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.

Background COVID-19 is still a global challenge in regard for management and therapy. Pulmonary embolism (PE) seems to have a higher prevalence in COVID-19 instead of non-COVID patients. Clinical and laboratory parameters related with PE are still unknown. Methods We conducted a retrospective unicentre study in Alto Vicentino Hospital between March 1st, 2020, and January 31st, 2021 in patients admitted for COVID-19 tested with a RT-PCR nasal swab. Data about patients studied with computed tomography pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) because of PE suspicion were collected, as their clinical and laboratory parameters too. Results 2621 patients were admitted for COVID-19 in Alto Vicentino Hospital between March 1st, 2020, and January 31st, 2021 and in 267 of them a CTPA was performed finding 50 PE (18.7%). Only non-Caucasian race (OR = 5.44; 95% CI 1.22–24.35; p = 0.027) and previous VTE (OR = 5.3; 95% CI 1.09–26.17; p = 0.039) were found to be independently associated with PE. Conclusion PE is a frequent complication of COVID-19 and clinician need high degree of suspicion because clinical and laboratoristic parameters cannot drive diagnosis.

Background Approximately 70% of cancer‐related deaths occur in low‐ and middle‐income countries. In addition to social and racial inequalities, treatment options in these countries are usually limited because of the lack of trained staff and equipment, limited patient access to health services, and a small number of clinical guidelines. Objectives The Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology developed this guideline to address these barriers and guide physicians treating patients with endometrial cancer (EC) in regions with limited resources and few specialized centers. Methods The guideline was prepared from 10 January to 25 October 20192019 by a multidisciplinary team of 56 experts to discuss the main obstacles faced by EC patients in Brazil. Thirteen questions considered critical to the surgical treatment of these patients were defined. The questions were assigned to groups that reviewed the literature and drafted preliminary recommendations. Following a review by the coordinators and a second review by all participants, the groups made final adjustments for presentations in meetings, classified the level of evidence, and voted on the recommendations. Results For all questions including staging, fertility spearing treatment, genetic testing, sentinel lymph node use, surgical treatment, and other clinical relevant questions, major agreement was achieved by the participants, always using accessible alternatives. Conclusions It is possible to provide adequate treatment for most EC patients in resource‐limited areas, but the first option should be referral to specialized centers with more resources.