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.

Findings from the present systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that sialendoscopy is efficacious, safe, and gland preserving for the treatment of obstructive major salivary gland disease.

Objectives. To evaluate tobacco smoking cessation interventions and cessation rates in the oncology population through a systematic review and meta-analysis.Data Sources. The literature was searched using PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (inception to October 2012) by 3 independent review authors.Review Methods. Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective cohort (PCs) studies evaluating tobacco smoking cessation interventions with patients assigned to a usual care or an intervention group. The primary outcome measure was smoking cessation rates. Two authors extracted data independently for each study. When applicable, disagreements were resolved by consensus.Results. The systematic review identified 10 RCTs and 3 PCs. Statistical analysis was conducted using StatsDirect software (Cheshire, UK). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) for smoking cessation interventions were calculated in 2 groups based on follow-up duration. The therapeutic interventions included counseling, nicotine replacement therapy, buproprion, and varenicline. Smoking cessation interventions had a pooled odds ratio of 1.54 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.909-2.64) for patients in the shorter follow-up group and 1.31 (95% CI, 0.931-1.84) in the longer follow-up group. Smoking cessation interventions in the perioperative period had a pooled odds ratio of 2.31 (95% CI, 1.32-4.07). Conclusion.Our systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate that tobacco cessation interventions in the oncology population, in both the short-term and long-term follow-up groups, do not significantly affect cessation rates. The perioperative period, though, may represent an important teachable moment with regard to smoking cessation. C igarette smoking and alcohol consumption synergistically increase the risk of developing squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.1,2 Tobacco carcinogens also further advance the molecular progression of squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck.1,2 Cigarette smoking has been related to approximately 90% of diagnoses of lung cancer in countries with a high prevalence of smoking. Furthermore, the increased incidence of lung cancer from smoking is proportional to the length and intensity of smoking history.3 Smoking cessation is particularly important for patients who have smoking-related cancers, such as head and neck or lung cancer. 3,4 Persistent tobacco smoking in the oncology population has a multitude of adverse effects during the treatment of the malignancy, increases the risk of a recurrence or a second primary tumor, and reduces survival. 5,6 These risks are particularly apparent in patients with head and neck or lung cancer. Cigarette smoking also increases the perioperative risks of general anesthesia, poor wound healing, and cardiovascular events. 7-9490886O TOXXX10

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is variation in the literature in regard to the occurrence of unilateral vocal fold paralysis (UVFP) after congenital cardiothoracic surgery. The objective of this study was to identify and appraise the evidence for the occurrence of UVFP after congenital cardiothoracic surgery in a meta-analysis.METHOD: A comprehensive search strategy in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted, limited to English publications. Two independent reviewers screened studies for eligibility criteria. Of the 162 identified studies, 32 (20%) met the inclusion criteria. Using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine guidelines, 2 reviewers appraised the level of evidence, extracted data, and resolved discrepancies by consensus. Weighted pooled proportion and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are reported.

Background. Tobacco smoking cessation interventions in the oncology population are an important part of comprehensive treatment plan. Objectives. To evaluate through a systematic review smoking cessation interventions and cessation rates in cancer patients. Search Strategy. The literature was searched using Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (inception to November 2010) by three independent review authors. Selection Criteria. Studies were included if tobacco smoking cessation interventions were evaluated and patients were randomized to usual care or an intervention. The primary outcome measure was cessation rates. Data Collection and Analysis. Two authors extracted data independently for each paper, with disagreements resolved by consensus. Main Results. The systematic review found eight RCTs investigating smoking cessation interventions in the oncology patient population. Pooled relative risks were calculated from two groups of RCTs of smoking cessation interventions based on followup duration. In both groups, the pooled relative risk did not suggest a statistically significant improvement in tobacco cessation compared to usual care. Conclusions. Our review demonstrates that recent interventions in the last decade which are a combination of non-pharmacological and pharmacological approaches yield a statistically significant improvement in smoking cessation rates compared to usual care.