scholarly journals Is minor surgery safe during the COVID-19 pandemic? A multi-disciplinary study

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. e0251122
Author(s):  
Michael Baboudjian ◽  
Mehdi Mhatli ◽  
Adel Bourouina ◽  
Bastien Gondran-Tellier ◽  
Vassili Anastay ◽  
...  

Background To assess the risk of postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods The CONCEPTION study was a cohort, multidisciplinary study conducted at Conception University Hospital, in France, from March 17th to May 11th, 2020. Our study included all adult patients who underwent minor surgery in one of the seven surgical departments of our hospital: urology, digestive, plastic, gynecological, otolaryngology, gynecology or maxillofacial surgery. Preoperative self-isolation, clinical assessment using a standardized questionnaire, physical examination, nasopharyngeal RT‐PCR and chest CT scan performed the day before surgery were part of our active prevention strategy. The main outcome was the occurrence of a SARS-CoV-2 infection within 21 days following surgery. The COVID-19 status of patients after discharge was updated during the postoperative consultation and to ensure the accuracy of data, all patients were contacted again by telephone. Results A total of 551 patients from six different specialized surgical Departments in our tertiary care center were enrolled in our study. More than 99% (546/551) of included patients underwent a complete preoperative Covid-19 screening including RT-PCR testing and chest CT scan upon admission to the Hospital. All RT-PCR tests were negative and in 12 cases (2.2%), preoperative chest CT scans detected pulmonary lesions consistent with the diagnosis criteria for COVID-19. No scheduled surgery was postponed. One patient (0.2%) developed a SARS-CoV-2 infection 20 days after a renal transplantation. No readmission or COVID-19 -related death within 30 days from surgery was recorded. Conclusions Minor surgery remained safe in the COVID-19 Era, as long as all appropriate protective measures were implemented. These data could be useful to public Health Authorities in order to improve surgical patient flow during a pandemic.

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vikram rao Bollineni ◽  
Koenraad Hans Nieboer ◽  
Seema Döring ◽  
Nico Buls ◽  
Johan de Mey

Abstract Background To evaluate the clinical value of the chest CT scan compared to the reference standard real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in COVID-19 patients. Methods From March 29th to April 15th of 2020, a total of 240 patients with respiratory distress underwent both a low-dose chest CT scan and RT-PCR tests. The performance of chest CT in diagnosing COVID-19 was assessed with reference to the RT-PCR result. Two board-certified radiologists (mean 24 years of experience chest CT), blinded for the RT-PCR result, reviewed all scans and decided positive or negative chest CT findings by consensus. Results Out of 240 patients, 60% (144/240) had positive RT-PCR results and 89% (213/240) had a positive chest CT scans. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of chest CT in suggesting COVID-19 were 100% (95% CI: 97–100%, 144/240), 28% (95% CI: 19–38%, 27/240), 68% (95% CI: 65–70%) and 100%, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of the chest CT suggesting COVID-19 was 71% (95% CI: 65–77%). Thirty-three patients with positive chest CT scan and negative RT-PCR test at baseline underwent repeat RT-PCR assay. In this subgroup, 21.2% (7/33) cases became RT-PCR positive. Conclusion Chest CT imaging has high sensitivity and high NPV for diagnosing COVID-19 and can be considered as an alternative primary screening tool for COVID-19 in epidemic areas. In addition, a negative RT-PCR test, but positive CT findings can still be suggestive of COVID-19 infection.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bonaventura Schmid ◽  
Doreen Feuerstein ◽  
Corinna N. Lang ◽  
Katrin Fink ◽  
Rebecca Steger ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Typical lung ultrasound (LUS) findings in patients with a COVID-19 infection were reported early on. During the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, LUS was propagated as a useful instrument in triage and monitoring. We evaluated LUS as a rapid diagnostic triage tool for the management of patients with suspected COVID-19 in the emergency department (ED). Methods The study retrospectively enrolled patients with suspected COVID-19, who were admitted from 1st April to 25th of April 2020 to the ED of a tertiary care center in Germany. During clinical work-up, patients underwent LUS and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2. The recorded ultrasound findings were analyzed and judged regarding typical signs of viral pneumonia, blinded for clinical information of the patients. The results were compared with PCR test and chest computed tomography (CT). Results 2236 patients were treated in the ED during the study period. 203 were tested for SARS-CoV-2 using PCR, 135 (66.5%) underwent LUS and 39 (28.9%) of the patients were examined by chest CT scan. 39 (28.9%) of the 135 patients were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 with PCR. In 52 (38.5%) COVID-19 was suspected from the finding of the LUS, resulting in a sensitivity of 76.9% and a specificity of 77.1% compared with PCR results. The negative predictive value reached 89.2%. The findings of the LUS had - compared to a positive chest CT scan for COVID-19 - a sensitivity of 70.6% and a specificity of 72.7%. Conclusions LUS is a rapid and useful triage tool in the work-up of patients with suspected COVID-19 infection during a pandemic scenario. Still, the results of the LUS depend on the physician’s experience and skills.


2021 ◽  
Vol 123 (4) ◽  
pp. 815-822
Author(s):  
Joanne Guerlain ◽  
Fabienne Haroun ◽  
Alexandra Voicu ◽  
Charles Honoré ◽  
Franck Griscelli ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatemeh Khatami ◽  
Mohammad Saatchi ◽  
Seyed Saeed Tamehri Zadeh ◽  
Zahra Sadat Aghamir ◽  
Alireza Namazi Shabestari ◽  
...  

AbstractNowadays there is an ongoing acute respiratory outbreak caused by the novel highly contagious coronavirus (COVID-19). The diagnostic protocol is based on quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and chests CT scan, with uncertain accuracy. This meta-analysis study determines the diagnostic value of an initial chest CT scan in patients with COVID-19 infection in comparison with RT-PCR. Three main databases; PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and EMBASE were systematically searched for all published literature from January 1st, 2019, to the 21st May 2020 with the keywords "COVID19 virus", "2019 novel coronavirus", "Wuhan coronavirus", "2019-nCoV", "X-Ray Computed Tomography", "Polymerase Chain Reaction", "Reverse Transcriptase PCR", and "PCR Reverse Transcriptase". All relevant case-series, cross-sectional, and cohort studies were selected. Data extraction and analysis were performed using STATA v.14.0SE (College Station, TX, USA) and RevMan 5. Among 1022 articles, 60 studies were eligible for totalizing 5744 patients. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of chest CT scan compared to RT-PCR were 87% (95% CI 85–90%), 46% (95% CI 29–63%), 69% (95% CI 56–72%), and 89% (95% CI 82–96%), respectively. It is important to rely on the repeated RT-PCR three times to give 99% accuracy, especially in negative samples. Regarding the overall diagnostic sensitivity of 87% for chest CT, the RT-PCR testing is essential and should be repeated to escape misdiagnosis.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Olivier Taton ◽  
Emmanuelle Papleux ◽  
Benjamin Bondue ◽  
Christiane Knoop ◽  
Sébastien Van Laethem ◽  
...  

Background. Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is currently not recommended in noncritically ill patients for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Indeed, the diagnosis is based on the RT-PCR test on a nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and abnormal findings on the chest CT scan. However, the sensitivity of the NPS and the specificity of the chest CT scan are low. Results of BAL in case of negative NPS testing are underreported, especially in the subgroup of immunocompromised patients. Objectives. The added value of BAL in the management of unstable, but noncritically ill patients, suspected of having SARS-CoV-2 infection despite one previous negative NPS and the side effects of the procedure for the patients and the health-care providers, were assessed during the epidemic peak of the COVID-19 outbreak in Belgium. Methods. This multicentric study included all consecutive noncritically ill patients hospitalized with a clinical and radiological suspicion of SARS-CoV-2 infection but with a negative NPS. BAL was performed according to a predefined decisional algorithm based on their state of immunocompetence, the chest CT scan features, and their respiratory status. Results. Among the 55 patients included in the study, 14 patients were diagnosed with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Interestingly, there was a relationship between the cycle threshold of the RT-PCR and the interval of time between the symptom onset and the BAL procedure ( Pearso n ’ s   correlation   coefficient = 0.8 , p = 0.0004 ). Therapeutic management was changed in 33 patients because another infectious agent was identified in 23 patients or because an alternative diagnosis was made in 10 patients. In immunocompromised patients, the impact of BAL was even more marked (change in therapy for 13/17 patients). No significant adverse event was noted for patients or health-care staff. All health-care workers remained negative for SARS-CoV-2 NPS and serology at the end of the study. Conclusions. In this real-life study, BAL can be performed safely in selected noncritically ill patients suspected of SARS-CoV-2 infection, providing significant clinical benefits that outweigh the risks.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (12) ◽  
pp. 1375-1377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aditya S. Shah ◽  
Lara A. Walkoff ◽  
Ronald S. Kuzo ◽  
Matthew R. Callstrom ◽  
Michael J. Brown ◽  
...  

AbstractObjective:Presently, evidence guiding clinicians on the optimal approach to safely screen patients for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to a nonemergent hospital procedure is scarce. In this report, we describe our experience in screening for SARS-CoV-2 prior to semiurgent and urgent hospital procedures.Design:Retrospective case series.Setting:A single tertiary-care medical center.Participants:Our study cohort included patients ≥18 years of age who had semiurgent or urgent hospital procedures or surgeries.Methods:Overall, 625 patients were screened for SARS-CoV-2 using a combination of phone questionnaire (7 days prior to the anticipated procedure), RT-PCR and chest computed tomography (CT) between March 1, 2020, and April 30, 2020.Results:Of the 625 patients, 520 scans (83.2%) were interpreted as normal; 1 (0.16%) had typical features of COVID-19; 18 scans (2.88%) had indeterminate features of COVID-19; and 86 (13.76%) had atypical features of COVID-19. In total, 640 RT-PCRs were performed, with 1 positive result (0.15%) in a patient with a CT scan that yielded an atypical finding. Of the 18 patients with chest CTs categorized as indeterminate, 5 underwent repeat negative RT-PCR nasopharyngeal swab 1 week after their initial swab. Also, 1 patient with a chest CT categorized as typical had a follow-up repeat negative RT-PCR, indicating that the chest CT was likely a false positive. After surgery, none of the patients developed signs or symptoms suspicious of COVID-19 that would indicate the need for a repeated RT-PCR or CT scan.Conclusion:In our experience, chest CT scanning did not prove provide valuable information in detecting asymptomatic cases of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) in our low-prevalence population.


Author(s):  
Ramin Hamidi Farahani ◽  
Meysam Mosallaei ◽  
Ebrahim Hazrati ◽  
Naeim Ehtesham ◽  
Bahram Pakzad ◽  
...  

The article's abstract is not available.  


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatemeh Khatami ◽  
Mohammad Saatchi ◽  
Seyed Saeed Tamehri Zadeh ◽  
Zahra Sadat Aghamir ◽  
Alireza Namazi Shabestari ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Nowadays there is an ongoing acute respiratory outbreak causing by the novel highly contagious coronavirus (nCoV). There are two diagnostic protocol based on chest CT scan and quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) which their diagnostic accuracy is under the debate. We designed this meta-analysis study to determine the diagnostic value of initial chest CT scan in patients with nCoV infection in comparison with RT- PCR.Search strategy and statistical analysis: Three main databases the PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and EMBASE was systematically searched for all published literatures from January 1st, 2019, to the 27th march 2020 with key grouping of “COVID19 virus”, “2019 novel coronavirus”, “Wuhan coronavirus”, “2019-nCoV”, “X-Ray Computed Tomography”, “Polymerase Chain Reaction”, “Reverse Transcriptase PCR”, and “PCR Reverse Transcriptase”. All relevant case- series, cross-sectional, and cohort studies were selected. Data extraction was done in Excel 2007 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, CA) and their analysis was performed using STATA v.14.0SE (College Station, TX, USA) and RevMan 5.Result: From first recruited 668 articles we end up to the final 47 studies, which comprised a total sample size of 4238 patients. In compare to RT-PCR, the overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of chest CT scan were 86% (95% CI: 83% -90%), 43 % (95% CI: 26% -60%), 67% (95% CI: 57% -78%), and 84% (95% CI: 74% -95%) respectively. However the RT-PCR should be repeated for three times in order to give the 99% accuracy especially in negative samples.Conclusion: According to the acceptable sensitivity of chest CT scan, it can be employed complement to RT-PCR to diagnosis patients who are clinically suspicious for nCoV.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Laure BRUN ◽  
Alexia GENCE-BRENEY ◽  
Julie TRICHEREAU ◽  
Marie-Christine BALLESTER ◽  
Marc VASSE ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives To assess inter-reader agreements and diagnostic accuracy of chest CT to identify COVID-19 pneumonia in patients with intermediate clinical probability during an acute disease outbreak.Methods:From March 20 to April 8, consecutive patients with intermediate clinical probability of COVID-19 pneumonia underwent a chest CT scan. Two independent chest radiologists blinded to clinical information and RT-PCR results retrospectively reviewed and classified images on a 1-5 confidence level scale for COVID-19 pneumonia. Agreements between radiologists were assessed with kappa statistics. Diagnostic accuracy of chest CT compared to RT-PCR assay and patient outcomes was measured using receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for COVID-19 pneumonia were calculated.Results: 319 patients with a mean age of 62.3 yo were included. Inter-observer agreement for highly probable (kappa: 0.83 [p < .001]) and highly probable or probable (kappa: 0.82 [p < .001]) diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia was very good. RT-PCR tests performed in 307 patients were positive in 173 and negative in 134. Sixteen patients with negative RT-PCR tests and probable or highly probable CT patterns according to both radiologists were reclassified COVID-19 positive after clinical discussion. The areas under the curve (AUC) were 0.94 and 0.92 respectively. With a disease prevalence of 61.6%, PPV were 96.6 % and 94.4%, and NPV 84.3% and 78.2%.Conclusion :During acute COVID-19 outbreak, chest CT scan may be used for triage of patients with intermediate clinical probability with very good inter-observer agreements and diagnostic accuracy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document