Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 16 de 16
Filter
1.
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg ; 47(3): 683-692, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1141395

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To analyse acute cholecystitis (AC) management during the first pandemic outbreak after the recommendations given by the surgical societies estimating: morbidity, length of hospital stay, mortality and hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection rate. METHODS: Multicentre-combined (retrospective-prospective) cohort study with AC patients in the Community of Madrid between 1st March and 30th May 2020. 257 AC patients were involved in 16 public hospital. Multivariant binomial logistic regression (MBLR) was applied to mortality. RESULTS: Of COVID-19 patients, 30 were diagnosed at admission and 12 patients were diagnosed during de admission or 30 days after discharge. In non-COVID-19 patients, antibiotic therapy was received in 61.3% of grade I AC and 40.6% of grade II AC. 52.4% of grade III AC were treated with percutaneous drainage (PD). Median hospital stay was 5 [3-8] days, which was higher in the non-surgical treatment group with 7.51 days (p < 0.001) and a 3.25% of mortality rate (p < 0.21). 93.3% of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection at admission were treated with non-surgical treatment (p = 0.03), median hospital stay was 11.0 [7.5-27.5] days (p < 0.001) with a 7.5% of mortality rate (p > 0.05). In patients with hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection, 91.7% of grade I-II AC were treated with non-surgical treatment (p = 0.037), with a median hospital stay of 16 [4-21] days and a 18.2% mortality rate (p > 0.05). Hospital-acquired infection risk when hospital stay is > 7 days is OR 4.7, CI 95% (1.3-16.6), p = 0.009. COVID-19 mortality rate was 11.9%, AC severity adjusted OR 5.64 (CI 95% 1.417-22.64). In MBLR analysis, age (OR 1.15, CI 95% 1.02-1.31), SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR 14.49, CI 95% 1.33-157.81), conservative treatment failure (OR 8.2, CI 95% 1.34-50.49) and AC severity were associated with an increased odd of mortality. CONCLUSION: In our population, during COVID-19 pandemic, there was an increase of non-surgical treatment which was accompanied by an increase of conservative treatment failure, morbidity and hospital stay length which may have led to an increased risk hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection. Age, SARS-CoV-2 infection, AC severity and conservative treatment failure were mortality risk factors.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19 , Cholecystectomy/statistics & numerical data , Cholecystitis, Acute , Conservative Treatment , Cross Infection , Infection Control , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cholecystitis, Acute/diagnosis , Cholecystitis, Acute/epidemiology , Cholecystitis, Acute/therapy , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Conservative Treatment/methods , Conservative Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/virology , Drainage/methods , Drainage/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/organization & administration , Infection Control/standards , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology
2.
Ann R Coll Surg Engl ; 103(4): 250-254, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1122496

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic stimulated a national lockdown in the UK. The public were advised to avoid unnecessary hospital attendances and health professionals were advised to avoid aerosol-generating procedures wherever possible. The authors hypothesised that these measures would result in a reduction in the number of patients presenting to hospital with acute appendicitis and alter treatment choices. METHODS: A multicentred, prospective observational study was undertaken during April 2020 to identify adults treated for acute appendicitis. Searches of operative and radiological records were performed to identify patients treated during April 2018 and April 2019 for comparison. RESULTS: A total of 190 patients were treated for acute appendicitis pre-lockdown compared with 64 patients treated during lockdown. Patients treated during the pandemic were more likely to have a higher American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score (p = 0.049) and to have delayed their presentation to hospital (2 versus 3 days, p = 0.03). During the lockdown, the use of computed tomography (CT) increased from 36.3% to 85.9% (p < 0.001), the use of an antibiotic-only approach increased from 6.2% to 40.6% (p < 0.001) and the rate of laparoscopic appendicectomy reduced from 85.3% to 17.2% (p < 0.001). The negative appendicectomy rate decreased from 21.7% to 7.1% during lockdown (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 lockdown was associated with a decreased incidence of acute appendicitis and a significant shift in the management approach. The increased use of CT allows the identification of simple appendicitis for conservative treatment and decreases the negative appendicectomy rate.


Subject(s)
Appendectomy/trends , Appendicitis/diagnosis , Appendicitis/surgery , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Services Accessibility/trends , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Acute Disease , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Appendectomy/methods , Appendicitis/drug therapy , Appendicitis/epidemiology , Conservative Treatment/methods , Conservative Treatment/trends , Delayed Diagnosis/trends , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index , United Kingdom/epidemiology
3.
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak ; 30(1): S50-S54, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1112952

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To measure the outcomes of conservative treatment of acute appendicitis. STUDY DESIGN: Observational study. PLACE AND DURATION OF STUDY: Fauji Foundation Hospital, Rawalpindi from April to July 2020.  Methodology: All 58 patients (n=58) presenting with acute appendicitis (AA) were included. Assessment was done with Alvarado score (AS) and ultrasound. Treatment was initiated according to the algorithm corresponding with AS. Those with AS score of 4 or less were started on outpatient oral antibiotics. Patients with AS score of 5 or more were admitted for IV antibiotics. If the symptoms and signs resolved, they were sent home on oral antibiotics to complete a course of 5 days. If their condition did not improve in 72 hours or deteriorated at any time, appendectomy was done. Outcomes were recorded and analysed on SPSS. RESULTS: Out of 58 patients, 16 were treated with oral, while 42 with IV antibiotics. This yielded a statistically significant difference on the course of disease (p=0.028). Resolution of symptoms was seen in 27.6% (n=16) with conservative management; whereas, 72.4% (n=42) patients needed a subsequent appendectomy. The difference in operative findings between patients, who had been given oral or IV antibiotics was statistically insignificant (p=0.536). Diagnostic value of leukocyte count (TLC), ultrasound and AS was not found to be significant. CONCLUSION: Non-operative management is successful in about a quarter of the patients of AA. There is very limited value of sonography, laboratory parameters, or AS in confirming the diagnosis of AA. Key Words: Appendicitis, Conservative treatmen, COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Appendicitis/therapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Conservative Treatment/methods , Pandemics , Acute Disease , Adult , Appendicitis/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Young Adult
4.
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg ; 47(3): 693-702, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1008156

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess how the COVID-19 outbreak has affected emergency general surgery (EGS) care during the pandemic, indications for surgery, types of procedures, perioperative course, and final outcomes. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of EGS patients during the pandemic period. The main outcome was 30-day morbidity and mortality according to severity and COVID-19 infection status. Secondary outcomes were changes in overall management. A logistic regression analysis was done to assess factors predictive of mortality. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-three patients were included. Half of the patients with an abdominal ultrasound and/or CT scan had signs of severity at diagnosis, four times higher than the previous year. Non-COVID patients underwent surgery more often than the COVID group. Over 1/3 of 100 operated patients had postoperative morbidity, versus only 15% the previous year. The most common complications were septic shock, pneumonia, and ARDS. ICU care was required in 17% of patients, and was most often required in the SARS-CoV-2-infected group, which also had a higher morbidity and mortality. The 30-day mortality in the surgical series was of 7%, with no differences with the previous year. The strongest independent predictors of overall mortality were age > 70 years, ASA III-IV, ESS > 9, and SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: Non-operative management (NOM) was undertaken in a third of patients, and only 14% of operated patients had a perioperative confirmation of -CoV-2 infection. The severity and morbidity of COVID-19-infected patients was much higher. Late presentations for medical care may have added to the high morbidity of the series.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergencies/epidemiology , Infection Control , Postoperative Complications , Surgical Procedures, Operative , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Conservative Treatment/methods , Conservative Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Female , General Surgery/trends , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Incidence , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/organization & administration , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Postoperative Complications/diagnosis , Postoperative Complications/mortality , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology , Surgical Procedures, Operative/adverse effects , Surgical Procedures, Operative/methods , Surgical Procedures, Operative/statistics & numerical data
5.
Acta Orthop ; 91(6): 639-643, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-748293

ABSTRACT

Background and purpose - Following the outbreak of COVID-19 in December 2019, in China, many hip fracture patients were unable to gain timely admission and surgery. We assessed whether delayed surgery improves hip joint function and reduces major complications better than nonoperative therapy. Patients and methods - In this retrospective observational study, we collected data from 24 different hospitals from January 1, 2020, to July 20, 2020. 145 patients with hip fractures aged 65 years or older were eligible. Clinical data was extracted from electronic medical records. The primary outcomes were visual analogue scale (VAS) score and Harris Hip Score. Major complications, including deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pneumonia within 1 month and 3 months, were collected for further analysis. Results - Of the 145 hip fracture patients 108 (median age 72; 70 females) received delayed surgery and 37 (median age 74; 20 females) received nonoperative therapy. The median time from hip fracture injury to surgery was 33 days (IQR 24-48) in the delayed surgery group. Hypertension, in about half of the patients in both groups, and cerebral infarction, in around a quarter of patients in both groups, were the most common comorbidities. Both VAS score and Harris Hip Score were superior in the delayed surgery group. At the 3-month follow-up, the median VAS score was 1 in the delayed surgery group and 2.5 in the nonoperative group (p < 0.001). Also, the percentage of complications was higher in the nonoperative group (p = 0.004 for DVT, p < 0.001 for pulmonary infection). Interpretation - In hip fracture patients, delayed surgery compared with nonoperative therapy significantly improved hip function and reduced various major complications.


Subject(s)
Cerebral Infarction , Conservative Treatment , Fracture Fixation , Hip Fractures , Hypertension , Postoperative Complications , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cerebral Infarction/epidemiology , Cerebral Infarction/etiology , Cerebral Infarction/prevention & control , China/epidemiology , Conservative Treatment/adverse effects , Conservative Treatment/methods , Conservative Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Electronic Health Records/statistics & numerical data , Female , Fracture Fixation/adverse effects , Fracture Fixation/methods , Fracture Fixation/statistics & numerical data , Hip Fractures/epidemiology , Hip Fractures/therapy , Humans , Hypertension/epidemiology , Hypertension/etiology , Hypertension/prevention & control , Male , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
7.
J Laryngol Otol ; 134(8): 747-749, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-611434

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To report our experience of diagnosis, investigation and management in patients who had undergone laryngectomy secondary to previous squamous cell carcinoma, who were subsequently infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. CASE REPORTS: Four post-laryngectomy patients with laboratory-proven severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection were admitted to our institution from 1 March to 1 May 2020. All patients displayed symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 and underwent investigations, including swab and serum sampling, and chest X-ray where indicated. All were managed conservatively on dedicated coronavirus disease 2019 wards and were discharged without the requirement of higher level care. CONCLUSION: It is hypothesised that laryngectomy may offer a protective effect against severe or critical disease in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection. We hope sharing our experience will aid all practitioners in the management of this, often intimidating, cohort of patients.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/surgery , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Laryngeal Neoplasms/pathology , Laryngectomy/adverse effects , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Aged , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Conservative Treatment/methods , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Female , Humans , Laryngectomy/methods , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Postoperative Complications/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
10.
Aust J Gen Pract ; 49(7): 444-446, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-621188

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Joint replacement surgery is a highly effective treatment option for patients with severe osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip and knee when other treatments have failed. Unfortunately, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, a temporary suspension of non-urgent elective surgery was implemented. Thousands of patients currently awaiting hip and knee replacements have been affected. Many of these patients will present to their general practitioners for symptom management during this interim period. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to summarise current recommendations for the non-operative management of patients with symptomatic OA. DISCUSSION: Non-operative treatment modalities for OA include education, lifestyle modification and exercise, mass reduction, physiotherapy, orthoses, psychology, pharmaceuticals and injections. Multimodal therapy is required for patients with severe symptoms. A number of useful online resources are presented, as access to public allied health services may be limited because of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Conservative Treatment/methods , Coronavirus Infections , Elective Surgical Procedures/methods , Osteoarthritis, Hip , Osteoarthritis, Knee , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Symptom Assessment/methods , Australia/epidemiology , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Osteoarthritis, Hip/diagnosis , Osteoarthritis, Hip/surgery , Osteoarthritis, Knee/diagnosis , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Watchful Waiting/methods
11.
Hernia ; 24(5): 937-941, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-421677

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acute IH is a common surgical presentation. Despite new guidelines being published recently, a number of important questions remained unanswered including the role of taxis, as initial non-operative management. This is particularly relevant now due to the possibility of a lack of immediate surgical care as a result of COVID-19. The aim of this review is to assess the role of taxis in the management of emergency inguinal hernias. METHODS: A review of the literature was undertaken. Available literature published until March 2019 was obtained and reviewed. 32,021 papers were identified, only 9 were of sufficient value to be used. RESULTS: There was a large discrepancy in the terminology of incarcerated/strangulated used. Taxis can be safely attempted early after the onset of symptoms and is effective in about 70% of patients. The possibility of reduction en-mass should be kept in mind. Definitive surgery to repair the hernia can be delayed by weeks until such time as surgery can be safely arranged. CONCLUSIONS: The use of taxis in emergency inguinal hernia is a useful first line of treatment in areas or situations where surgical care is not immediately available, including the COVID-19 pandemic. Emergency surgery remains the mainstay of management in the strangulated hernia setting.


Subject(s)
Conservative Treatment/methods , Coronavirus Infections , Emergency Medical Services , Hernia, Inguinal/therapy , Herniorrhaphy/methods , Musculoskeletal Manipulations/methods , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Time-to-Treatment/trends , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Clinical Decision-Making , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Emergency Medical Services/methods , Emergency Medical Services/trends , Health Services Accessibility/trends , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Ann Thorac Surg ; 110(5): e421-e423, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-351261

ABSTRACT

A patient underwent surgery for acute type A aortic dissection. Testing for SARS-CoV-2 was positive. The postoperative course was complicated by a mixed viral and bacterial pneumonia with bilateral infiltration, treated with antibiotics and hydroxychloroquine, without any need for reintubation. The patient recovered and finally could be discharged. This report shows the feasibility for surgical treatment of acute aortic disease in patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Aneurysm, Dissecting/etiology , Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic/etiology , Betacoronavirus , Conservative Treatment/methods , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Disease Management , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Acute Disease , Aneurysm, Dissecting/diagnosis , Aneurysm, Dissecting/therapy , Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic/diagnosis , Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic/therapy , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Humans , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
15.
Head Neck ; 42(6): 1131-1136, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-66373

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: There is an added level of complexity in the management of head and neck cancer patients with underlying immunosuppressive disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic. Head and neck oncologists are tasked with balancing the dual risks of cancer progression in the setting of impaired tumor immunity and increased susceptibility to life-threatening complications from exposure to viral infection for patients and providers. Through two cases of immunocompromised patients with newly diagnosed head and neck malignancies, we aim to provide guidance to clinicians struggling with how to best counsel and manage this unique subset of patients under these difficult circumstances. RESULTS: After careful consideration of the options, we took different approaches in the care of these two patients. CONCLUSIONS: Ultimately, there is no uniform set of rules to apply to this heterogeneous group of immunocompromised patients. We provide some general principles to help guide patient management during the current pandemic.


Subject(s)
Conservative Treatment/methods , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Head and Neck Neoplasms/therapy , Immunocompromised Host , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Time-to-Treatment/organization & administration , Adult , COVID-19 , Clinical Decision-Making , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Disease Management , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Head and Neck Neoplasms/pathology , Humans , Interdisciplinary Communication , Laryngeal Neoplasms/pathology , Laryngeal Neoplasms/surgery , Male , Middle Aged , Mouth Neoplasms/pathology , Mouth Neoplasms/surgery , Patient Safety , Risk Assessment , Sampling Studies , Time Factors , United States , Vocal Cords/pathology , Vocal Cords/surgery
16.
J Pain Symptom Manage ; 60(1): e27-e30, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-38424

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT: The COVID-19 pandemic is spreading across the world. Many patients will not be suitable for mechanical ventilation owing to the underlying health conditions, and they will require a conservative approach including palliative care management for their important symptom burden. OBJECTIVES: To develop a management plan for patients who are not suitable for mechanical ventilation that is tailored to the stage their COVID-19 disease. METHODS: Patients were identified as being stable, unstable, or at the end of life using the early warning parameters for COVID-19. Furthermore, a COVID-19-specific assessment tool was developed locally, focusing on key symptoms observed in this population which assess dyspnoea, distress, and discomfort. This tool helped to guide the palliative care management as per patients' disease stage. RESULTS: A management plan for all patients' (stable, unstable, end of life) was created and implemented in acute hospitals. Medication guidelines were based on the limitations in resources and availability of drugs. Staff members who were unfamiliar with palliative care required simple, clear instructions to follow including medications for key symptoms such as dyspnoea, distress, fever, and discomfort. Nursing interventions and family involvement were adapted as per patients' disease stage and infection control requirements. CONCLUSION: Palliative care during the COVID-19 pandemic needs to adapt to an emergency style of palliative care as patients can deteriorate rapidly and require quick decisions and clear treatment plans. These need to be easily followed up by generalist staff members caring for these patients. Furthermore, palliative care should be at the forefront to help make the best decisions, give care to families, and offer spiritual support.


Subject(s)
Conservative Treatment , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Emergency Medical Services , Palliative Care , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , COVID-19 , Conservative Treatment/methods , Disease Management , Emergency Medical Services/methods , Humans , Palliative Care/methods , Pandemics , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Severity of Illness Index , Terminal Care/methods
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL