Introduction The emergence of the novel coronavirus Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the coronavirus disease COVID-19 has impacted enormously on non-COVID-19-related hospital care. Curtailment of intensive care unit (ICU) access threatens complex surgery, particularly impacting on outcomes for time-sensitive cancer surgery. Oesophageal cancer surgery is a good example. This study explored the impact of the pandemic on process and shortterm surgical outcomes, comparing the first wave of the pandemic from April to June in 2020 with the same period in 2019. Methods Data from all four Irish oesophageal cancer centres were reviewed. All patients undergoing resection for oesophageal malignancy from 1 April to 30 June inclusive in 2020 and 2019 were included. Patient, disease, and peri-operative outcomes (including COVID-19 infection) were compared. Results In 2020, 45 patients underwent oesophagectomy, and 53 in the equivalent period in 2019. There were no differences in patient demographics, co-morbidities, or use of neoadjuvant therapy. The median time to surgery from neoadjuvant therapy was 8 weeks in both 2020 and 2019. There were no significant differences in operative interventions between the two time periods. There was no difference in operative morbidity in 2020 and 2019 (28% vs 40%, p = 0.28). There was no in-hospital mortality in either period. No patient contracted COVID-19 in the perioperative period. Conclusions Continuing surgical resection for oesophageal cancer was feasible and safe during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland. The national response to this threat was therefore successful by these criteria in the curative management of oesophageal cancer.

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Complications following oesophagogastric surgery have significant implications for patient recovery. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> identify cost-effective biomarkers which can predict morbidity. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Analysis of all upper gastrointestinal resections in Galway University Hospital from 2014 to 2018 was performed. The ability of C-reactive protein (CRP), neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and CRP-lymphocyte ratio (CLR) to predict morbidity, including anastomotic leak (AL), was assessed and compared. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Seventy-one oesophagectomies and 77 gastrectomies were performed. There were 2 (1%) 30-day mortalities and 83 (56%) morbidities of which 30 (20%) were of Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher. The rate of major morbidity within the oesophagectomy cohort was 27% and was 14% in the gastrectomy cohort. There were 11 (7%) ALs, 7 in the oesophagectomy cohort, and 4 in the gastrectomy cohort. From post-operative day (POD) 2 onwards, CRP could predict AL (POD2 AUC = 0.705, <i>p =</i> 0.025; POD3 AUC = 0.757, <i>p</i> = 0.005, POD4 AUC = 0.811, <i>p</i> = 0.001; and POD5 AUC = 0.824, <i>p</i> = 0.001). CLR predicted AL on POD2 onwards (POD2 AUC = 0.722, <i>p</i> = 0.005; POD3 AUC = 0.736, <i>p =</i> 0.01; POD4 AUC = 0.775, <i>p</i> = 0.003; and POD5 AUC = 0.817, <i>p</i> = 0.001). CRP level of 218 mg/dL and CLR level of 301 at POD 2 generated negative predictive values of 97 and 98%, respectively, for AL. Post-operative NLR did not display sufficient discriminatory ability for the outcomes. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> CRP and CLR are reliable negative predictors of major morbidity, including AL, after oesophagogastric resection. Their use can inform patient intervention and recovery.

No abstract

Introduction Textbook outcomes (TBO) are composite measures of care which may be superior in assessing quality compared to traditional methods. We aim to define TBO which are specific to surgical resection of colorectal liver metastases, and investigate their impact on survival. Methods Single center analysis of all liver resections performed at our center from 2009 to 2020. A Cox model was used to identify perioperative outcomes which impacted on overall survival. These were retained with important postoperative outcomes to form a “TBO.” The impact of a TBO on overall survival was investigated using Kaplan−Meier curve analysis. Results TBO was achieved in 72.2% (197/273) of resections. Major morbidity (Clavien−Dindo ≥3) at 19.4% was the major limiting factor in not achieving a TBO. TBO was associated with improved 3‐year (77% vs. 55%), 5‐year (60.7% vs. 42.5%), and median (93 vs. 44 months) overall survival (log‐rank test, p = 0.006). Multivariable analysis revealed age >65 years, American Society of Anaesthesiologists Grade III–IV, and resection of >2 segments as factors predictive of not achieving a TBO. Conclusion TBO is a useful composite measure in surgery for colorectal liver metastases. It can highlight areas which may be targeted for quality improvement and be useful as a tool to examine variation between centers. Achieving a TBO is associated with a significant improvement in survival.

Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries.