Background: Surgeons urgently need guidance on how to deliver surgical services safely and effectively during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim was to identify the key domains that should be considered when developing pandemic preparedness plans for surgical services. Methods: A scoping search was conducted to identify published articles relating to management of surgical patients during pandemics. Key informant interviews were conducted with surgeons and anaesthetists with direct experience of working during infectious disease outbreaks, in order to identify key challenges and solutions to delivering effective surgical services during the COVID-19 pandemic.Results: Thirteen articles were identified from the scoping search, and surgeons and anaesthetists representing 11 territories were interviewed. To mount an effective response to COVID-19, a pandemic response plan for surgical services should be developed in advance. Key domains that should be included are: provision of staff training (such as patient transfers, donning and doffing personal protection equipment, recognizing and managing COVID-19 infection); support for the overall hospital response to COVID-19 (reduction in non-urgent activities such as clinics, endoscopy, non-urgent elective surgery); establishment of a team-based approach for running emergency services; and recognition and management of COVID-19 infection in patients treated as an emergency and those who have had surgery. A backlog of procedures after the end of the COVID-19 pandemic is inevitable, and hospitals should plan how to address this effectively to ensure that patients having elective treatment have the best possible outcomes.
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.
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) first emerged in the fall of 2019 and has since become a global pandemic. This virus, which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has led to over 4.8 million infections and 316,000 deaths worldwide to date. 1 Prior studies have demonstrated advanced age, chronic cardiopulmonary diseases, immunosuppression and obesity as potential risk factors for worse clinical outcomes among patients with COVID-19-with mortality often driven by disease-associated cardiopulmonary failure. 2,3 While the virus primarily affects the lungs, experience from China and the USA also suggests that SARS-CoV-2 may impact extra-pulmonary systems, including the gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary systems. 4,5 Chronic liver disease (CLD), including non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), alcohol-related liver disease and chronic viral hepatitis, comprise a large global burden of disease. 6 Published reports indicate that up to half of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 have abnormal aminotransferase levels and 2%-11% have underlying liver conditions. 7-12 A meta-analysis of 11 observational studies of 2034 adults with COVID-19 from China revealed an overall CLD prevalence of 3%. 13 However, there are limited reports on the nature of liver disease among COVID-19 patients and it remains unclear how underlying CLD influences hepatic injury and clinical outcomes in these patients. Higher rates of liver dysfunction have been observed in patients with more severe cases of COVID-19 and among those requiring admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). 12,14 Given the high prevalence of NAFLD in the USA, as well as metabolic syndrome and
Background and Aims Therapeutic drug monitoring [TDM] has proven to be effective for optimising anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF] therapy in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. Nevertheless, the majority of data refer to infliximab and reactive testing or association studies. We aimed to compare the long-term outcome of patients with IBD who received at least one proactive TDM of adalimumab, with standard of care, defined as empirical dose escalation and/or reactive TDM. Methods This was a multicentre retrospective cohort study. Patients on maintenance adalimumab therapy from June 2006 to December 2015 were eligible. We analysed time to treatment failure from start of adalimumab until the end of follow-up [July 2016]. Treatment failure was defined as drug discontinuation for secondary loss of response or serious adverse event or need for IBD-related surgery. Serum adalimumab concentrations and antibodies to adalimumab were measured using the Prometheus homogeneous mobility shift assay. Results A total of 382 patients with IBD [Crohn’s disease, n = 311, 81%] were included and received either at least one proactive TDM [n = 53] or standard of care [empirical dose escalation, n = 279; reactive TDM, n = 50]. Patients were followed for a median of 3.1 years [interquartile range, 1.4–4.8 years]. Multiple Cox regression analyses showed that at least one proactive TDM was independently associated with a reduced risk for treatment failure (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.2–0.9; p = 0.022). Conclusions This multicentre, retrospective cohort study reflecting real-life clinical practice provides the first evidence that proactive TDM of adalimumab may be associated with a lower risk of treatment failure compared with standard of care in patients with IBD.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.