COVID-19 guidance for triage of operations for thoracic malignancies: A consensus statement from Thoracic Surgery Outcomes Research Network

Safety of lung resection surgery after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection in the post-vaccination era

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the postoperative outcomes of lung resection in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and determine the optimal timing of surgery.

METHODS

This retrospective, single-centre cohort study included patients who underwent lung resection between June 2021 and June 2022. Patients were divided into the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and non-COVID-19 groups based on their preoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection history, and postoperative outcomes were compared. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify the risk factors of complications after lung resection surgery.

RESULTS

In total, 1194 patients were enrolled, of whom, 79 had a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In the COVID-19 group, 66 patients (90.4%) had received at least 1 vaccination dose. The average interval between infection and surgery was 67 days, with no significant impact on postoperative outcomes. Regarding postoperative outcomes, there were no significant differences in major complication rate (6.3% vs 5.4%, P = 0.613), respiratory complication rate (19.0% vs 12.2%, P = 0.079) or length of stays (4.9 ± 3.4 vs 5.0 ± 5.6, P = 0.992) between the 2 groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that age, male sex, poor pulmonary function test, open surgery and extensive lung resection were risk factors for postoperative complications, while preoperative COVID-19 infection status was not a statistically significant risk factor.

CONCLUSIONS

In the post-vaccination era, lung resection surgery can be safely performed shortly after SARS-CoV-2 infection, even within 4 weeks of infection.

Lessons learned by thoracic surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

The scale of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has necessitated healthcare systems to adapt and evolve, altering physician roles and expectations. Thoracic surgeons have seen practice changes from new COVID-19 consults to necessary delay and triage of elective care. The goal of this study was to understand the impact of COVID-19 on thoracic surgeon experiences in order to anticipate roles and changes in practice in future such circumstances.

Methods

Semi-structured, qualitative individual telephone interviews were conducted with thoracic surgeons. Interviews were structured to understand how surgeons were impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and to record lessons learned. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was achieved. Data were analyzed using matrix analysis.

Results

Eleven board-certified general thoracic surgeons from nine institutions were interviewed. Thoracic surgeon roles in COVID-19 care included critical care delivery, performing tracheostomies and establishing related protocols, and interventions for long-term airway complications. Attention was called to the impact of the pandemic on thoracic cancer: patients avoided hospitals because of concern over COVID-19, delaying care.

Conclusions

Thoracic surgeons played a critical role in the COVID-19 pandemic response in both technical patient care and administrative capacities. Primary care responsibilities included the development, administration and delivery of tracheostomy protocols, and the care of down-stream airway complications. Thoracic surgeons were critical in triage decisions to minimize the impact of COVID-19 on thoracic cancer care. Lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic may provide insight into opportunities to promote collaboration in thoracic surgery and facilitate improved care delivery in future settings of resource limitation.

The Influence of COVID-19 on New Lung Cancer Diagnoses, by Stage and Treatment, in Northern Italy

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on new cancer diagnoses. This study aims to evaluate the implications of the lockdown period on new lung cancer diagnoses in northern Italy. We compared 2020 with 2019 cancer registry data, reporting the variations by age, stage, and treatments. In 2020, 303 lung cancer cases were registered, 21 fewer than in 2019. Cases fell in men (−31 patients, 9.6%) but not in women (+10 patients, +3.1%). A significant drop in stage I from 19.8% to 12.9% (p < 0.05) and an increase in stage III (12.7% vs. 19.1%; p < 0.05) was observed. Histological confirmation dropped (70.1% vs. 60.1%; p < 0.05) while cytology increased (12% vs. 20.8%; p < 0.01). Surgery declined (28.7% vs. 21.5%; p < 0.05) but increased in stage III (19.5% vs. 25.9%; p = 0.46), while chemotherapy increased (17.6% vs. 34.3%; p < 0.01) for all stages. During the pandemic, new lung cancer diagnoses dropped only in men. The reorganization of health services has ensured a decrease in surgical interventions (due to the unavailability of operating rooms) counterbalanced by an increase in chemotherapy.

The Early Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Lung, Colorectal, and Breast Cancer Screening and Treatment at a Tertiary Cancer Center

OBJECTIVES

During the coronavirus-19 pandemic, experts recommended delaying routine cancer screening and modifying treatment strategies. We sought to understand the sequalae of these recommendations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective single-center analysis of screening, diagnosis, and treatment of lung, colorectal, and breast cancer. Data was collected from our institutional cancer registry. Prepandemic (2016-2019) was compared with pandemic (2020) data.

RESULTS

Three thousand three sixty one screening chest computed tomography scans (CTs), 35,917 colonoscopies, and 48,093 screening mammograms were performed. There was no difference in CTs [81.0 (SEM10.0) vs. 65.6 (SEM3.29), P =0.067] or mammograms [1017.0 (SEM171.8) vs. 809.4 (SEM56.41), P =0.177] in 2020 versus prepandemic. There were fewer colonoscopies in 2020 [651.4 (SEM103.5) vs. 758.91 (SEM11.79), P =0.043]. There was a decrease in cancer diagnoses per month in 2020 of lung [22.70 (SEM1.469) vs. 28.75 (SEM0.8216), P =0.003] and breast [38.56 (SEM6.133) vs. 51.82 (SEM1.257), P =0.001], but not colorectal [13.11 (SEM1.467) vs. 15.88 (SEM0.585), P =0.074] cancer. There was no change in stage at presentation for lung ( P =0.717), breast ( P =0.115), or colorectal cancer ( P =0.180). Lung had a shorter time-to-treatment in 2020 [38.92 days (SEM 2.48) vs. 66 (SEM1.46), P =0.002].

CONCLUSIONS

In 2020, there was no difference in screening studies for lung and breast cancer but there was a decrease in new diagnoses. Although there were fewer colonoscopies performed in 2020, there was no change in new colorectal cancer diagnoses. Despite changes in guidelines during the pandemic, the time-to-treatment for lung cancer was shorter and was unchanged for colorectal and breast cancer. These findings highlight the importance of continuing care for a vulnerable patient population despite a pandemic.

Short and Long-Term Impact of COVID-19 Infection on Previous Respiratory Diseases

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) a pandemic. Till now, it affected 452.4 million (Spain, 11.18 million) persons all over the world with a total of 6.04 million of deaths (Spain, 100,992). It is observed that 75% of hospitalized COVID-19 patients have at least one COVID-19 associated comorbidity. It was shown that people with underlying chronic illnesses are more likely to get it and grow seriously ill. Individuals with COVID-19 who have a past medical history of cardiovascular disorder, cancer, obesity, chronic lung disease, diabetes, or neurological disease had the worst prognosis and are more likely to develop acute respiratory distress syndrome or pneumonia. COVID-19 can affect the respiratory system in a variety of ways and across a spectrum of levels of disease severity, depending on a person's immune system, age and comorbidities. Symptoms can range from mild, such as cough, shortness of breath and fever, to critical disease, including respiratory failure, shock and multi-organ system failure. So, COVID-19 infection can cause overall worsening of these previous respiratory diseases, such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), interstitial lung disease, etc. This review aims to provide information on the impact of the COVID-19 disease on pre-existing lung comorbidities.

Comparative early results of a robotics-assisted endoscope holder in single port thoracoscopic surgery in the era of COVID-19

Background

Innovations in surgical instruments have made single-port surgery more widely accepted and lead to a reduced demand for surgical assistants. As COVID-19 has ravaged the world, maintaining minimum medical staffing requirements and proper social distancing have become major topics of interest. We sought to evaluate the feasibility of applying the unisurgeon approach in single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery aided by a robotic camera holder.

Methods

Operative time, blood loss, setup time, postoperative hospital stays, and the number of participating surgeons in single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic lung resections were gathered for investigation after the introduction of the ENDOFIX^exo robotic endoscope holder system. In this cohort, we collected 213 patients who underwent single port video thoracoscope surgery, including 57 patients underwent robotic endoscope arm assisted surgery and case-matched 52 patients in the robotic arm–assisted group with patients in the human-assisted group through propensity score–matched analysis.

Results

In wedge resection, a single surgeon was able to completely operate on all lobes of target lesions. However, for anatomical resections, namely segmentectomy, the success rate was 95%, and for lobectomy, the success rate was only 64%. No significant differences between setup times, blood loss, or operative times between the two groups were observed.

Conclusions

When an experienced uniport surgeon is assisted by a robotic endoscope holder, wedge resection is the most suitable procedure to be performed through unisurgeon single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery without increasing setup time, operative time, or short-term complications. Verification of the technique’s applicability for use in anatomic resections requires further investigation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-022-09054-8.

From Pandemic to Endemic-Redefining Excellence in Thoracic Surgery Service Delivery

Covid-19 has touched all corners of the globe and impacted our lives in more ways than one. Thoracic surgeons are frontliners impacted in both our professional and personal capacities. In this commentary we discuss the impact that Covid-19 has had on thoracic surgery as a practice highlighting the discrepant impact upon developed and developing countries, the state of affairs of the "new normal" that we live in and the challenges ahead as we transition from pandemic living to endemic living alongside Covid-19. We need to evolve as the virus does and keep abreast of the latest developments to continue providing excellent care to our patients. While the challenges brought about by the Covid-19 pandemic are unprecedented in this generation, it can bring forth tremendous opportunities for us to redefine excellence in thoracic surgery service delivery in this endemic times.

The Impact of COVID-19 on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Lung Cancer at a Canadian Academic Center: A Retrospective Chart Review

The large burden of COVID-19 on health care systems worldwide has raised concerns among medical oncologists about the impact of COVID-19 on the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer patients. In this retrospective cohort study, we investigated the impact of COVID-19 on lung cancer diagnosis and treatment before and during the COVID-19 era. New lung cancer diagnoses decreased by 34.7% during the pandemic with slightly more advanced stages of disease, there was a significant increase in the utilization of radiosurgery as the first definitive treatment, and a decrease in both systemic treatment as well as surgery compared to the pre-COVID-19 era. There was no significant delay in starting chemotherapy and radiation treatment during the pandemic compared to pre-COVID-19 time. However, we observed a delay to lung cancer surgery during the pandemic time. COVID-19 seems to have had a major impact at our lung cancer center on the diagnoses and treatment patterns of lung cancer patients. Many oncologists fear that they will see an increase in newly diagnosed lung cancer patients in the coming year. This study is still ongoing and further data will be collected and analyzed to better understand the total impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our lung cancer patient population.

[Impact of COVID-19 on oncological surgery of the upper gastrointestinal tract]

BACKGROUND

The outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic imposed limitations for elective surgery, impacting the associated hospital standards worldwide. As certain treatment windows must be adhered to in oncological surgery, the limited intensive care unit (ICU) capacity had to be critically distributed in order to do justice to both acutely ill and oncology patients. This manuscript summarizes the impact of COVID-19 on the management of oncological surgery of the upper gastrointestinal tract and particularly esophageal surgery in German medical centers.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A survey of German centers for esophageal surgery was performed on the impact of COVID-19 on operative management for esophageal surgery during the first lockdown. After inspection, assessment, critical analysis and interpretation, the results were compared to the international literature.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Initial recommendations of international societies warned for caution and restraint regarding interventions of the upper gastrointestinal tract that were not absolutely necessary. Oncological surgery should be performed under strict restrictions, especially only after negative testing for COVID-19 and only with sufficiently available personal protective equipment for the personnel. Furthermore, minimally invasive procedures were preferably not recommended. In diseases with alternative treatment options, such as definitive chemoradiotherapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, these should be given priority when possible. In the further development of the pandemic, it was shown that due to a high standardization of preoperative management, postoperative results comparable to pre-pandemic times could be achieved particularly with respect to the diagnostics of infections.

COVID-19 and the multidisciplinary care of patients with lung cancer: an evidence-based review and commentary

Delivering lung cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic has posed significant and ongoing challenges. There is a lack of published COVID-19 and lung cancer evidence-based reviews, including for the whole patient pathway. We searched for COVID-19 and lung cancer publications and brought together a multidisciplinary group of stakeholders to review and comment on the evidence and challenges. A rapid review of the literature was undertaken up to 28 October 2020, producing 144 papers, with 113 full texts screened. We focused on new primary data collection (qualitative or quantitative evidence) and excluded case reports, editorials and commentaries. Following exclusions, 15 published papers were included in the review and are summarised. They included one qualitative paper and 14 quantitative studies (surveys or cohort studies), with a total of 2295 lung cancer patients data included (mean study size 153 patients; range 7-803). Review of current evidence and commentary included awareness and help-seeking; lung cancer screening; primary care assessment and referral; diagnosis and treatment in secondary care, including oncology and surgery; patient experience and palliative care. Cross-cutting themes and challenges were identified using qualitative methods for patients, healthcare professionals and service delivery, with a clear need for continued studies to guide evidence-based decision-making.

Ethics for Thoracic Surgeons in the Management of Lung Cancer

Lung cancer is a terrible disease, with less than 20% of patients with a diagnosis of lung cancer able to have a resection but many relapsing, making it one of the most biologically aggressive cancers known. Thoracic surgeons do not see all the other 80% but are often consulted and have to make recommendations, and sometimes have to intervene. Thoracic surgeons should be well informed about the ethical framework and participate actively in the discussion. Ethics is an important aspect of surgical practice and has implications for patients, surgeons, and surgical teams, as well as for society.

Thoracıc surgery experience from the largest pandemic hospital in Europe

Background

SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), which was detected in December 2019, whose first cases were observed in Turkey on 11^th March 2020, and which was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization on the same day, has become a public health problem worldwide and has required the adaptation of medical practices to the current situation. In the current paper, we present our experience and practices regarding thoracic surgery from the largest pandemic hospital in Europe over the 1-year period of the pandemic.

Methods

Patients who were operated by our thoracic surgery clinic in the largest pandemic hospital in Europe between March 2020 and March 2021 in the COVID-19 pandemic in our country and in the world were evaluated retrospectively.

Results

Eighty-five patients were operated on during the 1-year pandemic, of which 54 (63.5%) were men and 31 (36.5%) were women. The mean patient age was 47.7. Morbidity rate was 12%. The average number of PCR tests performed in the preoperative period for COVID-19 disease was 1.6. Sixteen patients had a history of COVID-19 before surgery. COVID-19 was not seen in any patient in our clinic during the postoperative period. Only one patient died out of those who underwent surgery. That patient died due to multiorgan failure.

Conclusion

Thoracic surgery has one of the highest risks due to direct contact with the lungs, especially in terms of surgery and the postoperative period. We consider that this risk will be minimized by taking measures during all processes. Moreover, we think that surgical treatments should be delayed as little as possible due to the special status of oncology patients. In addition, considering that if all these rules are followed in the COVID-19 pandemic and in other types of pandemics that may occur in the future, there will be no delay or insufficiency in the treatment of patients and healthcare professionals will be able to work safely.

The Impact of Extended Delayed Surgery for Indolent Lung Cancer or Part-solid Ground Glass Nodules

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with lung cancer may experience treatment delays. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of extended treatment delays on survival among patients with stage I typical bronchopulmonary carcinoid (BC), lepidic predominant adenocarcinoma (LPA) or invasive adenocarcinoma with a lepidic component (ADL).

METHODS

Using National Cancer Data Base data (2004-2015), multivariable Cox regression analysis with penalized smoothing splines was performed to examine the association between treatment delay and all-cause mortality for stage I BC, LPA and ADL. Propensity score-matched analyses compared the overall survival in patients who received "early" versus "delayed" surgery (i.e. 0-30 versus 90-120 days following diagnosis) across the different histologic subtypes.

RESULTS

During the study period, patients with stage I BC (n=4,947), LPA (n=5,340) and ADL (n=6,816) underwent surgery. Cox regression analysis of these cohorts showed a gradual steady increase in the hazard ratio the longer treatment is delayed. However, in propensity score-matched analyses which created cohorts of patients who underwent early and delayed surgery that were well-balanced in patient characteristics, no significant differences in 5-year survival were found between early and delayed surgery for stage I BC (87% [95% CI:77-93] vs 89% [95% CI:80-94]), stage I LPA (73% [95% CI:64-80] vs 77% [95% CI:68-83]) and stage I ADL (71% [95% CI:64-76] vs 69% [95% CI:60-76]).

CONCLUSIONS

During the COVID-19 pandemic, for early-stage indolent lung tumors and part-solid ground glass lung nodules, a delay of surgery by 3-4 months following diagnosis can be considered.

Prevention of COVID-19 in Thoracic Surgery Patients: Lessons Learned during the First Pandemic Wave

BACKGROUND

 The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the implementation of measures to prevent perioperative COVID-19 in thoracic surgery during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic 2020 allowing a continued surgical treatment of patients.

METHODS

 The implemented preventive measures in patient management of the thoracic surgery department of the Asklepios Lung Clinic Munich-Gauting, Germany were retrospectively analyzed. Postoperative COVID-19 incidence before and after implementation of preventive measures was investigated. Patients admitted for thoracic surgical procedures between March and May 2020 were included in the study. Patient characteristics were analyzed. For the early detection of putative postoperative COVID-19 symptoms, typical post-discharge symptomatology of thoracic surgery patients was compared to non-surgical patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

RESULTS

 Thirty-five surgical procedures and fifty-seven surgical procedures were performed before and after implementation of the preventive measures, respectively. Three patients undergoing thoracic surgery before implementation of preventive measures developed a COVID-19 pneumonia post-discharge. After implementation of preventive measures, no postoperative COVID-19 cases were identified. Fever, dyspnea, dry cough and diarrhea were significantly more prevalent in COVID-19 patients compared to normally recovering thoracic surgery patients, while anosmia, phlegm, low energy levels, body ache and nausea were similarly frequent in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

 Based on the lessons learned during the first pandemic wave, we here provide a blueprint for successful easily implementable preventive measures minimizing SARS-CoV-2 transmission to thoracic surgery patients perioperatively. While symptoms of COVID-19 and the normal postoperative course of thoracic surgery patients substantially overlap, we found dyspnea, fever, cough, and diarrhea significantly more prevalent in COVID-19 patients than in normally recovering thoracic surgery patients. These symptoms should trigger further diagnostic testing for postoperative COVID-19 in thoracic surgery patients.

Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer Performed During the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Delay in time to esophagectomy for esophageal cancer has been shown to have worse peri-operative and long-term outcomes. We hypothesized that COVID-19 would cause a delay to surgery, with worse perioperative outcomes, compared to standard operations. All esophagectomies for esophageal cancer at a single institution from March-June 2020, COVID-19 group, and from 2019 were reviewed and peri-operative details were compared between groups. Ninety-six esophagectomies were performed in 2019 vs 37 during March-June 2020 (COVID-19 group). No differences between groups were found for preoperative comorbidities. Wait-time to surgery from final neoadjuvant treatment was similar, median 50 days in 2019 vs 53 days during COVID-19 p = 0.601. There was no increased upstaging, from clinical stage to pathologic stage, 9.4% in 2019 vs 7.5% in COVID-19 p = 0.841. Fewer overall complications occurred during COVID-19 vs 2019, 43.2% vs 64.6% p = 0.031, but complications were similar by specific grades. Readmission rates were not statistically different during COVID-19 than 2019, 16.2% vs 10.4% p = 0.38. No peri-operative mortalities or COVID-19 infections were seen in the COVID-19 group. Esophagectomy for esophageal cancer was not associated with worse outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic with minimal risk of infection when careful COVID-19 guidelines are followed. Prioritization is recommended to ensure no delays to surgery.

Cardiac surgeons' concerns, perceptions, and responses during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on health care and cardiac surgery. We report cardiac surgeons' concerns, perceptions, and responses during the COVID‐19 pandemic.

Methods

A detailed survey was sent to recruit participating adult cardiac surgery centers in North America. Data regarding cardiac surgeons' perceptions and changes in practice were analyzed.

Results

Our study comprises 67 institutions with diverse geographic distribution across North America. Nurses were most likely to be redeployed (88%), followed by advanced care practitioners (69%), trainees (28%), and surgeons (25%). Examining surgeon concerns in regard to COVID‐19, they were most worried with exposing their family to COVID‐19 (81%), followed by contracting COVID‐19 (68%), running out of personal protective equipment (PPE) (28%), and hospital resources (28%). In terms of PPE conservation strategies among users of N95 respirators, nearly half were recycling via decontamination with ultraviolet light (49%), followed by sterilization with heat (13%) and at home or with other modalities (13%). Reuse of N95 respirators for 1 day (22%), 1 week (21%) or 1 month (6%) was reported. There were differences in adoption of methods to conserve N95 respirators based on institutional pandemic phase and COVID‐19 burden, with higher COVID‐19 burden institutions more likely to resort to PPE conservation strategies.

Conclusions

The present study demonstrates the impact of COVID‐19 on North American cardiac surgeons. Our study should stimulate further discussions to identify optimal solutions to improve workforce preparedness for subsequent surges, as well as facilitate the navigation of future healthcare crises.

Perspective: Did Covid-19 Change Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Surgery Approach?

The novel coronavirus (Covid-19), as of January 2021, infected more than 85 million people worldwide, causing the death of about 1,840 million. Italy had more than 2 million infected and about 75,000 deaths. Many hospitals reduced their ordinary activity by up to 80%, to leave healthcare staff, wards, and intensive care unit (ICU) beds available for the significant number of Covid-19 patients. All this resulted in a prolonged wait for hospitalization of all other patients, including those with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) eligible for surgery. The majority of thoracic surgery departments changed the clinical-therapeutic path of patients, re-adapting procedures based on the needs dictated by the pandemic while not delaying the necessary treatment. The establishment of Covid-19-free hub centers allowed some elective surgery in NSCLC patients but most of the operations were delayed. The technology has partly facilitated patients' visits through telemedicine when security protocols have prevented face-to-face assessments. Multidisciplinary consultations had to deal also with the priority of the NSCLC cases discussed. Interpretation of radiologic exams had to take into account the differential diagnosis with Covid-19 infection. All the knowledge and experience of the past months reveal that the Covid-19 pandemic has not substantially changed the indications and type of surgical treatment in NSCLC. However, the diagnostic process has become more complex, requiring rigorous planning, thus changing the approach with the patients.

COVID-19 and the multidisciplinary care of patients with lung cancer: an evidence-based review and commentary

Delivering lung cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic has posed significant and ongoing challenges. There is a lack of published COVID-19 and lung cancer evidence-based reviews, including for the whole patient pathway. We searched for COVID-19 and lung cancer publications and brought together a multidisciplinary group of stakeholders to review and comment on the evidence and challenges. A rapid review of the literature was undertaken up to 28 October 2020, producing 144 papers, with 113 full texts screened. We focused on new primary data collection (qualitative or quantitative evidence) and excluded case reports, editorials and commentaries. Following exclusions, 15 published papers were included in the review and are summarised. They included one qualitative paper and 14 quantitative studies (surveys or cohort studies), with a total of 2295 lung cancer patients data included (mean study size 153 patients; range 7-803). Review of current evidence and commentary included awareness and help-seeking; lung cancer screening; primary care assessment and referral; diagnosis and treatment in secondary care, including oncology and surgery; patient experience and palliative care. Cross-cutting themes and challenges were identified using qualitative methods for patients, healthcare professionals and service delivery, with a clear need for continued studies to guide evidence-based decision-making.

COVID-19 After Lung Resection in Northern Italy

We reviewed surgical cases from 4 Thoracic Surgery departments in the Lombardia region of Italy, the area mostly affected by Coronavirus pandemic in Europe, with the aim to describe the impact of COVID-19 on the treatment of thoracic surgical patients. Clinical, radiological and laboratory data from patients who underwent lung resection from December 2019 to March 2020 were retrospectively collected until June 2020. Univariable Cox regression models were estimated to evaluate potential prognostic factors for developing COVID-19 and to investigate postoperative mortality among patients who developed symptomatic COVID-19 infection. We examined data from 107 patients. (74 lobectomies, 32 wedge/segmentectomies and 1 pneumonectomy). Twelve patients developed COVID-19 (Group 1), whereas 95 patients were not infected (Group 2). In Group 1, 6 patients (50%) died from complications related to infection; in Group 2, one patient (1%) died because of non-COVID-19-related causes. Median days from surgery to first symptoms, CT confirmation, clinical confirmation and PCR positivity was 48.1, 54.3, 55.1, and 55.2 respectively. At univariable analysis, DLCO/VA% (P = 0.008), duration of the surgery (P = 0.009), smoking history (pack/year) (P < 0.001), BMI (P< 0.001) and number of segments resected (P = 0.010) were associated with COVID-19 onset. Moreover, CCI (P < 0.001), DLCO/VA% (P = 0.002), cigarette pack/year (P < 0.001), BMI (P < 0.001) and COVID-19 (P < 0.001) were associated with death. Patients who undergo lung resection and then develop symptomatic COVID-19 infection are at higher risk of developing severe respiratory complications and postoperative death. Insidious symptoms’ onset may lead to a delay in diagnosis. We suggest two mitigating strategies: (1) Improve symptoms surveillance and isolation during recovery period, (2) Be aware of a potential greater risk of developing symptomatic COVID-19 and death correlated with elevated CCI, BMI, smoking history, DLCO/VA%, number of resected segments and duration of surgery.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Lung Cancer Screening Program and Subsequent Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Low-dose CT (LDCT) screening reduces lung cancer mortality by at least 20%. The COVID-19 pandemic required an unprecedented shutdown in our institutional LDCT program. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of COVID-19 on lung cancer screening and subsequent cancer diagnosis.

STUDY DESIGN

We analyzed our prospective institutional LDCT screening database, which began in 2012. In all, 2,153 patients have participated. Monthly mean number of LDCTs were compared between baseline (January 2017 to February 2020) and COVID-19 periods (March 2020 to July 2020).

RESULTS

LDCT was suspended on March 13, 2020 and 818 screening visits were cancelled. Phased reopening began on May 5, 2020 and full opening on June 1, 2020. Total monthly mean ± SD LDCTs (146 ± 31 vs 39 ± 40; p < 0.01) and new patient monthly LDCTs (56 ± 14 vs 15 ± 17; p < 0.01) were significantly decreased during the COVID-19 period. New patient monthly LDCTs have remained low despite resuming full operations. Three- and 6-month interval follow-up LDCTs were prioritized and were significantly increased compared with baseline (11 ± 4 vs 30 ± 4; p < 0.01). The "no-show" rate was significantly increased from baseline (15% vs 40%; p < 0.04). Most concerning, the percentage of patients with lung nodules suspicious for malignancy (Lung-RADS 4) were significantly increased after screenings resumed (8% vs 29%; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 caused significant disruption in lung cancer screening, leading to a decrease in new patients screened and an increased proportion of nodules suspicious for malignancy once screening resumed. Using lung cancer and the LDCT screening program as a model, this early analysis showed the unrecognized consequences related to the pandemic for screening programs and cancer care.

Assessing the immediate impact of COVID-19 on surgical oncology practice: Experience from an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center in the Northeastern United States

Background

The effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic on surgical oncology practice are not yet quantified. The aim of this study was to measure the immediate impact of COVID‐19 on surgical oncology practice volume.

Methods

A retrospective study of patients treated at an NCI‐Comprehensive Cancer Center was performed. “Pre‐COVID” era was defined as January–February 2020 and “COVID” as March–April 2020. Primary outcomes were clinic visits and operative volume by surgical oncology subspecialty.

Results

Abouyt 907 new patient visits, 3897 follow‐up visits, and 644 operations occurred during the study period. All subspecialties experienced significant decreases in new patient visits during COVID, though soft tissue oncology (Mel/Sarc), gynecologic oncology (Gyn/Onc), and endocrine were disproportionately affected. Telehealth visits increased to 11.4% of all visits by April. Mel/Sarc, Gyn/Onc, and Breast experienced significant operative volume decreases during COVID (25.8%, p = 0.012, 43.6% p < 0.001, and 41.9%, p < 0.001, respectively), while endocrine had no change and gastrointestinal oncology had a slight increase (p = 0.823) in the number of cases performed.

Conclusions

The effects of the COVID‐19 pandemic are wide‐ranging within surgical oncology subspecialties. The addition of telehealth is a viable avenue for cancer patient care and should be considered in surgical oncology practice.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Care in the Post Pandemic World: Five Major Lessons Learnt from Challenges and Countermeasures of Major Asian Cancer Centres

Objective:

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically affected healthcare services around Asia. The Asian National Cancer Centres Alliance and the Asia-Pacific Organisation for Cancer Prevention collaborated to assess the mid- and long- term impact of COVID-19 to cancer care in Asia.

Methods:

The two entities organised a combined symposium and post-meeting interactions among representatives of major cancer centres from seventeen Asian countries to outlining major challenges and countermeasures.

Results:

Participating stakeholders distilled five big questions. 1) “Will there be an explosion of late-stage cancers after the pandemic?” To address and recover from perceived delayed prevention, screening, treatment and care challenges, collaboration of key stakeholders in the region and alignment in cancer care management, policy intervention and cancer registry initiatives would be of essential value. 2) “Operations and Finance” The pandemic has resulted in significant material and financial casualties. Flagged acute challenges (shortages of supplies, imposition of lockdown) as well as longer-standing reduction of financial revenue, manpower, international collaboration, and training should also be addressed. 3) “Will telemedicine and technological innovations revolutionize cancer care?” Deploying and implementing telemedicine such as teleconsultation and virtual tumour boards were considered invaluable. These innovations could become a new regular practice, leading to expansion of tele-collaboration through collaboration of institutions in the region. 4) “Will virtual conferences continue after the pandemic?” Virtual conferences during the pandemic have opened new doors for knowledge sharing, especially for representatives of low- and middle-income countries in the region, while saving time and costs of travel. 5) “How do we prepare for the next pandemic or international emergency?” Roadmaps for action to improve access to appropriate patient care and research were identified and scrutinised.

Conclusion:

Through addressing these five big questions, focused collaboration among members and with international organisations such as City Cancer Challenge will allow enhanced preparedness for future international emergencies.

Thoracic Surgeon Impressions of the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Lung Cancer Care-Lessons from the First Wave in Canada

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has invariably changed the way lung cancer surgical care is provided in Canada. Despite relevant management guidelines, the way in which cancer care has been affected has yet to be described for thoracic surgical populations. Routine lung cancer physiologic and staging assessments are unique in that they are droplet producing and aerosolizing procedures. Our objective was to quantify the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical lung cancer care as perceived by practicing thoracic surgeons during the first wave of the pandemic in Canada.

METHODS

An electronic survey was distributed to members of the Canadian Association of Thoracic Surgeons. The survey was designed to determine surgeon perception of lung cancer preoperative care during the Canadian pandemic-instilled period of resource reallocation compared to standard care. Planned analyses were exploratory in nature; with count and frequency distributions of responses quantified.

RESULTS

Fifty-three thoracic surgeons completed the survey. Responses were collected from all Canadian provinces. Little change in access to preoperative imaging was noted. However, a significant decrease in access to lung function and bronchoscopy testing occurred. Pulmonary surgery was perceived to be lengthier with reduced operating theater availability. Despite decreased OR access, only 40% of surgeons were aware of respective institutional mitigation strategies.

SUMMARY

The COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on standard lung cancer care preoperative workup. Further inquiry using institutional data is warranted to quantify its impact on cancer patient outcomes. Assessing the extent and effects of newly present barriers to standard lung cancer care is essential in forming appropriate mitigation strategies and planning for future pandemic waves.

Organization of thoracic surgical services during the COVID pandemic

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 presented an unprecedented challenge for healthcare workers and systems around the world. Healthcare systems have adapted differently in terms of pandemic planning of regular services, adopting infection control measures and prioritising essential hospital services in the context of a burgeoning COVID-19 patient load and inevitable surge.

METHODS

We performed a review on current evidence and share our practices at a teaching hospital in Singapore.

RESULTS

We outline principles and make recommendations for continuity of delivering essential thoracic surgical services during this current outbreak.

CONCLUSIONS

The maintenance and provision of thoracic surgery services in this context requires good preplanning and vigilance to infection control measures across all levels.

Changes in Cancer Management due to COVID-19 Illness in Patients with Cancer in Northern California

PURPOSE

The response to the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the management of patients with cancer. In this pooled retrospective analysis, we describe changes in management patterns for patients with cancer diagnosed with COVID-19 in two academic institutions in the San Francisco Bay Area.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Adult and pediatric patients diagnosed with COVID-19 with a current or historical diagnosis of malignancy were identified from the electronic medical record at the University of California, San Francisco, and Stanford University. The proportion of patients undergoing active cancer management whose care was affected was quantified and analyzed for significant differences with regard to management type, treatment intent, and the time of COVID-19 diagnosis. The duration and characteristics of such changes were compared across subgroups.

RESULTS

A total of 131 patients were included, of whom 55 were undergoing active cancer management. Of these, 35 of 55 (64%) had significant changes in management that consisted primarily of delays. An additional three patients not undergoing active cancer management experienced a delay in management after being diagnosed with COVID-19. The decision to change management was correlated with the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, with more delays identified in patients treated with palliative intent earlier in the course of the pandemic (March/April 2020) compared with later (May/June 2020) (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.03 to 17.3; P = .0497). This difference was not seen among patients treated with curative intent during the same timeframe.

CONCLUSION

We found significant changes in the management of cancer patients with COVID-19 treated with curative and palliative intent that evolved over time. Future studies are needed to determine the impact of changes in management and treatment on cancer outcomes for patients with cancer and COVID-19.

Cancer treatment in the coronavirus disease pandemic

•

COVID-19 patients with cancer had increased risk of death and severe outcomes compared to those without cancer.

•

There is no conclusive evidence indicating that antineoplastic treatment aggravates COVID-19 disease

•

There was no significant difference in COVID-19 severity regardless of PD-1 blockade exposure.

Half a year after its emergence, severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has resulted in a pandemic, with cases continuing to increase in nearly every country. Surges in coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) cases have clearly had profound effects on current cancer treatment paradigms. Considering the effect of antineoplastic treatment and the immunosuppressive properties of cancer itself, cancer patients are deemed to be more vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2. Hence, the specific risk of SARS-CoV-2 must be carefully weighed against the benefit of antineoplastic treatment for cancer patients in the COVID-19 era. In this review, we discuss the current evidence in this important field, and in particular, the effect of SARS-CoV-2 on antineoplastic treatment.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of surgery delays and survival in breast, lung and colon cancers: Implication for surgical triage during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Thousands of cancer surgeries were delayed during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study examines if surgical delays impact survival for breast, lung and colon cancers.

Methods

PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched. Articles evaluating the relationship between delays in surgery and overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) or cancer-specific survival (CSS) were included.

Results

Of the 14,422 articles screened, 25 were included in the review and 18 (totaling 2,533,355 patients) were pooled for meta-analyses. Delaying surgery for 12 weeks may decrease OS in breast (HR 1.46, 95%CI 1.28–1.65), lung (HR 1.04, 95%CI 1.02–1.06) and colon (HR 1.24, 95%CI 1.12–1.38) cancers. When breast cancers were analyzed by stage, OS was decreased in stages I (HR 1.27, 95%CI 1.16–1.40) and II (HR 1.13, 95%CI 1.02–1.24) but not in stage III (HR 1.20, 95%CI 0.94–1.53).

Conclusion

Delaying breast, lung and colon cancer surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic may decrease survival.

•

Delaying cancer surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic may impact survival.

•

Surgical delays of 12 weeks decreases survival in breast, lung and colon cancers.

•

Surgical delays worsen survival in stage I and II breast cancers but not stage III.

•

Triage recommendations for future waves of COVID-19 should consider this evidence.

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Versus Delayed Surgery for Early-stage Non-small-cell Lung Cancer

Objective:

To evaluate the overall survival of patients with operable stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who undergo “early” SBRT (within 0–30 days after diagnosis) versus “delayed” surgery (90–120 days after diagnosis).

Summary of Background Data:

During the COVID-19 pandemic, national guidelines have recommended patients with operable stage IA NSCLC to consider delaying surgery by at least 3 months or, alternatively, to undergo SBRT without delay. It is unknown which strategy is associated with better short- and long-term outcomes.

Methods:

Multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling and propensity score-matched analysis was used to compare the overall survival of patients with stage IA NSCLC in the National Cancer Data Base from 2004 to 2015 who underwent “early” SBRT (0–30 days after diagnosis) versus that of patients who underwent “delayed” wedge resection (90–120 days after diagnosis).

Results:

During the study period, 570 (55%) patients underwent early SBRT and 475 (45%) underwent delayed wedge resection. In multivariable analysis, delayed resection was associated with improved survival [adjusted hazard ratio 0.61; (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50–0.76)]. Propensity-score matching was used to create 2 groups of 279 patients each who received early SBRT or delayed resection that were well-matched with regard to baseline characteristics. The 5-year survival associated with delayed resection was 53% (95% CI: 45%–61%) which was better than the 5-year survival associated with early SBRT (31% [95% CI: 24%–37%]).

Conclusion:

In this national analysis, for patients with stage IA NSCLC, extended delay of surgery was associated with improved survival when compared to early treatment with SBRT.

Integrated Survival Estimates for Cancer Treatment Delay Among Adults With Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Importance

Cancer treatment delay has been reported to variably impact cancer-specific survival and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-specific mortality during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic. During the pandemic, treatment delay is being recommended in a nonquantitative, nonobjective, and nonpersonalized manner, and this approach may be associated with suboptimal outcomes. Quantitative integration of cancer mortality estimates and data on the consequences of treatment delay is needed to aid treatment decisions and improve patient outcomes.

Objective

To obtain quantitative integration of cancer-specific and COVID-19-specific mortality estimates that can be used to make optimal decisions for individual patients and optimize resource allocation.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this decision analytical model, age-specific and stage-specific estimates of overall survival pre-COVID-19 were adjusted by the probability of COVID-19 (individualized by county, treatment-specific variables, hospital exposure frequency, and COVID-19 infectivity estimates), COVID-19 mortality (individualized by age-specific, comorbidity-specific, and treatment-specific variables), and delay of cancer treatment (impact and duration). These model estimates were integrated into a web application (OncCOVID) to calculate estimates of the cumulative overall survival and restricted mean survival time of patients who received immediate vs delayed cancer treatment. Using currently available information about COVID-19, a susceptible-infected-recovered model that accounted for the increased risk among patients at health care treatment centers was developed. This model integrated the data on cancer mortality and the consequences of treatment delay to aid treatment decisions. Age-specific and cancer stage-specific estimates of overall survival pre-COVID-19 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database for 691 854 individuals with 25 cancer types who received cancer diagnoses in 2005 to 2006. Data from 5 436 896 individuals in the National Cancer Database were used to estimate the independent impact of treatment delay by cancer type and stage. In addition, data from 275 patients in a nested case-control study were used to estimate the COVID-19 mortality rate by age group and number of comorbidities. Data were analyzed from March 17 to May 21, 2020.

Exposures

COVID-19 and cancer.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Estimates of restricted mean survival time after the receipt of immediate vs delayed cancer treatment.

Results

At the time of the study, the OncCOVID web application allowed for the selection of up to 47 individualized variables to assess net survival for an individual patient with cancer. Substantial heterogeneity was found regarding the association between delayed cancer treatment and net survival among patients with a given cancer type and stage, and these 2 variables were insufficient to discriminate the net impact of immediate vs delayed treatment. Individualized overall survival estimates were associated with patient age, number of comorbidities, treatment received, and specific local community estimates of COVID-19 risk.

Conclusions and Relevance

This decision analytical modeling study found that the OncCOVID web-based application can quantitatively aid in the resource allocation of individualized treatment for patients with cancer during the COVID-19 global pandemic.

Minimising risk to thoracic surgical teams in an era of COVID-19: exploring possible preventative measures

The demands of curtailing the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic have disrupted the world’s ability to care for patients with thoracic pathologies. Those who undergo thoracic surgical therapeutic procedures are a high-risk category, likely to have impaired lung function but also high risk for exposing clinical teams to aerosolised viral loads. In light of this global pandemic, thorough pre-procedural planning, adequate personal protective equipment (PPE), experienced personnel and judicious anaesthetic and intra-operative measures will serve to be instrumental in ensuring positive patient outcomes whilst still protecting the safety of healthcare workers.

Thoracic surgery during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Madrid, Spain: single-centre report

OBJECTIVES

We reviewed the incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 cases and the postoperative outcomes of patients who had thoracic surgery during the beginning and at the highest point of transmission in our community.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who had undergone elective thoracic surgery from 12 February 2020 to 30 April 2020 and were symptomatic or tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection within 14 days after surgery, with a focus on their complications and potential deaths.

RESULTS

Out of 101 surgical procedures, including 57 primary oncological resections, 6 lung transplants and 18 emergency procedures, only 5 cases of coronavirus disease 2019 were identified, 3 in the immediate postoperative period and 2 as outpatients. All 5 patients had cancer; the median age was 64 years. The main virus-related symptom was fever (80%), and the median onset of coronavirus disease 2019 was 3 days. Although 80% of the patients who had positive test results for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 required in-hospital care, none of them were considered severe or critical and none died.

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate that, in properly selected cases, with short preoperative in-hospital stays, strict isolation and infection control protocols, managed by a dedicated multidisciplinary team, a surgical procedure could be performed with a relatively low risk for the patient.

COVID-19: The Impact in Oncology Care

The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed a critical challenge to the current oncology care and practices including late diagnoses, delayed anti-cancer treatment, and static clinical trials. With the increasing risk of cancer patients acquiring infection during receiving the essential care, the debate ensues on how to balance the risk factors and benefits out of the oncologic emergencies in cancer patients. In this review article, we have focused on the current global re-organization of the integrity and effectiveness of the treatment modalities depending on the patient and cancer-specific urgencies while minimizing exposure to the infection. In this review, we addressed how the worldwide oncology community is united to share therapy schemes and the best possible guidelines to help cancer patients, and to strategize and execute therapy/trial protocols. This review provides collective knowledge on the current re-structuring of the general framework that prioritizes cancer care with the available exploitation of the reduced resources and most importantly the unparalleled levels of companionship as a large health care community towards the need to offer the best possible care to the patients.

Modeling the Impact of Delaying the Diagnosis of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer During COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has led surgical societies to recommend delaying diagnosis and treatment of suspected lung cancer for lesions less than 2 cm. Delaying diagnosis can lead to disease progression, but the impact of this delay on mortality is unknown. The COVID-19 infection rate at which immediate operative risk exceeds benefit is unknown. We sought to model immediate versus delayed surgical resection in a suspicious lung nodule less than 2 cm.

METHODS

A decision analysis model was developed, and sensitivity analyses performed. The base case was a 65-year-old male smoker with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease presenting for surgical biopsy of a 1.5 to 2 cm lung nodule highly suspicious for cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. We compared immediate surgical resection to delayed resection after 3 months. The likelihood of key outcomes was derived from the literature where available. The outcome was 5-year overall survival.

RESULTS

Immediate surgical resection resulted in a similar but slightly higher 5-year overall survival when compared with delayed resection (0.77 versus 0.74) owing to the risk of disease progression. However, if the probability of acquired COVID-19 infection is greater than 13%, delayed resection is favorable (0.74 vs 0.73).

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate surgical biopsy of lung nodules suspicious for cancer in hospitals with low COVID-19 prevalence likely results in improved 5-year survival. However, as the risk of perioperative COVID-19 infection increases above 13%, a delayed approach has similar or improved survival. This balance should be frequently reexamined at each health care facility throughout the curve of the pandemic.

Recommendations for acting in elective and urgent thoracic surgery during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Spanish Society of Thoracic Surgery

La expansión de la pandemia producida por el nuevo coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 ha obligado a focalizar casi toda la asistencia sanitaria en pacientes con enfermedad COVID-19, obligando a suspender la mayoría de intervenciones quirúrgicas electivas programadas. La cirugía torácica es eminentemente oncológica, por lo que resulta obligada una adecuada priorización de los pacientes para ser intervenidos lo antes posible y en condiciones de máxima seguridad. Por otra parte, la afectación pulmonar grave COVID-19 presenta complicaciones que con frecuencia requieren procedimientos quirúrgicos torácicos urgentes en un contexto nuevo. La Sociedad Española de Cirugía Torácica (SECT) ha desarrollado este documento para establecer unas recomendaciones básicas para mantener la actividad quirúrgica electiva imprescindible y para orientar a los cirujanos que deban afrontar urgencias torácicas en este nuevo y desconocido entorno.

Discordance of COVID-19 guidelines for patients with cancer: A systematic review

This review was aimed to systematically evaluate the available literature on the impact of COVID-19 on cancer care and to critically analyze the diagnostic and therapeutic strategies suggested by various healthcare providers, societies, and institutions. Majority guidelines for various types of cancers favored a delay in treatment or a nonsurgical approach wherever feasible. These guidelines are based on a low level of evidence and have significant discordance for the role and timing of surgery, especially in early tumors.

Understanding the practice of thoracic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the entire medical community including the thoracic surgical practice. The guidelines, consensus statements, and preliminary recommendations published by the thoracic surgeons so far have appreciated the importance of triage of patients with thoracic surgical diseases and multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting. Delaying surgery or planning alternative treatment in patient care should be done by taking input from experts in thoracic specialties. The procedures that can be carried out in a hospital are based on the prevalence of COVID-19 patients within the hospital and availability of hospital resources. As a result, proper triaging, ensuring safety of patient and health care personnel, and optimal utilization of the available resources remain the cornerstone while fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. In this manuscript, we highlight these issues with respect to practice of thoracic surgery.

Clinical courses and outcomes of five patients with primary lung cancer surgically treated while affected by Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

OBJECTIVES

There is currently a lack of clinical data on the novel beta-coronavirus infection [caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)] and concomitant primary lung cancer. Our goal was to report our experiences with 5 patients treated for lung cancer while infected with SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 5 adult patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 who were admitted to our thoracic surgery unit between 29 January 2020 and 4 March 2020 for surgical treatment of a primary lung cancer. Clinical data and outcomes are reported.

RESULTS

All patients were men with a mean age of 74.0 years (range 67-80). Four of the 5 patients (80%) reported chronic comorbidities. Surgery comprised minimally invasive lobectomy (2 patients) and segmentectomy (1 patient), lobectomy with en bloc chest wall resection (1 patient) and pneumonectomy (1 patient). Mean chest drain duration was 12.4 days (range 8-22); mean hospital stay was 33.8 days (range 21-60). SARS-CoV-2-related symptoms were fever (3 patients), persistent cough (3 patients), diarrhoea (2 patients) and syncope (2 patients); 1 patient reported no symptoms. Morbidity related to surgery was 60%; 30-day mortality was 40%. Two patients (1 with a right pneumonectomy, 74 years old; 1 with a lobectomy with chest wall resection and reconstruction, 70 years old), developed SARS-CoV-2-related lung failure leading to death 60 and 32 days after surgery, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung cancer surgery may represent a high-risk factor for developing a severe case of coronavirus disease 2019, particularly in patients with advanced stages of lung cancer. Additional strategies are needed to reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection during treatment for lung cancer.

COVID-19: clinical issues from the Japan Surgical Society

In this unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic, several key issues must be addressed to ensure safe treatment and prevent rapid spread of the virus and a consequential medical crisis. Careful evaluation of a patient's condition is crucial for deciding the triage plan, based on the status of the disease and comorbidities. As functionality of the medical care system is greatly affected by the environmental situation, the treatment may differ according to the medical and infectious disease circumstances of the institution. Importantly, all medical staff must prevent nosocomial COVID-19 by minimizing the effects of aerosol spread and developing diagnostic and surgical procedures. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) screening for COVID-19 infection, particularly in asymptomatic patients, should be encouraged as these patients are prone to postoperative respiratory failure. In this article, the Japan Surgical Society addresses the general principles of surgical treatment in relation to COVID-19 infection and advocates preventive measures against viral transmission during this unimaginable COVID-19 pandemic.

The influence of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on esophagogastric cancer services: an international survey of esophagogastric surgeons

BACKGROUND

Several guidelines to guide clinical practice among esophagogastric surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic were produced. However, none provide reflection of current service provision. This international survey aimed to clarify the changes observed in esophageal and gastric cancer management and surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

An online survey covering key areas for esophagogastric cancer services, including staging investigations and oncological and surgical therapy before and during (at two separate time-points-24th March 2020 and 18th April 2020) the COVID-19 pandemic were developed.

RESULTS

A total of 234 respondents from 225 centers and 49 countries spanning six continents completed the first round of the online survey, of which 79% (n = 184) completed round 2. There was variation in the availability of staging investigations ranging from 26.5% for endoscopic ultrasound to 62.8% for spiral computed tomography scan. Definitive chemoradiotherapy was offered in 14.8% (adenocarcinoma) and 47.0% (squamous cell carcinoma) of respondents and significantly increased by almost three-fold and two-fold, respectively, in both round 1 and 2. There were uncertainty and heterogeneity surrounding prioritization of patients undergoing cancer resections. Of the surgeons symptomatic with COVID-19, only 40.2% (33/82) had routine access to COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction testing for staff. Of those who had testing available (n = 33), only 12.1% (4/33) had tested positive.

CONCLUSIONS

These data highlight management challenges and several practice variations in caring for patients with esophagogastric cancers. Therefore, there is a need for clear consistent guidelines to be in place in the event of a further pandemic to ensure a standardized level of oncological care for patients with esophagogastric cancers.

Management of Lung Nodules and Lung Cancer Screening During the COVID-19 Pandemic: CHEST Expert Panel Report

Background

The risks from potential exposure to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and resource reallocation that has occurred to combat the pandemic, have altered the balance of benefits and harms that informed current (pre-COVID-19) guideline recommendations for lung cancer screening and lung nodule evaluation. Consensus statements were developed to guide clinicians managing lung cancer screening programs and patients with lung nodules during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Materials and Methods

An expert panel of 24 members, including pulmonologists (n = 17), thoracic radiologists (n = 5), and thoracic surgeons (n = 2), was formed. The panel was provided with an overview of current evidence, summarized by recent guidelines related to lung cancer screening and lung nodule evaluation. The panel was convened by video teleconference to discuss and then vote on statements related to 12 common clinical scenarios. A predefined threshold of 70% of panel members voting agree or strongly agree was used to determine if there was a consensus for each statement. Items that may influence decisions were listed as notes to be considered for each scenario.

Results

Twelve statements related to baseline and annual lung cancer screening (n = 2), surveillance of a previously detected lung nodule (n = 5), evaluation of intermediate and high-risk lung nodules (n = 4), and management of clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer (n = 1) were developed and modified. All 12 statements were confirmed as consensus statements according to the voting results. The consensus statements provide guidance about situations in which it was believed to be appropriate to delay screening, defer surveillance imaging of lung nodules, and minimize nonurgent interventions during the evaluation of lung nodules and stage I non-small cell lung cancer.

Conclusion

There was consensus that during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is appropriate to defer enrollment in lung cancer screening and modify the evaluation of lung nodules due to the added risks from potential exposure and the need for resource reallocation. There are multiple local, regional, and patient-related factors that should be considered when applying these statements to individual patient care.

© 2020 RSNA; The American College of Chest Physicians, published by Elsevier Inc; and The American College of Radiology, published by Elsevier Inc.