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.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in a lockdown in South East Scotland on 23 March 2020. This had an impact on the volume of benign elective surgery able to be undertaken. The degree to which this reduced hernia surgery was unknown. The aim of this study was to review the hernia surgery workload in the Lothian region of Scotland and assess the impact of COVID-19 on hernia surgery. MethodsThe Lothian Surgical Audit database was used to identify all elective and emergency hernia operations over a six-month period from 23 March 2020 and for the same time period in 2019. Data were collected on age, gender, anatomical location of the hernia, hernia repair technique, and whether elective or emergency operation. Statistical analysis was performed using the chi-squared test in R-Studio, with a p-value of <0.05 accepted as statistically significant. ResultsThe total number of hernia repairs reduced considerably between 2019 and 2020 (570 vs 149). The majority of this can be explained by a decrease in elective operating (488 vs 87), with the percentage of elective repairs reducing significantly from 85.6% to 58.4% (p<0.001). The inguinal hernia subgroup had a 24% rise in emergency operations from 21 to 26 operations, despite a reduction from 270 to 84 total inguinal repairs. There were just two elective hernia repairs carried out in the first three months of the 2020 study period (5.6% of all operations for April-June) compared to 265 (87.7%) for the same period in 2019 (p<0.001). No statistically significant differences were observed in the rates of laparoscopic versus open operating techniques across the two study periods on any analysis. The age and gender of the patients were similar over the two time periods. ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic led to a marked reduction in the number of elective hernia repairs (especially incisional hernia surgery), with the effect most pronounced over the first three months of lockdown. Despite an overall reduction in total emergency operative figures, possibly due to more widespread use of nonoperative strategies, there was still an increase in emergency inguinal hernia repairs during the lockdown. Further studies are needed to evaluate if the delays to elective operating will result in a long-term increase in the rates of emergency presentation.

The Mazon Creek region in Northeastern Illinois is home to a Middle Pennsylvanian (~307 million years old) soft-bodied fossil Lagerstätte of animals and plants that lived along a subtropical swampy coastline. This area was strip mined for coal from 1928 to 1974 and museum geologists and amateur collectors acquired large fossil collections during this time by collecting and splitting millions of nodules unearthed at the mines. These large collections are important because of the rarity of many of the species in the Mazon Creek biota. There are about 250 described fossil invertebrate species from the Mazon Creek region. Fifty-one of these species (mostly insects and arachnids) are represented by just a single specimen in the Field Museum’s collection. Since the 1980’s collecting has decreased and the mines have been restored to parks and wildlife areas. The Field Museum maintained a collection of 34,000 Mazon Creek invertebrate fossil for many decades. With the new donations from private collectors in the last three years this collection has grown by 20% and now represents 18% of the Fossil Invertebrate systematic collection. The Mazon Creek is also the most used fossil invertebrate collection accounting for about 38% of loans in the last five years. Dealing with these large and often unexpected donations adds to the already large workload of the collection staff, so interns and volunteers are utilized to process, catalog, digitize, and integrate these fossils into the museum’s collection. In the summer of 2016, interns Mackenzie Best and Yaal Dryer unpacked and sorted into drawers the Thomas V. Testa collection, and digitized the first 1,000 fossils. In 2017, two Women in Science interns, Kate Hodge and Dana Kahn, spent 6 weeks entering the data for 5,000 fossils into our database, numbering these fossils, and printing their labels. Having a well curated collection, as well as volunteer Jack Wittry, who has expert knowledge of Mazon Creek fossils, has also been crucial to the success of these projects. Mane Pritza, a Field Museum volunteer, began photographing these collections and has captured over 11,000 images. Janel Nelson, a former volunteer, has uploaded these images into our multimedia database and linked them to the corresponding records in the catalog module. James and Sylvia Konecny donated their 4,000-specimen Mazon Creek collection in December of 2017, ensuring that interns and volunteers will continue their curation work for at least the next two years.

Aims This audit aimed to assess pre-operative NELA risk score documentation and subsequent specialist peri-operative critical care involvement. Methods This complete audit cycle retrospectively reviewed notes (electronic patient records, anaesthetic charts and CEPOD booking forms) of all patients undergoing emergency laparotomy between March and May 2019. The NELA score was calculated retrospectively if not documented. Following the initial audit, the following multi-disciplinary interventions were instituted: alteration of the physical CEPOD booking form to include NELA score (Surgical); a sticker added to anaesthetic charts to prompt NELA calculation (Anaesthetic), formal recording of NELA score during theatre brief (Theatre staff); and by increasing awareness of NELA via departmental education (All). The audit cycle was completed by reassessment between October and November 2020. Results The initial cycle included 34 patients, with only 2 (6%) having a NELA documented. The repeat cycle included 35 patients, with 29 (83%) having a NELA documented. Regarding post-operative critical care admissions, both cycles found that 100% of patients with a NELA of ≥ 5%, were admitted to either surgical HDU or ICU (n = 17 in first cycle, n = 17 in second cycle). For those with a high-risk NELA of ≥ 10% (n = 11 in first cycle, n = 7 in second cycle), only 2 (18%) were admitted to ICU in the first cycle vs 7 (100%) in the second cycle. Conclusions This complete audit cycle demonstrates improved NELA score calculation following institution of several multidisciplinary interventions. The improved NELA score uptake was associated with increased critical care review and admission to ITU in high-risk cases.