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.

No abstract

Objectives To compare the accuracy of transvaginal sonography (TVS)

Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index <20), moderate lockdowns (20–60), and full lockdowns (>60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04384926 . Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include...

No abstract

PurposeThe aim of this study was to help with the process of selecting patients with advanced ovarian cancer to undergo cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) by analyzing outcome data at distinct clinical time points reflecting the natural history of the disease.MethodsIn a retrospective Italian multicenter study investigating patients with advanced ovarian cancer who underwent CRS plus HIPEC between 1998 and 2014, we analyzed data for consecutive patients at eight treatment time points: primary debulking surgery (PDS); interval debulking surgery after partial response, after no response, and after a pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy; first recurrence with a progression-free interval >12, <12 months, or >12 months in patients who underwent further chemotherapy before CRS and HIPEC; and patients who underwent two or more CRS procedures and chemotherapy lines before CRS and HIPEC.ResultsThe 511 enrolled patients underwent 3373 procedures; 72.6% achieved complete cytoreduction, with an overall major morbidity of 17.4%. At a median follow-up of 53.8 months, overall survival (OS) was 54.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 44–58.4) and progression-free (PFS) survival was 16.6 months (95% CI 14.7–19.1). Outcome analysis in patients in whom CRS plus HIPEC was used for primary advanced cancer or recurrent ovarian cancer showed significant differences in OS and PFS according to the time points analyzed. Multivariate analysis identified completeness of CRS, Peritoneal Cancer Index, and the times when patients underwent CRS plus HIPEC as independent prognostic factors.ConclusionsThis selective information on survival should help in interpreting the findings from ongoing randomized studies focusing on CRS plus HIPEC in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

PurposeTo investigate the prognostic value of posttreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) treated with concomitant chemoradiation therapy (CCRT). The secondary aim was to assess the possible role of intensity-based and volume-based PET parameters including SUVmax, SUVmean, MTV and TLG, and clinical parameters including age, pathology, FIGO stage and nodal involvement as factors predicting response to treatment.MethodsThis retrospective study included 82 patients affected by LACC treated with CCRT. All patients underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT both before and after treatment. The posttreatment PET/CT scans were used to classify patients as complete metabolic responders (CMR) or non-complete metabolic responders (N-CMR) according to the EORTC criteria. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to evaluate differences in overall survival (OS) between the CMR and N-CMR groups. Student’s t test, Pearson’s chi-squared test and logistic regression were used to investigate the possible value of PET and clinical parameters as predictors of metabolic response to therapy.ResultsKaplan­Meier analysis showed a highly significant difference in OS between the CMR and N-CMR groups (log-rank test p < 0.0001). Significant independent predictors of response to therapy were MTV (p = 0.019, odds ratio = 1.015, 95% CI = 1.002–1.028, Nagelkerke R2 = 0.110), TLG (p = 0.045, odds ratio = 1.001, 95% CI = 1.000–1.002, Nagelkerke R2 = 0.081) and nodal involvement (p = 0.088, odds ratio = 2.361, 95% CI = 0.879–6.343, Nagelkerke R2 = 0.051).Conclusion18F-FDG PET/CT-based response assessment using the EORTC criteria reliably predicts OS in LACC patients treated with CCRT. In our cohort of patients, pretreatment MTV and TLG and nodal involvement were predictors of response to therapy. MTV was the best predictor of response. However, its additional risk value seems to be low (MTV odds ratio = 1.015).

No abstract