Pneumoperitoneum in a COVID-19 Patient Due to the Macklin Effect.

A 63-year-old male with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia presented to the emergency department, supplementary oxygen is delivered via nasal cannula, and invasive ventilation was not needed; there was significant pneumoperitoneum on radiologic control. After a meticulous examination of the thoracic tomography, there were some linear air collections adjacent to the bronchovascular sheaths, indicative of the Macklin effect, without abdominal alterations, and the patient remained stable; therefore, we did not perform a surgical procedure, and the pneumoperitoneum reabsorbed spontaneously on radiologic control. The pulmonary origin of pneumoperitoneum is unusual and is associated with mechanical ventilation and alveolar leak; the air leak with subsequent dissection into other anatomical spaces is called the Macklin effect. It is essential to have this mechanism in mind because most of these patients respond well to conservative treatment. When studying primary pneumoperitoneum, the cause should be studied carefully to discard visceral perforation, tracheal or esophageal rupture.

Challenges in diabetic foot treatment during pandemic of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: To avoid hospital spread of Coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) and to analyze out of hospital outcomes after amputation. METHODS: Prospective analysis of data obtained from 60 diabetic patients in 2020 was performed at Cantonal Hospital Zenica, Zenica, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Personal protection equipment included double surgical mask, glasses, disposable surgical coats, and surgical masks for patients. Swabs were used to take samples from wounds. We randomly divided patients in 2 groups of 30 patients each. In pre-operative treatment, we used local anesthesia lidocaine hydrochloride 2% (Belupo, Koprivnica, Croatia) in group A and systemic analgesia intravenous tramadol chloride 100 mg intravenous (Krka, Novo Mesto, Slovenia) in group B. Wounds were surgically treated each day and heal spontaneously. Periodical control exams were performed. RESULTS: Wound healing did not present any statistically significant differences between groups (group A: 69±21.97 and B: 61±22.13 days, t=-1.22; p=0.11). No statistically significant differences (p<0.05) between groups A and B in wound healing regarding to gender or cigarette use was noted. CONCLUSION: No significant differences in amputation treatment between the 2 comparative groups were noted. No confirmed COVID-19 infections in medical staff who performed surgical interventions or in treated patients were detected.

Rapid Implementation of a Multidisciplinary COVID-19 Cytokine Storm Syndrome Task Force.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can progress to a state of unregulated inflammation called cytokine storm syndrome (CSS). We describe formation and operation of a COVID-19 multidisciplinary consultation service that was allowed to individualize treatment for critically ill patients with COVID-19 during the pandemic. METHODS: Institutional experts from different subspecialties formed a COVID-19 CSS task force at Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY. They agreed on a set of four clinical and six laboratory parameters that can help early identify COVID-19 CSS. We describe the formation and implementation of the COVID-19 task force. The case series description of the COVID-19 CSS consultation cohort highlights consultation volume, baseline characteristics, clinical and laboratory parameters, and how biologic treatments were allocated to these patients. RESULTS: Between April 4,2020, and May 7,2020, the COVID-19 CSS task force was formed, consisting of adult and pediatric rheumatologists and allergy and immunology physicians. The task force evaluated a total of 288 patients, of whom 197 (68%) were male, the median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 62 (51-70) years, 122 (42%) were Hispanic, and 88 (31%) were Black or African American. The common presenting symptoms in all referred patients were dyspnea (85%) and diarrhea (80%). Thirty-one patients who received biologic therapy were younger, with a median (IQR) age of 53 (32-63) years, as opposed to 62.5 (52-70) years in the nonbiologic group (P = 0.008). A higher proportion receiving biologics was in the critical care setting (26 [84%] vs 151 [59%]; P = 0.006). CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first multidisciplinary collaborative effort to provide individualized patient recommendations for evaluation and treatment of patients with COVID-19 who may have CSS. This working model helped to devise an approach that may have identified patients who were most likely to benefit from biologic therapy in the absence of evidence-based guidelines.

Postoperative outcomes in surgical COVID-19 patients: a multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Data on postoperative outcomes of the COVID-19 patient population is limited. We described COVID-19 patients who underwent a surgery and the pandemic impact on surgical activities. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter cohort study between March 13 and June 192,020. We included all COVID-19 patients who underwent surgery in nine centres of the Province of Québec, the Canadian province most afflicted by the pandemic. We also included concomitant suspected COVID-19 (subsequently confirmed not to have COVID-19) patients and patients who had recovered from it. We collected data on baseline characteristics, postoperative complications and postoperative mortality. Our primary outcome was 30-day mortality. We also collected data on overall surgical activities during this first wave and during the same period in 2019. RESULTS: We included 44 COVID-19 patients, 18 suspected patients, and 18 patients who had recovered from COVID-19 at time of surgery. Among the 44 COVID-19 patients, 31 surgeries (71%) were urgent and 16 (36%) were major. In these patients, pulmonary complications were frequent (25%) and 30-day mortality was high (15.9%). This mortality was higher in patients with symptoms (23.1%) compared to those without symptoms (5.6%), although not statistically significant (p = 0.118). Of the total 22,616 cases performed among participating centres during the study period, only 0.19% had COVID-19 at the time of surgery. Fewer procedures were performed during the study period compared to the same period in 2019 (44,486 cases). CONCLUSION: In this Canadian cohort study, postoperative 30-day mortality in COVID-19 patients undergoing surgery was high (15.9%). Although few surgeries were performed on COVID-19 patients, the pandemic impact on surgical activity volume was important. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04458337 .

The precaution strategy toward the COVID-19 pandemic in the operating room of a tertiary hospital in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND: The pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), which began in December 2019, spread mostly from person to person through respiratory droplets. A recommendation was issued to postpone all elective surgical practices. However, some confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients required life-saving emergent surgeries. METHODS: To facilitate emergent surgical interventions for these patients, we have reviewed the current literature and established an algorithm of precautions to be taken by operating room team members during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: The initial algorithm of preparation for surgical intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic was relatively simple. However, the abrupt increase of confirmed COVID-19 cases due to returned overseas travelers since mid-March 2020 disrupted the routine hospital clinical service. Due to the large number of febrile patients, the algorithm was therefore revised according to travel history, occupation, contact and cluster history (TOCC), unexplained fever/symptoms, and emergent/nonemergent surgery. TOCC (+) patients presenting with otherwise unexplained fever/symptoms would be regarded as belonging to the fifth category of "severe special infectious pneumonia." If the patient requires emergent surgery to relieve the non-life-threatening disorders, two times of negative COVID-19 tests are necessary before the operation is approved. For life-threatening situations without two negative results of COVID-19 tests, the operation schedule should be approved by the Chairman of Surgery Management Committee. CONCLUSION: The application of a clear and integrated algorithm for operating room team members aids in effective personal protective equipment facilitation to keep both healthcare providers and patients safe as well as to prevent hospital-based transmission of COVID-19.

Early Intervention for the Treatment of Acute Laryngeal Injury After Intubation.

Importance: Patients with laryngeal injury after endotracheal intubation often present long after initial injury with mature fibrosis compromising cricoarytenoid joint mobility and glottic function. Objective: To compare functional outcomes between early and late intervention for intubation-related laryngeal injury. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study involved 29 patients with laryngeal injury resulting from endotracheal intubation who were evaluated at a tertiary care center between May 1, 2014, and June 1, 2018. Ten patients with intubation injury to the posterior glottis who received early treatment were compared with 19 patients presenting with posterior glottic stenosis who received late treatment. Statistical analysis was performed from May 1 to July 1, 2019. Exposures: Early intervention, defined as a procedure performed 45 days or less after intubation, and late treatment, defined as an intervention performed greater than 45 days after intubation. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient-specific and intervention-specific covariates were compared between the 2 groups, absolute differences with 95% CIs were calculated, and time to tracheostomy decannulation was compared using log-rank testing. Results: The 2 groups had similar demographic characteristics and a similar burden of comorbid disease. Ten patients who received early intervention (7 women [70%]; median age, 59.7 years [range, 31-72 years]; median, 34.7 days to presentation [IQR, 1.5-44.8 days]) were compared with 19 patients who received late intervention (11 women [58%]; median age, 53.8 years [range, 34-73 years]; median, 341.9 days to presentation [IQR, 132.7-376.3 days]). Nine of 10 patients (90%) who received early intervention and 11 of 19 patients (58%) who received late interventions were decannulated at last follow-up (absolute difference, 32%; 95% CI, -3% to 68%). Patients who received early treatment required fewer total interventions than patients with mature lesions (mean, 2.2 vs 11.5; absolute difference, 9.3; 95% CI, 6.4-12.1). In addition, none of the patients who received early treatment required an open procedure, whereas 17 patients (90%) with mature lesions required open procedures to pursue decannulation. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that early intervention for patients with postintubation laryngeal injury was associated with a decreased duration of tracheostomy dependence, a higher rate of decannulation, and fewer surgical procedures compared with late intervention. Patients who underwent early intervention also avoided open reconstruction. These findings may bear relevance to the management of patients requiring extended durations of endotracheal intubation during recovery for critical illness related to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

Is COVID-19 a high risk factor for lung cancer?: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 has become a common threat to global human health and is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Some asymptomatic patients with early-stage lung cancer who have COVID-19 receive surgical treatment but develop severe pneumonia and other complications or even experience postoperative death, and they may have a worse prognosis compared with healthy individuals infected with COVID-19. However, there is no evidence that COVID-19 is a risk factor for lung cancer patients. This systematic review aims to evaluate the incidence and prognosis of COVID-19 in lung cancer patients and provide evidence-based medical support for clinical treatment. METHODS: We will search 6 medical databases to identify eligible studies published from the establishment of the database to the present. The quality of the included literature will be evaluated using the bias risk assessment tool in Cochrane 5.1.0, and a meta-analysis will be performed using Stata 14.0. Heterogeneity will be statistically assessed using χ2 tests. RESULTS: The study will integrate existing research findings to investigate the prevalence and severity rate of patients with lung cancer infected with SARS-CoV-2 and analyze the prognosis and adverse clinical outcomes in patients with or without COVID-19. CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide evidence to support whether COVID-19 is a risk factor for lung cancer and provide guidance for clinical prevention and treatment based on the evidence obtained in light of the unpredictable threat posed by COVID-19. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for this systematic review as it will involve the collection and analysis of secondary data. The results of the review will be reported in international peer-reviewed journals. PRORPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020195967.

Resumption of Elective Orthopaedic Surgery in the US Epicenter of COVID-19.

On March 1, 2020, New York State confirmed its first case of COVID-19. This state has had the largest initial mortality in the United States with more than 479,000 confirmed cases and over 25,000 deaths as of October 10, 2020. All elective surgeries in New York State were suspended on March 23, 2020, due to the national state of emergency. Syosset Hospital is a 75-bed community hospital dedicated primarily to elective surgery. During the COVID-19 surge, the hospital was converted to provide needed beds for the treatment of COVID-19 illness. In anticipation of the resumption of urgent elective procedures, this hospital became one of the two designated sites within the Northwell Health system to be "non-COVID." Once the hospital was emptied of all inpatients, a complete and thorough cleaning and disinfection was performed on the entire building. All equipment was thoroughly decontaminated following Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines. In anticipation of the resumption of elective surgery, each surgeon evaluated their cancelled case list to determine patient priority, based on a scale of 1 (elective, non-urgent), 2 (semi-urgent), 3 (urgent), to 4 (highly urgent). Site-specific disaster credentialing was expedited so that emergent surgeries could be performed by surgeons located at other Northwell sites. To ensure a structured and informative onboarding process, each visiting surgeon received a "welcome" email which requested pertinent information to facilitate the surgical process. Presurgical, surgical, and postoperative protocols were revised based on federal and local guidance and regulations. Resumption of elective surgery post COVID-19 placed the hospital into uncharted territory.

Clinical approach to patients admitted to the emergency room due to acute cholecystitis during the COVID-19 pandemic and percutaneous cholecystostomy experience.

BACKGROUND: Acute cholecystitis (AC), a common complication of gallstones, is responsible for a significant part of emergency applications, and cholecystectomy is the only definitive treatment method for AC. Early cholecystectomy has many reported advantages. Operation-related morbidity and mortality have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, our aim is to present our general clinical approach to patients who were diagnosed with AC during the pandemic and our percutaneous cholecystostomy experience during this period. METHODS: This study included 72 patients who were presented to our hospital's emergency room between March 11 and May 31, 2020, with AC. Patients were divided into three groups based on their treatment: outpatients (Group 1), inpatients (Group 2) and patients undergoing percutaneous cholecystostomy (Group 3). These three groups were compared by their demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: There were 36 (50%) patients in Group 1, 25 (34.7%) patients in Group 2, and 11 (15.3%) patients in Group 3. The demographic characteristics of the patients were similar. The CRP and WBC levels of the patients in Group 3 were significantly higher compared to the other groups. Moreover, the wall of the gallbladder was thicker and the size of the gallbladder was larger in Group 3. Patients had percutaneous cholecystostomy at the median of 3.5 days and the length of hospital stay was longer compared to Group 2 (3.9 days versus 9.2 days, p=0.00). The rate of re-hospitalization after discharge was similar in Group 2 and Group 3, but none of the patients in Group 1 required hospitalization. None of 72 patients developed an emergency condition requiring surgery, and there was no death. CONCLUSION: Although many publications emphasize that laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) can be performed with low morbidity at the first admission in acute cholecystitis, it is a clinical condition that can be delayed in the COVID-19 pandemic and other similar emergencies. Thus, percutaneous cholecystostomy should be effectively employed, and its indications should be extended if necessary (e.g., younger patients, patients with lower CCI or ASA). This approach may enable us to protect both patients and healthcare professionals that perform the operation from the risk of COVID-19.

Risk Assessment of Surgical Interventions Performed on Non-Infected Patients During COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background A number and a variety of surgical interventions were highly affected by the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak. Most of the elective operations were discontinued with the fear of exacerbating the disease in patients and spreading it among healthcare professionals. Objective The objective of this study was to report postoperative rates of COVID-19 in patients who underwent emergency and urgent surgery during the pandemic and to determine a safe algorithm in order to propose an ideal approach for surgeries. Patients and methods A total of 162 patients being operated upon emergency or urgent causes between March 11 and May 31 2020 were included in the study. Safety measures advised by the World Health Organization were applied. The patients' operative data and postoperative COVID-19 status were recorded and statistically evaluated. Results Surgical interventions were required for skin cancer, upper extremity trauma, soft tissue infections, maxillofacial trauma, lower extremity trauma and other causes. Local anesthesia was used for 127 patients (78.4%). General anesthesia was used for 28 patients (17,3%). Two of 162 patients contracted COVID-19 postoperatively on days 15 and 21, respectively. No statistical significance was found between surgery and anesthesia types regarding COVID-19 risk. Conclusion It appears that emergency and urgent surgeries can be performed safely. However, this relies upon adequate safety measures being taken with regards to screening for COVID-19 antigen positivity in patients preoperatively. Further evidence is required to determine the safety of elective surgeries.

Results of COVID-minimal Surgical Pathway During Surge-phase of COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The outcomes of patients treated on the COVID-minimal pathway were evaluated during a period of surging COVID-19 hospital admissions, to determine the safety of continuing to perform urgent operations during the pandemic. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Crucial treatments were delayed for many patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, over concerns for hospital-acquired COVID-19 infections. To protect cancer patients whose survival depended on timely surgery, a "COVID-minimal pathway" was created. METHODS: Patients who underwent a surgical procedure on the pathway between April and May 2020 were evaluated. The "COVID-minimal surgical pathway" consisted of: (A) evolving best-practices in COVID-19 transmission-reduction, (B) screening patients and staff, (C) preoperative COVID-19 patient testing, (D) isolating pathway patients from COVID-19 patients. Patient status through 2 weeks from discharge was determined as a reflection of hospital-acquired COVID-19 infections. RESULTS: After implementation, pathway screening processes excluded 7 COVID-19-positive people from interacting with pathway (4 staff and 3 patients). Overall, 122 patients underwent 125 procedures on pathway, yielding 83 admissions (42 outpatient procedures). The median age was 64 (56-79) and 57% of patients were female. The most common surgical indications were cancer affecting the uterus, genitourinary tract, colon, lung or head and neck. The median length of admission was 3 days (1-6). Repeat COVID-19 testing performed on 27 patients (all negative), including 9 patients evaluated in an emergency room and 8 readmitted patients. In the postoperative period, no patient developed a COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSIONS: A COVID-minimal pathway comprised of physical space modifications and operational changes may allow urgent cancer treatment to safely continue during the COVID-19 pandemic, even during the surge-phase.

Thoracic Surgery during Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): The Experience of a Level 1 Trauma Center.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a novel coronavirus primarily affecting the respiratory system, was initially diagnosed in Wuhan, China, in late 2019. Identified as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by the World Health Organization, the virus rapidly became a global pandemic. The effects on health care worldwide were unprecedented as countries adapted services to treat masses of critically ill patients.The aim of this study is to analyze the effect that the COVID-19 pandemic had on thoracic surgery at a major trauma center during peak prevalence. METHODS: Prospective unit data were collected for all patients who underwent thoracic surgery during March 2020 until May 2020 inclusive. Retrospective data were collected from an earlier comparable time period as a comparison. RESULTS: In the aforementioned time frame, 117 thoracic surgical operations were performed under the care of four thoracic surgeons. Six operations were performed on three patients who were being treated for SARS-CoV-2. One operation was performed on a patient who had recovered from SARS-CoV-2. There were no deaths due to SARS-CoV-2 in any patient undergoing thoracic surgery. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that during the first surge of SARS-CoV-2, it was possible to adapt a thoracic oncology and trauma service without increase in mortality due to COVID-19. This was only possible due to a significant reduction in trauma referrals, cessation of benign and elective work, and the more stringent reprioritization of cancer surgery. This information is vital to learn from our experience and prepare for the predicted second surge and any similar future pandemics we might face.

A Survey on the Impact of COVID-19 on Lacrimal Surgery: The Asia-Pacific Perspective.

AIM: To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic-related lockdown on lacrimal surgery among oculoplastic surgeons in the Asia-Pacific region. METHODS: An institutional board review approved anonymous electronic survey was sent out via email to oculoplastic surgeons across the Asia-Pacific region. All responses were tabulated and analysed. RESULTS: A total of 259 valid responses were received. Nearly 87% of the surgeons agreed that lacrimal procedures were associated with a high risk of COVID-19 transmission. In all, at the time of taking the survey, 151/259 (58.3%) of the surgeons were not performing any lacrimal surgeries in view of the COVID-19 pandemic and 71/259 (27.4%) of the respondents were only performing emergency lacrimal surgeries. External dacryocystorhinostomy was the most commonly performed lacrimal procedure across the region and lacrimal procedures contributed to at least 25% of the income for nearly a third of the respondents. Majority of the respondents were female (52.9%), but a significantly higher proportion of male oculoplastic surgeons were still performing lacrimal surgeries during the lockdown. Over 75% of respondents indicated that resuming lacrimal procedures is important to their practice. CONCLUSION: The survey showed that there was a general agreement among the surveyed oculoplastic surgeons in the Asia-Pacific region that lacrimal procedures were associated with a high risk of COVID-19 transmission and over 85% of them of had either stopped performing elective lacrimal surgeries altogether or were providing only emergent care. It is likely that not performing elective lacrimal procedures, COVID-19 has financially impacted a high percentage of the surveyed oculoplastic surgeons.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Neurosurgical Practice in India: A Survey on Personal Protective Equipment Usage, Testing, and Perceptions on Disease Transmission.

BACKGROUND: There is a significant knowledge gap and anxiety among health care workers (HCWs) including neurosurgeons regarding in-hospital disease transmission and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the ensuing COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To assess present practice and perceptions among Indian neurosurgeons with respect to type of surgeries performed, PPE usage and SARS-CoV-2 testing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 12-item questionnaire on surgeries performed in the 6 weeks prior to the survey date, PPE usage, and preoperative SARS-CoV-2 testing was circulated electronically to Indian neurosurgeons from May 12, 2020 to May 31, 2020 and their responses analyzed. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-four neurosurgeons (237 males) participated in the survey; of whom, 230 had performed surgeries during the pandemic period. In total, 84.3% of respondents were performing semiemergency or emergency procedures only. N95 masks were utilized by only 83% of the respondents (n = 230) while performing surgical procedures. Only 40.9% of the respondents were satisfied regarding adequacy of available PPE. Preoperative SARS-CoV2 testing as well as testing of all asymptomatic patients prior to admission into ward/intensive care unit was perceived to be beneficial in reducing transmission risk by more than 85% respondents. More than 90% respondents felt that HCWs including neurosurgeons were at risk of acquiring infection through an outpatient consultation from an asymptomatic individual. CONCLUSIONS: Access to and utilization of appropriate PPE was lacking among the one-fifth of neurosurgeons who participated in this survey. To gain the confidence of neurosurgeons, hospitals should address their concerns regarding PPE and testing of patients prior to surgery and admission to the hospital.

Effects of Coronavirus Disease 2019 on Solid Organ Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: As the novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has emerged as a viral pandemic, data on the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection undergoing solid organ transplant are emerging. The objective of this systematic review was to assess currently published literature relating to the management, clinical course, and outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection in liver, kidney, and heart solid organ transplant recipients. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to assess currently published literature relating to the management, clinical course, and outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection in liver, kidney, and heart solid organ transplant recipients. Articles published through June 2020 were searched in the MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and PubMed databases. We identified 49 eligible studies comprising a total of 403 solid organ transplant recipients. RESULTS: Older age, male sex, and preexisting comorbidities, including hypertension and/or diabetes, were the most common prevailing characteristics among the solid organ transplant recipients. Clinical presentation ranged from mild to severe disease, including multiorgan failure and death. We found an overall mortality rate of 21%. CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests no increase in overall mortality or worse outcome in solid organ transplant recipients receiving immunosuppressive therapy compared with mortality in the general surgical population with SARS-CoV-2. Our findings suggest that transplant surgery and its immunosuppressive effects should not be a deterrent to proper surgical care for patients in the SARS-CoV-2 era.

Uniform infection screening allowed safe head and neck surgery during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in Japan.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine whether a uniform infection screening protocol could be used to safely perform head and neck cancer surgery during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and clarify how surgical treatment changed compared with the pre-pandemic period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During the unprecedented coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in Tokyo, we continued providing head and neck cancer care, guided by our own uniform screening protocol. In this study, medical records of 208 patients with head and neck malignancy, who underwent surgical treatment at our hospital during the first and second wave of pandemic for each 2-month period (first wave: 30 March 2020-30 May 2020, second wave: 14 July 2020-14 September 2020) and the 2-month pre-pandemic period (30 October 2019-30 December 2020), were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 133 patients were admitted for surgical treatment and all, except six patients with emergency tracheostomy, were screened according to the protocol. As a result, all 127 patients received surgical treatment as planned, and all 1247 medical staff members involved in the surgeries were uninfected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. During the first wave of pandemic, 20% reduction of head and neck surgery was requited; however, restrictions of surgery were not necessary during the second wave. Surgical procedure, length of hospitalization, postoperative complications and number of medical staff were unchanged compared with pre-pandemic period. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that continuation of head and neck anticancer surgical treatment in an epidemic area during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic were safe and feasible, if adequate and strict preventive measures are vigorously and successfully carried out.

In vitro comparison of surgical techniques in times of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: electrocautery generates more droplets and aerosol than laser surgery or drilling.

INTRODUCTION: Based on current knowledge, the SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted via droplet, aerosols and smear infection. Due to a confirmed high virus load in the upper respiratory tract of COVID-19 patients, there is a potential risk of infection for health care professionals when performing surgical procedures in this area. The aim of this study was the semi-quantitative comparison of ENT-typical interventions in the head and neck area with regard to particle and aerosol generation. These data can potentially contribute to a better risk assessment of aerogenic SARS-CoV-2-transmission caused by medical procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As a model, a test chamber was created to examine various typical surgical interventions on porcine soft and hard tissues. Simultaneously, particle and aerosol release were recorded and semi-quantitatively evaluated time-dependently. Five typical surgical intervention techniques (mechanical stress with a passive instrument with and without suction, CO2 laser treatment, drilling and bipolar electrocoagulation) were examined and compared regarding resulting particle release. RESULTS: Neither aerosols nor particles could be detected during mechanical manipulation with and without suction. The use of laser technique showed considerable formation of aerosol. During drilling, mainly solid tissue particles were scattered into the environment (18.2 ± 15.7 particles/cm2/min). The strongest particle release was determined during electrocoagulation (77.2 ± 30.4 particles/cm2/min). The difference in particle release between electrocoagulation and drilling was significant (p < 0.05), while particle diameter was comparable. In addition, relevant amounts of aerosol were released during electrocoagulation (79.6% of the maximum flue gas emission during laser treatment). DISCUSSION: Our results demonstrated clear differences comparing surgical model interventions. In contrast to sole mechanical stress with passive instruments, all active instruments (laser, drilling and electrocoagulation) released particles and aerosols. Assuming that particle and aerosol exposure is clinically correlated to the risk of SARS-CoV-2-transmission from the patient to the physician, a potential risk for health care professionals for infection cannot be excluded. Especially electrocautery is frequently used for emergency treatment, e.g., nose bleeding. The use of this technique may, therefore, be considered particularly critical in potentially infectious patients. Alternative methods may be given preference and personal protective equipment should be used consequently.

Emergent Ophthalmic Surgical Care at a Tertiary Referral Center During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: This study characterized the delivery of emergent ophthalmic surgical care during April 2020 of the coronarvirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic compared with the same interval the previous year. DESIGN: Retrospective observational before-and-after study. METHODS: This study reviewed and characterized each emergent and/or urgent procedure performed during April 2020 and April 2019 at a single tertiary ophthalmology referral center. Information collected included the details of patient presentation, diagnosis, surgical procedure, and preoperative COVID-19 testing. RESULTS: In total, 117 surgical procedures were performed on 114 patients during the month of April 2020 compared with 1,107 performed in April 2019 (P < .0001). Retinal detachment repair was the most common procedure (n = 37; 31.6%) in April 2020, whereas elective cataract surgery (n = 481; 47.3%) was the most common procedure in April 2019. The mean age of patients was 50.0 years in April 2020 compared with 59.0 years (P < .0001) the previous year. During April 2020, the mean age of surgeons performing procedures was 42.3 years compared with 48.4 years (P < .0001) during April 2019. In April 2020, all but 5 patients (96%) had reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction based COVID-19 testing before their procedure. One patient (0.88%) had a positive COVID-19 test. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic decreased our institution's surgical volume in April 2020 to approximately 10% of the usual volume. The pandemic changed the type of cases performed and led to a statistically significant decrease in both the age of our surgeons and patients relative to the same interval in the previous year. Broad preoperative screening led to 1 positive COVID-19 test in an asymptomatic patient.

Rapid, large-scale, and effective detection of COVID-19 via non-adaptive testing.

Pooling of samples can increase lab capacity when using Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to detect diseases such as COVID-19. However, pool testing is typically performed via an adaptive testing strategy which requires a feedback loop in the lab and at least two PCR runs to confirm positive results. This can cost precious time. We discuss a non-adaptive testing method where each sample is distributed in a prescribed manner over several pools, and which yields reliable results after one round of testing. More precisely, assuming knowledge about the overall incidence rate, we calculate explicit error bounds on the number of false positives which scale favourably with pool size and sample multiplicity. This allows for hugely streamlined PCR testing and cuts in detection times for a large-scale testing scenario. A viable consequence of this method could be real-time screening of entire communities, frontline healthcare workers and international flight passengers, for example, using the PCR machines currently in operation.

What is the Preferred Screening Tool for COVID-19 in Asymptomatic Patients Undergoing a Surgical or Diagnostic Procedure?

INTRODUCTION: Since the outbreak of COVID-19, measures were taken to protect healthcare staff from infection, to prevent infection of patients admitted to the hospital and to distribute PPE according to need. To assure the proper protection without overuse of limited supply of these equipments, screening of patients before surgical or diagnostic procedure was implemented. This study evaluates the results of this screening. METHOD: All patients screened for COVID-19 before procedure warranting either general, locoregional anaesthesia or sedation were included. Screening included a symptom questionnaire by phone, PCR and HRCT chest testing. Surgical or procedural details were registered together with actions taken based on screening results. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-eight screenings were performed on 386 patients. The symptom questionnaire was completed in 72% of screenings. In 371 screenings, PCR testing was performed and negative. HRCT chest found 18 cases where COVID-19 could not be excluded, with negative PCR testing. Three patients had their surgery postponed due to inconclusive screening, and additional measures were taken in three other patients. There were incidental findings in 14% of HRCT chest scans. DISCUSSION: Pre-operative screening will differentiate if PPE is needed for procedures and which patients can safely have elective surgery during this COVID-19 pandemic and in the times to come. HRCT chest has no additional value in the pre-operative screening of asymptomatic patients. Screening can be performed with a symptom questionnaire, and additional screening with PCR testing in high-risk patient groups should be considered.