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.

There is significant shrinkage of mucosal margins after surgery. Hence this should be considered and appropriate margins should be taken at initial resection to prevent the agony of post-operative positive surgical margins.

Pancreatic anastomotic leak is the single most important factor responsible for the considerable morbidity and mortality associated with pancreaticoduodenectomy. Management of the pancreatic remnant is controversially discussed, reflecting the complexity of anastomosing a pancreas of different textures to the digestive tract. A number of studies evaluating diverse options have often provided conflicting conclusions. This information is confusing particularly to those surgeons outside of large-volume centers with broad experience and to general surgeons who perform pancreatic surgery. A PubMed search with the key words pancreaticoduodenectomy, pancreatic anastomosis, pancreaticojejunostomy, pancreaticogastrostomy, and pancreatic fistula was performed. Major series of pancreatic anastomosis published between 1990 and 2002 were studied from diverse centers worldwide. Their results with regard to pancreatic fistula, morbidity, and mortality were documented. Nine series of pancreaticojejunostomy and seven series of pancreaticogastrostomy were evaluated. Eight comparative studies evaluating the two techniques were also analyzed. A single randomized controlled trial was identified among these comparative studies. Equally good results were observed with the two techniques. Other uncommon methods of management of the pancreatic remnant (duct occlusion and ligation) were also evaluated. Pancreaticojejunostomy followed by pancreaticogastrostomy are the most favored techniques. A duct-to-mucosa anastomosis is preferred over other methods. Fistula rates of less than 5%-10% should be the standard irrespective of the technique used. Unlike in the past, mortality can be reduced even in the event of an anastomotic dehiscence, and this aspect is primarily dependent on a meticulous anastomosis based on sound surgical principles rather than the method per se. Based on the information accumulated, adherence to these specific principles could ensure a safe and reliable pancreatic anastomosis with mimimal morbidity and mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy, even in the hands of general surgeons operating outside high-volume centers.

Background: Overburdened systems and concerns of adverse outcomes have resulted in deferred cancer surgeries with devastating consequences. In this COVID pandemic, the decision to continue elective cancer surgeries, and their subsequent outcomes, are sparsely reported from hotspots. Methods: A prospective database of the Department of Surgical Oncology was analysed from March 23rd to April 30th, 2020. Findings: Four hundred ninety-four elective surgeries were performed (377 untested and 117 tested for Covid 19 before surgery). Median age was 48 years with 13% (n ¼ 64) above the age of 60 years. Sixty-eight percent patients were American Society of Anaesthesiology (ASA) grade I. As per surgical complexity grading, 71 (14Á4%) cases were lower grade (I-III) and 423 (85.6%) were higher grade complex surgeries (IV-VI). Clavien-Dindo ! grade III complications were 5.6% (n ¼ 28) and there were no postoperative deaths. Patients >60 years documented 9.3% major complications compared to 5.2% in <60 years (P ¼ 0.169). The median hospital stay was 1 to 9 days across specialties. Postoperatively, 26 patients were tested for COVID 19 and 6 tested positive. They all had higher grade surgeries but none required escalated or intensive care treatment related to COVID infection. Interpretation: A combination of scientific and administrative rationale contributed to favorable outcomes after major elective cancer surgeries. These results support the continuation of elective major cancer surgery in regions with Covid 19 trends similar to India.

No abstract

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.

No abstract

Central venous catheters (CVCs) represent a significant source of infection in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and can add to the cost of care, morbidity, and mortality. Organisms forming biofilms on the inner surface of catheters require a much higher local antibiotic concentration to clear the pathogen growth. Antibiotic lock therapy (ALT) represents one such strategy to achieve such high intraluminal concentrations of antibiotics and can facilitate catheter salvage. Patients with catheter colonization (CC) or hemodynamically stable catheter‐related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) received ALT per institutional policy. We analyzed the incidence of CC and CRBSI and salvage rate of tunneled CVCs (Hickman) with ALT in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplant in this retrospective study. Catheter colonization was noted in 9.8% and CRBSI in 10.7% patients. Gram‐negative bacilli (GNB) accounted for 45% and 83% of isolates in CC and CRBSI, respectively. In patients with CRBSI, the rate of catheter salvage with the use of ALT in addition to systemic antibiotics was 86% compared to 55% in patients with systemic antibiotics use only (P = 0.06). There was no CRBSI related mortality, and no increase in resistant strains was noted at subsequent CRBSI. In conclusion, ALT represents an important strategy for catheter salvage, especially for gram‐negative infections, in a carefully selected patient population.