| Literature DB >> 32728918 |
Maximilian Brunner1, Christian Krautz1, Stephan Kersting1, Georg F Weber1, Benno Stinner2, Stefan R Benz3, Robert Grützmann4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to clarify the surgical supply situation of oncological colorectal patients in Germany during limitations of the OR caseload due to the COVID-19 pandemic.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19 pandemic; Colorectal surgery; Oncological surgery; SARS-CoV-2 infection; Surgical caseload
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32728918 PMCID: PMC7389155 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-020-03697-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis ISSN: 0179-1958 Impact factor: 2.571
Fig. 1Distribution of participating hospitals to the different federal states in Germany and frequency of patients with COVID-19 in the different federal states (status in April 23, 2020; red = high frequency of COVID-19 (≥ 150 cases per 100,000 residents, green = low frequency of COVID-19 (< 150 cases per 100,000 residents); BA = Bavaria, BER = Berlin, BR = Brandenburg, BRE = Bremen, BW=Baden-Württemberg, HA = Hamburg, HE = Hesse, LS = Lower Saxony, NRW=North Rhine-Westphalia, RP = Rhineland Palatinate, SA = Saxony, SAA = Saarland, SAAN=Saxony-Anhalt, SH=Schleswig Holstein, TH = Thuringia, MWP = Mecklenburg Western Pomerania
Data of participating hospitals
| Number | 101 | |
| Kind of hospital | Tertiary referral hospitals | 42 (42) |
| University hospital | 24 (24) | |
| Non-university hospitals | 18 (18) | |
| Other hospitals | 59 (58) | |
| Hospitals with focus on colorectal surgery | 48 (48) | |
| Basic care hospitals | 11 (11) | |
| Hospitals stratified to their federal state | North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) | 27 (27) |
| Bavaria (BA) | 19 (19) | |
| Baden-Württemberg (BW) | 13 (13) | |
| Saxony | 7 (7) | |
| Others | 30 (30) | |
| Unknown | 5 (5) | |
| Hospitals stratified to frequence of patients with COVID-19 in their federal state (status on 23th april 2020) | < 150 cases per 100,000 residents | 33 (34) |
| > 150 cases per 100,000 residents (NRW, BA, BW, HA, SAA) | 63 (66) | |
| Caseload per year | Cases of oncological colorectal surgery per year | Mean 123 [range 4–750] Median 110 |
| Hospitals stratified to caseload per year | < 110 cases per year | 50 (50) |
| ≥ 110 cases per year | 51 (50) | |
NRW North Rhine-Westphalia, BA Bavaria, BW Baden-Württemberg, HA Hamburg, SAA Saarland
Current status of oncological colorectal surgery in Germany during COVID-19 pandemic; sub-groups included tertiary referral hospitals (TRH) vs. other hospitals (OH), hospitals with low caseload (< 110 cases per year, low-CL) vs. high caseload (> 110 cases per year, high-CL), hospitals in areas with low frequency of COVID-19 (< 150 cases per 100,000 residents, low-FRE) vs. with high frequency of COVID-19 (≥ 150 cases per 100,000 residents, high-FRE)
| All hospitals ( | Differences in sub-groupsa | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Remaining total surgical caseload | < 20% | 10 (10) | – |
| 20–40% | 37 (37) | ||
| 40–60% | 28 (28) | ||
| 60–80% | 11 (11) | ||
| 80–99% | 2 (2) | ||
| 100% | 13 (13) | ||
| Remaining volume for oncological colorectal surgery | < 20% | 6 (6) | – |
| 20–40% | 8 (8) | ||
| 40–60% | 9 (9) | ||
| 60–80% | 9 (9) | ||
| 80–99% | 2 (2) | ||
| 100% | 67 (66) | ||
| Changes in interdisciplinary tumor boardsa | Unchanged | 6 (6) | – |
| Fewer staff | 71 (70) | ||
| Fewer frequency | 4 (4) | ||
| Via video conference | 39 (39) | ||
| Current procedure for COVID-19 patients | Surgery at the own hospital | 95 (94) | |
| Transfer to a specialized center | 6 (6) | ||
| Pre-surgery testing | All | 20 (20) | OH vs. TRH: 12/59/29% vs. 31/36/33%, |
| Patients with symptoms | 50 (50) | ||
| None | 31 (31) | ||
| Used test method for COVID-19 | PCR | 97 (96) | – |
| CT-Thorax | 1 (1) | ||
| Clinical evaluation | 3 (3) | ||
| Lack of surgical equipment | 8 (8) | – | |
| Lack of protective equipmentb | 45 (45) | OH vs. TRH: 56% vs. 29%, | |
aNineteen percent of the participating hospitals have more than one measure
bMasks, gowns, etc.
Assessment of measures taken for the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany; sub-groups included tertiary referral hospitals (TRH) vs. other hospitals (OH), hospitals with low caseload (< 110 cases per year, low-CL) vs. high caseload (> 110 cases per year, high-CL), hospitals in areas with low frequency of COVID-19 (< 150 cases per 100,000 residents, low-FRE) vs. with high frequency of COVID-19 (≥ 150 cases per 100,000 residents, high-FRE)
| All hospitals ( | Differences in sub-groups* | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Reduction of surgical caseload justified? | Yes, at all | 6 (6) | – |
| Yes, if care of oncological patients is ensured | 79 (78) | ||
| No | 16 (16) | ||
| Measures taken for the COVID-19 pandemia regarding lifestyle appropriate? | Too much | 16 (16) | – |
| Adequate | 81 (80) | ||
| Too little | 4 (4) | ||
| Measures taken for the COVID-19 pandemia regarding hospital management appropriate? | Too much | 33 (33) | – |
| Adequate | 68 (67) | ||
| Too little | 0 (0) | ||
Assessments of 112 German colorectal surgeons on the therapy of oncological colorectal patients during COVID-19 pandemic. High/moderate/low agreement was defined as > 80%/60–80%/< 60% agreement. Sub-groups included tertiary referral hospitals (TRH) vs. other hospitals (OH), hospitals with low caseload (< 110 cases per year, low-CL) vs. high caseload (> 110 cases per year, high-CL), hospitals in areas with low frequency of COVID-19 (< 150 cases per 100,000 residents, low-FRE) vs. with high frequency of COVID-19 (≥ 150 cases per 100,000 residents, High-FRE), hospitals with low OR-caseload-reduction (remaining caseload > 40%, low-OCR) vs. high OP-caseload-reduction (remaining caseload ≤ 40%, high-OCR), hospitals with OP-caseload-reduction of colorectal patients (OCR-CR) vs. without OP-caseload-reduction of colorectal patients (non-OCR-CR)
| Agree | Indecisive | Disagree | Differences in sub-groups | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High agreement | ||||
| (1) All patients with colorectal cancer and indication for surgery should undergo surgery in good time, regardless of the capacity reserve for COVID-19 patients | 95% | 3% | 3% | – |
| What additional waiting time to surgery do you consider acceptable for patients with non-metastatic/metastatic colorectal carcinoma? | – | |||
| No additional waiting time | 37%/49% | |||
| Up to 2 weeks | 63%/51% | |||
| Up to 4 weeks | 24%/16% | |||
| Up to 8 weeks | 3%/5% | |||
| Up to 12 weeks | 0%/2% | |||
| (2) All patients with non-metastatic rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation should receive a resection, regardless of the capacity available for COVID-19 patients | 83% | 8% | 9% | – |
| (3) All patients with non-metastatic rectal cancer and indication for primary resection (T1–2 N0 M0) should currently receive neoadjuvant chemoradiation in order to maintain capacity for COVID-19 patients | 4% | 4% | 92% | – |
| (4) All patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma should currently preferably receive systemic treatment, even if a resection of the primary and/or metastases would make sense | 3% | 4% | 94% | – |
| (5) Resectable colorectal liver metastases should currently preferably be treated using interventional procedures (e.g. ablation) | 2% | 6% | 92% | – |
| (6) All oncological colorectal resections should currently be performed with appropriate protective clothing (FFP3-masks, safety glasses) | 10% | 9% | 81% | – |
| Moderate agreement | ||||
| (1) In order to extend the time until the required operation, short-term radiation (5 × 5 Gray) should be avoided during the COVID-19 pandemic | 20% | 11% | 70% | – |
| (2) The training of young colorectal surgeons should currently be put in the background to reduce morbidity and optimize the operating times | 22% | 15% | 63% | – |
| (3) If the operating capacity is limited, patients with colorectal cancer should be selected based on their age and comorbidities | 27% | 11% | 63% | – |
| Low agreement | ||||
| (1) In patients with rectal cancer and minimal residuals after neoadjuvant chemoradiation, a longer wait is justified during COVID-19 pandemic in order to possibly achieve a higher rate of complete remissions and thus less need for surgery | 26% | 15% | 59% | – |
| (2) If the operating capacity is limited, all oncological patients should be selected based on their prognosis | 38% | 8% | 55% | – |
| (3) Robotic oncological colorectal surgery should be avoided due to the longer surgical time to optimize surgical capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic | 30% | 19% | 52% | Low-CL vs. high-CL: 27/29/44% vs. 32/9/60%, |
| (4) COVID-19-positive patients with colorectal cancer should be operated in specialized centers | 43% | 5% | 52% | OH vs. TRH: 24/5/71% vs. 67/6/27%, Low-FRE vs. high-FRE: 27/5/68% vs. 51/6/43%, |
| (5) All patients should receive a test for COVID-19 before planned surgery | 38% | 11% | 51% | – |
| (6) Colorectal surgeons should currently be deployed in the therapy of COVID-19 patients in the absence of surgical capacity | 36% | 22% | 43% | Low-FRE vs. high-FRE: 22/24/54% vs. 43/20/37%, |