A Comparison of Operative Time and Intraoperative Blood Volume Loss Between Stemless and Short-stem Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Single Institution's Experience.

INTRODUCTION: There has been increasing interest in the use of stemless humeral implants for total shoulder arthroplasty when compared with both short-stem (SS) and standard-length implants. Although evidence for decreased surgical time and blood loss exists for stemless versus standard-length stems, far less literature exists comparing these clinical parameters for stemless versus SS implants. METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) cases conducted by a single, fellowship-trained shoulder surgeon was undertaken from January 2016 through January 2022 with the exception of March 2020 through January 2021 secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic. Demographic patient and surgical data, including age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index, prior ipsilateral shoulder arthroscopy, surgical time, use of a Hemovac drain and/or tranexamic acid, hospital length of stay (LOS), and both postoperative day #1 (POD 1) and discharge visual analog scores. The use of a stemless or SS implant was recorded. Intraoperative total blood volume loss (TBVL) was calculated, in addition to the need for either intraoperative or postoperative transfusions. Nonparametric analysis of covariance was used to examine effects of stemless versus SS aTSA on surgical time and intraoperative TBVL adjusted for demographic, clinical, and surgical variables. RESULTS: There were 47 SS and 83 stemless anatomic implants included, of which 74 patients (57%) overall were women. The median surgical time for the stemless cohort was 111 minutes (IQR 96-130) versus 137 minutes (IQR 113-169) for the SS cohort (P < 0.00001). The median intraoperative TBVL for the stemless cohort was 298.3 mL (IQR 212.6-402.8) versus 359.7 mL (IQR 253.9-415.0) for the SS cohort (P = 0.05). After multivariable regression analysis, use of stemless humeral implants was independently associated with both decreased surgical time and intraoperative blood loss (P < 0.001 and P = 0.005, respectively). There was a shorter median hospital LOS in the stemless group (2 days [IQR 1-2] versus 2 days [IQR 2-3], P = 0.03). The visual analog score pain score at discharge was lower among the stemless cohort (0 [IQR 0-3] versus 4 [IQR 2-6], P < 0.00001). Increased surgical time was associated with intraoperative TBVL (r = 0.340, P < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: Stemless aTSA is associated with a markedly decreased surgical time and intraoperative TBVL when compared with a SS aTSA. Furthermore, the use of a stemless implant results in a shorter hospital LOS and lower discharge pain scores.

Personal Protective Equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic and operative time in cesarean section: retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The covid-19 pandemic has meant a change in working protocols, as well as in Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). Obstetricians have had to adapt quickly to these changes without knowing how they affected their clinical practice. The aim of the present study was to evaluate how COVID-19 pandemic and PPE can affect operative time, operating room time, transfer into the operating room to delivery time and skin incision to delivery time in cesarean section. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective cohort study. Women with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection having a cesarean section after March 7th, 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic were included in the study. For each woman with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, a woman who had a cesarean section for the same indication during the COVID-19 pandemic and with similar clinical history but not affected by SARS-CoV-2 was included. RESULTS: 42 cesarean sections were studied. The operating room time was longer in the COVID-19 confirmed or suspected women: 90 (73.0 to 110.0) versus 61 (48.0 to 70.5) minutes; p < .001. The transfer into the operating room to delivery time was longer, but not statistically significant, in urgent cesarean sections in COVID-19 confirmed or suspected women: 25.5 (17.5 to 31.75) versus 18.0 (10.0 to 26.25) minutes; p = .113. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in the operative time, transfer into the operating room to delivery time and skin incision to delivery time when wearing PPE in cesarean section. The COVID-19 pandemic and the use of PPE resulted in a significant increase in operating room time.

Efficacy of the slow firing method using a reinforced triple-row stapler for preventing postoperative pancreatic fistula during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

PURPOSE: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains the most clinically relevant complication of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). The present study evaluated the efficacy of the "slow firing method" using a reinforced triple-row stapler (Covidien, Tokyo, Japan) during LDP. METHODS: This retrospective single-center study included 73 consecutive patients who underwent LDP using the slow firing method. A black cartridge was used in all patients. The primary endpoint was the rate of clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF) after LDP. Secondary endpoints included perioperative outcomes and factors associated with CR-POPF as well as the correlation between the transection time and thickness of the pancreas. RESULTS: Four patients (5.5%) developed CR-POPF (grade B). Overall morbidity rates, defined as grade ≥ II and ≥ III according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, were 21 and 11%, respectively. The median postoperative hospital stay was 10 days. Preoperative diabetes (13.6 vs. 0.2%, P = 0.044) and thickness of the pancreas ≥ 15 mm (13.8% vs. 0%, P = 0.006) were identified as independent risk factors for CR-POPF. The median transection time was 16 (8-29) min. CONCLUSION: The slow firing method using a reinforced triple-row stapler for pancreatic transection is simple, safe, and effective for preventing CR-POPF after LDP.

Negative-Pressure Isolation Mask for Endoscopic Examination During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, endoscopists have high risks of exposure to exhaled air from patients during gastroscopy. To minimize this risk, we transformed the oxygen mask into a fully closed negative-pressure gastroscope isolation mask. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and feasibility of use of this mask during gastroscopy. METHODS: From February 28, 2020, to March 10, 2020, 320 patients undergoing gastroscopy were randomly assigned into the mask group (n = 160) or conventional group (n = 160). Patients in the mask group wore the isolation mask during gastroscopy, whereas patients in the conventional group did not wear the mask. The adenosine triphosphate fluorescence and carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration in patients' exhaled air were measured to reflect the degree of environmental pollution by exhaled air. Patients' vital signs, operation time, and adverse events during endoscopy were also evaluated. RESULTS: Four patients were excluded because of noncooperation or incomplete data. A total of 316 patients were included in the final analysis. The difference between the highest CO2 concentration around patients' mouth and CO2 concentration in the environment was significantly decreased in the mask group compared with the conventional group. There was no significant difference in the adenosine triphosphate fluorescence, vital signs, and operation time between the 2 groups. No severe adverse events related to the isolation mask, endoscopy failure, or new coronavirus infection during follow-up were recorded. DISCUSSION: This new isolation mask showed excellent feasibility of use and safety compared with routine gastroscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Minimal invasive surgery for left colectomy adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic: laparoscopic intracorporeal resection and anastomosis, a 'don't touch the bowel' technique.

AIM: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced surgeons to adapt their standard procedures. The modifications introduced are designed to favour minimally invasive surgery. The positive results obtained with intracorporeal resection and anastomosis in the right colon and rectum prompt us to adapt these procedures to the left colon. We describe a 'don't touch the bowel' technique and outline the benefits to patients of the use of less surgically aggressive techniques and also to surgeons in terms of the lower emission of aerosols that might transmit the COVID-19 infection. METHODS: This was an observational study of intracorporeal resection and anastomosis in left colectomy. We describe the technical details of intracorporeal resection, end-to-end stapled anastomosis and extraction of the specimen through mini-laparotomy in the ideal location. RESULTS: We present preliminary results of 17 patients with left-sided colonic pathologies, 15 neoplasia and two diverticular disease, who underwent four left hemicolectomies, six sigmoidectomies and seven high anterior resections. Median operating time was 186 min (range 120-280). No patient required conversion to extracorporeal laparoscopy or open surgery. Median hospital stay was 4.7 days (range 3-12 days). There was one case of anastomotic leak managed with conservative treatment. CONCLUSION: Intracorporeal resection and end-to-end anastomosis with the possibility of extraction of the specimen by a mini-laparotomy in the ideal location may present benefits and also adapts well to the conditions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Future comparative studies are needed to demonstrate these benefits with respect to extracorporeal anastomosis.

Thoracic Surgeon Impressions of the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Lung Cancer Care-Lessons from the First Wave in Canada.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has invariably changed the way lung cancer surgical care is provided in Canada. Despite relevant management guidelines, the way in which cancer care has been affected has yet to be described for thoracic surgical populations. Routine lung cancer physiologic and staging assessments are unique in that they are droplet producing and aerosolizing procedures. Our objective was to quantify the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical lung cancer care as perceived by practicing thoracic surgeons during the first wave of the pandemic in Canada. METHODS: An electronic survey was distributed to members of the Canadian Association of Thoracic Surgeons. The survey was designed to determine surgeon perception of lung cancer preoperative care during the Canadian pandemic-instilled period of resource reallocation compared to standard care. Planned analyses were exploratory in nature; with count and frequency distributions of responses quantified. RESULTS: Fifty-three thoracic surgeons completed the survey. Responses were collected from all Canadian provinces. Little change in access to preoperative imaging was noted. However, a significant decrease in access to lung function and bronchoscopy testing occurred. Pulmonary surgery was perceived to be lengthier with reduced operating theater availability. Despite decreased OR access, only 40% of surgeons were aware of respective institutional mitigation strategies. SUMMARY: The COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on standard lung cancer care preoperative workup. Further inquiry using institutional data is warranted to quantify its impact on cancer patient outcomes. Assessing the extent and effects of newly present barriers to standard lung cancer care is essential in forming appropriate mitigation strategies and planning for future pandemic waves.

Aerosol Generation During Myringotomy With Tympanostomy Tube Insertion: Implications for Otolaryngology in the COVID-19 Era.

The risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission to health care workers during myringotomy and tympanostomy tube (MT) insertion is unknown. To determine the need for enhanced precautions to prevent potential spread via aerosolized particles, we used an optical particle sizer to measure aerosol generation intraoperatively during a case series of MT insertion. We also discuss our institutional experience with safe pandemic-era perioperative practices. There was no measured increase in aerosol particle number during the procedure at a distance of 30 cm from the external auditory canal. These initial data are reassuring regarding the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to the operating room team due to aerosol generation, but further study is necessary before making definitive recommendations.

Evaluating the feasibility of performing elective gastrointestinal cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: An observational study with 60 days follow-up results of a tertiary referral pandemic hospital.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has interfered with the treatment algorithm for patients with gastrointestinal (GIS) cancer, resulting in deferral of surgery. We presented the outcomes of our patients to evaluate whether surgery could be safely performed and followed-up without delaying any stage of GIS cancer during the pandemic. METHODS: This was an observational study of 177 consecutive patients who underwent elective GIS cancer surgery between March 11 and November 1, 2020. They were assessed regarding their perioperative and 60 days follow-up results for either surgical or COVID-19 status. Morbidity was determined according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC). Continuous and categorical data were presented as median ± SD and number with percentage (%), respectively. RESULTS: The study included 44 gastric, 33 pancreatic, 40 colon, and 59 rectal cancer patients. All patients underwent surgery and received neo/adjuvant treatments without delay. The overall morbidity (CDC grade II-IV) and mortality rates were 10.1% and 3.9%, respectively. None of the patients or medical staff were infected with COVID-19 during the study period. CONCLUSION: GIS cancer surgery can be safely performed even within a pandemic hospital if proper isolation measures can be achieved for both patients and health workers. Regardless of the tumor stage, surgery should not be deferred, depending on unstandardized algorithms.

The management of "fragile" and suspected COVID-19 surgical patients during pandemic: an Italian single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: During Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic entire countries rapidly ran out of intensive care beds, occupied by critically ill infected patients. Elective surgery was initially halted and acute non-deferrable surgical care drastically limited. The presence of COVID-19 patients into intensive care units (ICU) is currently decreasing but their congestion have restricted our therapeutic strategies during the last months. METHODS: In the COVID-19 era eighteen patients (8 men, 10 women) with a mean age of 80 years, needing undelayable abdominal surgery underwent awake open surgery at our Department. Prior to surgery, all patients underwent COVID-19 investigation. In all cases locoregional anesthesia (LA) was performed. Intraoperative and postoperative pain has been monitored and regularly assessed. A distinct pathway has been set up to keep patients of uncertain COVID-19 diagnosis separated from all other patients. RESULTS: Mean operative time was 104 minutes. In only one case conversion to general anesthesia was necessary. Postoperative pain was always well controlled. None of them required postoperative intensive care support. Only one perioperative complication occurred. Early readmissions after surgery were never observed. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of our experience awake laparotomy under LA resulted feasible, safe, painless and, in specific cases, the only viable option. For patients presenting fragile cardiovascular and respiratory, reserves and in whom general anesthesia (GA) would presumably increase morbidity and mortality we encourage LA as an alternative to GA. In the COVID-19 era, it has become part of our ICU-preserving strategy allowing us to carry out undeferrable surgeries.

Can machine learning optimize the efficiency of the operating room in the era of COVID-19?

SUMMARY: The cancellation of large numbers of surgical procedures because of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has drastically extended wait lists and negatively affected patient care and experience. As many facilities resume clinical work owing to the currently low burden of disease in our community, we are faced with operative booking protocols and procedures that are not mathematically designed to optimize efficiency. Using a subset of artificial intelligence called "machine learning," we have shown how the use of operating time can be optimized with a custom Python (a high-level programming language) script and an open source machine-learning algorithm, the ORTools software suite from the Google AI division of Alphabet Inc. This allowed the creation of customized models to optimize the efficiency of operating room booking times, which resulted in a reduction in nursing overtime of 21% - a theoretical cost savings of $469 000 over 3 years.

Head and neck surgery during the coronavirus-19 pandemic: The University of California San Francisco experience.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines regarding head and neck surgical care have evolved during the coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. Data on operative management have been limited. METHODS: We compared two cohorts of patients undergoing head and neck or reconstructive surgery between March 16, 2019 and April 16, 2019 (pre-COVID-19) and March 16, 2020 and April 16, 2020 (COVID-19) at an academic center. Perioperative, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: There were 63 operations during COVID-19 and 84 operations during pre-COVID-19. During COVID-19, a smaller proportion of patients had benign pathology (12% vs 20%, respectively) and underwent thyroid procedures (2% vs 23%) while a greater proportion of patients underwent microvascular reconstruction±ablation (24% vs 12%,). Operative times increased, especially among patients undergoing microvascular reconstruction±ablation (687 ± 112 vs 596 ± 91 minutes, P = .04). Complication rates and length of stay were similar. CONCLUSIONS: During COVID-19, perioperative outcomes were similar, operative time increased, and there were no recorded transmissions to staff or patients. Continued surgical management of head and neck cancer patients can be provided safely.

Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery During COVID-19 Pandemic: Single-Center Experience.

Background: COVID-19 era has put laparoscopic surgery a risk procedure because of theoretical risk of viral transmission of COVID-19. However, safe evacuation of stagnant air during laparoscopic surgery is also necessary to safeguard health care warriors. Methods: We are reporting experience of 24 laparoscopic surgeries using a closed smoke evacuation/filtration system using a ultra low-particulate air (ULPA) filtration capability (ConMed AirSeal® System) at a single center between March 22, 2020, and May 30, 2020. All surgeries were either urgent or emergency in nature. Results: Totally, 17 males and 7 females who required urgent surgery. Most common indication for laparoscopic intervention was acute cholecystitis and complications related to acute cholecystitis. Owing to the closed smoke evacuation system, low intra-abdominal pressure was maintained during all surgeries. Of all procedures, only 0.8 time per procedure, the laparoscope taken out for cleaning. Mean time for completion of surgery was 58 minutes. Compliance of surgical staff was high due to the deemed safe smoke evacuation system. Mean of postoperative pain score was low. Mean hospital stay was 4.9 days. Conclusions: We propose to use a closed smoke evacuation/filtration system with ULPA filtration capability or similar devices in each minimally invasive surgery to reduce risks of transmission as minute as possible until we have enough knowledge about the pattern of disease transmission.

Thyroid surgery during coronavirus-19 pandemic phases I, II and III: lessons learned in China, South Korea, Iran and Italy.

OBJECTIVE: We compared demographic and clinic-pathological variables related to the number of surgeries for thyroid conditions or for cancer, morbidity, and fine needle aspiration (FNA) practices among Covid19 pandemic phases I, II, III and the same seasonal periods in 2019. METHODS: The prospective database of the Division of Thyroid Surgery, China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China was used for this study. Covid19 emergency levels were stratified according to the World Health Organization: phase I (January 25-February 25, 2020), phase II (February 26-March 19), phase III (March 20-April 20). RESULTS: There were fewer outpatient FNAs and surgeries in 2020 than in 2019. There were no thyroid surgeries during phase I. There were also fewer surgeries for cancer with a significant reduction of advanced stage cancer treatments, mainly stage T1b N1a in phase II and T3bN1b in phase III. Operative times and postoperative stays were significantly shorter during the pandemic compared to our institutional baseline. In phase III, vocal cord paralysis (VCP) increased to 4.3% of our baseline numbers (P = 0.001). There were no cases of Covid19-related complications during the perioperative period. No patients required re-admission to the hospital. CONCLUSION: The Covid19 outbreak reduced thyroid surgery patient volumes. The decrease of Covid19 emergency plans contributed to unexpected outcomes (reduction of early stage cancer treatment, decreased operative times and hospital stays, increased VCP rate).

Guidelines Adaptation to the COVID-19 Outbreak for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Background: COVID-19 pandemic rendered the surgical approach as well as the surgical indication very complex due to the outstanding consumption of public health system' resources, especially in the intensive care subdivision. A multidisciplinary team-based strategy is necessary to adapt guidelines and medical practices to the actual situation. The aim of this study is to evaluate the changes in the therapeutic algorithm in a small group of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) enlisted for surgery during the COVID-19 outbreak. Materials and Methods: A multidisciplinary strategy has been adopted to allocate HCC patients to a treatment that permitted to reduce the risk of complications and the hospital stay, thus preventing contamination by the virus. Nasopharyngeal swab and a chest radiograph were performed in all patients within 48 hours before the surgical procedure: in the suspected cases with negative COVID tests, we prudently postponed surgery and repeated the diagnostic tests after 15 days. Results: During the emergency state, 11 HCC patients were treated (8 laparoscopic ablations and 3 hepatic resections). We reported only 1 postoperative complication (hemothorax) and 1 death during the follow-up for COVID pneumonia. Comparing our performances with those in the same time frame in the past 4 years, we treated a similar number of HCC patients, obtaining a decrease in operative timing (P = .0409) and hospital stay (P = .0412) (Fig. 2b) with similar rates of immediate postoperative complications, without ICU admissions. Conclusions: An adapted algorithm for the treatment of HCC to COVID outbreak permitted to manage safely these patients by identifying those most at risk of evolution of the neoplastic disease.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on congenital heart surgery practice: An alarming change in demographics.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of COVID-19 outbreak on congenital cardiac surgery practice in a single center. METHODS: The first case of COVID-19 in our country was seen on March 11th, 2020. The patients operated between March 11th, 2019-and March 10th, 2020 were taken as the pre-COVID group, and those operated between March 11th and May 11th, 2020 were taken as the COVID group. The data was retrospectively collected, and the two periods were compared. RESULTS: Monthly average number of cases which was 52 patients/month (626 patients in 12 months) before COVID decreased to 35 patients/month (70 patients in 2 months) during COVID periods (P < .01). During the pre-COVID period the median postoperative length of hospital stay was 3 (IQR: 1-5) days. During the COVID period, this decreased to 1 (IQR: 1-3) day (P < .01). During the pre-COVID period, the hospital expenses of 17% (8/47) of the foreign nationals were covered by their homeland. The remaining 83% (39/47) were paid from the asylum seekers' fund. The proportion of foreign nationals operated significantly decreased during the COVID period ([7%; 47/632 vs 1%; 1/70]; P = .04). No significant difference was observed in terms of STAT mortality scores and categories and postoperative results of the operations performed between the two periods. CONCLUSIONS: Congenital cardiac surgery practice can be safely maintained with restricted case volume during the pandemic period. It is alarming that patients in the deprived areas cannot access pediatric cardiac surgery and possibly other health services because of closure of the borders between countries.

Awake breast cancer surgery: strategy in the beginning of COVID-19 emergency.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 is a declared worldwide pandemic. In our country, due to shortage of hospitals and beds in intensive care unit, oncological and breast cancer (BC) resources are temporarily shifted to COVID-19 patients. In addition, risk of cross-infections should be considered in these frail patients. To accomplish more surgical procedures and to reduce the length of hospital stay (LOS), fast track awake BC surgery should be implemented. The aim of the study is to estimate the effects of surgical shift in our facility during the early COVID-19 outbreak. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 30th January 2020 to 30th of March 2020, 86 consecutive patients were retrospectively enrolled and divided into pre-COVID-19-BC and COVID-19-BC. Clinical parameters and anamnestic data were collected and analyzed. Surgical procedures, relative complications and type of anaesthesia were reported. The effect on surgical time (ST), operative room time (ORT) and length of stay (LOS) were described and examined. RESULTS: No statistical difference was found in complications rate, clinical data and surgical procedures (p > 0.05). Awake breast conservative surgery (BCS) was the most frequent procedure in COVID-19-BC (p = 0.006). A statistically significant decrease in ORT and LOS was reported in COVID-19-BC (p = 0.040 and p = 0.0015 respectively), while comparable time resulted for ST (p = 0.976). Mean ORT and LOS reduction were 20.79 min and 0.57 hospital bed days. CONCLUSION: In the "COVID-19 era", fast track awake breast surgery provides a reduction of ORT, LOS and potentially surgical treatment for a wider number of oncological patients.

Standardization of elective tracheostomies at the Central Institute of the Hospital das Clínicas in São Paulo during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 Pandemic has resulted in a high number of hospital admissions and some of those patients need ventilatory support in intensive care units. The viral pneumonia secondary to Sars-cov-2 infection may lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and longer mechanical ventilation needs, resulting in a higher demand for tracheostomies. Due to the high aerosolization potential of such procedure, and the associated risks of staff and envoirenment contamination, it is necesseray to develop a specific standardization of the of the whole process involving tracheostomies. This manuscript aims to demonstrate the main steps of the standardization created by a tracheostomy team in a tertiary hospital dedicated to providing care for patients with COVID-19.

Disproportionate Case Reduction After Ban of Elective Surgeries During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic.

STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective case analysis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to illustrate the numerical effects of regulatory restrictions of elective surgery at an orthopaedic university hospital. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic all over the world places extraordinary demands on health care systems which are forced to ensure structural and personnel capacities. Consequently, hospitals may only perform urgent interventions. Spine patients, however, often need urgent surgery and, moreover, bear an above-average perioperative risk frequently requiring postoperative surveillance on intensive care units (ICUs). Facing this dilemma, we want to share our practice and its unexpected numerical effects. METHODS: We compare case statistics during normal operation, directly before and after implementation of regulatory measures. We also analyzed the differences in ICU utilization, complexity and duration of interventions and the patient population. RESULTS: Spine surgical interventions have been reduced by 42.7%. Regulatory restriction of "elective surgeries" in pandemic situations results in reduced ICU utilization, however in a disproportionate manner. Although other specialized surgeries can be reduced by 59%, surgical spine cases are only diminishable by 24%. The spine surgery-related ICU occupancy has been reduced by 35%. CONCLUSION: The disproportionate effect of case reduction needs to be considered while calculating resources released by regulatory limitation of "elective surgeries" on a (inter-)national level.