Timing of elective surgery and risk assessment after SARS-CoV-2 infection: 2023 update: A multidisciplinary consensus statement on behalf of the Association of Anaesthetists, Federation of Surgical Specialty Associations, Royal College of Anaesthetists and Royal College of Surgeons of England.

Guidance for the timing of surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection needed reassessment given widespread vaccination, less virulent variants, contemporary evidence and a need to increase access to safe surgery. We, therefore, updated previous recommendations to assist policymakers, administrative staff, clinicians and, most importantly, patients. Patients who develop symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection within 7 weeks of planned surgery, including on the day of surgery, should be screened for SARS-CoV-2. Elective surgery should not usually be undertaken within 2 weeks of diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. For patients who have recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection and who are low risk or having low-risk surgery, most elective surgery can proceed 2 weeks following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test. For patients who are not low risk or having anything other than low-risk surgery between 2 and 7 weeks following infection, an individual risk assessment must be performed. This should consider: patient factors (age; comorbid and functional status); infection factors (severity; ongoing symptoms; vaccination); and surgical factors (clinical priority; risk of disease progression; grade of surgery). This assessment should include the use of an objective and validated risk prediction tool and shared decision-making, taking into account the patient's own attitude to risk. In most circumstances, surgery should proceed unless risk assessment indicates that the risk of proceeding exceeds the risk of delay. There is currently no evidence to support delaying surgery beyond 7 weeks for patients who have fully recovered from or have had mild SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Postoperative mortality and complications in patients with and without pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection: a service evaluation of 24 million linked records using OpenSAFELY.

Surgical decision-making after SARS-CoV-2 infection is influenced by the presence of comorbidity, infection severity and whether the surgical problem is time-sensitive. Contemporary surgical policy to delay surgery is informed by highly heterogeneous country-specific guidance. We evaluated surgical provision in England during the COVID-19 pandemic to assess real-world practice and whether deferral remains necessary. Using the OpenSAFELY platform, we adapted the COVIDSurg protocol for a service evaluation of surgical procedures that took place within the English NHS from 17 March 2018 to 17 March 2022. We assessed whether hospitals adhered to guidance not to operate on patients within 7 weeks of an indication of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Additional outcomes were postoperative all-cause mortality (30 days, 6 months) and complications (pulmonary, cardiac, cerebrovascular). The exposure was the interval between the most recent indication of SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent surgery. In any 6-month window, < 3% of surgical procedures were conducted within 7 weeks of an indication of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Mortality for surgery conducted within 2 weeks of a positive test in the era since widespread SARS-CoV-2 vaccine availability was 1.1%, declining to 0.3% by 4 weeks. Compared with the COVIDSurg study cohort, outcomes for patients in the English NHS cohort were better during the COVIDSurg data collection period and the pandemic era before vaccines became available. Clinicians within the English NHS followed national guidance by operating on very few patients within 7 weeks of a positive indication of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In England, surgical patients' overall risk following an indication of SARS-CoV-2 infection is lower than previously thought.

Aerosol precautions and airway complications: a national prospective multicentre cohort study.

The perceived risk of transmission of aerosolised viral particles from patients to airway practitioners during the COVID-19 pandemic led to the widespread use of aerosol precautions, including personal protective equipment and modifications to anaesthetic technique. The risk of these aerosol precautions on peri-operative airway complications has not been assessed outside of simulation studies. This prospective, national, multicentre cohort study aimed to quantify this risk. Adult patients undergoing general anaesthesia for elective or emergency procedures over a 96-hour period were included. Data collected included use of aerosol precautions by the airway practitioner, airway complications and potential confounding variables. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to assess the risk of individual aerosol precautions on overall and specific airway complications. Data from 5905 patients from 70 hospital sites were included. The rate of airway complications was 10.0% (95%CI 9.2-10.8%). Use of filtering facepiece class 2 or class 3 respirators was associated with an increased risk of airway complications (odds ratio 1.38, 95%CI 1.04-1.83), predominantly due to an association with difficult facemask ventilation (odds ratio 1.68, 95%CI 1.09-2.61) and desaturation on pulse oximetry (odds ratio 2.39, 95%CI 1.26-4.54). Use of goggles, powered air-purifying respirators, long-sleeved gowns, double gloves and videolaryngoscopy were not associated with any alteration in the risk of airway complications. Overall, the use of filtering facepiece class 2 or class 3 respirators was associated with an increased risk of airway complications, but most aerosol precautions used during the COVID-19 pandemic were not.

Timing of elective surgery and risk assessment after SARS-CoV-2 infection: an update: A multidisciplinary consensus statement on behalf of the Association of Anaesthetists, Centre for Perioperative Care, Federation of Surgical Specialty Associations, Royal College of Anaesthetists, Royal College of Surgeons of England.

The impact of vaccination and new SARS-CoV-2 variants on peri-operative outcomes is unclear. We aimed to update previously published consensus recommendations on timing of elective surgery after SARS-CoV-2 infection to assist policymakers, administrative staff, clinicians and patients. The guidance remains that patients should avoid elective surgery within 7 weeks of infection, unless the benefits of doing so exceed the risk of waiting. We recommend individualised multidisciplinary risk assessment for patients requiring elective surgery within 7 weeks of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This should include baseline mortality risk calculation and assessment of risk modifiers (patient factors; SARS-CoV-2 infection; surgical factors). Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection with previous variants increased peri-operative mortality risk three-fold throughout the 6 weeks after infection, and assumptions that asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection does not add risk are currently unfounded. Patients with persistent symptoms and those with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 may require a longer delay than 7 weeks. Elective surgery should not take place within 10 days of diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, predominantly because the patient may be infectious, which is a risk to surgical pathways, staff and other patients. We now emphasise that timing of surgery should include the assessment of baseline and increased risk, optimising vaccination and functional status, and shared decision-making. While these recommendations focus on the omicron variant and current evidence, the principles may also be of relevance to future variants. As further data emerge, these recommendations may be revised.

Inadequate neuraxial anaesthesia in patients undergoing elective caesarean section: a systematic review.

Neuraxial anaesthesia is widely utilised for elective caesarean section, but the prevalence of inadequate intra-operative anaesthesia is unclear. We aimed to determine the prevalence of inadequate neuraxial anaesthesia for elective caesarean section; prevalence of conversion from neuraxial anaesthesia to general anaesthesia following inadequate neuraxial anaesthesia; and the effect of mode of anaesthesia. We searched studies reporting inadequate neuraxial anaesthesia that used ≥ ED95 doses (effective dose in 95% of the population) of neuraxial local anaesthetic agents. Our primary outcome was the prevalence of inadequate neuraxial anaesthesia, defined as the need to convert to general anaesthesia; the need to repeat or abandon a planned primary neuraxial technique following incision; unplanned administration of intra-operative analgesia (excluding sedatives); or unplanned epidural drug supplementation. Fifty-four randomised controlled trials were included (3497 patients). The overall prevalence of requirement for supplemental analgesia or anaesthesia was 14.6% (95%CI 13.3-15.9%); 510 out of 3497 patients. The prevalence of general anaesthesia conversion was 2 out of 3497 patients (0.06% (95%CI 0.0-0.2%)). Spinal/combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia was associated with a lower overall prevalence of inadequate neuraxial anaesthesia than epidural anaesthesia (10.2% (95%CI 9.0-11.4%), 278 out of 2732 patients vs. 30.3% (95%CI 26.5-34.5%), 232 out of 765 patients). Further studies are needed to identify risk factors, optimise detection and management strategies and to determine long-term effects of inadequate neuraxial anaesthesia.

SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 and timing of elective surgery: A multidisciplinary consensus statement on behalf of the Association of Anaesthetists, the Centre for Peri-operative Care, the Federation of Surgical Specialty Associations, the Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Royal College of Surgeons of England.

The scale of the COVID-19 pandemic means that a significant number of patients who have previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2 will require surgery. Given the potential for multisystem involvement, timing of surgery needs to be carefully considered to plan for safe surgery. This consensus statement uses evidence from a systematic review and expert opinion to highlight key principles in the timing of surgery. Shared decision-making regarding timing of surgery after SARS-CoV-2 infection must account for severity of the initial infection; ongoing symptoms of COVID-19; comorbid and functional status; clinical priority and risk of disease progression; and complexity of surgery. For the protection of staff, other patients and the public, planned surgery should not be considered during the period that a patient may be infectious. Precautions should be undertaken to prevent pre- and peri-operative infection, especially in higher risk patients. Elective surgery should not be scheduled within 7 weeks of a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection unless the risks of deferring surgery outweigh the risk of postoperative morbidity or mortality associated with COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 causes either transient or asymptomatic disease for most patients, who require no additional precautions beyond a 7-week delay, but those who have persistent symptoms or have been hospitalised require special attention. Patients with persistent symptoms of COVID-19 are at increased risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality even after 7 weeks. The time before surgery should be used for functional assessment, prehabilitation and multidisciplinary optimisation. Vaccination several weeks before surgery will reduce risk to patients and might lessen the risk of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection of other patients and staff. National vaccine committees should consider whether such patients can be prioritised for vaccination. As further data emerge, these recommendations may need to be revised, but the principles presented should be considered to ensure safety of patients, the public and staff.

Functional outcome assessment after open tennis elbow release: what are the predictor parameters?

INTRODUCTION: Open surgical release remains the gold standard for treatment of recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis (tennis elbow). We aimed to evaluate the potential impact of perioperative factors on outcome after open surgical release for tennis elbow. METHODS: All patients without elbow dislocation who underwent open surgical release for tennis elbow from January 2000 to June 2006 were included in the study. Comorbidities and associated pathologies of the upper limb as well as postoperative pain score, range of motion, evidence of instability, recurrence and other complications were noted. RESULTS: There were 37 female and 24 male patients aged 22-60 (44.95 +/- 7.34) years. Five (8.1 percent) patients had diabetes mellitus. The mean duration of symptoms before surgery was 16.8 +/- 15.3 (range 2-84) months. The average duration of follow-up was 23.0 +/- 34.5 (range 0.4-206) months. Overall, 59 (96.7 percent) patients reported improvement of symptoms post surgery. Median grip strength on the operated and unoperated sides were 25.5 +/- 9.0 (range 10.5-44.0) KgN and 23.7 +/- 9.1 (range 9.3-41.5) KgN, respectively. Patients with diabetes mellitus had significantly higher pain scores (2.80 versus 0.36, p-value less than 0.01, 95 percent confidence interval [CI] 1.2-3.7), reduced grip strength (0.91 KgN versus 1.06 KgN, p-value is 0.038, 95 percent CI 0.29-0.01) and higher recurrence rates (40 percent versus 7.7 percent, p-value is 0.018). CONCLUSION: Diabetes mellitus has a negative effect on surgical outcome in terms of pain scores, grip strength ratio and recurrence rate. This should be reiterated during preoperative counselling.

Periampullary diverticulum: a case of bleeding from a periampullary diverticulum.

INTRODUCTION: Duodenal diverticula are uncommon and usually asymptomatic. Complications like bleeding, perforation and biliary fistulae are rare. The management of a bleeding duodenal diverticulum can be challenging. With the improvement of endoscopic techniques, many of the cases reported in the literature were managed with endoscopic methods. We present a case report of bleeding duodenal diverticulum. CLINICAL FEATURES: The patient was treated successfully with endoscopic haemostasis during her first epidsode when she initially presented with bleeding duodenal diverticulum, but recurred after 2 months. TREATMENT: Despite initial endoscopic haemostasis during her second episode, she rebled after 2 days, necessitating surgical management. OUTCOME: After suture ligation of the ulcer, the patient recovered and there was no more recurrence. CONCLUSION: Periampullary diverticulum is a rare source of gastrointestinal bleeding, which can be challenging to diagnose and treat. A multidisciplinary approach encompassing radiology, endoscopy and surgery is most effective.

The prevalence of psychological and psychiatric sequelae of cancer in the elderly - how much do we know?

INTRODUCTION: Ageing is the greatest single risk factor for cancer but there is a dearth of systematically reviewed data on the psychological and psychiatric sequelae in elderly cancer patients. The aim of this paper is to review the current literature on these issues. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multiple searches using Medline (1970 to 2003), PsycInfo (1970 to 2003), CINAHL (1982 to 2003), EMBASE Psychiatry (1992 to 2003) and Cochrane Research Database were carried out. Additional searches were made using the reference lists of published papers and chapters. RESULTS: Most of the studies were cross-sectional in nature. The few longitudinal studies had fairly short follow-up periods. Overall, the available evidence suggests that up to a third of elderly cancer patients may experience psychological distress. The psychological impact of cancer on the elderly was less adverse or similar compared with younger patients. There were only limited studies that specifically addressed the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in elderly cancer patients, which suggested that the prevalence for clinically significant depression could range from 3% to 25%. Organic mental disorders were more prevalent in the older group. CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that the psychological impact of cancer is less negative in the elderly compared to younger patients. As for the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in elderly cancer patients, this review suggests that it is an unanswered question with a dearth of published data, with most work either based only on clinical or hospital samples or not solely on the elderly.

A 20-year follow-up study on schizophrenia in Singapore.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the outcome and predictors of patients with schizophrenia 20 years later. METHOD: The patients, aged 15-39 years, with diagnosis of schizophrenia and first admitted to a national mental hospital in Singapore in 1975 were included. In 1980, 1985, 1990 and 1995, their hospital records were examined and the patients were interviewed to determine their working and treatment status. Possible predictors of good outcome and suicide data were determined. RESULTS: A total of 402 patients were included. Over 20 years, there was lower percentage of patients working full time and proportionately more patients were receiving out-patient treatment. Overall, about two-third of the patients had a good/fair outcome. Shorter illness duration before admission was significantly associated with a good outcome. The suicide rate was the highest in the first 10 years. CONCLUSION: Most patients with schizophrenia had a good/fair outcome at 20 years.

The use of remifentanil to facilitate the insertion of the laryngeal mask airway.

UNLABELLED: Propofol is often used as an IV induction drug for anesthesia and the insertion of a laryngeal mask airway (LMA). As a sole anesthetic, it may be associated with undesirable airway responses such as coughing and gagging. We conducted a randomized, double-blinded study to compare the conditions during insertion of the LMA in 120 patients who received normal saline (Group P), remifentanil 0.25 microg/kg (Group R1), or remifentanil 0.5 microg/kg (Group R2) before the induction of anesthesia with IV propofol. The addition of remifentanil significantly improved the conditions of insertion; in Group R1, 82.5% (33 of 40 patients), and in Group R2, 85.0% (34 of 40 patients) had excellent insertion conditions as compared with the Control group P, 32.5% (13 of 40 patients). Patients in Group P were apneic for a mean (SD) time of 85 (38) s, 186 (75) s in group R1, and 284 (130) s in group R2. There was a lesser decrease in mean arterial blood pressure in group R1. We conclude that remifentanil 0.25 microg/kg, when administered after IV propofol 2.5 mg/kg, provides excellent conditions for insertion of the LMA with minimal hemodynamic disturbances. IMPLICATIONS: Small-dose remifentanil can provide excellent conditions for laryngeal mask airway insertion with minimal hemodynamic disturbances.

Stabilization of coiled-coil peptide domains by introduction of trifluoroleucine.

Substitution of leucine residues by 5,5,5-trifluoroleucine at the d-positions of the leucine zipper peptide GCN4-p1d increases the thermal stability of the coiled-coil structure. The midpoint thermal unfolding temperature of the fluorinated peptide is elevated by 13 degrees C at 30 microM peptide concentration. The modified peptide is more resistant to chaotropic denaturants, and the free energy of folding of the fluorinated peptide is 0.5-1.2 kcal/mol larger than that of the hydrogenated form. A similarly fluorinated form of the DNA-binding peptide GCN4-bZip binds to target DNA sequences with affinity and specificity identical to those of the hydrogenated form, while demonstrating enhanced thermal stability. Molecular dynamics simulation on the fluorinated GCN4-p1d peptide using the Surface Generalized Born implicit solvation model revealed that the coiled-coil binding energy is 55% more favorable upon fluorination. These results suggest that fluorination of hydrophobic substructures in peptides and proteins may provide new means of increasing protein stability, enhancing protein assembly, and strengthening receptor-ligand interactions.

Mental health literacy in Singapore: a comparative survey of psychiatrists and primary health professionals.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the beliefs amongst health professionals in Singapore about management of 3 major mental disorders, comparing psychiatrists and a sample of primary care physicians, and so identify target areas for the education of primary health professionals. MATERIALS AND METHOD: A questionnaire earlier distributed to psychiatrists at Woodbridge Hospital was posted to both Singapore general practitioners and polyclinic doctors. The questionnaire assessed the capacity of respondents to identify vignettes of depression, schizophrenia or mania, and then assessed respondents' views about the likely helpfulness of a number of interventions. RESULTS: The psychiatrists and primary health professionals differed little in terms of diagnostic accuracy for depression and schizophrenia; however, only half the general practitioners and three-quarters of the polyclinic doctors correctly diagnosed mania, which was consistently diagnosed by the psychiatrists. A number of distinct differences were identified between the groups concerning the likely helpfulness and disorder specificity of various psychotropic drugs. The primary health physicians were more likely to favour non-specific management approaches, whilst the psychiatrists generally supported a focused biological approach to treatment, especially for the psychotic disorders. Some of the differences in beliefs about mental health management may well be contributed by the different patients treated by each group of clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: The findings have important clinical implications in terms of diagnosing common psychiatric conditions accurately and giving us professionals' views about a range of interventions for such conditions, while also assisting review of educational programmes for identifying and managing major mental disorders.

A comparative mental health literacy survey of psychiatrists and other mental health professionals in Singapore.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study are, first, to replicate and extend an Australian approach to assessing mental health literacy by studying a sample of Singapore mental health professionals, and to focus on differences between judgements made by the psychiatrists in comparison with the other mental health professionals. Second, to compare the psychiatrists' judgements with those of Australian psychiatrists. METHOD: The Australian questionnaire, assessing responses in relation to vignettes of major depression and to schizophrenia was extended by adding a third vignette of mania, and by the addition of several region-specific response options. Nearly 500 questionnaires were distributed to representative staff (psychiatrists, nurses and allied health) of a large psychiatric institution in Singapore, with a response rate of 81%. Psychiatrists' judgements were compared with all other hospital staff, and with Australian psychiatrists' judgements. RESULTS: The two principal contrast groups (Singapore psychiatrists and other Singapore mental health professionals) differed slightly in terms of diagnostic accuracy. The psychiatrists differed in favouring a more professionally focused model of intervention, while both professional groups viewed traditional healers and their practices as distinctly unhelpful. Direct comparison of psychiatrist ratings generated in Singapore and in Australia revealed quite similar response profiles. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to generating data of some intrinsic importance, comparison with Australian survey data allows the potential impact of regional and cultural differences, as well as of varying psychiatric practices, to be identified. Responses identified more similarities than differences in the judgements of the psychiatrists from the two countries.

Beliefs about outcomes for mental disorders: a comparative study of primary health practitioners and psychiatrists in Singapore.

OBJECTIVES: To compare responses to a mental health literacy survey assessing the likely outcome of three major mental disorders by primary health practitioners (OPD doctors and GPs) and by psychiatrists in Singapore. METHODS: We used two vignettes of Major Depression and Schizophrenia developed in an Australian study. In addition, a third vignette of Mania was developed locally and included. The respondents were required to choose one of the set of prognostic options if the patients received or did not receive professional help, to rate the likely impact of the disorder, and to assess the likelihood of the patient being discriminated against. Psychiatrists' responses were obtained by surveying staff at Woodbridge Hospital, while the primary health practitioners were required to respond to a postal survey. RESULTS: The response rate for the psychiatrists was 70% (69/99), while the Primary health practitioners had an overall response rate of 38% (264/691). The response from OPDs being 51% (77/151) and that of the GPs being 35% (189/540). There was evidence of disorder specificity, with schizophrenia judged as having the worst outcome and depression the best outcome in response to treatment. There was also evidence of group specificity, with the psychiatrists most optimistic and the OPD doctors least optimistic about the outcome following professional intervention. The majority of both the primary health practitioners and the psychiatrists judged that patients would be discriminated against, more so for schizophrenia and mania than for depression. Compared to the OPD doctors, a lower percentage of GPs felt that the patients would be discriminated against. CONCLUSION: Primary health practitioners in Singapore hold more negative views than Singapore psychiatrists about the outcome of professional intervention for three major psychiatric disorders. This finding has implications for education and training for primary health practitioners as well as for treatment of psychiatric patients in the primary health setting.

Spinal haematoma following epidural anaesthesia in a patient with eclampsia.

A patient with a twin pregnancy required a Caesarean section for severe pre-eclampsia. Her platelet count was 71 x 10(9).l-1. Epidural anaesthesia was performed after platelet transfusion. A spinal epidural haematoma was diagnosed postoperatively. A generalised tonic-clonic seizure sparing the lower limbs enabled early diagnosis to be made. The patient recovered with no permanent neurological damage after laminectomy and clot removal. The risks and benefits of regional techniques require careful consideration, and postoperative monitoring for recovery of neural blockade is essential.