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.

To describe cochlear implantation (CI) outcomes, with speech perception, auditory, language, and parent-reported auditory and speech behaviors, in children with an enlarged vestibular aqueduct (EVA) and incomplete partition type 2 (IP-II) and compare to control children without inner ear malformations (IEMs) and to determine cerebrospinal fluid gusher rates and effect on outcomes.Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and CINAHL databases were searched from inception to February 2020. Studies reporting relevant outcomes in children with EVA or EVA + IP-II and controls without IEMs undergoing CI were included. Mean differences in speech perception, auditory, and language scores between cases and controls were meta-analyzed. Gusher rates were determined by proportion meta-analyses.Results: Of 214 identified articles, 42 met inclusion criteria, evaluating 775 cases and 2,191 controls. Of -cases, 578 (74.6%) had EVA and 197 (25.4%) had EVA + IP-II. Cases showed a significant improvement in speech perception, auditory and language performance, comparable to controls. Parent-reported auditory and speech production behaviors outcomes were positive among cases and comparable to controls. Pooled gusher proportions in EVA and EVA + IP-II cases were 27.7% (95% CI: 17.6-39.1) and 48.6% (95% CI: 28.6-69.0), respectively, with a proportion difference of 20.9% (95% CI: 11.0-30.1). Gusher occurrence did not impact speech perception or language outcomes.Conclusion: Outcomes in children with EVA or EVA + IP-II undergoing CI are favorable and largely comparable to outcomes in children with hearing loss undergoing CI without IEMs. Intraoperative gusher is more prevalent among children with EVA + IP-II as compared to iEVA. Gusher does not influence speech perception and language development outcomes.

Objectives/Hypothesis Patient satisfaction is increasingly emphasized and measured in healthcare delivery. However, patient satisfaction is multifactorial and difficult to comprehensively assess. The objective of this study was to assess for correlation between patient satisfaction measured by Press Ganey surveys (PGS) and physician demographics of gender, years in practice, academic rank, and specialty in academic otolaryngology. Study Design Review of publicly available PGS scores in academic otolaryngology practice. Methods Public websites of academic otolaryngology departments were assessed for inclusion of PGS scores. Individual physician profiles were queried for years in practice, academic rank, and specialty. Gender was determined by picture or profile pronouns. Univariate and multivariate analyses compared PGS scores with studied variables. Results Forty‐seven of 113 (42.8%) academic practices publicly reported physician PGS score. Of 1,360 affiliated otolaryngologists, 742 (54.6%,592 male:150 female) revealed PGS scores. Average PGS score for male and female providers was equivalent (PGS = 4.73, P = .84). There was no significant difference in PGS scores by academic rank (P = .28). A weak statistically significant decrease in mean PGS scores was associated with longer duration of practice (r = −0.11, P = .018). Head and neck oncologic surgeons had higher mean PGS score in comparison to other specialties (PGS = 4.81, P < .05). General/comprehensive otolaryngologists had lower average PGS score (PGS = 4.66) in comparison to specialists (P < .05). Conclusions Physician gender and academic rank do not correlate with patient satisfaction in academic otolaryngology as measured by publicly reported PGS scores. Head and neck oncology is rated more highly than other specialties, and physicians in practice for longer demonstrate decreased PGS scores. With PGS scores tied to physician evaluation and reimbursement, investigation into the generalizability of PGS in otolaryngology is warranted. Level of Evidence NA Laryngoscope, 130: 1902–1906, 2020