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.

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.

Background25(OH) vitamin D levels may be low in patients with moderately or severely active inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD: Crohn’s disease and Idiopathic Ulcerative Colitis) but this is less clear in patients with mild or inactive IBD. Furthermore there is limited information of any family influence on 25(OH) vitamin D levels in IBD. As a possible risk factor we hypothesize that vitamin D levels may also be low in families of IBD patients.ObjectivesTo evaluate 25[OH] vitamin D levels in patients with IBD in remission or with mild activity. A second objective is to evaluate whether there are relationships within IBD family units of 25[OH] vitamin D and what are the influences associated with these levels.MethodsParticipants underwent medical history, physical examination and a 114 item diet questionnaire. Serum 25[OH] vitamin D was measured, using a radioimmunoassay kit, (replete ≥ 75, insufficient 50–74, deficient < 25–50, or severely deficient < 25 nmol/L). Associations between 25[OH] vitamin D and twenty variables were evaluated using univariate regression. Multivariable analysis was also applied and intrafamilial dynamics were assessed.Results55 patients and 48 controls with their respective families participated (N206). 25[OH] vitamin D levels between patients and controls were similar (71.2 ± 32.8 vs. 68.3 ±26.2 nmol/L). Vitamin D supplements significantly increased intake but correlation with serum 25[OH] vitamin D was significant only during non sunny months among patients. Within family units, patients’ families had mean replete levels (82.3 ± 34.2 nmol/L) and a modest correlation emerged during sunny months between patients and family (r2 =0.209 p = 0.032). These relationships were less robust and non significant in controls and their families.ConclusionsIn patients with mild or inactive IBD 25[OH] vitamin D levels are less than ideal but are similar to controls. Taken together collectively, the results of this study suggest that patient family dynamics may be different in IBD units from that in control family units. However contrary to the hypothesis, intra familial vitamin D dynamics do not pose additional risks for development of IBD.

Structured Abstract Background Despite extensive efforts to monitor and prevent surgical site infections (SSIs), real-time surveillance of clinical practice has been sparse and expensive or non-existent. However, natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning (i.e., Bayesian network analysis) may provide the methodology necessary to approach this issue in a new way. We investigated the ability to identify SSIs following colorectal surgery (CRS) through an automated detection system using a Bayesian network. Materials and Methods Patients who underwent CRS from 2010 to 2012 and were captured in our institutional American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) comprised our cohort. A Bayesian network was applied to detect SSIs using risk factors from ACS-NSQIP data and keywords extracted from clinical notes by NLP. Two surgeons provided expertise informing the Bayesian network to identify clinically meaningful SSIs (CM-SSIs) occurring within 30 days after surgery. Results We utilized data from 751 CRS cases experiencing 67 (8.9%) SSIs and 78 (10.4%) CM-SSIs. Our Bayesian network detected ACS-NSQIP-captured SSIs with an ROC area under the curve of 0.827, but this value increased to 0.892 when using surgeon-identified CM-SSIs. Conclusions A Bayesian network coupled with NLP has the potential to be used in real-time SSI surveillance. Moreover, surgeons identified CM-SSI not captured under current NSQIP definitions. Future efforts to expand CM-SSI identification may lead to improved and potentially automated approaches to survey for post-operative SSI in clinical practice.

No abstract