Major Urological Cancer Surgery for Patients is Safe and Surgical Training Should Be Encouraged During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multicentre Analysis of 30-day Outcomes

COVID-19 and Mortality in the Global Surgical Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

To date, no systematic review or meta-analysis has comprehensively estimated the risk of mortality by surgery type on an international scale. We aim to delineate the risk of mortality in patients with COVID-19 who undergo surgery.

METHODS

PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, OVID, the World Health Organization Global Literature on Coronavirus Disease, and Corona-Central databases were searched from December 2019 through January 2022. Studies providing data on mortality in patients undergoing surgery were included. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines for abstracting data were followed and performed independently by two reviewers. The main outcome was mortality in patients with COVID-19.

RESULTS

Of a total of 4023 studies identified, 46 studies with 80,015 patients met our inclusion criteria. The mean age was 67 y; 57% were male. Surgery types included general (14.9%), orthopedic (23.4%), vascular (6.4%), thoracic (10.6%), and urologic (8.5%). Patients undergoing surgery with COVID-19 elicited a nine-fold increased risk of mortality (relative risk [RR] 8.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.96-16.32) over those without COVID-19. In low-income and middle-income countries (RR: 16.04, 95% CI: 4.59-56.12), the mortality risk was twice as high compared to high-income countries (RR: 7.50, 95% CI: 4.30-13.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality risk in surgical patients with COVID-19 compared to those without is increased almost 10-fold. The risk was highest in low-income and middle-income countries compared to high-income countries, suggesting a disproportionate effect of the pandemic on resource-constrained regions.

Safe Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) has had an enormous impact on all aspects of healthcare, but its effect on patients needing surgery and surgeons has been disproportionate. In this review, we aim to understand the impact of the pandemic on surgical patients and teams. We compiled the emerging data on pre-operative screening methods, vaccinations, safe-surgery pathways and surgical techniques and make recommendations for evidence-based safe-surgical pathways. We also present surgical outcomes for emergency, oncological and benign surgery in the context of the pandemic. Finally, we attempt to address the impact of the pandemic on patients, staff and surgical training and provide perspectives for the future.

RECENT FINDINGS

Surgical teams have developed consensus guidelines and established research priorities and safety precautions for surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence supports that surgery in patients with a peri-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection carries substantial risks, but risk mitigation strategies are effective at reducing harm to staff and patients. Surgery has increased risk for patients and staff, but this can be mitigated effectively, especially for elective surgery. Elective surgery can be safely performed during the COVID-19 pandemic employing the strategies discussed in this review.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) on Fixed Operating Room Times in Urologic Surgeries

Objective

To evaluate the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, on operating room (OR) efficiency for urologic procedures using the concept of fixed OR times.

Patients and Methods

Over a 24-month period, urology OR data were prospectively collected. Operations were divided into fixed and variable time points. The fixed OR times were in-roomw to anesthesia-release time, anesthesia-release to cut time, in-room to cut time, and close to wheels-out time. Data from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2019, were pre-COVID-19 data, and data from April 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020, were post-COVID-19 data. Operations were grouped into endoscopic, implant, major open, and robotic-assisted cases. In the post-COVID-19 era, all patients had a negative polymerase chain reaction test result within 48 hours of operation. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to compare the fixed OR times between the pre- and post-COVID-19 eras.

Results

A total of 3189 procedures were evaluated: 2058 endoscopic operations (1124 in the pre-COVID-19 era and 934 in the post-COVID-19 era), 343 implant procedures (192 in the pre-COVID-19 era and 151 in the post-COVID-19 era), 222 major open procedures (119 in the pre-COVID-19 era and 103 in the post-COVID-19 era), and 566 robotic-assisted procedures (338 in the pre-COVID-19 era and 228 in the post-COVID-19 era). There were no fixed OR times in any of the examined groups that were negatively impacted by COVID-19. The percentage of the total OR time occupied by fixed OR variables in the pre-COVID-19 era was 40.6% for endoscopic operations, 41.1% for implant procedures, 29.8% for major open procedures, and 21.8% for robotic-assisted procedures.

Conclusion

A substantial portion of the total OR time includes fixed time points. Furthermore, COVID-19 did not have a negative impact on fixed OR times in a negative testing environment. Urologic OR efficiency should be maintained in the post-COVID-19 era.

Lessons learned after one year of COVID-19 from a urologist and radiotherapist view: A German survey on prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment

Introduction

Since the beginning of the pandemic in 2020, COVID-19 has changed the medical landscape. International recommendations for localized prostate cancer (PCa) include deferred treatment and adjusted therapeutic routines.

Materials and methods

To longitudinally evaluate changes in PCa treatment strategies in urological and radiotherapy departments in Germany, a link to a survey was sent to 134 institutions covering two representative baseline weeks prior to the pandemic and 13 weeks from March 2020 to February 2021. The questionnaire captured the numbers of radical prostatectomies, prostate biopsies and case numbers for conventional and hypofractionation radiotherapy. The results were evaluated using descriptive analyses.

Results

A total of 35% of the questionnaires were completed. PCa therapy increased by 6% in 2020 compared to 2019. At baseline, a total of 69 radiotherapy series and 164 radical prostatectomies (RPs) were documented. The decrease to 60% during the first wave of COVID-19 particularly affected low-risk PCa. The recovery throughout the summer months was followed by a renewed reduction to 58% at the end of 2020. After a gradual decline to 61% until July 2020, the number of prostate biopsies remained stable (89% to 98%) during the second wave. The use of RP fluctuated after an initial decrease without apparent prioritization of risk groups. Conventional fractionation was used in 66% of patients, followed by moderate hypofractionation (30%) and ultrahypofractionation (4%). One limitation was a potential selection bias of the selected weeks and the low response rate.

Conclusion

While the diagnosis and therapy of PCa were affected in both waves of the pandemic, the interim increase between the peaks led to a higher total number of patients in 2020 than in 2019. Recommendations regarding prioritization and fractionation routines were implemented heterogeneously, leaving unexplored potential for future pandemic challenges.

Impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on urological cancers: The surgical experience of two cancer hubs in London and Milan

Objective

Materials and Methods

Results

Conclusion

The impact of COVID-19 on surgical volume and surgical training at a high-volume pelvic oncology centre

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has overwhelmed most health services. As a result, many surgeries have been deferred and diagnoses delayed. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic at a high-volume pelvic oncology centre.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of clinical activity from 2017 to 2020. We compared caseload for index procedures 2017-2019 (period 1) versus 2020 (period 2) to see the effect of the COVID pandemic. We then compared the activity during the first lockdown (March 23rd) to the rest of the year when we increased our theatre access by utilising a 'clean' site.

RESULTS

The average annual number of robotic assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) performed during period 1 was 82 and 352 respectively. This reduced to 68 (17.1% reduction) and 262 (25.6% reduction) during period 2. The number of patients who underwent prostate brachytherapy decreased from 308 to 243 (21% reduction). The number of prostate biopsies decreased from 420 to 234 (44.3% reduction). The number of radical orchidectomies decreased from 18 to 11 (39% reduction). The mean number of RARC and RARP per month during period 2 was 5.5 and 22. This decreased to 4 and 9 per month during the first national lockdown but was maintained thereafter despite two further lockdowns.

CONCLUSION

There has been a substantial decrease in urological oncology caseload during the COVID pandemic. The use of alternate pathways such as 'clean' sites can ensure continuity of care for cancer surgery and training needs.