Peri-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection increases postoperative mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal duration of planned delay before surgery in patients who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection. This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery during October 2020. Surgical patients with pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality. Logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted 30-day mortality rates stratified by time from diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection to surgery. Among 140,231 patients (116 countries), 3127 patients (2.2%) had a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Adjusted 30-day mortality in patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection was 1.5% (95%CI 1.4-1.5). In patients with a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, mortality was increased in patients having surgery within 0-2 weeks, 3-4 weeks and 5-6 weeks of the diagnosis (odds ratio (95%CI) 4.1 (3.3-4.8), 3.9 (2.6-5.1) and 3.6 (2.0-5.2), respectively). Surgery performed ≥ 7 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was associated with a similar mortality risk to baseline (odds ratio (95%CI) 1.5 (0.9-2.1)). After a ≥ 7 week delay in undertaking surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection, patients with ongoing symptoms had a higher mortality than patients whose symptoms had resolved or who had been asymptomatic (6.0% (95%CI 3.2-8.7) vs. 2.4% (95%CI 1.4-3.4) vs. 1.3% (95%CI 0.6-2.0), respectively). Where possible, surgery should be delayed for at least 7 weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with ongoing symptoms ≥ 7 weeks from diagnosis may benefit from further delay.

To cite this version:J. Zabaleta, B. Aguinagalde, M.G. Fuentes, N. Bazterargui, J.M. Izquierdo, et al.. Survival after lung metastasectomy for colorectal cancer: Importance of previous liver metastasis as a prognostic factor. EJSO -European Journal of Surgical Oncology, WB Saunders, 2011, 37 (9) This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. were performed on 84 patients. The median age of patients was 65.4 years, and 60% of patients were male. The 30-day mortality rate was 2%, and incidence of complications was 7%. The overall survival was 72 months, with 3-and 5-year survival rates of 70% and 54%, respectively. A total of 17 patients (20%) had previously undergone resection of liver metastasis. No significant differences were found in the distribution of what were supposed to be the main variables between patients with and without previous hepatic metastases. Multivariate analysis identified the following statistically significant factors affecting survival: previous liver metastasectomy (p=0.03), tumour-infiltrated pulmonary lymph nodes (p=0.04), disease-free interval ≥ 48 months (p=0.03), and presence of more than one lung metastasis (p<0.01). In patients with previous liver metastasis, the shorter the time between primary colorectal surgery and the hepatectomy, the lower the survival rate after pulmonary metastasectomy (p=0.048). M A N U S C R I P T A C C E P T E D ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT M A N U S C R I P T A C C E P T E D ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Conclusions:A previous history of liver metastasis shortens survival after lung metastasectomy. The time between hepatic resection and lung metastasectomy does not affect survival; however, patients with synchronous liver metastasis and colorectal neoplasia have poorer survival rates than those with metachronous disease.

SARS-CoV-2 has been associated with an increased rate of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients. Since surgical patients are already at higher risk of venous thromboembolism than general populations, this study aimed to determine if patients with peri-operative or prior SARS-CoV-2 were at further increased risk of venous thromboembolism. We conducted a planned sub-study and analysis from an international, multicentre, prospective cohort study of elective and emergency patients undergoing surgery during October 2020. Patients from all surgical specialties were included. The primary outcome measure was venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis) within 30 days of surgery. SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was defined as peri-operative (7 days before to 30 days after surgery); recent (1-6 weeks before surgery); previous (≥7 weeks before surgery); or none. Information on prophylaxis regimens or pre-operative anti-coagulation for baseline comorbidities was not available. Postoperative venous thromboembolism rate was 0.5% (666/123,591) in patients without SARS-CoV-2; 2.2% (50/2317) in patients with peri-operative SARS-CoV-2; 1.6% (15/953) in patients with recent SARS-CoV-2; and 1.0% (11/1148) in patients with previous SARS-CoV-2. After adjustment for confounding factors, patients with peri-operative (adjusted odds ratio 1.5 (95%CI 1.1-2.0)) and recent SARS-CoV-2 (1.9 (95%CI 1.2-3.3)) remained at higher risk of venous thromboembolism, with a borderline finding in previous SARS-CoV-2 (1.7 (95%CI 0.9-3.0)). Overall, venous thromboembolism was independently associated with 30-day mortality ). In patients with SARS-CoV-2, mortality without venous thromboembolism was 7.4% (319/4342) and with venous thromboembolism was 40.8% (31/76). Patients undergoing surgery with peri-operative or recent SARS-CoV-2 appear to be at increased risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism compared with patients with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Optimal venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment are unknown in this cohort of patients, and these data should be interpreted accordingly.

Spontaneous pneumothorax is an extremely frequent pathology. Despite this, there is still no clear consensus on managing these patients. Therefore, we perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of percutaneous aspiration compared with tube drainage for treating idiopathic spontaneous pneumothorax. Controlled, randomised clinical trials were selected, in which the effectiveness of percutaneous aspiration is compared with that of chest tube drainage, in terms of resolution of the pneumothorax and rates of relapse and hospital admission. Relevant articles were identified by searching electronic databases (e.g., Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, mRCT and Pascal), as well as the references of the papers found in this manner, with a cut-off date of April 2009. Quality was assessed by two independent evaluators, using the CASPe appraisal tool. Effectiveness of percutaneous aspiration is compared with that of chest tube drainage, in terms of resolution of the pneumothorax and rates of relapse and hospital admission.

No abstract