SRED-ARCE Recommendations for Minimally Invasive Interventions During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Romania

COVID-19 pandemic: is it time for shared surgical guidelines? A systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

The recent COrona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused a massive disruption of surgical activity and after a year from its first outbreak surgeons still struggle to keep their regular activity coexisting with the virus exhausting requests of healthcare resources. The aim of this paper is to offer a comprehensive overview of the most important recommendations by the International Guidelines about general surgery, and possibly to invite building common shared guidelines to preserve the potential to provide surgical assistance despite the pandemic.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science databases were searched.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The searches revealed a total of 18579 articles published up to the end of February 2021. Five articles published between March and May 2020, were included in the present study: Guidelines from The European Society of Trauma and Emergency Surgery (ESTES), The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) and The European Association for Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES), The Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Surgeons of Asia (ELSA), The European Hernia Society (EHS) and The International Organization for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IOS-IBD).

CONCLUSIONS

In the likely scenario that the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic will become an endemic chronic problem, we should not be forced to choose between COVID-19 or surgery in the future and find a way to make both coexisting.

Intraoperative Measures to Reduce the Risk of COVID-19 Transmission During Minimally Invasive Procedures: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of Societies' Recommendations

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus 2019 pandemic and the hypothetical risk of virus transmission through aerosolized CO2 or surgical smoke produced during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) procedures have prompted societies to issue recommendations on measures to reduce this risk. The aim of this systematic review is to identify, summarize and critically appraise recommendations from surgical societies on intraoperative measures to reduce the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission to the operative room (OR) staff during MIS.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar databases were searched using a search strategy or free terms. The search was supplemented with searches of additional relevant records on coronavirus 2019 resource websites from Surgical Associations and Societies. Recommendations published by surgical societies that reported on the intraoperative methods to reduce the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission to the OR staff during MIS were also reviewed for inclusion. Expert opinion articles were excluded. A preliminary synthesis was performed of the extracted data to categorize and itemize the different types of recommendations. The results were then summarized in a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Thirty-three recommendation were included in the study. Most recommendations were targeted to general surgery (13) and gynecology (8). Areas covered by the documents were recommendations on performance of laparoscopic/robotic surgery versus open approach (28 documents), selection of surgical staff (13), management of pneumoperitoneum (33), use of energy devices (20), and management of surgical smoke and pneumoperitoneum desufflation (33) with varying degree of consensus on the specific recommendations among the documents.

CONCLUSIONS

While some of the early recommendations advised against the use of MIS, they were not strictly based on the available scientific evidence. After further consideration of the literature and of the well-known benefits of laparoscopy to the patient, later recommendations shifted to encouraging the use of MIS as long as adequate precautions could be taken to protect the safety of the OR staff. The release and implementation of recommendations should be based on evidence-based practices that allows health care systems to provide safe surgical and medical assistance.

Consistency of global recommendations regarding open versus laparoscopic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

Background

Throughout the COVID‐19 pandemic, there has been worldwide debate regarding whether open surgery should be performed in preference to laparoscopic surgery due to the theoretical higher risk of viral aerosolization by the release of pneumoperitoneum. We aimed to assess the consistency of national and international surgical society recommendations regarding the choice of surgical approach; assess the quality of evidence of viral emission in surgical aerosol; and assess the quality of evidence comparing aerosol generation by different surgical energy devices.

Methods

A systematic review of PubMed, Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases was performed. Three search strategies were employed. Twenty‐eight studies were included in the final analysis and quality appraised. Confidence in review findings was assessed using the GRADE‐CERQual (Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) tool.

Results

Worldwide recommendations regarding open versus laparoscopic surgery are consistent, with a majority recommending that surgical approach is decided on a case‐by‐case, risk minimization approach. There is limited, low‐quality evidence that viral particles can be emitted in surgical aerosol. There is a paucity of literature on the quantity of aerosol produced by different surgical energy devices, and no evidence to support the use of certain surgical instruments to minimize aerosol production.

Conclusions

There is considerable consistency among worldwide recommendations regarding the choice of surgical approach, although the evidence base is lacking. To inform clinical recommendations, further research examining viral emission, transmission, infectivity and amount of surgical aerosol produced is required.

Acute surgical abdomen during the COVID-19 pandemic: Clinical and therapeutic challenges

The present study investigated the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the clinical presentation and therapeutic management of acute surgical abdomen. A retrospective study of emergency hospitalizations with a diagnosis of acute surgical abdomen between April and July 2020 vs. a similar period in 2019 was performed. The observation sheets and the operating protocols were analyzed. Between April and July 2020, 50 cases of acute surgical abdomen were hospitalized and treated, compared to 43 cases in the same period last year. The main types of pathology in both groups included: Occlusions (60%, respectively 44.2% in 2019) and peritonitis (32%, respectively 41.8% in 2019). There was an increased rate of patients with colorectal cancers neglected therapeutically or uninvestigated, who presented during the pandemic period with emergencies for complications such as occlusion or tumor perforation (32 vs. 6.97%, P=0.0039). One case, with gastric perforation, was COVID-positive, with no pulmonary symptoms at admission. The number of postoperative infectious complications was lower during the pandemic (2 vs. 13.95%, P=0.0461). As the COVID-19 pandemic appears to be still far from ending, we should learn to adapt our surgical protocols to the new evidence. Oncological patients are a vulnerable group, who were neglected in the first months of the pandemic. SARS-Cov-2 infection may be a cause of abdominal pain and should be taken into account in different diagnoses of acute abdomen in surgical wards. Correct wearing of adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) and respecting strict rules of asepsis and antisepsis are required for preventing in-hospital transmission of infection.

Strategies for Optimizing the Use of PPE During Surgery in COVID-19 Pandemic: Rapid Scoping Review of Guidelines

Personal protective equipment (PPE) plays a fundamental role in the prevention of spread to Health Care Professionals (HCP) ; especially in a surgical setting. This scoping review of surgery guidelines was performed to appraise the quality of appropriate PPE recommendations and propose a strategy to optimize the PPE usage. This rapid scoping review of guidelines on surgery during COVID-19 was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews protocol. Important databases were searched from January 1, 2020 to July 31, 2020, for relevant studies produced by a national/international academic association/organization, in English literature, using relevant keywords. Quality of evidence was graded according to GRADE guidelines. The searches yielded a total of 1725 studies, out of these 41 guidelines on surgery during COVID-19 matching with pre-defined criteria were evaluated. The level of evidence was uniformly rated "low," as assessed by GRADE guidelines and recommendations provided by them were mostly non-specific covering a narrow range of items. The crucial issue of optimization of PPE was not addressed at all. Economic implications demand optimization of PPE and conservation of resources. A simple decision-making algorithm addressing all the limitations of guidelines can be constructed, which allows HCPs to safeguard themselves and at the same time optimize/ conserving resources.

Laparoscopic Surgery in COVID-19 Era-Safety and Ethical Issues

(1) Background: The paper aims to review the available evidence regarding the health risk of the aerosolization induced by laparoscopy induced and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic upon minimally invasive surgery. (2) Materials and methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed on PubMed, Medline and Scopus until 10 July. (3) Results: Chemicals, carcinogens and biologically active materials, such as bacteria and viruses, have been isolated in surgical smoke. However, the only evidence of viral transmission through surgical smoke to medical staff is post-laser ablation of HPV-positive genital warts. The reports of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery revealed the presence of the virus, when tested, in digestive wall and stools in 50% of cases but not in bile or peritoneal fluid. All surgeries did not result in contamination of the personnel, when protective measures were applied, including personal protective equipment (PPE) and filtration of the pneumoperitoneum. There are no comparative studies between classical and laparoscopic surgery. (4) Conclusions: Previously published data showed there is a possible infectious and toxic risk related to surgical smoke but not particularly proven for SARS-CoV-2. Implementing standardized filtration systems for smoke evacuation during laparoscopy, although increases costs, is necessary to increase the safety and it will probably remain a routine also in the future.