Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has led to drastic measures being implemented for the management of surgical patients across all health services worldwide, including the National Health Service in the United Kingdom. It is suspected that the virus has had a detrimental effect on perioperative morbidity and mortality. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on these outcomes in emergency general surgical patients. Methods Emergency general surgical admissions were included in this retrospective cohort study in one of the COVID-19 hotspots in the South East of England. The primary outcome was the 30-day mortality rate. Secondary outcomes included the length of stay in hospital, complication rate and severity grade and admission rates to the ITU. Results Of 123 patients, COVID-19 was detected in 12.2%. Testing was not carried out in 26%. When comparing COVID-positive to COVID-negative patients, the mean age was 71.8 + 8.8 vs. 50.7 + 5.7, respectively, and female patients accounted for 40.0 vs. 52.6%. The 30-day mortality rate was 26.7 vs. 3.9 (OR 6.49, p = 0.02), respectively. The length of stay in hospital was 20.5 + 22.2 vs. 7.7 + 9.8 ( p < 0.01), the rate of complications was 80.0 vs. 23.7 (OR 12.9, p < 0.01), and the rate of admission to the ITU was 33.3 vs. 7.9% (OR 5.83, p = 0.01). Conclusion This study demonstrates the detrimental effect of COVID-19 on emergency general surgery, with significantly worsened surgical outcomes.
INTRODUCTIONWomen presenting with breast complaints, like breast pain, nipple discharge, cystic lesions, especially lump are a common finding and a cause of significant anxiety in view of extensive public awareness.1 Breast problems, benign and malignant, are common in occurrence worldwide, though nation wise breast cancer is the second most common malignancy among women in Nepal. 2,3,4 A lump in the breast is experienced by the patient with the phobia of cancer. The disease poses a threat to the woman's sense of bodily integrity and her conceptions of body image and sexuality. Knowledge regarding risk factors in the development of breast cancer helps in developing targeted risk reduction strategies. 5 The prevalence
Background: Ultrasound guided abdominal nerve blocks are increasingly being used for anaesthesia and analgesia for surgeries like appendectomy, hernia repair in our centre. The aim of the study was to compare abdominal nerve blocks and subarachnoid block for appendectomy.Method: Retrospective data of patients that underwent appendectomy either under subarachnoid block (Group-S) or abdominal nerve blocks (Group-A) for three months were collected from hospital records. The groups were compared for conversion to general anaesthesia as a primary end point of study and also for the time taken for the procedure, the first requirement of opioids, total opioid consumption and length of hospital stay.Result: Out of 116 patients studied, 75 surgeries were performed under subarachnoid block and 41 under abdominal plane blocks. Two patients in Group-S and 1 patient in Group-A were converted to general anaesthesia due to inadequate blockade. The time taken to perform the block was around four minutes in Group-S and 12 minutes in Group-A. The mean pethidine consumption in 24 hours was 62.33+16.63 mg and 23.17+15.19 mg in Group-S and Group-A respectively. The time to the first dose of pethidine in Group-S groups was 224.66+43.56 minutes and 813.17+361.80 minutes in Group-A. The mean duration of hospital stay in Group-S was 5.14+0.72 days and Group-A was 2.24+0.58 days.Conclusion: Appendectomy can be safely performed under subarachnoid block as well as the abdominal nerve blocks. The abdominal nerve block technique is found to be advantageous in terms of better postoperative analgesia, less opioid consumption and early hospital discharge.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.