Early experience of aortic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: A multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: A significant restructuring of the healthcare services has taken place since the declaration of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, with elective surgery put on hold to concentrate intensive care resources to treat COVID-19 as well as to protect patients who are waiting for relatively low risk surgery from exposure to potentially infected hospital environment. METHODS: Multicentre study, with 19 participating centers, to define the impact of the pandemic on the provision of aortovascular services and patients' outcomes after having adapted the thresholds for intervention to guarantee access to treatment for emergency and urgent conditions. Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, including all patients with aortovascular conditions admitted for surgical or conservative treatment from the 1st March to the 20th May 2020. RESULTS: A total of 189 patients were analyzed, and 182 underwent surgery. Diagnosis included: aneurysm (45%), acute aortic syndrome (44%), pseudoaneurysm (4%), aortic valve endocarditis (4%), and other (3%). Timing for surgery was: emergency (40%), urgent (34%), or elective (26%). In-hospital mortality was 12%. Thirteen patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 during the peri-operative period, and this subgroup was not associated with a higher mortality. CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant change in service provision for aortovascular patients in the UK. Although the emergency and urgent surgical activity were maintained, elective treatment was minimal during early months of the pandemic. The preoperative COVID-19 screening protocol, combined with self-isolation and shielding, contributed to the low incidence of COVID-19 in our series and a mortality similar to that of pre-pandemic outcomes.

A National Survey of Undergraduate Suture and Local Anesthetic Training in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Suturing is a skill expected to be attained by all medical students on graduation, according to the General Medical Council's (GMC) Tomorrow's Doctors. There are no GMC recommendations for the amount of suture training required at medical school nor the level of competence to be achieved. This study examines the state of undergraduate suture training by surveying a sample of medical students across the United Kingdom. METHODS: We distributed a survey to 17 medical schools to be completed by undergraduates who have undergone curricular suture training. The survey included questions relating to career intention, hours of curricular suture training, hours of additional paid training, confidence in performing various suture techniques and knowledge of their indications. We also asked about the students' perceived proficiency at injecting local anesthetic and their overall opinion of medical school suture training. RESULTS: We received responses from 705 medical students at 16 UK medical schools. A total of 607 (86.1%) medical students had completed their scheduled curricular suture training. Among them, 526 (86.5%) students reported inadequate suture training in medical school and 133 (21.9%) students had paid for additional training. Results for all competence markers were significantly lower than the required GMC standards (p < 0.001). Students who had paid for additional training were significantly more confident across all areas examined (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified a deficiency in the curricular suture training provided to the medical students surveyed. These findings suggest that medical schools should provide more opportunities for students to develop their suturing skills to achieve the GMC standard.

Does surgical sympathectomy improve clinical outcomes in patients with refractory angina pectoris?

A best evidence topic in cardiothoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: In patients with angina pectoris refractory to medical therapy, does surgical sympathectomy improve clinical outcomes? A total of 528 papers were identified using the search protocol described, of which 6 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. There were 5 case series and 1 prospective cohort study. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. All 5 of the case series demonstrated an improvement in symptoms, exercise tolerance or quality of life in patients undergoing surgical sympathectomy. An early case series investigating an open approach had a high morbidity and mortality rate, but the 4 other series used a minimally invasive technique and had low morbidity and zero perioperative mortality rates. The cohort study compared surgical sympathectomy with transmyocardial laser revascularization (TMR) and concluded TMR to be superior. However, this study looked only at unilateral sympathectomy, whereas all 5 case series focused on bilateral surgery. We conclude that the best currently available evidence does suggest that patients report an improvement in their symptoms and quality of life following surgical sympathectomy, but the low level of this evidence does not allow for a statistically proved recommendation.

Medical grade honey in the management of chronic venous leg ulcers.

A best evidence topic in vascular surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: In patients with chronic venous leg ulcers (CVLU), does the use of medical grade honey as compared to standard wound therapy improve clinical outcomes? A total of 299 papers were identified using the search protocol described, of which five represented the best evidence available to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Two randomised controlled trials arrived at contradictory conclusions: one showing better outcomes for CVLU healing with use of honey over standard wound therapy and the other showing equivalent outcomes but more adverse effects. A third randomised controlled trial showed a non-significant reduction in bacterial colonisation of CVLU with honey compared to standard therapy. Two further studies--a prospective cohort study and a case series--supported the use of honey, but these were of lower grade evidence and had numerous methodological faults. Therefore, the clinical bottom line is that there is no conclusive evidence that honey improves outcome in patients with CVLU, and until more robust trials are conducted, its benefit should be considered unproven.