Natura non facit saltus: a phase 2 proposal to manage brain tumors cases from the Neuro-oncology section of the Italian Society of Neurosurgery (SINch®)

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on surgical neuro-oncology: A survey from the Italian society of neurosurgery (SINch)

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on hospitals' activity and organization has imposed a vast change in standard neurosurgical oncology practice to accommodate for shifting resources.

Aims

This investigation aims to analyse the nationwide capability in reorganizing the surgical neuro-oncological activity during the COVID-19 pandemic to evaluate whether COVID-19-pandemic influenced the surgical management in these patients.

Method

A web-based dataset model organized by the Italian Neurosurgical Society (SINCh) was sent to all the Italian neurosurgical departments in May 2021, requesting to report the types and numbers of surgical procedures performed in the pre-pandemic period (from March 9th 2019 to March 9th 2020) compared to the pandemic period (from March 10th 2020 to March 10th 2021).

Results

This multicentre investigation included the surgical activity of 35 Italian Neurosurgical Departments in a pre-pandemic year versus a pandemic year. During the COVID period, 699 fewer neuro-oncological patients were operated on than in the pre-COVID period. We noted a slight increase in urgency and a more severe decrease in elective and benign pathology. None of these differences was statistically significant. Surgically treated patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were 36, of which 11 died. Death was found to be COVID-related only in 2 cases.

Conclusion

The reorganization of the Italian Neurosurgical Departments was able to guarantee a redistribution of the CNS tumors during the inter-pandemic periods, demonstrating that patients even in the pandemic era could be treated without compromising the efficacy and safety of the surgical procedure.

How has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted clinical care and research in Neuro-Oncology?

The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged the continued delivery of healthcare globally. Due to disease risk, clinicians were forced to re-evaluate the safety and priorities of pre-pandemic care. Neuro-oncology presents unique challenges, as patients can deteriorate rapidly without intervention. These challenges were also observed in countries with reduced COVID-19 burden with centres required to rapidly develop strategies to maintain efficient and equitable care. This review aims to summarise the impact of the pandemic on clinical care and research within the practice of Neuro-oncology. A narrative review of the literature was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASS and results screened using PRISMA guidelines with relevant inclusion and exclusion criteria. Search strategies included variations of ‘Neuro-oncology’ combined with COVID-19 and other clinical-related terms. Most adult and paediatric neurosurgical centres experienced reductions in new referrals and operations for brain malignancies, and those who did present for treatment frequently had operations cancelled or delayed. Many radiation therapy and medical oncology centres altered treatment plans to mitigate COVID-19 risk for patients and staff. New protocols were developed that aimed to reduce in-person visits and reduce the risk of developing severe complications from COVID-19. The COVID-19 pandemic has presented many challenges to the provision of safe and accessible healthcare. Despite these challenges, some benefits to healthcare provision such as the use of telemedicine are likely to remain in future practice. Neuro-oncology staff must remain vigilant to ensure patient and staff safety.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the management of glioma patients around the world. An evidence-based review

Background

The coronavirus pandemic has affected many health care services worldwide since the emergence of the first case in Wuhan. Surgical neuro-oncology care is a fundamental part of hospital services, making it susceptible to strategic changes amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

An electronic search on several databases (PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Google Scholar) from the beginning of the pandemic to the end of 2020, each paper was reviewed independently. The publication inclusion and exclusion criteria were done using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.

Results

Eight studies were found to be eligible for our meta-analysis. Most of the studies were on a retrospective basis, except one which was retrospective and prospective. An overall of 951 glioma patients’ were included for surgical admission from the beginning of the pandemic until 2020. Seventy-four patients' had mortality outcomes, and 250 patients had complications for both surgical admitted and non-surgical admitted purposes.

Conclusions

To our knowledge, we made the first systematic review and meta-analysis regarding the management of glioma patients’ during the pandemic of COVID-19. Our main findings are that the number of surgical admissions for glioma patients’ did not significantly differ between COVID-19 negative and COVD-19 positive cases; however, surprisingly, we found that both overall complications and mortality outcomes were more significant COVID-19 negative patients’ from the reported studies.

Delays and Disruptions in Cancer Health Care Due to COVID-19 Pandemic: Systematic Review

PURPOSE

There has been noteworthy concern about the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on health services including the management of cancer. In addition to being considered at higher risk for worse outcomes from COVID-19, people with cancer may also experience disruptions or delays in health services. This systematic review aimed to identify the delays and disruptions to cancer services globally.

METHODS

This is a systematic review with a comprehensive search including specific and general databases. We considered any observational longitudinal and cross-sectional study design. The selection, data extraction, and methodological assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by specific tools. The delays and disruptions identified were categorized, and their frequency was presented.

RESULTS

Among the 62 studies identified, none exhibited high methodological quality. The most frequent determinants for disruptions were provider- or system-related, mainly because of the reduction in service availability. The studies identified 38 different categories of delays and disruptions with impact on treatment, diagnosis, or general health service. Delays or disruptions most investigated included reduction in routine activity of cancer services and number of cancer surgeries; delay in radiotherapy; and delay, reschedule, or cancellation of outpatient visits. Interruptions and disruptions largely affected facilities (up to 77.5%), supply chain (up to 79%), and personnel availability (up to 60%).

CONCLUSION

The remarkable frequency of delays and disruptions in health care mostly related to the reduction of the COVID-19 burden unintentionally posed a major risk on cancer care worldwide. Strategies can be proposed not only to mitigate the main delays and disruptions but also to standardize their measurement and reporting. As a high number of publications continuously are being published, it is critical to harmonize the upcoming reports and constantly update this review.