surgery were included. The mean follow-up was 140.4 days (± 53.4). Overall, 316 interventions (25.4%) were maintained whereas 74 (5.9%) were canceled, 848 (68.1%) postponed and 8 patients (0.6%) died. At the end of the follow-up, 184 patients (21.7%) were still not rescheduled. If the intervention was postponed, the mean delay between the initial and final date was 85.7 days (± 64.4). CONCLUSION: Overall, more than two thirds of interventions had to be postponed and the mean delay between the initial and final date was about three months.

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.

Is Uro-oncological Surgery Safe During the COVID-19 Pandemic? Comparative Morbidity and Mortality in Patients Undergoing Surgery 2019-2020.

INTRODUCTION: The SARS-CoV-2 infection has resulted in an unprecedented pandemic. Patients undergoing surgery are a group at risk of exposure. Also, patients with ongoing infection undergoing surgery may be more susceptible to developing complications. There is no significant data on surgical safety in the pandemic period. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Observational study based in a prospective database of urological oncological surgery. Data were obtained during the 2020 mandatory confinement period compared to the same period in 2019. The records were reviewed 45 days post-surgery. The objective was to compare surgical morbidity and mortality during the pandemic versus an average year in urological cancer surgery. RESULTS: During confinement period (2020), 85 patients underwent uro-oncology surgery, while in 2019, during the same period, 165. The Clavien-Dindo morbidity ≥3 in 2020 was 2.3% (n=2), and in 2019, it reached 6% (n=10). In 2020, 9 patients were readmitted (10.5%). One patient (1.1%) was re-interfered, with a perioperative mortality of 1.1%. In 2019, 21 patients (12.7%) were readmitted. Seventeen patients (10.3%) were re-interfered, with a perioperative mortality of 1.8%. The median number of days hospitalized was 2 (IQR=2) in 2020 and 3 (IQR=3) in 2019. No significant differences were found in population or morbimortality, except for reoperation in a normal year. CONCLUSION: Postoperative morbidity and mortality reported are lower than those shown in the literature concerning COVID-19 and similar to that historically reported by our centers. This study suggests that it is safe to operate patients with urological cancer following the appropriate protocols during a pandemic.

Urological activity at the time of COVID-19 pandemic: is there any difference between public and private field?

INTRODUCTION: as COVID-19 pandemic is rapidly evolving, there is a whole reorganization in hospitals to concentrate more resources to face the crisis. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 disease on urological activity in Tunisia. To assess the differences in the management of urological conditions between the private and the public field. METHODS: a survey was addressed to all certified urologists working in Tunisia in both the public and private sectors (n=194) using the national database of active urologists available and updated. We either called them or looked them up through email or social media. The form was open from March the 28th to April the 3rd. Results were obtained via spreadsheet and analysed using SPSS 23.0. RESULTS: one hundred and twenty urologists have filled in the form. Consultations at the outpatient office were restricted to urgent cases in 66% (n=79). Telemedicine was more used by urologists in private than in public fields p=0.03. Urologists in private sector followed more the sterilization protocol of the hospital/clinic and used more disposable materials whenever possible p=0.011. Elective surgical activity has completely stopped in 85% of the responders (n=102). Elective surgery requiring transfusion or intensive care unit was performed in 38% (n=46) and 26% (n=31) if there was a risk of disease progression. Benign Prostate Hyperplasia (BPH) surgery was more performed as usual in private sector than in public sector p=0.012. It was the only condition managed differently between both sectors. CONCLUSION: the drop of the urological activity is essential in order to give relevant stakeholders room to act efficiently against the spread of the virus. The context of the pandemic and the hospital´s condition must be taken into consideration without compromising the patient´s outcome.

Effect of SARS and COVID-19 outbreaks on urology practice and training.

INTRODUCTION: The objective was to investigate the changes in urology practice during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with a perspective from our experience with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003. METHODS: Institutional data from all urology centres in the Hong Kong public sector during the COVID-19 pandemic (1 Feb 2020-31 Mar 2020) and a non-COVID-19 control period (1 Feb 2019-31 Mar 2019) were acquired. An online anonymous questionnaire was used to gauge the impact of COVID-19 on resident training. The clinical output of tertiary centres was compared with data from the SARS period. RESULTS: The numbers of operating sessions, clinic attendance, cystoscopy sessions, prostate biopsy, and shockwave lithotripsy sessions were reduced by 40.5%, 28.5%, 49.6%, 44.8%, and 38.5%, respectively, across all the centres reviewed. The mean numbers of operating sessions before and during the COVID-19 pandemic were 85.1±30.3 and 50.6±25.7, respectively (P=0.005). All centres gave priority to cancer-related surgeries. Benign prostatic hyperplasia-related surgery (39.1%) and ureteric stone surgery (25.5%) were the most commonly delayed surgeries. The degree of reduction in urology services was less than that during SARS (47.2%, 55.3%, and 70.5% for operating sessions, cystoscopy, and biopsy, respectively). The mean numbers of operations performed by residents before and during the COVID-19 pandemic were 75.4±48.0 and 34.9±17.2, respectively (P=0.002). CONCLUSION: A comprehensive review of urology practice during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed changes in every aspect of practice.

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.

Impact of COVID-19 outbreak on urology surgical waiting lists and waiting lists prioritization strategies in the Post-COVID-19 era. / Impacto del brote de COVID-19 en las listas de espera de cirugía urológica y estrategias de priorización en la era post-COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The suspension of most elective surgeries during COVID-19 pandemic caused the lengthening of urology surgical waiting lists. The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on urology surgical waiting list in a high-volume hospital. METHODS: An observational descriptive study was designed. All patients included in the urology surgical waiting list of our high-volume center on May 1st 2020 (46 days after the suspension of elective surgery) were analyzed. Baseline variables, priority on the waiting list, main urological disease, type of scheduled surgery, and waiting time were recorded. Other variables recorded were the presence of a urinary catheter, number of accesses to the emergency department, evidence of COVID-19 infection, number of deaths and their cause. The waiting time for each disease was compared with the time to surgery in 2019. RESULTS: A total of 350 patients were included. The mean (SD) time on the waiting list was 97.33 (55.47) days. Priority 1 patients, who normally should undergo surgery within 30 days, were on the waiting list for a mean (SD) time of 60.51 (20.14) days. They were mainly patients with ureteral lithiasis (25.6%), high-risk or muscle-invasive bladder cancer (20.9%) and high-risk prostate cancer (13.9%). The mean waiting time had already significantly exceeded the mean time to surgery in 2019 for radical cystectomy (p = 0.04) and URS (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The suspension of most elective surgeries due to COVID-19 had a significant impact on urology surgical waiting list of our high-volume center, especially in priority 1 group.

Impact of the COVID-19 Crisis on Same-day Discharge After Robotic Urologic Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the rate of same-day discharge (SDD) after robotic surgery METHODS: We reviewed our robotic surgeries during COVID-19 restrictions on surgery in Ohio between March 17 and June 5, 2020 and compared them with robotic procedures before COVID-19 and after restrictions were lifted. We followed our formerly described protocol in use since 2016 offering the option of SDD to all robotic urologic surgery patients, regardless of procedure type or patient-specific factors. RESULTS: During COVID-19 restrictions (COV), 89 robotic surgeries were performed and compared with 1667 of the same procedures performed previously (pre-COV) and 42 during the following month (post-COV). Among COV patients 98% (87/89 patients) opted for same-day discharge after surgery versus 52% in the historical pre-COV group (P < .00001). Post-COV, the higher rate of SDD was maintained at 98% (41/42 patients). There were no differences in 30-day complications or readmissions between SDD and overnight patients with only 2 COV (2%) and no post-COV 30-day readmissions. CONCLUSION: SDD after robotic surgery was safely applied during the COVID-19 crisis without increasing complications or readmissions. SDD may allow continuation of robotic surgery despite limited hospital beds and when minimizing hospital stay is important to protect postoperative patients from infection. Our experience suggests that patient attitude is a major factor in SDD after robotic surgery since the proportion of patients opting for SDD was much higher during COV and continued post-COV. Consideration of SDD long-term may be warranted for cost savings even in the absence of a crisis.

Urological emergency activities during COVID-19 pandemic: Our experience.

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) is causing a significant health emergency which is overturning dramatically routine activities in hospitals. The outbreak is generating the need to provide assistance to infected patients and in parallel to treat all nondeferrable oncological and urgent benign diseases. A panel of Italian urologists agreed on possible strategies for the reorganization of urological routine practices and on a set of recommendations that should facilitate a further planning of both inpatient visits and surgical activities during the COVID- 19 pandemic. According to this only urgent benign and nondeferrable oncological activities have been kept. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We have considered urgent outpatient visits requested by Emergency Department (ED) or by General Practitioner (GP) and emergency surgical procedures performed in our Urology Unit from March 9th to April 14th 2020, during COVID-19 pandemic. These figures have been compared to those observed last year from March 9th to April 14th 2019. RESULTS: Our data show that urgent care visits decreased during COCID-19 pandemic (from 293 to 179). Urgent care visits of patients who accessed directly to the ED decreased (from 219 to 107) whereas the number of urgent care visits referred by GP remained unchanged (74 vs 72). Consequently, the rate of visits from ED decreased from 75% to 60% and the rate of visit requested by GP increased from 25% to 40% (p = 0.001). Particularly, the rate of visits for renal colic, LUTS and other not precisely defined disorders from ED decreased and the corresponding rates of visits of patients referred by GPs increased significantly (p = 0.0001, p = 0.0180 and p = 0.0185, respectively). The rate of visits for acute urinary retention, hematuria, sepsis, acute scrotum, cystitis, prostatitis and genito-urinary trauma from ED and GP remained unchanged. Finally, urgency endourology and surgical activities have been stable in relation to the same period last year. CONCLUSIONS: Urological emergency activities during COVID- 19 pandemic are more appropriate since urgent outpatients' visits required by ED are decreased and emergency surgical and endourological procedures are stable.

Urological surgery during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Descriptive analysis of the experience in a Urology Department across the pandemic phases. / Cirugía urológica durante la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2. Análisis descriptivo de la experiencia en un Servicio de Urología durante distintas fases epidemiológicas.

INTRODUCTION: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has changed the urological practice around the world. Our objective is to describe the outcomes presented by patients undergoing surgery in the urology department of a tertiary hospital, across the pandemic phases. METHODS: Observational, cohort study including all patients undergoing surgery from March 1 to May 14. According to the hospital organization, we identified three periods: there were no changes during the first two weeks (1st. period), the following seven weeks, when only urgent interventions were carried out after performance of nasopharyngeal swab test (2nd. period), and finally, elective surgery was resumed on May 4, after the implementation of a multidisciplinary screening protocol (3rd. period). Demographic, baseline, surgical and perioperative variables, as well as postoperative outcomes, were obtained in a retrospective (periods 1 and 2) and prospective (period 3) manner. Telephone follow-up was initiated at least 3 weeks after hospital discharge. RESULTS: 103 urological surgeries were performed, and 11 patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, 8 of them within the 1st. PERIOD: The diagnosis was already known in 1 patient, while the other 10 developed the disease in an average of 25 days after the intervention and 16,6 days after discharge. Of seven transplant patients, four got the infection. Three deaths were recorded due to the disease: a 69-year-old woman transplanted and two men over 80 with comorbidities and high anesthetic risk who underwent drainage of retroperitoneal abscess and retrograde intrarenal surgery, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 infection mainly affected renal transplant recipients or elderly patients with high anesthetic risk, during the first 2 weeks of the pandemic. After implementing preoperative PCR tests and a comprehensive screening protocol, cases were substantially reduced, and safe surgical procedures were achieved.

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.

How the COVID-19 Wave Changed Emergency Urology: Results From an Academic Tertiary Referral Hospital in the Epicentre of the Italian Red Zone.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify and characterize the burden of urological patients admitted to emergency department (ED) in Lombardy during Italian COVID-19 outbreak, comparing it to a reference population from 2019. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed all consecutive admissions to ED from 1 January to 9 April in both 2019 and 2020. According to the ED discharge ICD-9-CM code, patients were grouped in urological and respiratory patients. We evaluated the type of access (self-presented/ambulance), discharge priority code, ED discharge (hospitalization, home), need for urological consultation or urgent surgery. RESULTS: The number of urological diagnoses in ED was inversely associated to COVID-19 diagnoses (95% confidence interval -0.41/-0.19; Beta = -0.8; P < .0001). The average access per day was significantly lower after 10 March 2020 (1.5 ± 1.1 vs 6.5 ± 2.6; P < .0001), compared to reference period. From 11 March 2020, the inappropriate admissions to ED were reduced (10/45 vs 96/195; P = .001). Consequently, the patients admitted were generally more demanding, requiring a higher rate of urgent surgeries (4/45 vs 4/195; P = .02). This reflected in an increase of the hospitalization rate from 12.7% to 17.8% (Beta = 0.88; P < .0001) during 2020. CONCLUSION: Urological admissions to ED during lockdown differed from the same period of 2019 both qualitatively and quantitatively. The spectrum of patients seems to be relatively more critical, often requiring an urgent management. These patients may represent a challenge due to the difficult circumstances caused by the pandemic.

Design of an assistance protocol for the restart of scheduled urologic surgery in a COVID-19 epidemic period. / Diseño de un protocolo asistencial para el reinicio de la cirugía urológica programada en periodo de epidemia COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: Design a care protocol to restart scheduled surgical activity in a Urology service of a third level hospital in the Community of Madrid, in a safe way for our patients and professionals in the context of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus epidemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A multidisciplinary group reviewed the different recommendations of the literature, national and international health organizations and scientific societies, as well as their application to our environment. Once scheduled surgery has restarted, the patients undergoing surgery for complications related to COVID-19 are being followed up. RESULTS: Since the resumption of surgical activity, 19 patients have been scheduled, of which 2 have been suspended for presenting COVID-19, one diagnosed by positive PCR for SARS-CoV-2, and another by laboratory and imaging findings compatible with this infection. With a median follow-up of 10 days (4-14 days), no complications related to COVID-19 were detected. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary results indicate that the protocol designed to ensure the correct application of preventive measures against the transmission of coronavirus infection is being safe and effective.

Postoperative assessment of nosocomial transmission of COVID-19 after robotic surgical procedures during the pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To assess potential nosocomial coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) transmission in patients who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic procedures during the pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective study in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopy in urology or gynaecology within 2 academic hospitals. Patients underwent local preoperative COVID-19 screening using a symptoms questionnaire. Patients with suspicious screening underwent coronavirus real time-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and were excluded from robotic surgery if positive. Patients with symptoms postsurgery were systematically tested for coronavirus by RT-PCR. One-month postsurgery, all patients had a telephone consultation to evaluate COVID-19 symptoms. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients underwent robotic surgery during the study period (median age: 63-years [IQR: 53-70], 1.8 male: female ratio). Oncology was the main indication for robotic surgery (n = 62, 91.2%) and 26 patients (38.2%) received a chest CT-scan prior to surgery. Eleven patients (16.2%) were symptomatic after surgery of whom only 1 tested positive for coronavirus by RT-PCR (1.5%) and was transferred to COVID-19 unit with no life-threatening condition. No attending surgeon was diagnosed with COVID-19 during the study. CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery seemed safe in the era of COVID-19 as long as all recommended precautions are followed. The rate of nosocomial COVID-19 transmission was extremely low despite the fact that we only used RT-PCR testing in symptomatic patients during the preoperative work-up. Larger cohort is needed to validate these results.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Health-Related Quality of Life in Uro-oncologic Patients: What Should We Wait For?

PURPOSE: To investigate the health-related quality of life of uro-oncologic patients whose surgery was postponed without being rescheduled during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From the March 1 to April 26, 2020, major urologic surgeries were drastically reduced at our tertiary-care referral hospital. In order to evaluate health-related quality-of-life outcomes, the SF-36 questionnaire was sent to all patients scheduled for major surgery at our department 3 weeks after the cancellation of the planned surgical procedures because of the COVID-19 emergency. RESULTS: All patients included in the analysis had been awaiting surgery for a median (interquartile range) time of 52.85 (35-72) days. The SF-36 questionnaire measured 8 domains: physical functioning (PF), role limitations due to physical health (PH), role limitations due to emotional problems (RE), energy/fatigue (EF), emotional well-being (EWB), social functioning (SF), bodily pain (BP), general health perceptions (GHP). When considering physical characteristics as measured by the SF-36 questionnaire, PF was 91.5 (50-100) and PH was 82.75 (50-100) with a BP of 79.56 (45-90). For emotional and social aspects, RE was 36.83 (0-100) with a SF of 37.98 (12.5-90). Most patients reported loss of energy (EF 35.28 [15-55]) and increased anxiety (EWB 47.18 [interquartile range, 20-75]). All patients perceived a reduction of their health conditions, with GHP of 49.47 (15-85). Generally, 86% of patients (n = 43) noted an almost intact physical function but a significant emotional alteration characterized by a prevalence of anxiety and loss of energy. CONCLUSION: The lockdown due to the novel coronavirus that has affected most operating rooms in Italy could be responsible for the increased anxiety and decrement in health status of oncologic patients. Without any effective solution, we should expect a new medical catastrophe-one caused by the increased risk of tumor progression and mortality in uro-oncologic patients.

Outreach and Influence of Surgical Societies' Recommendations on Minimally Invasive Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic-An Anonymized International Urologic Expert Inquiry.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the outreach and influence of the main recommendations of surgical governing bodies on adaptation of minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery (MIS) procedures during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in an anonymized multi-institutional survey. MATERIALS AND METHODS: International experts performing MIS were selected on the basis of the contact database of the speakers of the Friends of Israel Urology Symposium. A 24-item questionnaire was built using main recommendations of surgical societies. Total cases/1 Mio residents as well as absolute number of total cases were utilized as surrogates for the national disease burden. Statistics and plots were performed using RStudio v0.98.953. RESULTS: Sixty-two complete questionnaires from individual centers performing MIS were received. The study demonstrated that most centers were aware of and adapted their MIS management to the COVID-19 pandemic in accordance to surgical bodies' recommendations. Hospitals from the countries with a high disease burden put these adoptions more often into practice than the others particularly regarding swabs as well as CO2 insufflation and specimen extraction procedures. Twelve respondents reported on presumed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission during MIS generating hypothesis for further research. CONCLUSION: Guidelines of surgical governing bodies on adaptation of MIS during the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrate significant outreach and implementation, whereas centers from the countries with a high disease burden are more often poised to modify their practice. Rapid publication and distribution of such recommendation is crucial during future epidemic threats.