Society of Robotic Surgery review: recommendations regarding the risk of COVID‐19 transmission during minimally invasive surgery

Porter, James; Blau, Elliot; Gharagozloo, Farid; Martino, Martin A; Cerfolio, Robert J.; Duvvuri, Umamaheswar; Caceres, Aileen; Badani, Ketan K.; Bhayani, Sam B.; Collins, Justin; Coelho, Rafael F.; Rocco, Bernardo; Wiklund, Peter; Nathan, Senthil; Parra-Dávila, Eduardo; Ortiz-Ortiz, Carlos; Maes, Kris; Patel, Vipul

doi:10.1111/bju.15105

Cited by 42 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Since April 1, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration has approved rapid testing based on IgM and IgG antibodies [29]. Test result may be available within 20 min and the test has been currently approved as an adjunct to PCR testing with a sensitivity of 93.8% [30]. Although there is no worldwide approval for the antibody test, it may be helpful before surgery in increasing sensitivity and determine asymptomatic carriers [30].…”

Section: Surgerymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Management of prostate cancer patients during COVID-19 pandemic

Öbek

Doğanca

Argun

et al. 2020

Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prostate cancer patients' management demands prioritization, adjustments, and a tailored approach during the unprecedented SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Benefit of care from treatment must be carefully weighed against the potential of infection and morbidity from COVID-19. Furthermore, urologists need to be cognizant of their obligation for wise consumption of restricted healthcare resources and protection of the safety of their coworkers. Nonurgent in-person clinic visits should be postponed or conducted remotely via phone or teleconference. Prostate cancer screening, imaging, and biopsies may be suspended in general. Treatment may be safely deferred in low and intermediate risk patients. Surgery may be delayed in most high-risk patients and neoadjuvant ADT is generally not advocated prior to surgery. Initiation of long-term ADT coupled with EBRT subsequent to the pandemic may be favored as a feasible alternative in high-risk and very high-risk disease. In patients with cN1 disease, treatment within 6 weeks is advocated. Presurgery assessment should include testing for COVID-19 and preferably a chest imaging. In the presence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, surgery should be postponed whenever possible. All protective measurements suggested by national/international authorities must to be diligently followed during perioperative period. Strict precautions specific to laparoscopic/robotic surgery are required, considering the unproven but potential risk of aerosolization of SARS-CoV-2 virus and spillage with pneumoperitoneum. Regarding radiotherapy, shortest safe EBRT regimen should be favored and prophylactic whole pelvic RT and brachytherapy avoided. Chemotherapy should be avoided whenever possible.

show abstract

Section: Surgerymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even in the presence of a negative COVID-19 PCR test result, all recommendations to mitigate SARS-CoV-2 transmission must be diligently followed, due to the likelihood of false-negative test results [30,32]. Only essential staff should participate in surgical case without exchange of room personnel.…”

Section: Surgerymentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of prostate cancer patients during COVID-19 pandemic

Öbek

Doğanca

Argun

et al. 2020

Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A summary of all guidelines with the origin of their country, academic association, type of study, type of evidence, and recommendations based on various surgical/technical parameters are shown in Table 2 [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rapid Scoping Review of Laparoscopic Surgery Guidelines During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Appraisal Using a Simple Quality Appraisal Tool “EMERGE”

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The theoretical danger of virus transmission during laparoscopic surgery (LS) via surgical smoke and laparoscopy gas has led to the formulation of many guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic. This rapid scoping review of these guidelines was done to assess the quality of their evidence and appraise them for their impact on surgical services from the global south. A simple quality appraisal tool was constructed which can be used to evaluate rapidly emerging guidelines for evidence as well as for the needs of the global south. This rapid scoping review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews protocol. Electronic databases were searched with predefined strategy and retrieved papers were screened according to relevant criteria. A simple objective tool to assess the quality of rapidly emerging guidelines including evidence, methodology, ease, resource optimization, geography, and the economy was constructed. Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. None of the guidelines qualified to be evidence-based clinical practice guidelines as the level of evidence was uniformly rated "low". A newly constructed tool showed good validation, reliability, and internal consistency. This rapid scoping review found two major research gaps: lack of systematic review of evidence during their development and insufficient weightage of their impact on surgical services from the global south. These significant issues were addressed by constructing a simple and more representative tool for evaluating rapidly emerging guidelines which also gives the rightful importance of their impact on surgical services from the global south.

show abstract

“…Porter et al suggested in a recent review that every patient should be managed as COVID-19 positive and one of the first recommendations in personal protection equipment (PPE) in the daily routine in and outside of the hospital is the use of a mask [22]. According to a German survey by Paffenholz et al only a minority of respondents experienced a regular or continuous shortage of masks or gowns with no significant differences between university and regional hospitals [23].…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%