COVID-19: potential transmission through aerosols in surgical procedures and blood products

Can aerosols-generating dental, oral and maxillofacial, and orthopedic surgical procedures lead to disease transmission? An implication on the current COVID-19 pandemic

Various dental, maxillofacial, and orthopedic surgical procedures (DMOSP) have been known to produce bioaerosols, that can lead to the transmission of various infectious diseases. Hence, a systematic review (SR) aimed at generating evidence of aerosols generating DMOSP that can result in the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), further investigating their infectivity and assessing the role of enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE) an essential to preventing the spreading of SARS-CoV-2 during aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs). This SR was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA) guidelines based on a well-designed Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes and Study (PICOS) framework, and various databases were searched to retrieve the studies which assessed potential aerosolization during DMOSP. This SR included 80 studies (59 dental and 21 orthopedic) with 7 SR, 47 humans, 5 cadaveric, 16 experimental, and 5 animal studies that confirmed the generation of small-sized < 5 μm particles in DMOSP. One study confirmed that HIV could be transmitted by aerosolized blood generated by an electric saw and bur. There is sufficient evidence that DMOSP generates an ample amount of bioaerosols, but the infectivity of these bioaerosols to transmit diseases like SARS-CoV-2 generates very weak evidence but still, this should be considered. Confirmation through isolation and culture of viable virus in the clinical environment should be pursued. An evidence provided by the current review was gathered by extrapolation from available experimental and empirical evidence not based on SARS-CoV-2. The results of the present review, therefore, should be interpreted with great caution.

The IMPACT of COVID-19 on trauma & orthopaedic surgery provides lessons for future communicable disease outbreaks : minimum reporting standards, risk scores, fragility trauma services, and global collaboration

Research into COVID-19 has been rapid in response to the dynamic global situation, which has resulted in heterogeneity of methodology and the communication of information. Adherence to reporting standards would improve the quality of evidence presented in future studies, and may ensure that findings could be interpreted in the context of the wider literature. The COVID-19 pandemic remains a dynamic situation, requiring continued assessment of the disease incidence and monitoring for the emergence of viral variants and their transmissibility, virulence, and susceptibility to vaccine-induced immunity. More work is needed to assess the long-term impact of COVID-19 infection on patients who sustain a hip fracture. The International Multicentre Project Auditing COVID-19 in Trauma & Orthopaedics (IMPACT) formed the largest multicentre collaborative audit conducted in orthopaedics in order to provide an emergency response to a global pandemic, but this was in the context of many vital established audit services being disrupted at an early stage, and it is crucial that these resources are protected during future health crises. Rapid data-sharing between regions should be developed, with wider adoption of the revised 2022 Fragility Fracture Network Minimum Common Data Set for Hip Fracture Audit, and a pragmatic approach to information governance processes in order to facilitate cooperation and meta-audit. This editorial aims to: 1) identify issues related to COVID-19 that require further research; 2) suggest reporting standards for studies of COVID-19 and other communicable diseases; 3) consider the requirement of new risk scores for hip fracture patients; and 4) present the lessons learned from IMPACT in order to inform future collaborative studies.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(6):342–345.

Impact of COVID-19 on Key Performance Indicators of the National Hip Fracture Database and the Management of Hip Fracture Patients

Background: A hospital's performance regarding the management of hip fractures is based on six key performance indicators (KPIs) which are recorded onto the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD). The aim of this study was to assess the overall impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the management and outcomes of hip fracture patients against a similar period in 2019 by utilizing the KPIs.

Method: Retrospective data collection of hip fracture patients during a six-week (pre-COVID) period in 2019 and a six-week (COVID-19) period in a single orthopedic unit. The following parameters were compared; patient age, time to theater, surgeon operating time, total time in the operating room, time from ward to recovery, time from hospital presentation to theater, and total time from presentation to hospital discharge.

Results: Some 38 patients in the pre-COVID-19 period vs. 27 patients with hip fractures in the COVID-19 period were included in the study. Time from diagnosis to theater and surgeon operating time were similar in both groups. The mean length of stay was 9.3 days vs. a mean of 31.34 days (p = 0.0004) in the COVID-19 and pre-COVID-19 groups respectively. A 30-day mortality was 22.2% (n = 6) in the COVID-19 group vs. 5.3% (n = 2) in the pre-COVID-19 group.

Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that the combination of surgical stress and COVID-19 leads to higher mortality rates. Our hospital’s structural reorganization during the pandemic has shown progress in achieving important KPIs and improved short-term outcomes for hip fracture and trauma patients.

COVID-19 lockdown and recovery: a dental public health perspective from Lancashire and South Cumbria

The COVID-19 pandemic has created novel barriers in providing and accessing all forms of healthcare, including dentistry. The national dental response during the first peak of the pandemic resulted in rapid changes in the provision of service, to safeguard providers and users of dental care.Such rapidly leveraged changes resulted in several issues in service delivery, requiring careful input from managers and commissioners within NHS England and Improvement, trainees and consultants in dental public health within Public Health England, and frontline dental teams working across the health and social care system. The local response from Lancashire and South Cumbria is outlined within this article.Teamwork, communication and reflexive, iterative learning from these groups ensured the delivery of an Urgent Dental Care service during the first lockdown of the pandemic.The impact of COVID-19 has enabled considerable learning which will inform future pandemic planning, alongside providing the opportunity to deliver meaningful change within NHS dentistry as the service continues to recover.

Cessation of Pulsed Lavage During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: The Effect on Hip Hemiarthroplasty Cement Mantles

Background With the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, we were issued with guidance to minimize aerosol-generating procedures and discontinued the use of pulsed lavage for hip hemiarthroplasty. Instead, we used a bladder syringe to wash the femoral canal. The aim of this study was to assess whether this change in practice had a detrimental effect on the quality of the bone cement mantles in patients undergoing cemented hip hemiarthroplasty. Methodology We performed a retrospective review of all patients treated at a tertiary teaching hospital in the United Kingdom (Addenbrookes, Cambridge University Hospitals) presenting with a neck of femur fracture requiring a hemiarthroplasty between October 2019 and June 2020. We retrospectively assessed 100 post-operative radiographs for patients who had received hip hemiarthroplasty following neck of femur fragility fracture (50 before the service change and 50 after). The Barrack classification was used to assess the quality of the bone cement mantle. Results Pre-SARS-CoV-2, 30% of hemiarthroplasties were deemed as being "at risk" of aseptic loosening. During SARS-CoV-2, 64% of hips were deemed as being "at risk." This represents a statistically significant absolute increase of 34% (P < 0.05, the P value is 0.000645). Both clinicians agreed on the classification of hips "at risk" or "not at risk" (i.e., grades C/D and A/B, respectively) in 85% of the cases. Cohen's kappa coefficient was calculated as 0.68, indicating substantial agreement. Conclusions Following our experience of this forced service change, we would discourage abandoning the use of pulsed lavage in future pandemics. We have demonstrated an association between abandoning pulsed lavage and detrimental effects on the procedural quality for hip hemiarthroplasty. Patients treated over this time period will be closely monitored for operative complications. As this was the only equipment change made for this procedure, we have demonstrated its detrimental effect on the procedural quality. Should pulsed lavage be discontinued, patients may need to be counseled for higher risk of early failure and revision surgery and may require long-term radiographic follow-up. In SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, Surgeons should carefully consider the risks and benefits of using pulsed lavage in accordance with the personal protective equipment they have available and the consequential impact on the bone cement mantle quality.

Drill splatter in orthopaedic procedures and its importance during the COVID-19 pandemic : an experimental study

AIMS

During the COVID-19 pandemic, drilling has been classified as an aerosol-generating procedure. However, there is limited evidence on the effects of bone drilling on splatter generation. Our aim was to quantify the effect of drilling on splatter generation within the orthopaedic operative setting.

METHODS

This study was performed using a Stryker System 7 dual rotating drill at full speed. Two fluid mediums (Videne (Solution 1) and Fluorescein (Solution 2)) were used to simulate drill splatter conditions. Drilling occurred at saw bone level (0 cm) and at different heights (20 cm, 50 cm, and 100 cm) above the target to simulate the surgeon 'working arm length', with and without using a drill guide. The furthest droplets were marked and the droplet displacement was measured in cm. A surgical microscope was used to detect microscopic droplets.

RESULTS

Bone drilling produced 5 cm and 7 cm droplet displacement using Solutions 1 and 2, respectively. Drilling at 100 cm above the target produced the greatest splatter generation with a 95 cm macroscopic droplet displacement using Solution 2. Microscopic droplet generation was noticed at further distances than what can be macroscopically seen using Solution 1 (98 cm). Using the drill guide, there was negligible drill splatter generation.

CONCLUSION

Our study has shown lower than anticipated drill splatter generation. The use of a drill guide acted as a protective measure and significantly reduced drill splatter. We therefore recommend using a drill guide at all times to reduce the risk of viral transmission in the operative setting. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(9):752-756.

Bioaerosols in orthopedic surgical procedures and implications for clinical practice in the times of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Orthopedic surgical procedures (OSPs) are known to generate bioaerosols, which could result in transmission of infectious diseases. Hence, this review was undertaken to analyse the available evidence on bioaerosols in OSPs, and their significance in COVID-19 transmission.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, medRxiv, bioRxiv and Lancet preprint databases for studies on bioaerosols in OSPs. Random-effects metanalysis was conducted to determine pooled estimates of key bioaerosol characteristics. Risk of bias was assessed by the RoB-SPEO tool; overall strength of evidence was assessed by the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

17 studies were included in the systematic review, and 6 in different sets of meta-analyses. The pooled estimate of particle density was 390.74 μg/m3, Total Particle Count, 6.08 × 106/m3, and Microbial Air Contamination, 8.08 CFU/m3. Small sized particles (

CONCLUSION

Whereas there is evidence to suggest that OSPs generate large amounts of bioaerosols, their potential to transmit infectious diseases like COVID-19 is questionable. High-quality research, as well as consensus minimum reporting guidelines for bioaerosol research in OSPs is the need of the hour.

Collapse

Key Words

• Aerosol
• Aerosol generating procedure (AGP)
• COVID19
• Coronavirus
• Guideline
• Orthopaedics surgical procedures
• Personal protective equipment (PPE)
• Review
• SARS

Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Siddhartha Sharma Department of Orthopaedics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, 160012, India
Rakesh John Department of Orthopaedics, Hull and Yorkshire Royal Infirmary, Hull, United Kingdom
Sandeep Patel Department of Orthopaedics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, 160012, India
Deepak Neradi Department of Orthopaedics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, 160012, India
Kamal Kishore Department of Biostatistics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, 160012, India
Mandeep S. Dhillon Department of Orthopaedics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, 160012, India

Collapse

The MeNT-OS Score for Orthopaedic Surgery: An Objective Scoring System for Prioritisation of Orthopaedic Elective Surgeries During a Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The reintroduction of elective Orthopaedic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic is likely to occur in phases, dictated by resource limitations and loco-regional pandemic status. Guidelines providing a general framework for the prioritisation of surgery have largely been based on surgical urgency, while scoring systems such as the MeNTS score may have limited applicability in the setting of Orthopaedic Surgery. We, therefore, propose an Orthopaedic-specific algorithm ('MeNT-OS'), based on a modification of the MeNTS scoring system, that may be used to objectively triage and prioritise Orthopaedic cases during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We developed a scoring algorithm modified from the Medically Necessary Time-Sensitive Procedure (MeNTS) score with 13 unique variables, reflecting human and physical resource utilisation, surgical complexity, functional status of patients, as well as COVID-19 transmission risk. This score was then trialled in a sample of 118 cases, comprising 69 completed and 49 postponed cases. A higher overall score was intended to correlate with lower surgical prioritisation.

RESULTS

The use of our scoring system resulted in higher average scores for postponed cases compared to completed cases, as well as higher median, 25th and 75th percentile scores. These results were statistically significant and showed concordance with the ad hoc decisions made before the scoring system was used, with the lower scores for completed cases suggesting a more favourable risk-benefit ratio for being performed as compared to the postponed cases.

CONCLUSION

The utility of the proposed 'MeNT-OS' scoring system has been assessed using data from our institution and offers an objective and systematic approach that is geared towards Orthopaedic procedures. We believe this scoring tool can provide Orthopaedic surgeons a safe and equitable approach to making difficult decisions on prioritisation of surgery during the COVID-19 period, and possibly other resource-limited settings in the future.

The Risk of Spread of Infection During Craniotomy/Craniostomy on Patients with Active Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Infection: Myth or Fact?

OBJECTIVES

Craniotomies/craniostomies have been categorized as aerosol-generating procedures and are presumed to spread coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the presence of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus 2 virus in the generated bone dust has never been proved. Our objective is to evaluate the presence of virus in the bone dust (aerosol) generated during emergency neurosurgical procedures performed on patients with active COVID-19. This would determine the true risk of disease transmission during the surgery.

METHODS

Ten patients with active COVID-19 infection admitted to our institute in 1 month required emergency craniotomy/craniostomy. The bone dust and mucosal scrapings form paranasal sinuses (if opened) collected during these procedures were tested for the virus using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. The entire surgical team was observed for any symptoms related to COVID-19 for 14 days following surgery.

RESULTS

Nine patients had moderate viral load in their nasopharyngeal cavity, as detected on reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. None of the samples of bone dust from these 10 patients tested positive. Mucosal scrapping obtained in 1 patient in which mastoid air cells were inadvertently opened tested negative as well. No health workers from the operating room developed COVID-19-related symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

The bone dust generated during craniotomy/stomy of active patients does not contain the virus. The procedure on an active patient is unlikely to spread the disease. However, a study with larger cohort would be confirmatory.

COVID-19 pandemic: management of patients affected by SARS-CoV-2 in Rome COVID Hospital 2 Trauma Centre and safety of our surgical team

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 pandemic left a deep mark in the health systems around the globe, leading to an important change in the way we intend the access to the healthcare and its fruition. Hospitals faced something unexpected, and they underwent a deep change and so did orthopaedic activity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In "A. Gemelli" University hospital new protocols were adopted for the safe management of patients affected by SARS-CoV-2. Among these patients, six had to be treated also for orthopaedic problems. The management of these patients, from the admission in the Emergency Room (E.R). to the operating room (O.R.), followed the protocols we developed for the coronavirus crisis.

RESULTS

Four among the six patients underwent surgical treatments. Two of them showed a change of their clinical status, due to a worsening of COVID-19 symptoms, so the surgical option was postponed. All of them were admitted to the Infectious Diseases Unit, rather than the Orthopaedic and Traumatology Unit, in order to provide the best measures to prevent the spread of the contagion and to ensure the best treatment for COVID-19. No O.R. staff was infected by SARS-CoV-2.

CONCLUSIONS

More studies are needed to provide a higher statistical significance to the safety measures taken in order to contrast the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the Surgical Room. Orthopaedic surgeons are more exposed to the contagion due to the particular tools set they use. A more sensible and specific quick test for novel Coronavirus is particularly needed, due to the lack of sensitivity of the serological rapid test.

COVID-19 pandemic: management of patients affected by SARS-CoV-2 in Rome COVID Hospital 2 Trauma Centre and safety of our surgical team

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 pandemic left a deep mark in the health systems around the globe, leading to an important change in the way we intend the access to the healthcare and its fruition. Hospitals faced something unexpected, and they underwent a deep change and so did orthopaedic activity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In "A. Gemelli" University hospital new protocols were adopted for the safe management of patients affected by SARS-CoV-2. Among these patients, six had to be treated also for orthopaedic problems. The management of these patients, from the admission in the Emergency Room (E.R). to the operating room (O.R.), followed the protocols we developed for the coronavirus crisis.

RESULTS

Four among the six patients underwent surgical treatments. Two of them showed a change of their clinical status, due to a worsening of COVID-19 symptoms, so the surgical option was postponed. All of them were admitted to the Infectious Diseases Unit, rather than the Orthopaedic and Traumatology Unit, in order to provide the best measures to prevent the spread of the contagion and to ensure the best treatment for COVID-19. No O.R. staff was infected by SARS-CoV-2.

CONCLUSIONS

More studies are needed to provide a higher statistical significance to the safety measures taken in order to contrast the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the Surgical Room. Orthopaedic surgeons are more exposed to the contagion due to the particular tools set they use. A more sensible and specific quick test for novel Coronavirus is particularly needed, due to the lack of sensitivity of the serological rapid test.

A comparative study looking at trauma and orthopaedic operating efficiency in the COVID-19 era

Backgroud

COVID-19 has led to a reduction in operating efficiency. We aim to identify these inefficiencies and possible solutions as we begin to pursue a move to planned surgical care.

Methods

All trauma and orthopaedic emergency surgery were analysed for May 2019 and May 2020. Timing data was collated to look at the following: anaesthetic preparation time, anaesthetic time, surgical preparation time, surgical time, transfer to recovery time and turnaround time. Data for 2019 was collected retrospectively and data for 2020 was collected prospectively.

Results

A total of 222 patients underwent emergency orthopaedic surgery in May 2019 and 161 in May 2020. A statistically significant increase in all timings was demonstrated in 2020 apart from anaesthetic time which demonstrated a significant decrease. A subgroup analysis for hip fractures demonstrated a similar result. No increase in surgical time was observed in hand and wrist surgery or for debridement and washouts.Although the decrease in anaesthetic time is difficult to explain, this could be attributed to a reduction in combined anaesthetic techniques and possibly the effect of fear. The other increases in time demonstrated can largely be attributed to the PPE required for aerosol generating procedures and other measures taken to reduce spread of the virus. These procedures currently form a large amount of the orthopaedic case load.

Conclusion

COVID-19 has led to significant reductions in operating room efficiency. This will have significant impact on waiting times. Increasing frequency of regional anaesthesia concurrently with non-aerosol generating surgeries may improve efficiency.

Managing Burns During COVID-19 Outbreak

The coronavirus disease pandemic has affected our practice as healthcare professionals. As burn surgeons, we are obliged to provide the best possible care to our patients. However, due to the risk of viral transmission, the goal should be to provide safe care to our patients as well as ensure the safety of the whole team providing burn care. The burn patients are usually debilitated and require a prolonged hospital stay and multiple operative procedures which put them and everyone involved in their care at increased risk of coronavirus infections and transmission. This warrants special caution to the burn team while managing such patients. In this review, we aim to highlight the key considerations for burn care teams while dealing with burn patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Bone sarcoma surgery in times of COVID-19 pandemic lockdown-early experience from a tertiary centre in India

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown has presented a unique challenge for sarcoma care. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the early results and feasibility of surgeries for bone sarcomas during the COVID-19 lockdown.

METHODS

Our prospectively collected orthopaedic oncological database was reviewed to include two groups of patients- those who underwent surgery in the immediate 4 weeks before lockdown (non-lockdown group) and those operated in the first 4 weeks of lockdown (lockdown group). All patients were followed-up clinically and telephonically to collect the outcome data.

RESULTS

Out of the 91 patients who qualified for inclusion, fifty were classified into the non-lockdown group while 41 patients formed the lockdown group. Both the groups were comparable with respect to baseline demographic parameters. However, during the lockdown period 37 patients (90%) had undergone a major surgical intervention as against 24 patients (48%) in the non-lockdown group (P < .001). There was no significant difference in type of anaesthesia, median estimated blood loss and procedure duration. None of the patients/health care workers had evidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 infection at 15 days follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Our study results suggest that appendicular bone tumours can be safely operated with adequate precautions during the lockdown period.

30-day mortality following trauma and orthopaedic surgery during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic: a multicentre regional analysis of 484 patients

AIMS

Now that we are in the deceleration phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, the focus has shifted to how to safely reinstate elective operating. Regional and speciality specific data is important to guide this decision-making process. This study aimed to review 30-day mortality for all patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery during the peak of the pandemic within our region.

METHODS

This multicentre study reviewed data on all patients undergoing trauma and orthopaedic surgery in a region from 18 March 2020 to 27 April 2020. Information was collated from regional databases. Patients were COVID-19-positive if they had positive laboratory testing and/or imaging consistent with the infection. 30-day mortality was assessed for all patients. Secondly, 30-day mortality in fracture neck of femur patients was compared to the same time period in 2019.

RESULTS

Overall, 496 operations were carried out in 484 patients. The overall 30-day mortality was 1.9%. Seven out of nine deceased patients underwent surgery for a fractured neck of femur. In all, 27 patients contracted COVID-19 in the peri-operative period; of these, four patients died within 30 days (14.8%). In addition, 21 of the 27 patients in this group had a fractured neck of femur, 22 were over the age of 70 years (81.5%). Patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade > 3 and/or age > 75 years were at significantly higher risk of death if they contracted COVID-19 within the study period.

CONCLUSION

Overall 30-day postoperative mortality in trauma and orthopaedic surgery patients remains low at 1.9%. There was no 30-day mortality in patients ASA 1 or 2. Patients with significant comorbidities, increasing age, and ASA 3 or above remain at the highest risk. For patients with COVID-19 infection, postoperative 30-day mortality was 14.8%. The reintroduction of elective services should consider individual patient risk profile (including for ASA grade). Effective postoperative strategies should also be employed to try and reduce postoperative exposure to the virus.Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-7:392-397.

Outcome of trauma and orthopaedic surgery at a UK District General Hospital during the Covid-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

There are suggestions that elective surgery performed during the incubation period of COVID-19 infection may cause an immediate impairment of cell-mediated immunity, leading to high morbidity and mortality. However is contrasting data about the associated mortality. Since the outbreak, our unit has maintained a prospective database recording Trauma and Orthopaedic surgical activity. Our aim was to share our experience of the first 3 months with prospective data on outcome of essential surgery during the covid-19 peak. Our focus in this report was on the mortality rate as services begin to open. Methods: We prospectively collected data during the peak of the pandemic in the UK, for fracture neck of femur patients (NOF) the most commonly performed surgical procedure and the most vulnerable during this period. We compared this Covid-19 cohort of NOFs against a cohort of NOF's during the same time in 2019 and another cohort of NOF's in 2020 outside the lockdown period to compare mortality rates and give a broader perspective.

RESULTS

During the period March 1, 2020 to May 31, 2020, total of 206 patients were operated. Ninety-four fracture NOF and another one hundred twelve essential surgical procedures were performed. In the NOF cohort, there were nine patients that died. Three of them were covid-19 positive, one was not tested and the rest five were covid-19 negative. There was no mortality reported in the non NOF group. Conclusion: In our unit, during the lock down period, mortality rate in patients undergoing fracture NOF was not significantly different from a similar cohort earlier in the year and similar period last year. We have not observed any mortality, to date in the Non NOF procedures carried out.

Addressing Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Spine Surgery: A Rapid National Consensus Using the Delphi Method via Teleconference

The magnitude and potential duration of the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is something that most doctors currently in practice have yet to experience. While considerable information regarding COVID-19 is being published every day, it is challenging to filter out the most relevant or appropriate information for our individual practice. The Spine Society of Singapore convened via a teleconference on April 24, 2020 to collaborate on a national level and share collective wisdom in order to tackle the ongoing crisis. In the teleconference, 13 spine surgeons from across various hospitals in Singapore constituted the panel of experts. The following topics were discussed: repurposing of surgeons, continuity of spine services, introduction of telemedicine, triaging of spinal surgeries, preoperative testing, new challenges in performing spine surgery, and preparing for the post-pandemic era. While some issues required only the sharing of best practices, the Delphi panel method was adopted to form a consensus on others. Existing spine specific triage guidelines were debated and a locally accepted set of guidelines was established. Although preoperative testing is currently not performed routinely, the panel voted in favor of its implementation because they concluded that it is vital to protect themselves, their colleagues, and their patients. Solutions to operating room specific concerns were also discussed. This article reflects the opinions and insights shared during this meeting and reviews the evidence relevant to the issues that were raised. The rapid consensus reached during the teleconference has enabled us to be concerted, and thus stronger, in our national efforts to provide the best standard of care via our spine services in these challenging times. We believe that this article will provide some guidance for addressing COVID-19 in spine surgery and encourage other national/regional societies to conduct similar discussions that would help their navigation of this pandemic.