• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • Search
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2026 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • MIS Fellows Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
  • Opportunities
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs and Humanitarian Efforts
  • Search
    • Search the SAGES Site
    • Guidelines Search
    • Video Search
    • Search Images
    • Search Abstracts
  • OWLS/FLS
  • Login
You are here: Home / Archives for COVID-19

SAGES COVID-19 / Coronavirus Announcement Archives

SAGES will compile all of its announcements and recommendations regarding Covid-19/Coronavirus at this location.  Please bookmark it for your convenience.


General Disclaimer:

The following is intended to provide our members with additional information to help manage surgical patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. These are not formal guidelines and due to time constraints, SAGES has not reviewed or authenticated them by utilizing its standard rigorous guidelines process. Statements and information are updated regularly and subject to change as more data becomes available.

Did you find this information helpful?

Please consider joining SAGES or making a donation to the SAGES Education and Research Foundation so we can continue to bring content like this to the surgical community for free.


 

Addressing Religious Concerns About COVID-19 Vaccine

October 21, 2021 by SAGES Webmaster

This may be a difficult subject matter for you and your patient to talk about.  Be assured, all major organized religious groups encourage and recommend the COVID-19 vaccine. Listed below are references and websites you can direct your patient towards to help them make an informed decision with regards to their religious concerns against the COVID-19 vaccine.

Pope Francis video message approving the COVID-19 Vaccine
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/248714/pope-francis-ad-council-collaborate-to-promote-covid-19-vaccines-in-the-americas

Statement from the Vatican approving the COVID-19 Vaccine
https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2020/12/21/201221c.ht

Catholic US Bishops approve the use of the COVID 19 Vaccine
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/46899/catholic-us-bishops-approve-use-of-covid-19-vaccines-with-remote-connection-to-abortion

Christian Connection for International Health Vaccine Campaign
https://www.ccih.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Faith-Leaders-COVID-Vaccine-Factsheet.pdf

Central Conference of American Rabbis Support COVID-19 Vaccinations
https://www.ccarnet.org/ccar-responsa/nyp-no-5759-10/

Orthodox Union COVID-19 Vaccination Guidance
https://rabbis.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Guidance-re-Vaccines.pdf

Dalai Lama Urges other to get vaccinated
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-56310274

National Muslim Task Force and the National Black Muslim COVID Coalition (NBMCC) on Ramadan 2021 and COVID-19 Vaccines
https://isna.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Press-Release-NMTF-Ramadan-Statement-4.6.2021.pdf

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saint approve vaccination
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/church-makes-immunizations-an-official-initiative-provides-social-mobilization?lang=eng&query=vaccination

Jehovah’s Witness “Are Jehovah’s Witnesses Opposed to Vaccination?  NO”
https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/jw-vaccines-immunization/


List compiled 9-30-2021

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19

Free SAGES Webinar: Lessons from COVID on Living and Thriving as Surgeons

May 22, 2020 by Julie Miller

SAGES recognizes that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a big impact on surgical practice and in surgeon wellness. SAGES’ Reimagining the Practice of Surgery Taskforce will present “Finding the Opportunities: Lessons from COVID and How We Live and Thrive as Surgeons”  to look at ways in which innovative leadership at various levels may help transform the practice of surgery to promote healthier approaches to life and work. CME credit will be provided to participants. The program outline includes:

  • Welcome and Introduction: Horacio Asbun, MD
  • Lessons About Surgical Practice from COVID: John Romanelli, MD
  • Challenges and Opportunities of Telehealth: Denise Gee, MD
  • What Motivates How We Work, Teach and Learn: John Mellinger, MD
  • Innovative Leadership to Support a Paradigm Shift: Adnan Alseidi, MD
  • Q&A Discussion Moderated by Liane Feldman. MD

To register, please go to:

https://zoom.us/webinar/register/9115899271563/WN_6DvvFtWWSQmzex4NzTGLqg

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19

Notes from the Battlefield – May 14, 2020

May 14, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

Coronavirus Global Surgical Collaborative (CVGSC)*
An initiative sponsored by SAGES in collaboration with EAES, AEC, KSELS, and ELSA


A group of surgical leaders from affected countries have joined to discuss what they are learning during this Covid-19 Global crisis. The following is a brief summary of what they feel may be useful information to disseminate to the surgical community:

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Conduct of Surgical Research

The COVID impact on basic research has been extensive in certain areas of the world. Research labs have been affected and many times closed, except for those focused on COVID-19.  Clinical trials at institutions have been severely impacted and largely stopped.  Large streams of funding have been diverted away from non-COVID related research.  Adapting clinical research to the COVID-19 era is important and can be done incorporating COVID-19 testing and study protocol and using telehealth platforms.  For a useful guide on how to adapt research and clinical trials during this period, refer to the document prepared by the CVGSC

  • Impact of COVID on Research

“Closing the Back Door” Protocol Helpful

Confidential reports from Italy and Spain confirm the efficacy of the “closing the back door protocol” in allowing an early detection of infected hospitalized surgical patients. Checking in house surgical patients twice a day – short interviews, temperature, and O2 saturation – led to several “suspected” infections. Standard operating protocol has been proven successful in identifying a few patients who later tested positive and were promptly isolated and managed accordingly. Although the early warning system increased the workload in the surgical wards, it definitely proved useful to limit in-hospital micro-outbreaks that potentially can affect other patients and staff health.

Preoperative Testing and Screening for Elective Surgery During the Pandemic to Restart Surgery

To minimize the spread and to plan appropriate protective measures for patients and OR staff, all patients should be tested prior to surgery.  The type and timing of testing remains controversial, however, and is highly dependent on local resources. Please see attached statement for further suggestions.

  • COVID Testing
  • Figure A
  • Figure B
  • Figure C

Participants:

Drs.  Horacio Asbun (Lead), Mohammed Abu Hilal, Jaap Bonjer, Nicolas Demartines, Nader Francis, Ho-Seong Han, Davide Lomanto, Salvador Morales, Andrea Pietrabissa, Aurora Pryor, Christopher Schlachta, Patricia Sylla, Eduardo Targarona, Suthep Udomsawaengsup

Other Surgical Societies/leaders are welcome to participate in future discussions. Please contact SAGES Executive Director, Sallie Matthews at sallie@sages.org if interested in being considered for participation.


General Disclaimer:

The following is intended to provide our members with information arising from the experience of our colleagues from Europe and Asia who experienced the pandemic first.  While the information provided is from very reliable sources, it is NOT evidence based data, since there was no time to test its validity on scientific grounds. It is merely an attempt to share practical advice based upon prior experience and current knowledge.


Did you find this information helpful?
Please consider joining SAGES or making a donation to the SAGES Education and Research Foundation so we can continue to bring content like this to the surgical community for free.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19, Notes from the Battlefield Tagged With: coronavirus, covid testing, covid-19, surgical research

COVID-19 Medical Device Repository

May 8, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

If you have a product you believe should appear on this list, please submit your request here:

https://www.sages.org/industry-repository-document-request/

Disclaimer:

This list should not be considered an endorsement of any product by SAGES, or as a SAGES recommendation. For user instructions, visit the company website, or the linked document in the table.

Disclaimer of Liability:

The information herein is offered only as a resource. It has been provided by the companies, and the accuracy of the information is solely the responsibility of the company. The products have not been researched or tested by SAGES, nor has the products’ accuracy been confirmed by SAGES.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

 

Commercially Available Smoke and Gas Evacuation Systems

 

 

Company Product Open Laparoscopic ULPA Passive or Active Links
Alessi Surgical
  • Ultravision
No Yes Yes Active
Bowa
  • She Sha Smoke Evacuation System
Yes Yes Yes Active
  • BOWA-BRO-12054-SHESHA-2020-04-EN.pdf
Braun Aesculap
  • AESCULAP® Flow 50 Insufflator
No Yes Yes Active
  • Braun Aesculap Customer Letter
Conmed
  • Airseal® iFS
  • Buffalo® Filter Smoke Management
Yes Yes Yes Active
  • Conmed Statement
  • Insufflation Recommendations
  • Surgical Smoke Management
  • Airseal Filtration
  • Airseal Smoke Evacuation Mode
  • Covid-19 Insufflation Recommendations
CooperSurgical
  • SeeClear®
  • Plume-Away
No Yes Yes Passive
Ethicon
  • Megadyne™ Smoke Evacuators
Yes Yes (Mega Vac Plus Only) Yes Active
  • Ethicon Covid-19 Statement
IC Medical
  • Crystal Vision 450-D (lap)
  • PenEvac1® (open)
Yes Yes (Model 450-D) Yes Active
  • COVID-19 Considerations for Smoke Evacuation during Non-Deferrable Surgery
  • Smoke Evacuation Letter
Lexion Medical
  • PneuView XE
  • AP50/30
No Yes Yes Active
Medtronic
  • ValleyLab™ Rapidvac Smoke Evacuator
  • Valleylab™ Laparoscopic Smoke Evacuation System
Yes Yes Yes Active
  • Medtronic Smoke Evacuation and Coronavirus Letter and Frequently Asked Questions
Olympus
  • UHI-4
Yes Yes No Active
Stryker
  • Pneumoclear
  • Neptune 3
  • SafeAir
Yes Yes Yes Active
  • Stryker Response to SAGES
  • Stryker Customer Letter
Northgate Technologies
  • Nebulae™ I
No Yes Yes Active
Karl Storz
  • S-Pilot (031111-10 & 031110-10)
No Yes No Active (S-Pilot)
  • Karl Storz Smoke Evacuation Letter
Symmetry Surgical
  • Smoke Shark II
Yes Yes Yes Active
Palliare Ltd
  • EVA 15 Insufflator
No Yes Yes Active
  • EVA15-Brochure
  • EVA15-Specifications-Sheet
Boehringer Laboratories LLC
  • VISIMAX™ Laparoscopic Smoke Evacuation System
No Yes No Active
  • Surgical Challenges During COVID-19 Webinar

 

N95 Facepiece Respirator Decontamination Systems

Company Method of Decontamination Max number of respirators Decontamination Cycles Links
Battelle CCDS Vapor Phase Hydrogen Peroxide 80,000/per machine/day 20 FDA EUA

IFU

Steris V-Pro Vapor Phase Hydrogen Peroxide 10/machine/10 min 10 FDA EUA

IFU

 

COVID-19 Testing

Company Product Literature
Abbott Abbott Now Rapid SARS-Cov-2 Test Abbot Real Time Assay Fact Sheet
Cellex, Inc. qSARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM Rapid Test qSARS-Cov-2 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Instructional Video

This document is the companion to: Resources for Smoke & Gas Evacuation During Open, Laparoscopic, and Endoscopic Procedures
 
 

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19 Tagged With: coronavirus, COVID, covid-19, evacuation, filtration, industry, medical devices, smoke, ULPA

COVID-19 Update For FLS, FES, and FUSE Test Takers – Updated April 28

April 28, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

SAGES has made the decision to extend FLS, FES, and FUSE Test Center closures through May 31st, 2020.

All exams scheduled during this time have been cancelled. Some test centers have already chosen to remain closed beyond May 31st. A list of those centers can be found at FLS/FES/FUSE Test Center Closings

Rescheduling

Test takers are able to log in to their test taker account at any time to reschedule their exam appointment. Many test centers will have availability starting June 1st depending on local guidelines.

Additional Testing Opportunities

We understand that once restrictions lift, demand for test appointments will be high. We are committed to providing access to the Fundamentals Exams to all prospective test takers and will be working with our test centers to increase their availability as well as scheduling several Special Onsite Testing Events (FLS) in areas where availability may be limited. Announcements regarding these events will be posted to the FLS website as they are scheduled. www.flsprogram.org

2020 ABS Applicants (FLS, FES)

For those test takers who still need FLS and/or FES certification for their American Board of Surgery (ABS) QE application, ABS will permit those affected by the cancellation of FLS and FES exams to apply for and take the QE without these certifications by the posted deadlines. For more information, please visit http://archive.mailengine1.com/csb/Public/show/fav9-1u74dh–p2vei-98bijss3  or email gsqe@absurgery.org.

2021 ABOG Applicants (FLS)

The American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ABOG) candidates have until mid-December 2020 to complete FLS certification if they are completing their residency in the 2020-21 academic year and plan to begin the certification process and apply for the 2021 ABOG Specialty Qualifying Examination (QE). Application for certification for the Specialty QE is not tied to FLS status. Candidates can complete the application for the 2021 QE prior to completion of FLS certification.  The 2021 QE application should be available in September 2020. Residents are encouraged to apply as soon as the QE application becomes available. Residents should contact ABOG Exams at exams@abog.org with concerns about completing the FLS program by December 2020.

Voucher Expiration Dates

Test takers in possession of vouchers that are set to expire over the next several months can fill out the form(s) below to request a voucher extension allowing for the voucher to be used through December 31, 2020. All voucher extension requests submitted during this time will be granted.

FLS Voucher Extension Request Form

FES Voucher Extension Request Form

FUSE Voucher Extension Request Form

Fundamentals Division
FLS, FES, and FUSE Programs
Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons

Phone: (310) 437-0544
Fax: (310) 424-3398
11300 W Olympic Blvd, Ste 600
Los Angeles, CA  90064

SAGES is committed to the protection and care of patients, their surgeons and staff, and all who are served by the medical community at large. For more information on the COVID-19 pandemic from the SAGES organization, please visit: https://www.sages.org/category/covid-19/

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19 Tagged With: fes, FLS, Fundamentals, fuse, testing

Notes from the Battlefield – April 23, 2020

April 23, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

Coronavirus Global Surgical Collaborative (CVGSC)*
An initiative sponsored by SAGES in collaboration with EAES, AEC, KSELS, and ELSA


A group of surgical leaders from affected countries have joined to discuss what they are learning during this Covid-19 Global crisis. The following is a brief summary of what they feel may be useful information to disseminate to the surgical community:

Improving communication strategies for hospitalized COVID patients:

Because of the no visitor or restricted visitor policies in hospitals affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, communications between patients, families and their care teams have become extremely difficult. Understandably, clinical interactions are limited and preferentially conducted remotely, through glass doors, with in-person evaluations. Conversations are kept short and focused. Patients in isolation are particularly vulnerable to anxiety, fear of the unknown, and may have limited understanding of their condition and medical decision-making. A document on Communication Strategies during the COVID Pandemic is provided here and could be of valuable help in better understanding and addressing this issue.

  • Communication strategies during the COVID pandemic

Understanding COVID testing:

Several tests for the diagnosis of COVID infection have emerged. PCR, IgM and IgG are all valuable indicators at different stages of the disease. A comparison between the different tests, significance and potential pitfalls of the results are presented on the following document, courtesy of Surgery-AEC-COVID.

  • COVID laboratory test comparison

Transition back to surgical activities: When? How? by Whom?:

As we witness the decrease in cases in Europe and the plateau of the curve in certain parts of the US, a crucial question arises: How do we safely become operational and what will that look like? Since no one has a crystal ball to predict resurgence of the pandemic and prevalence of active infection, all answers to the question are based on predictions from expert opinion.  Clinicians and health care providers should have an important role in advising both policy makers, hospital administration and the public on the need for a thoughtful approach before calling for a full return to normal activities. A webinar on the subject will be held (link) which may shed some light on this difficult issue. At the same time, SAGES and EAES, in collaboration with several international surgical societies, are conducting a Delphi study with rigorous methodology with the goal of getting some valid information that will aid in answering this question.

Message from Italy, Spain & Netherlands to North America:

SAGES and EAES have joined forces during this crisis in creating initiatives like the CVGSC and multiple sources of information that have been of significant value to the global surgical community. It is from EAES that SAGES has received a heartfelt message of support and encouragement. SAGES thanks their European sister society for such a gesture of friendship. The letter clearly illustrates what the human spirit is and how difficult times brings people together to join forces and overcome adversity.

  • Message from EAES to SAGES

Participants:

Drs. Horacio Asbun (Lead), Mohammed Abu Hilal, Jaap Bonjer, Nicolas Demartines, Nader Francis, Ho-Seong Han, Davide Lomanto, Salvador Morales, Andrea Pietrabissa, Aurora Pryor, Christopher Schlachta, Patricia Sylla, Eduardo Targarona, Suthep Udomsawaengsup

Other Surgical Societies/leaders are welcome to participate in future discussions. Please contact SAGES Executive Director, Sallie Matthews at sallie@sages.org if interested in being considered for participation.


General Disclaimer:

The following is intended to provide our members with information arising from the experience of our colleagues from Europe and Asia who experienced the pandemic first.  While the information provided is from very reliable sources, it is NOT evidence based data, since there was no time to test its validity on scientific grounds. It is merely an attempt to share practical advice based upon prior experience and current knowledge.


Did you find this information helpful?
Please consider joining SAGES or making a donation to the SAGES Education and Research Foundation so we can continue to bring content like this to the surgical community for free.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19, Notes from the Battlefield Tagged With: coronavirus, covid testing, covid-19, restarting surgery, webinar

Free SAGES Webinar: Returning to Operations After COVID-19

April 21, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, elective surgeries have been cancelled, and the whole surgical community has been affected. Going back to “normal” activities will require a significant amount of forethought and strategic planning. In fact, the new “normal” may be quite different than what we had considered normal in the pre-COVID era.

This webinar “Returning to Operations after COVID-19” will address a range of subjects related to this issue and hopes to shed some light on the potential changes that will be needed in the short and medium time frame. Program below:

  • Welcome, Introduction and Objectives: Horacio Asbun / Christopher Schlachta
  • How do we get back to normal? We don’t: Gretchen Jackson
  • Are we at the COVID-19 peak? Epidemiologic Projections: Jinwei Hu
  • Now is the time to reopen – Point: Mohammed Abu Hilal
  • Now is not the time to reopen – Counter Point: Andrea Pietrabissa
  • Panel discussion: Horacio Asbun / Christopher Schlachta
  • I will be a surgeon again, but how and on whom?: Linda Zhang
  • Navigating the COVID-19 pandemic from the medical device industry perspective: Brian Dunkin
  • Post pandemic collaboration: How industry and caregivers will make healthcare better: Chad Evans
  • Restoring hospital operations during the transition: Steven Schwaitzberg
  • Medical education in the transition period and long-term implications: Liane Feldman
  • Panel discussion: Horacio Asbun / Christopher Schlachta
  • Wrap up: Horacio Asbun, SAGES President

The recorded webinar is now posted on SAGES.TV

SAGES Webinar April 23 3pm Eastern

https://www.sages.org/video/returning-to-operations-after-covid-19/

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19 Tagged With: abby normal, abnormal, coronavirus, covid-19, elective, get back to work, normal, surgery

N95 Mask Re-Use Strategies

April 17, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

This document was updated and re-released April 17, 2020. This content supersedes the previous versions.

Did you find this information helpful?
Please consider joining SAGES or making a donation to the SAGES Education and Research Foundation so we can continue to bring content like this to the surgical community for free.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


Personal protective equipment (PPE) shortages during the COVID-19 pandemic have precipitated a wave of creative solutions for repurposing of N95 masks. A growing influx of new information can make it difficult to discern best practices for mask re-use. Below we provide resources and tips on this topic. This page will be updated regularly as new information comes in.

Note that based on manufacturer recommendations, N95 masks are designed for one-time use. The CDC and NIOSH do not formally recommend decontamination and re-use of N95 masks, but acknowledge that in times of scarcity, the strategies below are options that can be considered based on individual clinical judgment and the institutional resources available.[1]

How do N95’s work?

The filtration media contained in the N95 is designed to capture at least 95% of particles measuring a median of 0.3 µm. Even though viral particles are a few orders of magnitude smaller than this, nanoparticles mainly travel by Brownian motion and are effectively captured within the N95 filter via mechanical and electrostatic forces.[2] The outer mask material is typically hydrophobic polypropylene. Importantly, extended use, re-use, or re-processing of masks all affect the filtration capacity of the mask.

What are my options for extending the life of my N95 mask?

It is important to differentiate between extended use, re-use, and mask re-processing.

Extended use

The CDC reports that prolonged N95 mask use (including between patients) can be safe for up to 8 hours, and encourages each user to review each manufacturer’s recommendations prior to following this strategy. Current guidelines encourage wearing a face shield over the N95 to decrease the chances of soiling the mask.

Re-use

Because coronaviruses lose their viability significantly after 72 hours[3],[4], many organizations have promoted a rotation and re-use strategy. Assuming there is no soiling and minimal to no viral contamination to the mask, the CDC suggests that masks can be re-used up to 5 times with the following strategy:

Mask Rotation

Acquire a set number of N95 masks (at least 5 per the CDC), and rotate their use each day, allowing them to dry for long enough that the virus is no longer viable (> 72 hours). Proper storage for this technique requires either hanging the respirators to dry, or keeping them in a clean, breathable container like a paper bag between uses. Make sure the masks do not touch each other, and that you do not share your respirator with other people. A user seal check should be performed before each use.

Importantly, when planning to reuse an N-95 mask, practice fastidious donning/doffing to avoid contamination of the inside or outside of the mask at all times (see below methods for donning and doffing). If the mask is damaged or significantly contaminated from aerosol-generating procedures or bodily fluids, the CDC recommends discarding it.

Reprocessing/Decontamination

Mask decontamination strategies are actively being investigated by the CDC, mask companies, and large academic/industry collaboratives. General principles of re-processing include:

  1. The method must sufficiently inactivate the viral load on the mask.
  2. The mask cannot be soiled (bodily fluids, makeup[a]).
  3. The filtration capacity and electrostatic charge must be preserved as much as possible.
  4. The fit of the mask cannot be compromised.

Most studies on N95 decontamination were performed with flu virus or bacterial spores and cautious extrapolation to the current pandemic is being exercised. Fortunately, recent publications have started to test SARS-CoV-2 specifically, and have found promising results.

Below is a brief summary of the decontamination methods supported by current data. Due to the rapid nature of this research, some publications are not yet peer-reviewed. Additionally, note that there are many versions of N95 masks, with different strap materials and shapes. Thus, one method may work well for one mask type, and not for another.

Hydrogen Peroxide Vaporization

Hydrogen peroxide vapor (HPV) decontamination has been shown in pilot studies to allow multiple cycles of N95 processing with acceptable preservation of function.[5] It is now approved by the FDA as an emergency method for N95 decontamination for healthcare personnel during the COVID-19 pandemic.[6] This method of decontamination can only be used on N95 models that do not contain cellulose, such as the 1860. It is being utilized in industrial facilities such as Battelle (up to 20 cycles) as well as individual hospitals via Sterrad (up to 2 cycles) or Steris equipment (up to 10 cycles).

UV treatment

Proper UV treatment of N95 masks requires specific dosing protocols and full surface area illumination to ensure proper inactivation of viral particles with minimal mask degradation.[7] Due to the precision required, home UV light use is not recommended. This method of decontamination has been implemented by some hospital systems in the United States.[8],[9]

Moist Heat

Moist heat (heating at 60-70°C and 80-85% relative humidity) has been shown to be effective for flu viruses, but there is limited data on the temperature, humidity, and time required to completely inactivate SARS-COV-2 viral particles. Moreover, the parameters required to kill the virus may adversely affect filtration efficacy of the mask. Due to the dearth of specific data on a protocol to achieve both aims, this method is not currently recommended.[10]

Dry Heat

Dry heating of the mask at 70°C for 30 minutes has been suggested as a method of decontamination which can adequately kill virus and preserve the filter integrity for re-use.[11], [12] Recent tests at the NIH utilizing SARS-CoV-2 specifically indicated that this method can be used for two cycles to kill the virus without compromising fit.[13] Research efforts are ongoing to determine optimal parameters (temperature and duration), and this is not yet recommended by the CDC.

Please also see our COVID-19 Medical Device Repository for more information on N95 Facepiece Respirator Decontamination Systems.

My hospital only provides one N95 at a time and I cannot utilize the rotation or decontamination strategies. What are my options?

If your hospital has one-day turnaround capability for the above strategies, this is a potential option. Otherwise, unfortunately there are no at-home strategies recommended by the CDC. The best method is to follow meticulous donning and doffing to avoid touching the inside or outside of the mask, and to prevent soilage. If new methods become available, this section will be updated.

What methods are pending/promising?

The CDC lists a few methods undergoing investigation that may eventually become viable:

  • Steam
  • Liquid Hydrogen Peroxide

Which methods are NOT approved?

  • Bleach
  • Alcohol
  • Baking
  • Boiling
  • Ethylene oxide
    • May be toxic to the wearer
  • Microwave
    • At-home microwaving is not recommended because of variable power settings, and metal portions of the masks may catch fire.
  • Sanitizing wipes
  • Soapy Water

Are there alternatives to N95 Masks?

The CDC recently allowed use of particular non-NIOSH masks from other countries. The approved list is here.

Certain hospital systems have created masks from available hospital materials. These are listed here for informational purposes only, but are not endorsed by the FDA:

  • Reusable Elastomeric Respirator
  • Halyard Masks

Home-made or fashion-industry N95-like masks made from materials such as HEPA filters or fabric are unproven and have potential hazards (HEPA filters may expose the user to fiberglass), and are not recommended at this time.

How do I spot a counterfeit?

The NIOSH has an approved list of N95 vendors that is regularly updated. Check to see if your mask is on this list. The manufacturer of the mask should have certifications readily available for you to view. In addition, there are telltale signs of counterfeits listed on the NIOSH website. Do not use a non-NIOSH mask unless you have ensured it is authentic.

My hospital is no longer doing fit testing, or no longer carries the mask I was originally fitted for. Do I have options for performing a seal check at home?

The CDC does not consider a user seal check an adequate substitute for a fit test.[14]

If you have to wear a new type of N95 mask, a formal fit test is recommended. To ensure that your mask continues to have an adequate seal with repeat uses, the CDC and OSHA recommend performing a user seal check each time the mask is re-used.

Additional Tips

The University of Nebraska has a compilation of PPE protocols available to healthcare personnel that are based on their extensive experience as a National Ebola Training and Education center.

Other problems encountered on the ground include:

  • Facial hair is an important consideration when it comes to mask fit. The CDC has recommendations for acceptable configurations. For people who still cannot achieve an adequate seal with an N95, half-face masks or powered air purifying respirators (PAPR) are the next options.[15]
  • There are various online videos with methods of donning and doffing that help to minimize contact to the front of the mask. Here is a representative example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhxpJFDHAeI

Summary

There is no definitive “best practice” for N95 re-use and re-processing. These methods are options for times of crisis and should not be used routinely if mask supply is sufficient. Based on the resources available at each institution, the optimal strategy for each person or institution will vary.


References

[a] Residue on the mask may adversely affect the integrity of the material after re-processing. It is recommended that foundation, sunscreen, or other forms of make-up not be worn underneath.

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/ppe-strategy/decontamination-reuse-respirators.html

[2] https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/376179O/nanotechnology-and-respirator-use.pdf

[3] van Doremalen N, Bushmaker T, Morris DH, et al. Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 as Compared with SARS-CoV-1 [published online ahead of print, 2020 Mar 17]. N Engl J Med. 2020;10.1056/NEJMc2004973. doi:10.1056/NEJMc2004973

[4] https://www.facs.org/covid-19/ppe/additional

[5] https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/mcm-regulatory-science/investigating-decontamination-and-reuse-respirators-public-health-emergencies

[6] https://www.fda.gov/media/136529/download

[7] https://www.n95decon.org/uvc

[8] https://www.nebraskamed.com/sites/default/files/documents/covid-19/n-95-decon-process.pdf

[9] https://www.wbur.org/commonhealth/2020/03/27/umass-memorial-disinfects-masks-ultraviolet-light

[10] https://www.n95decon.org/heat

[11] https://utrf.tennessee.edu/information-faqs-performance-protection-sterilization-of-masks-against-covid-19/

[12] https://news.stonybrook.edu/sb_medicine/dry-heat-ovens-can-effectively-disinfect-n95-masks/

[13] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.11.20062018v1

[14] https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2018-130/pdfs/2018-130.pdf?id=10.26616/NIOSHPUB2018130

[15] https://www.osha.gov/Publications/OSHA3990.pdf

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19 Tagged With: coronavirus, covid-19, masks, n-95, N95, ppe

SAGES Primer for Taking Care of Yourself During and After the COVID-19 Crisis

April 16, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

This document was reviewed and approved by the Board of Governors of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) in April 2020.

Jonathan Dort · John Romanelli · Nabajit Choudhury · Benjamin J. Flink · Kathleen Lak · Shauna Levy · Bradley J. Needleman7· Charles J. Paget III · Dana Telem9 · Erin Schwarz10 · Linda P. Zhang · Patricia Sylla · John D. Mellinger · Brent D. Matthews · Liane Feldman · Aurora D. Pryor · Horacio J. Asbun

Abstract

COVID-19 is a pandemic which has affected almost every aspect of our life since starting globally in November 2019. Given the rapidity of spread and inadequate time to prepare for record numbers of sick patients, our surgical community faces an unforeseen challenge. SAGES is committed to the protection and care of patients, their surgeons and staff, and all who are served by the medical community at large. This includes physical health, mental health, and well-being of all involved. The fear of the unknown ahead can be paralyzing. International news media have chronicled the unthinkable situations that physicians and other health care providers have been thrust into as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. These situations include making life or death decisions for patients and their families regarding use of limited health care resources. It includes caring for patients with quickly deteriorating conditions and limited treatments available. Until recently, these situations seemed far from home, and now they are in our own hospitals. As the pandemic broadened its reach, the reality that we as surgeons may be joining the front line is real. It may be happening to you now; it may be on the horizon in the coming weeks. In this context, SAGES put together this document addressing concerns on clinician stressors in these times of uncertainty. We chose to focus on the emotional toll of the situation on the clinician, protecting vulnerable persons, reckoning with social isolation, and promoting wellness during this crisis. At the same time, the last part of this document deals with the “light at the end of the tunnel,” discussing potential opportunities, lessons learned, and the positives that can come out of this crisis.

Keywords Surgeon wellness · COVID-19 · Pandemic well-being · Burnout

Introduction

COVID-19 is a pandemic which has affected almost every aspect of our life since starting globally in November 2019. Given the rapidity of spread and inadequate time to prepare for record numbers of sick patients, our surgical community faces an unforeseen challenge. SAGES is committed to the protection and care of patients, their surgeons and staff, and all who are served by the medical community at large. This includes physical health, mental health, and well-being of all involved.

The fear of the unknown ahead can be paralyzing. It is important to remember that while we have never gone through anything like this, neither has your friend from primary school, your coworker or anyone else. International news media have chronicled the unthinkable situations that physicians and other health care providers have been thrust into as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. These situations include making life or death decisions for patients and their families regarding use of limited health care resources. It includes caring for patients with quickly deteriorating conditions and limited treatments available. Until recently, these situations seemed far from home, and now they are in our own hospitals. As the pandemic broadened its reach, the reality that we as surgeons may be joining the front line is real. It may be happening to you now; it may be on the horizon in the coming weeks.

In this context, SAGES put together this document addressing concerns on clinician stressors in these times of uncertainty. We chose to focus on the emotional toll of the situation on the clinician, protecting vulnerable persons, reckoning with social isolation, and promoting wellness during this crisis. At the same time, the last part of this document deals with the “light at the end of the tunnel,” discussing potential opportunities, lessons learned and the positives that can come out of this crisis.

Emotional Toll of the Situation

One of the very basic instincts that leads to fear is the threat to personal safety. An out-of-proportion percentage of fatalities caused by this virus worldwide is in health care providers. The stories and images of war zone conditions in hospitals flood our inboxes and social media feeds every hour of every day. While this feels novel in the West, it is day-to-day life in other parts of the world and therefore it’s an opportunity for us to appreciate and learn from colleagues who live in lower resource settings as we serve those we need to serve now.

This fear is real, justified, shared, and appropriate. This fear unleashes a whole set of alternative emotions; anger at governments, health care systems, and hospitals for not being able to adequately supply or protect us, sadness over being stuck in this predicament that none of us signed up or petitioned for, uncertainty over how long this will last, how exposed we will become, how much we, and those we care greatly for, may suffer, and whether we all will survive it. All of these separate emotions share one quality; how hard it is to control them.

The key to success for managing this fear is to acknowledge those fears and to focus on the elements for which we do have control, as Mark Twain would say, “courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear, not absence of fear.” Use every precaution you have available to you with every patient you see; masks, gloves, gowns, handwashing, and sanitizer. Assume every patient has tested positive, whether in the operating room (OR), emergency department (ED), intensive care unit (ICU), or the elevator. We are bound to our hospital rules for personal protective equipment (PPE), but to the extent you are capable, be aggressive with your protection. SAGES has endorsed statements by the American College of Surgeons (ACS) and Joint Commission concerning your ability to protect yourself. Make sure your leadership has seen these statements. When you are at work, be vigilant about practicing physical distancing. Be pathologically cautious over where you go, what surfaces you touch, and what precautions you take. If you do not already have an obsessive-compulsive disorder, develop one. We have to face this fight. So, whether you are already in the fight or bracing to enter it, know that fear is here or on its way. Together, we need to expect it, accept it, and, most importantly, take control over it. Some concerns include, but are not limited to:

Fear of inadvertent viral transmission

Events like the current COVID-19 pandemic can bring the fear of contagion and of loved ones falling sick. Healthcare workers are most exposed to the virus and many have contracted the disease with some fatalities. The fear of spreading it to family members is a real problem. Having to self-isolate from your social support in the case of a positive test adds to the stress of an already traumatized surgeon. In the current situation, when there is not enough personal protective equipment, it will only make the stress worse. Incidents of PTSD have been reported in parents and children who were quarantined during the SARS outbreak(1). Apart from taking measures to minimize the spread of disease to family members or loved ones like isolation, wearing masks, hand hygiene, physical (not social) distancing, there are few things we can do to help during the period of isolation. Talking to friends and family via video call is a great way to be in touch with your loved ones. As suggested by astronaut Scott Kelly in the New York Times recently, maintaining a routine and picking up hobbies like reading, playing instruments or making art can help to cope with such situations(2).

Concerns regarding clinical redeployment

The stress and anxiety that clinical redeployment carries with it is heavy. Anxiety of the unknown:

  • What area of clinical medicine will I be asked to join?
  • Do I have the necessary skills to help these patients in need?
  • Will I have oversight from a physician experienced in critical care or COVID management?
  • Will I have to ration care?
  • How often will/should I be deployed?

Much of this anxiety can be rooted in the fear of the unknown. Many of us may be forced into situations with uncomfortable clinical decisions based on limited resources. For instance, clinicians worldwide are forced to make life or death choices about rationing care(3). While we have no way of knowing if or when the curve will be flattened, if our hospital surge plans will be enough or if our treatments will make an impact, what we do know is that regardless of our current specialty and regardless of the time since we practiced general medicine, that our contribution in fighting this medical nightmare is a unique and noble one. Our surgical training and heritage will support us. The role we may serve during the present need eclipses and stretches our normal patterns of practice, but not beyond the depth of our training backgrounds. Our SAGES community has issued statements on the basics of mechanical ventilation and acute care surgery management recommendations among others. We can help take control of our anxiety by ensuring that there will be oversight from a more experienced physician (critical care and infectious disease) that we can turn to for medical decision-making. On the flip side, we must be prepared to be asked to perform duties that are below our skill level. It is important to be flexible, open-minded, and adapt to the needs of our redeployment. If we are redeployed as a team, take control by ensuring that the junior members (residents, physician assistants, medical assistants) are donning/doffing proper PPE and are protected from unsafe clinical situations.

While deployment schedules may vary based on hospital needs, adequate recovery time must be provided between 8-12 hour consecutive shifts. We need to stay alert for signs of fatigue among team members which can negatively impact patient care and personal safety during high-risk clinical situations. Delegation of tasks commensurate to the skills of each team member will help relieve anxiety and maintain focus.

Whether there is anxiety associated with feeling unprepared to physically or mentally deal with what is coming, or feeling that the system itself is ill-equipped to support us, lean on your partners, your medicine colleagues and your SAGES community.

Concern for personal and family safety during redeployment

Not only is there concern for the clinical aspect of redeployment, there will also be significant mental strain from worrying about personal and family safety.

  • Will I have proper PPE and will it protect me?
  • Should I self-isolate from my family? What does that look like?
  • When is it safe to return to my family?

One way to minimize the emotional toll of redeployment is to prepare and strategize prior to redeployment. Understanding the PPE supply of the unit where you will be deployed, and devising a backup plan to ensure adequate PPE for the team will alleviate anxiety upon arrival to the redeployment site. Reviewing safety tips and best practices for personal safety and minimize high-risk exposure with others on the frontline is extremely helpful to better prepare.

Surgeons should have thorough discussions with their family regarding how best to minimize contamination of their homes and transmission to family members. Strategies range from living separately in a hotel, rental home, or second home. Some surgeons chose to send their children to stay with relatives during the active period of redeployment. If these are not viable options, living in a separate bedroom or floor of the house can also diminish risk of transmission. There will be an emotional toll for sequestering and not having physical contact with family members. This is true for both the surgeon and their family members, especially young children who may not understand the situation. Video calls and parallel activities (taking walks together but with distancing, watching children play for afar, etc.) can help maintain the family connection. Self-isolation can be even harder or impossible for single-parent families, and these obstacles should be addressed early within the family and with Departmental leadership.

Once redeployment is over, there is no clear guideline regarding when is the appropriate time to reunite with family. If readily available, perhaps COVID PCR and/or antibody testing will alleviate anxiety and help confirm safety in returning to their family. Once reunited, some may consider wearing a facemask for a few days during the potential incubation period. If feasible, waiting the full 14-day incubation period will exclude the risk of transmission.

Financial hardship

In many states, local governments have placed a moratorium on elective surgery. This was in concert with a recommendation from the American College of Surgeons regarding the cessation of elective surgical cases, echoed by the SAGES statement. This was done to make admission beds available for the expected surge of COVID-19 patients, as well as freeing up hospital resources that are needed to care for sick patients. Ventilator shortages are expected and already real in some centers, and operating rooms contain anesthesia machines that could be redeployed as ventilators for these patients. In addition, inpatient procedures can inadvertently expose our patients to COVID-19. Anesthesia staff may be called upon to help manage the excessive number of intubated and/or critically ill patients. While this momentous change has occurred for all the right reasons, there is a burden on surgeons both as they contemplate stewarding their patients’ needs as well as considering the fiscal implications to themselves, their staff, their employees, and the overall healthcare system.

Most of the recommendations were, fortunately, left to the surgeons to determine the urgency of operative cases, and that “urgent” and certainly “emergent” cases should proceed as planned. This unfortunately leaves a “gray zone” for determining what is elective.

  • Is a paraesophageal hernia elective, or urgent?
  • What if there is a gastric volvulus?
  • What about patient is in chronic pain?
  • What about patients for whom there were multiple ED visits for a clinical problem?

The surgeons are left to face their patients, and have to take the brunt of the dissatisfaction, which can be a significant stressor as well. Whether or not financial concerns color the definition of “urgent” and the ethical ramifications of this decision can also become a source of stress for surgeons.

An additional stressor is the concern about lost revenue and keeping businesses afloat. While some surgeons continue to work based on their case mix, others have virtually stopped. Also, those in private practice employ others that often become a small family, and those employees of the practice might have to be furloughed. If employed by a large health system, getting paid regularly is less of a concern, but salary reductions have been reported even in the setting of physicians at the most risk directly treating COVID-19 patients. Finally, even for those employed by a large health care entity, the most profitable cases for the hospital were the first to be stopped. No doubt even the large hospital systems will take a huge financial loss; how this will eventually play out is anyone’s guess and again, creates uncertainty.

Another factor to consider is the financial hardship of our colleagues. As much as loss of income is frightening, logically we are still in a much better position than many of the nurses or other hospital employees that we work with daily. Despite the uncertainty of this crisis, we cannot lose sight of this fact.

Re-entering practice

In a period wrought with uncertainty and chaos with regards to the pandemic and its strain on hospital resources, one potentially overlooked topic for robust discussion is how to return to relative normalcy in practice after the crisis eases. One can forecast changes in the delivery of care which will be stressful for surgeons and their teams who have limited exposure to new technology.

  • How does one resume elective work?
  • Do patients get rescheduled on an acuity basis?
  • Do they get rescheduled in the order they have been scheduled/cancelled?
  • Will surgeons get their pre-crisis amount of block operating time?
  • Will other surgeons who are harder hit by the crisis (either financially or due to high patient volumes) be given more operating time than usual to help catch up, and will that reduce access to the operating room for other surgeons?
  • Will patients be afraid to come to health care facilities after the crisis abates to have their elective surgery, or will there be a measurable loss of business and reduction in surgeon volumes due to fear of catching communicable disease?

While there are no known answers to the questions in the preceding paragraph, health care systems need to look carefully at where to deploy resources during times of crisis, and how they emerge from the crisis may be dependent on each system. For example, a hospital system with a large urban center, and smaller, outlying community hospitals might send many COVID-19 patients to larger institutions, allowing for resumption of elective cases at an earlier date once there is availability of surgeons, anesthetists, and nursing care (who may have been re-deployed elsewhere). That may force surgeons to operate at facilities with which they have less familiarity and may bias their booking to lower acuity, less complicated cases. Surgeons should align with their hospital leadership as much as they can and are comfortable doing so to have open and honest dialogue about how and when to resume booking elective cases; their outpatient office visits could begin around the same time to begin seeing new patients again. While much uncertainty exists with this crisis, one potential overlooked element is exactly how to return to normal professional workloads. This uncertainty can serve as an additional stressor, but frequent conversations with OR and hospital leadership can help to ease the stress, and allow for a plan to move forward once given the ability to do so. With so much disruption caused by the nature of the pandemic, how to return to normalcy might not generate much thought, but it now is the time to begin thinking about this concept.

Vulnerable Persons

Intimate partner abuse and abuse of children transcends all the demographic categories we draw. Shelter at home and self-isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic can be dangerous to those in abusive relationships. With stress levels and economic hardships heightening, an uptick in domestic abuse has been reported worldwide (4). A close proximity and an inability to escape abusers at home leads to a tremendously dangerous situation putting additional lives at risk as victims often wait to be by themselves before they seek help. Moreover, with schools and daycares cancelled, children are more likely to witness intimate partner violence or be victimized themselves.

While resources are limited, options remain available to persons in an abusive household. First, if possible, remove yourself from the home. Hotlines for domestic abuse remain open and shelters have been deemed essential services and remain open during the COVID-19 pandemic. For those who are unable to leave their home, identify the safest place in the home with distance from objects that may be used as weapons.

Most importantly, remember that you are not alone and support remains available. Some resources include, but are not limited to:

  • National Domestic Hotline (24/7 and confidential): 1-800-799-7233
  • National Sexual Assault Hotline (24/7 and confidential): 1-800-656-4673

For those who are in positions of safety, please remember to check in on friends, families and colleagues during this time. Frequent touchpoints by phone or video communications to provide support or a trusted outlet for someone in an abusive situation may stimulate them to reach out and attain help.

Social Isolation

While physical distancing is a necessary step to prevent the spread of this infectious disease, social isolation has negative consequences that can produce new stressors for clinicians. Given that surgery is mostly conducted in a team-based environment, becoming isolated socially is something new that most of us have never confronted. It is important to distinguish between the need to physically separate, but to stay connected with colleagues, partners, friends, and family. Between telemedicine and virtual meetings, our workplaces have made efforts to convert our nonoperative work life into an electronic platform. What about adapting our life outside of work? Social isolation and loneliness have negative impacts on our health that worsen as we get older but there are ways for us to mitigate these issues even in these unusual times. Virtual meeting platforms can be used for group exercise classes, watching TV shows together, family reunions, happy hour, etc. Support groups are powerful tools used by many patients but they can be helpful to us and connect with those around us. Acts of service can help us feel connected to the surrounding world. In fact, as surgeons we typically thrive on helping others, and it can be challenging to feel unhelpful. This situation will challenge our resilience by reducing our participation in community and making us question our pursuit of purpose and meaning in our professional lives. However, this is also an opportunity to engage in reflection and consideration of the ‘important but not urgent’ elements of our lives.

Promoting Wellness

Broadly speaking many surgeons have not mastered the work-life balance, and our work can be all-consuming. Despite the long work hours, our work typically includes a plethora of human interaction: patients, nurses, other physicians, operations and meetings. Ordinarily our days can be so full that we crave alone time or other ways to decompress.

There are many barriers for surgeons to retain wellness and deal with uncertainty in the time of COVID-19. We as surgeons tend to be action or at least accomplishment-oriented, flexible in our approach, resilient, and tireless in commitment and driven to matter in the world at large. We tend to measure our success in quantifiable means. We have a direct effect on the morale of the other professionals around us though we do not always realize this. We are poor at acknowledging our own weakness and need for help and have been conditioned to independence and self-sufficiency. We are very much control-oriented, and a high demand- low control environment is a major driver of psychological stress and physical illness (5). COVID-19 is taking us to such a place and that puts surgeons at more risk. Loss of elective cases causes financial hardship and isolation. We also define ourselves often as sub-specialists: e.g., bariatric surgeons, colorectal surgeons, or acute care surgeons, but forget that we are amongst the broadest trained of all medical professions and we were trained as general surgeons before we became sub-specialists.

Many of the standard methods of wellness such as exercise, yoga, mindfulness, and eating well, we either already do, or do not find useful on a personal basis. For some, this crisis will offer an opportunity to introduce one of the practices, but for most, this can be challenging in the setting of social isolation. Further, we understand this disease and the risk to ourselves and our families as well as any other individuals of our community. We have been taught not to acknowledge fear or weakness and understand that “there is an ethical consensus that healthcare workers have a prima facie duty to work because of everything that has been invested in them (6).” This essentially pulls us in two directions and adds to our stress. How can we then retain wellness in this period of uncertainty?

We as surgeons have the unique ability to reinvent ourselves during this time of crisis to continue to be valuable contributing members of the surgical community despite the barriers to our usual areas of productivity. Some surgeons may be redeployed to other areas of their health system and may have the ability to work with new teams towards common goals to address this crisis. Finding a way to remain busy and productive is intrinsic to what makes us surgeons, and this need must be met in some form. We have a unique opportunity to be leaders both nationally and locally and assist others around us. This is an opportunity to rally our teams and look for ways to support those around us more than we ever have. We have the tools to soberly digest the facts and utilize this knowledge to assist those around us.

Specific recommendations to retain wellness revolve around acknowledging both our strengths and our weaknesses, filling our time with work that is useful and necessary in the crisis setting, and by supporting those around us. Let us recognize that we are highly valued by society, both normally and especially at this time. Those around us will look to us for leadership and assessment of facts and clinical decision making. The fear for our well-being and that of our families, colleagues, and patients makes us human and not weak.Another concept to consider is how to use time if we are not at the front lines of the COVID-19 battle. Catch up on administrative work, serve in roles of leadership, teach, conduct research or spend time with family or in self-care. From a clinical perspective, step in and help with emergency general surgery, trauma, or surgical oncology as you are able to free other colleagues to flex to other areas of need.

Also, how can we support those around us? Consider your partners in practice or your division, and make their wellness also part of your awareness. Remember that surgeons culturally have difficulty asking for help especially in terms of emotional aspects of our lives. We were conditioned in our residencies to persevere through excessive work hours and stress; this may have served a purpose once but is a model that likely needs to be abandoned. The military learned this many decades ago, that you take care of your own and leave no man or woman behind (7). This has not been the mantra of surgeons for decades but can be. Be your brother or sister surgeon’s keeper and be aware of who is struggling. Much of the battle of non-wellness is recognition.

The Light at the End of the Tunnel

The strategic vision for SAGES is, “Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world”. While there is no dispute that the COVID-19 pandemic has produced a tremendous loss of life, strain on health care systems and providers, and a negative financial impact on the global economy, one must look beyond this crisis to a near-future surgical world which could look quite different. Perhaps this is a chance to reimagine surgery during this chaotic period into better care for our patients. The socio-economic disparities in care that have been revealed by this crisis make this work even more urgent as we move forward.

While much of our regular work flow has become disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, it is also true that desirable disruptive change can normally be difficult to implement locally, given the typical volume of patients and routine work burden. This period of reduced surgical activity might provide time for strategic thinking, re-development of clinical programs, and discussions about impactful changes to patient care including ways to provide equitable care to the most vulnerable populations. Barriers to change could be addressed now during these times, so that the post-crisis surgical world could be improved. Hospital systems could consider altering what surgical care occurs at the tertiary centers, and what is delivered in the community hospital setting. Change has been thrust upon the surgical world, but that doesn’t mean that it is all undesirable by definition.

Further, the sudden cessation of elective surgical practice may afford the opportunity for innovation on the outpatient side. Reimbursement has been the previous barrier to widespread adoption of telehealth and video telehealth. While these obstacles have been temporarily lifted by the federal government, many states, and some private payers, it remains to be seen if this is a permanent change. In a positive step, according to the ACS Bulletin, “the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, enacted March 27, appropriated $200 million to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for an emergency program to provide funding so health care providers can purchase services and devices necessary to provide telehealth care(8).” One can envision post-operative surgical care being delivered in a totally different manner with the advent of these technologies. This may lead to more outpatient efficiency, even potentially increased productivity, and also having the potential to improve access to care and patient engagement.

Yogi Berra once said, “It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future.” However, all prediction models about this pandemic share a common outcome; that it will end. While there is uncertainty about what lies between here and there, we will endure it together, and we will emerge from it together. The shared financial losses will transform into the shared professional satisfaction of having answered the call of our duties when we were needed most. The uncertainty of collectively stretching beyond our professional comfort zones will transform into a shared strengthening of our collected wisdom and knowledge. And most significantly, standing side by side on this unprecedented battlefield, with common purpose and resolve, will transform us into a more bonded and unified group than we have ever been before. Indeed, it already has.

References

  1. Only connect. The Economist, April 4th, 2020: 51-53.
  2. Kelly, Scott. I Spent a Year in Space, and I Have Tips on Isolation to Share
    Take it from someone who couldn’t: Go outside. New York Times. March 21, 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/21/opinion/scott-kelly-coronavirus-isolation.html
  3. Goldhill, Olivia. Ethicists agree on who gets treated first when hospitals are overwhelmed by coronavirus. Quartz. March 19, 2020. https://qz.com/1821843/ethicists-agree-on-who-should-get-treated-first-for-coronavirus/
  4. Smith, Dana. Domestic violence on the rise during COVID-19 outbreak. ABC 13NewsNow. March 25, 2020. https://www.13newsnow.com/article/news/local/mycity/norfolk/domestic-violence-on-the-rise-during-covid-19-outbreak/291-c415c26e-ec37-4511-bd55-88852d8e82a3
  5. García-Herrero S, Lopez-Garcia JR, Herrera S, Fontaneda I, Báscones SM, Mariscal MA. The Influence of Recognition and Social Support on European Health Professionals’ Occupational Stress: A Demands-Control-Social Support-Recognition Bayesian Network Model. Biomed Res Int 2017:4673047. DOI:10.1155/2017/4673047
  6. James Tabery, PhD as quoted by Christopher Cheney in “4 Ethical Dilemmas for Healthcare Organizations during the COVID-19 Pandemic” Health Leaders. March 18, 2020. healthleadersmedia.com/clinical-care/4-ethical-dilemmas-healthcare-organizations-during-covid-19-pandemic
  7. Sotile WM, Sotile MO. The Resilient Physician: Effective Emotional Management for Doctors and Their Medical Organizations. Chicago, IL: American Medical Association; 2002.
  8. ACS COVID-19 Update—April 10. ACS COVID-19 Newsletter. American College of Surgeons. April 10, 2020. https://www.facs.org/covid-19/newsletter/041020

Additional Resources

AMA Tips for keeping your practice in business during the COVID-19 pandemic. American Medical Association. May 1, 2020.

  • https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/public-health/tips-keeping-your-practice-business-during-covid-19-pandemic

Ethical Framework for Health Care Institutions & Guidelines for Institutional Ethics Services Responding to the Coronavirus: Managing Uncertainty, Safeguarding Communities, Guiding Practice. The Hastings Center. March 16, 2020.

  • https://www.thehastingscenter.org/ethicalframeworkcovid19/

Did you find this information helpful?
Please consider joining SAGES or making a donation to the SAGES Education and Research Foundation so we can continue to bring content like this to the surgical community for free.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19 Tagged With: burnout, coronavirus, covid-19, depression, self-care, stress

Notes from the Battlefield – April 15, 2020

April 15, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

Coronavirus Global Surgical Collaborative (CVGSC)*
An initiative sponsored by SAGES in collaboration with EAES, AEC, KSELS, and ELSA


A group of surgical leaders from affected countries have joined to discuss what they are learning during this Covid-19 Global crisis. The following is a brief summary of what they feel may be useful information to disseminate to the surgical community:

Anticoagulation and high risk of thrombosis:

Many COVID-19 patients develop a pro-thrombotic state which places them at high risk of thrombosis and significantly worsens their prognosis. A wide range of approaches have been used, from the usual prophylactic DVT regimens to full therapeutic anticoagulation. The majority of institutions place hospitalized patients in some type of prophylactic regimens as soon as the diagnosis is confirmed. In some areas of Italy, patients receive anticoagulants even when treated as outpatient.  Stony Brook University has kindly shared their protocol that includes escalation of anticoagulation on the basis of D-dimer levels.

  • StonyBrook Anticoagulation Plan for COVID-19 patients

Primers on COVID-19 Deployment for Surgeons:

As expected, in high COVID areas an increasing number of surgeons find themselves on the front lines of the COVID-19 battlefield, with very little time to prepare for deployment.  A primer on what to expect, how to prepare and helpful hints has been put together by international members of this CVGSC group that have been, or currently are in the front lines. The purpose of these documents is to aid those who will be, or are currently deployed.

  • You have been deployed, now what?
  • You have been deployed to a COVID Unit – 10 points to know

Avoiding injury/decreasing discomfort while wearing an N95 mask:

The need to use N95 masks has been widely emphasized. However, their use for prolonged periods of times may pose a problem related to discomfort and skin related issues. The CVGSC issued a statement on April 6 regarding re-sterilization of N95 masks.  We now would like to add a list of products for face protection under N95 masks that may be useful to the providers in the front line.

  • 2020 Products for Face Protection Under PPE

Participants:

Drs.  Horacio Asbun (Lead), Mohammed Abu Hilal, Jaap Bonjer, Nicolas Demartines, Nader Francis, Ho-Seong Han, Davide Lomanto, Salvador Morales, Andrea Pietrabissa, Aurora Pryor, Christopher Schlachta, Patricia Sylla, Eduardo Targarona, Suthep Udomsawaengsup

Other Surgical Societies/leaders are welcome to participate in future discussions. Please contact SAGES Executive Director, Sallie Matthews at sallie@sages.org if interested in being considered for participation.


*GENERAL DISCLAIMER:  

The following is intended to provide our members with information arising from the experience of our colleagues from Europe and Asia who experienced the pandemic first.  While the information provided is from very reliable sources, it is NOT evidence based data, since there was no time to test its validity on scientific grounds. It is merely an attempt to share practical advice based upon prior experience and current knowledge.


Did you find this information helpful?
Please consider joining SAGES or making a donation to the SAGES Education and Research Foundation so we can continue to bring content like this to the surgical community for free.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19, Notes from the Battlefield

Free SAGES Webinar: Rapid Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic

April 14, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

The current public health crisis has exposed a gap in physicians’ knowledge, skills and performance. Because the SARS-Cov-2 virus is novel, there are new patient and team safety issues relating to surgery. SAGES has drafted and released a number of statements and resources since March 21, 2020.

As a result of participating in this webinar, learners will be more familiar with the topics noted below and will be better prepared to respond to these situations in their own institution. CME Credit will be available for participants. This webinar will also be recorded and available on the SAGES website for review.

Topics to be covered:

  • Allocation of physicians and ICU space during a pandemic – Michael Cripps, MD
  • Tiered approach to surgical response – Samuel Ross, MD
  • Organizing trauma care during a pandemic – Joseph Forrester, MD
  • Performing tracheostomies in COVID-19+ or suspected patients, Christoper Michetti, MD
  • You’re a surgeon and you’ve been activated to the ICU and ED, now what? – Patricia Sylla, MD and Daniel Herron, MD

Introduction by Robert Lim, MD. Closing remarks by SAGES President Horacio Asbun, MD.


Register Now:

https://zoom.us/webinar/register/9215860293586/WN_UL8EPWXCSiWQM8Q-BP2cwQ

Register for the Free SAGES Webinar - April 15, 2020


The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.

SAGES designates this live activity for a maximum of 1.5 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits(TM). Each physician should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.


Did you find this information helpful?
Please consider joining SAGES or making a donation to the SAGES Education and Research Foundation so we can continue to bring content like this to the surgical community for free.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19

The Surgical Guidelines During COVID-19 Webinar is now on SAGES TV

April 14, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

Please visit

https://www.sages.org/video/surgical-guidelines-during-covid-19/

to watch the webinar and claim CME credits.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19

Management of Endoscopes, Endoscope Reprocessing, and Storage Areas during the COVID-19 Pandemic

April 13, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

  • This document provides best practice recommendations with respect to endoscope handling, endoscope reprocessing, and storage area management during the COVID-19 pandemic.
  • As more evidence becomes available, some of these suggestions may require subsequent updates.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


Disinfection, Handling, and Endoscope Storage

Endoscopes

Question: Does standard manual cleaning followed by high-level disinfection eradicate SARS-CoV-2?

Recommendation:

  • Based on available evidence, standard manual cleaning followed by high-level disinfection (HLD) should be effective at eradicating SARS-CoV-2(1). At this time no changes to the reprocessing of GI endoscopes are recommended

 

Question: Is there any specific new guidance to the reprocessing steps as outlined in prior guidelines for the SARS-CoV-2?

Recommendations:

  • Consider limiting the number of reprocessing staff
  • Consider limiting reprocessing to experienced staff with documented competency (avoid trainees and novices at this time).
  • All endoscopes should undergo full standard reprocessing prior to return to the endoscope manufacturer for maintenance, as per usual practice

 

Question: What changes are needed to prevent transmission from patients to the reprocessing staff?

Recommendations:

  • Pre-cleaning should commence in the procedure room per protocol, which is typically done by the staff already in the room
  • Reprocessing staff should be donning personal protective equipment (PPE) that includes gloves, gown, face shield, and mask(2). While there is no data to support a requirement for the use of N95 respirators in the reprocessing room, their use should be considered, if available.
  • Place endoscope in a fully enclosed and labeled container for transportation to the decontamination room, as per institutional policy.

 

Question: Is there any special handling of endoscopes for known COVID-19 cases?

Recommendation:

  • There is no evidence that any special handling of endoscopes used in known COVID-19 positive patients is required at this time

 

Question: Are there any changes to the process needed to prevent transmission from staff to patients via handling of fully reprocessed endoscopes post high-level disinfection?

Recommendations:

  • No changes are recommended to existing processes
  • Fully dry endoscopes to prevent outbreaks of waterborne organisms(3, 4).
  • Dry exterior of the endoscope using a clean, lint free cloth
  • Dry the interior of an endoscope with prolonged flow of medical air through all accessible channels for at least 10 minutes(5).
  • Ensure that all endoscopes are completely dried after reprocessing and before use.
  • Transport dry endoscopes to storage or drying cabinet wearing clean gloves.

 

Room cleaning processes

Question: How should procedure rooms be cleaned after each patient during the COVID-19 pandemic?

Recommendations:

  • Perform meticulous cleaning of room after each procedure, which includes cleaning of all high touch and horizontal surfaces in procedure rooms with an EPA approved surface disinfectant(6).
  • Medical waste and linen should be removed from each room according to endoscopy unit policy.
  • Staff involved in the cleaning of endoscopy rooms should utilize PPE. This should include: head cover, gown, surgical mask, eye-protection, and gloves.
  • Each endoscopy unit should have a plan in place for the cleaning and disinfecting of the entire unit at the end of the day.

 

Question: How should a procedure room be cleaned after known COVID-19 cases?

Recommendations:

  • Perform meticulous cleaning as above.
  • Once the procedure is completed, extra time, as determined by your facility, should be allowed to permit air changes to remove potentially infectious particles within the room.
  • Adequate aeration time will be determined by your facility. If negative pressure rooms are utilized, as has been advised by CDC, aeration time may be more abbreviated(7).

 

Endoscope storage

Question: Are there any special endoscope storage needs after use on suspected/confirmed COVID-19 patients?

Recommendations:

  • There is no evidence for any special considerations with regards to endoscope storage during the pandemic.
  • After an endoscope has been fully reprocessed and dried, it should be stored in a secure storage cabinet according to manufacturer instructions for use (IFU) and according to the endoscopy unit’s own policies.

 

Question: How long can an endoscope be stored after it is fully reprocessed?

Recommendation:

  • This should be based on each institution’s policy, as the COVID pandemic does not require any specific changes in storage from usual practices.

Guidance for Resumption of Elective Endoscopy

Endoscopes

Question: Are there any special instructions to reprocess the endoscopes before long-term storage?

Recommendations:

  • There is no evidence that endoscopes need to be handled differently at the time of storage.
  • Leave endoscopes in hanging storage, if available.
  • Ensure adequate drying before storing.
  • Consider use of drying verification.
  • Reprocess endoscopes before use after long-term storage that exceeds the unit policy for limits on “hang time.”

 

Reprocessing rooms & storage areas

Question: Are there any instructions on cleaning reprocessing and storage areas prior to re-opening of endoscopy suites?

Recommendations:

  • Perform meticulous cleaning for all reprocessing and storage areas after the last procedure.
  • Repeat meticulous cleaning on the day before anticipatedreopening.
  • Staff involved in the cleaning process should be protected by PPE.
  • Ensure that high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters are replaced as per IFU.

 

Reprocessing equipment

Question: Are there any special instructions on handling reprocessing equipment when shutting down, during shutdown, and just before reopening endoscopy facilities?

Recommendations for prolonged full or partial closure:

  • Consult your automated endoscope reprocessor (AER) manufacturer for instructions on the proper procedure for shutting down your AER for an extended period of time.
  • Perform a disinfection cycle of all AERs and automated flushing pumps based on manufacturer IFUs.
  • All chemical solutions should be emptied.

Recommendations during the pandemic:

  • Check that all routine maintenance is up to date.
  • Ensure ample supplies of detergents and accessories.

Recommendations for re-opening:

  • Consult your AER manufacturer for instructions on the proper procedure for restarting your AER after being shut down either completely or with limited use for an extended period of time.
  • Perform disinfection cycle of all AERs and automated flushing pumps per manufacturer IFUs.
  • Clean and disinfect all plumbing lines feeding all equipment used for reprocessing, including sinks, hookups, channel adaptors, and AERs and if needed, test for water quality.
  • Change all filters and pre-filters for all applicable equipment.
  • Check expiration dates for all chemical solutions and detergents.
  • Contact automatic equipment manufacturer to confirm specific recommendations.

Discussion

A number of guidelines recommend high-level disinfection (HLD) for the reprocessing of gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopes(8-11). Manual cleaning followed by HLD, when properly performed, effectively eliminates nearly all microorganisms from endoscopes during reprocessing(12). Transmission of viral infections during endoscopy is exceedingly rare and when it does occur, it is the result of noncompliance or deviation from the required steps of reprocessing.

Reprocessing of GI endoscopes has been outlined in a number of guidelines(8-11) and should follow endoscope manufacturer IFUs. Reprocessing staff should undergo necessary training and ongoing, annual assessment of competency. A reprocessing training curriculum that is evidence based and incorporates effective modalities for adult learning should be employed. Part of this curriculum should embed an auditing tool for reprocessing staff. It would be prudent at this time for endoscopy unit leadership to re-emphasize the importance of optimal reprocessing and ensure competency assessments are up-to-date.

SARS-CoV-2 is known to remain on some surfaces for up to three days(13). The recommendations above therefore reflect an even higher degree of surface cleaning than is performed under typical circumstances.

Current literature does not support a maximal outer duration for use of appropriately cleaned, reprocessed, dried, and stored flexible endoscopes. Reuse of endoscopes within 21, and perhaps even 56 days of appropriately reprocessed, dried, and stored flexible endoscopes appears to be safe(14).

Independent of the COVID pandemic, endoscopy units have been advised to evaluate the available literature, perform an assessment as to the benefits and risks around the optimal storage time for endoscopes, and develop a policy and procedure specific to their unit on endoscope storage time. Any endoscope not reprocessed for longer than the endoscopy unit’s own endoscope storage time policy ought to be reprocessed again prior to use.


References

  1. Kampf G, Todt D, Pfaender S, Steinmann E. Persistence of coronaviruses on inanimate surfaces and their inactivation with biocidal agents. J Hosp Infect. 2020;104(3):246-51.
  2. Joint Gastroenterology Society Message: COVID-19 Use of Personal Protective Equipment in GI Endoscopy https://www.asge.org/home/advanced-education-training/covid-19-asge-updates-for- members/joint-gastroenterology-society-message-covid-19-use-of-personal-protective-equipment-in-gi- Accessed March 30, 2020.
  3. Moayyedi P, Lynch D, Axon A. Pseudomonas and endoscopy. Endoscopy. 1994;26(6):554-8.
  4. Muscarella LF. Inconsistencies in endoscope-reprocessing and infection-control guidelines: the importance of endoscope drying. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101(9):2147-54.
  5. Barakat MT, Huang RJ, Banerjee S. Comparison of automated and manual drying in the elimination of residual endoscope working channel fluid after reprocessing (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2019;89(1):124-32
  6. EPA Disinfectants for Use Against SARS-CoV-2. https://epa.gov/pesticide-registration/list- n-disinfectants-use-against-sars-cov-2. Accessed March 30, 2020.
  7. CDC Interim Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations for Patients with Suspected or Confirmed Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Healthcare Settings https://cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/infection-control- recommendations.html?CDC_AA_refVal=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cdc.gov%2Fcoronavirus%2F2019- ncov%2Finfection-control%2Fcontrol-recommendations.html. Accessed March 30, 2020.
  8. Reprocessing Guideline Task Force, Petersen BT, Cohen J, Hambrick RD, 3rd, Buttar N, Greenwald DA, et al. Multisociety guideline on reprocessing flexible GI endoscopes: 2016 Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85(2):282-94 e1.
  9. Standards of Infection Prevention in Reprocessing of Flexible Gastrointestinal Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates (SGNA) Practice Committee, 2017-18. https://www.sgna.org/Portals/0/SGNA Standards of infection prevention in reprocessing_FINAL.pdf?ver=2018-11-16-084835-387. Accessed March 30, 2020.
  10. ANSI/AAMI ST91: 2015 Flexible and semi-rigid endoscope processing in health care facilities. https://my.aami.org/aamiresources/previewfiles/ST91_1504_preview.pdf. Accessed March 30,
  11. Guidelines for Perioperative Practice: Flexible Endoscopes. https://preview.aornguidelines.org/guidelines/content?sectionid=173735349&view=book. Accessed March 30,
  12. Kovaleva J. Infectious complications in gastrointestinal endoscopy and their prevention. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2016;30(5):689-704.
  13. van Doremalen N, Bushmaker T, Morris DH, Holbrook MG, Gamble A, Williamson BN, et Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 as Compared with SARS-CoV-1. N Engl J Med. 2020.
  14. Schmelzer M, Daniels G, Hough H. Safe storage time for reprocessed flexible endoscopes: a systematic review. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015;13(9):187-243.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19 Tagged With: ACG, AGA, ASCRS, ASGE, cleaning, coronavirus, covid-19, endoscopes, endoscopy, recommendations, SGNA, sterilization

SAGES Recommendations Regarding Surgical Management of Gastric Cancer Patients During the Response to the COVID-19 Crisis

April 11, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

Note: these recommendations are subject to change and update.


Introduction

The care for all patients with cancer requires multidisciplinary review and decision-making, and entails the consideration of many factors in order to develop a sound plan of treatment. This requires a detailed assessment of patient, disease, surgical team, and hospital resources. (1) These principles remain critical and in fact, arguably more important now as we combat the COVID-19 pandemic than ever before. Thus a “one size fits all” recommendation would be unwise due to significant variability in patient presentation, individual comorbidities, disease severity, regional pandemic burden, and hospital-regional resources. It is important to recognize this document presents general recommendations. These are meant to be helpful to the surgeon while recognizing that the individual surgeon and patient will need to decide upon the course of therapy depending on local resources and individual situations.

The recommendations below are aimed to help guide practicing surgeons by providing a framework to address more urgent cancer cases, and to help stratify options that may diminish risk and improve outcomes. To address these concerns, we refer to several resources including the Elective Surgery Acuity Scale (ESAS) (2) as published by the American College of Surgeons (ACS).

As each surgeon assesses their patient, it should be kept in mind that at of the date of this publication, no region in the USA is thought to have peaked in this epidemic. Thus, conditions are expected to get worse before improving. Having said that, when areas experience a “flattening of the curve”, some non-emergent surgeries may be considered.

ESSENTIAL POINTS TO HELP WITH CANCER CARE TRIAGE

Important Considerations for all Cancer Patients:

  1. The comorbidities and age of the patient are paramount in assessing the relative risk and benefit of exposing the patient to coronavirus versus pursuing alternative, next-best options such as neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to operation.
  2. The resources available to the surgeon and hospital at the time of assessment are also critical. Since this pandemic is dynamic in terms of patient acuity, volume, and hospital resources, the current state and immediate potential future state of the hospital system at the time of the proposed operation and anticipated postoperative inpatient recovery needs to be considered.

COVID-19 PHASE of Hospital or Healthcare System:

Phase Condition Description
0 Unaffected No COVID-19 patients, hospital operating as normal
I Semi-urgent COVID-19 patients are in the hospital, but resources and ICU beds/ventilators are not threatened
II Urgent Many COVID-19 patients are in the hospital, ICU beds/ventilator availability is strained and operative and/or PPE resources are limited
III Emergent Crisis situation where most ICU/ventilator resources are directed to COVID-19 patients and operating room and/or PPE equipment are minimally or entirely unavailable
  1. The urgency of the operation proposed. Most hospital systems are endorsing that, as hospital resources allow, patients with cancer should undergo curative resection if delaying surgery by more than 3 months will adversely impact tumor and oncologic outcomes.
  2. Testing for coronavirus prior to operation is strongly encouraged, contingent on testing availability. This is encouraged as a precaution for your patients who may be about to become ill, as well as for staff and the surgical provider, who need to be stewarded as fundamental workforce resources for our patients. A complex surgical procedure will likely affect a patient’s immune system, and deferral should be considered for COVID-positive patients until the COVID disease process has stabilized.
  3. Open surgery and minimally invasive approaches – Consideration should be given when performing open, laparoscopic or robotic surgical approaches to risks of aerosolization of the virus. As long as the patient is negative for the virus either approach is appropriate. However, for patients who are positive for the virus and require more urgent operation, each approach has its own considerations. Concerns exist regarding potential viral contamination with pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Even though there is no clear evidence it occurs with COVID-19, the risk cannot be overlooked and there are ways of mitigating the risk as we previously described (see link below). During open surgery, the risk of viral spread within the plumes generated by electrosurgery or other energy sources is also to be considered. Robotic approaches in confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients also had the added consideration of potential contamination of the robotic equipment. https://www.sages.org/resources-smoke-gas-evacuation-during-open-laparoscopic-endoscopic-procedures/; https://www.sages.org/recommendations-surgical-response-covid-19/
  4. Likelihood for need of ICU – Patients who are expected to require significant time in the hospital, or have a higher risk of peri-operative complications potentially requiring ICU or step-down unit/telemetry services that may be needed for acutely ill COVID patients, should be have their operation timed to avoid surge resource constraints and contamination, if possible.
  5. Length of time for recovery – The benefits of MIS surgery with reduced hospital stay and higher rate of discharge to home, rather than a nursing home, should be considered in planning surgical approaches. (3, 4)
  6. Consenting the patient for surgery – The potential risks and implications of doing surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic, particular to the local institution, should be clearly discussed with the patient and family when obtaining consent for surgery.

General management strategies for patients with cancer during COVID-19 pandemic (Tier-based):

Generally, cancer patients require resources and support services that are typically stressed during pandemics. Further, early reports in this pandemic show that viral infection with COVID-19 tends to be specifically more lethal in cancer patients (5). This highlights that surgeons and systems must recognize that all cancer patients are in a high-risk category.

Tier 1a Tier 1b Tier 2a Tier 2b Tier 3a Tier 3b
Low acuity surgery/healthy patient

Outpatient surgery

Not life- threatening illness

Low acuity surgery/unhealthy patient Intermediate acuity surgery/healthy patient

Not life threatening but potential for future morbidity and mortality.

Requires in hospital stay

Intermediate acuity surgery/unhealthy patient High acuity surgery/healthy patient High acuity surgery/unhealthy patient

Modified from COVID-19: Guidance for Triage of Non-Emergent Surgical Procedures. American College of Surgeons, Clinical Issues and Guidance (2)

General comments on cancer patients as they relate to the ESAS tier system:

  • Tier 3a or 3b (ESAS): All patients in this Tier should undergo appropriate procedures to remedy their urgent or emergent condition.**
  • Tier 2a or 2b (ESAS): The majority of cancer patients will fall in Tier 2. The guiding principle here is that these patients will require multidisciplinary input (done virtually as needed), and also that the surgeon carefully assess all variables listed above . Patients falling in the high-risk category, i.e. personal high-risk features or high-risk due to environment and resource issues (as outlined by the considerations above ), should preferentially be offered non-operative alternative measures in-lieu of surgery . If surgery cannot be avoided, measures to reduce inpatient LOS are recommended.***
  • Tier 1a or 1b (ESAS): All patients in this Tier are considered elective and should be delayed until pandemic is stabilized, resources are rebalanced, and risk is returning to baseline levels.

**When multiple options exist, especially for Tier 3b, the surgeon is encouraged to choose the treatment option that minimizes use of resources and decreases risk to patient and healthcare. (1)

***Disease site specific non-operative alternative measures are outlined below.

Site Specific Recommendations:

III. Management strategies for patients with gastric cancers during COVID-19 pandemic:

For patients presenting with new gastric cancers at this time, we propose specific recommendations and guidelines to consider when deciding whether to proceed or delay an operation for these patients. In the following case scenarios, we are adhering to the 3 month-rule (is the cancer likely to progress in the next three months without treatment?)

  1. Stage of gastric cancer – For the specific stages below, surgeons need to consider the hospital COVID-19 phase response (above ). For Phase I, consider non-surgical alternatives, however, surgery may be acceptable. For COVID-19 Phase II – III, surgery would be delayed until the pandemic abates and resources return.
    1. For patients with stage-specific gastric cancer
      1. T1a cancers – these patients may be candidates for EMR or ESD and referring them for a same-day procedure. These may be considered in Phase I depending on hospital resources. If not, then weekly “check-ins” to reassess the stage are reasonable to find the best “window”. In Phase II – III, these should be deferred. Also note, there are concerns for aerosolization with endoscopic procedures (EMR/ESD) and thus we recommend delaying these procedures and ensuring patient is COVID-19 negative.
      2. T1b and T2 cancers – these patients need surgery, however, a 4 – 6 week window to time the operation when hospital resources are optimal (relatively-speaking) is reasonable. Minimally invasive options are preferable as they will likely decrease the length of stay in the hospital.
      3. T3 or higher cancers, or those who are clinically node positive – these are patients in whom neoadjuvant chemotherapy is recommended, allowing physicians a 3-4 month window to plan surgery (likely after the crisis phase has passed). Staging Diagnostic Laparoscopy – although patients with this stage of gastric cancer typically have staging with diagnostic laparoscopy prior to initiation of chemotherapy to rule out occult metastatic disease, if hospital resources and space is critical at the time and the patient is at higher risk due to age or comorbidities, then consideration for proceeding straight to chemotherapy is reasonable. Plan for diagnostic laparoscopy after chemotherapy is completed and prior to operation.
      4. Obstructing and Bleeding Gastric Cancers – for gastroesophageal junction cancers, immediate initiation of chemotherapy and radiation therapy may obviate the need for a stent for gastric outlet obstructions. If the obstruction is complete and the patient requires admission to a hospital, then proceed with gastrectomy. However, for near-complete obstructions, chemotherapy may improve the ability to eat within 2-3 days. Avoid stents as they make as they could make subsequent procedures more challenging.
      5. For a bleeding lesion, non-surgical approaches (IR and or endoscoy) should be attempted first. When not able to control otherwise, a surgical resection may be indicated.
      6. Patients who have completed Neoadjuvant treatment and are Waiting for Surgery – these patients are difficult to manage, although from last chemotherapy to operation there is a window of 3-6 weeks during which surgery can be planned without losing the opportunity for potential cure. For some patients, consider speaking with the medical oncologist about adding an additional 1-2 cycles of chemotherapy to bridge the patient through the worst of the pandemic crisis and plan surgery thereafter.

General Comment

Optimally managing cancer patients within the confines of limited medical resources is a hurdle rarely encountered in modern times in the USA. Never before has our Hippocratic Oath come more into play. This document will be updated as new scenarios or suggestions are posted. Again, it is of paramount importance to recognize these as general recommendations are meant to be helpful to the surgeon, while recognizing that the individual surgeon and patient will need to decide upon the course of therapy depending upon local resources and individual situations.

We will all make difficult decisions and all stand behind one another, as we should always strive to do. Prioritizing the patient’s needs and wishes, the family, and standing by them in the surgeon-patient relationship whatever course is necessitated, remains our professional calling and commitment.

References

  1. Kutikov A, Weinberg DS, Edelman MJ, et al. A War on Two Fronts: Cancer Care in the Time of COVID-19. Ann Intern Med. 2020; [Epub ahead of print 27 March 2020]. doi: https://doi.org/10.7326/M20-1133
  2. COVID-19: Guidance for Triage of Non-Emergent Surgical Procedures. American College of Surgeons, Clinical Issues and Guidance. https://www.facs.org/covid-19/clinical-guidance/triage online March 17 2020 and accessed Apr 1st 2020.
  3. Delaney CP, Chang E, Senagore AJ, et al. Clinical Outcomes and Resource Utilization Associated with Laparoscopic and Open Colectomy Using a Large National Database. Ann Surg. 2008; 247: 819 – 824.
  4. Gerber MH, Delitto D, Crippen CJ, et al. Analysis of the Cost Effectiveness of Laparoscopic Pancreatoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg (2017) 21: 1404 – 1410.
  5. Liang W, Guan W, Chen R, et al. Cancer patients in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a nationwide analysis in China. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21:335-337. [PMID: 32066541] doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30096-6.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19 Tagged With: Cancer, coronavirus, covid-19, gastric

SAGES – AHPBA Recommendations Regarding Surgical Management of HPB Cancer Patients During the Response to the COVID-19 Crisis

April 11, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

Note: these recommendations are subject to change and update.


Introduction

The care for all patients with cancer requires multidisciplinary review and decision-making, and entails the consideration of many factors in order to develop a sound plan of treatment. This requires a detailed assessment of patient, disease, surgical team, and hospital resources. (1) These principles remain critical and in fact, arguably more important now as we combat the COVID-19 pandemic than ever before. Thus a “one size fits all” recommendation would be unwise due to significant variability in patient presentation, individual comorbidities, disease severity, regional pandemic burden, and hospital-regional resources. It is important to recognize this document presents general recommendations. These are meant to be helpful to the surgeon while recognizing that the individual surgeon and patient will need to decide upon the course of therapy depending on local resources and individual situations.

The recommendations below are aimed to help guide practicing surgeons by providing a framework to address more urgent cancer cases, and to help stratify options that may diminish risk and improve outcomes. To address these concerns, we refer to several resources including the Elective Surgery Acuity Scale (ESAS) (2) as published by the American College of Surgeons (ACS).

As each surgeon assesses their patient, it should be kept in mind that at of the date of this publication, no region in the USA is thought to have peaked in this epidemic. Thus, conditions are expected to get worse before improving. Having said that, when areas experience a “flattening of the curve”, some non-emergent surgeries may be considered.

ESSENTIAL POINTS TO HELP WITH CANCER CARE TRIAGE

Important Considerations for all Cancer Patients:

  1. The comorbidities and age of the patient are paramount in assessing the relative risk and benefit of exposing the patient to coronavirus versus pursuing alternative, next-best options such as neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to operation.
  2. The resources available to the surgeon and hospital at the time of assessment are also critical. Since this pandemic is dynamic in terms of patient acuity, volume, and hospital resources, the current state and immediate potential future state of the hospital system at the time of the proposed operation and anticipated postoperative inpatient recovery needs to be considered.
COVID-19 PHASE of Hospital or Healthcare System:
Phase Condition Description
0 Unaffected No COVID-19 patients, hospital operating as normal
I Semi-urgent COVID-19 patients are in the hospital, but resources and ICU beds/ventilators are not threatened
II Urgent Many COVID-19 patients are in the hospital, ICU beds/ventilator availability is strained and operative and/or PPE resources are limited
III Emergent Crisis situation where most ICU/ventilator resources are directed to COVID-19 patients and operating room and/or PPE equipment are minimally or entirely unavailable
  1. The urgency of the operation proposed. Most hospital systems are endorsing that, as hospital resources allow, patients with cancer should undergo curative resection if delaying surgery by more than 3 months will adversely impact tumor and oncologic outcomes.
  2. Testing for coronavirus prior to operation is strongly encouraged, contingent on testing availability. This is encouraged as a precaution for your patients who may be about to become ill, as well as for staff and the surgical provider, who need to be stewarded as fundamental workforce resources for our patients. A complex surgical procedure will likely affect a patient’s immune system, and deferral should be considered for COVID-positive patients until the COVID disease process has stabilized.
  3. Open surgery and minimally invasive approaches – Consideration should be given when performing open, laparoscopic or robotic surgical approaches to risks of aerosolization of the virus. As long as the patient is negative for the virus either approach is appropriate. However, for patients who are positive for the virus and require more urgent operation, each approach has its own considerations. Concerns exist regarding potential viral contamination with pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Even though there is no clear evidence it occurs with COVID-19, the risk cannot be overlooked and there are ways of mitigating the risk as we previously described (see link below). During open surgery, the risk of viral spread within the plumes generated by electrosurgery or other energy sources is also to be considered. Robotic approaches in confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients also had the added consideration of potential contamination of the robotic equipment. https://www.sages.org/resources-smoke-gas-evacuation-during-open-laparoscopic-endoscopic-procedures/ https://www.sages.org/recommendations-surgical-response-covid-19/
  4. Likelihood for need of ICU – Patients who are expected to require significant time in the hospital, or have a higher risk of peri-operative complications potentially requiring ICU or step-down unit/telemetry services that may be needed for acutely ill COVID patients, should be have their operation timed to avoid surge resource constraints and contamination, if possible.
  5. Length of time for recovery – The benefits of MIS surgery with reduced hospital stay and higher rate of discharge to home, rather than a nursing home, should be considered in planning surgical approaches. (3, 4)
  6. Consenting the patient for surgery – The potential risks and implications of doing surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic, particular to the local institution, should be clearly discussed with the patient and family when obtaining consent for surgery.

General management strategies for patients with cancer during COVID-19 pandemic (Tier-based):

Generally, cancer patients require resources and support services that are typically stressed during pandemics. Further, early reports in this pandemic show that viral infection with COVID-19 tends to be specifically more lethal in cancer patients (5). This highlights that surgeons and systems must recognize that all cancer patients are in a high-risk category.

Tier 1a Tier 1b Tier 2a Tier 2b Tier 3a Tier 3b
Low acuity surgery/healthy patient

Outpatient surgery

Not life- threatening illness

Low acuity surgery/unhealthy patient Intermediate acuity surgery/healthy patient

Not life threatening but potential for future morbidity and mortality.

Requires in hospital stay

Intermediate acuity surgery/unhealthy patient High acuity surgery/healthy patient High acuity surgery/unhealthy patient

Modified from COVID-19: Guidance for Triage of Non-Emergent Surgical Procedures. American College of Surgeons, Clinical Issues and Guidance (2)

General comments on cancer patients as they relate to the ESAS tier system:

  • Tier 3a or 3b (ESAS): All patients in this Tier should undergo appropriate procedures to remedy their urgent or emergent condition.**
  • Tier 2a or 2b (ESAS): The majority of cancer patients will fall in Tier 2. The guiding principle here is that these patients will require multidisciplinary input (done virtually as needed), and also that the surgeon carefully assess all variables listed above . Patients falling in the high-risk category, i.e. personal high-risk features or high-risk due to environment and resource issues (as outlined by the considerations above ), should preferentially be offered non-operative alternative measures in-lieu of surgery . If surgery cannot be avoided, measures to reduce inpatient LOS are recommended.***
  • Tier 1a or 1b (ESAS): All patients in this Tier are considered elective and should be delayed until pandemic is stabilized, resources are rebalanced, and risk is returning to baseline levels.

**When multiple options exist, especially for Tier 3b, the surgeon is encouraged to choose the treatment option that minimizes use of resources and decreases risk to patient and healthcare. (1)

***Disease site specific non-operative alternative measures are outlined below.

Site Specific Recommendations:

Management strategies for patients with Hepato-Pancreatic-Biliary (HPB) cancers during COVID-19 pandemic:

Generally, surgeons are encouraged to avoid operative management of HPB oncologic surgery in high risk patients (see variables noted above ) until locoregional pandemic status improves. It is worth noting that following the recommendations below may result in an endoscopic procedure, which harbors the risk of aerosolization, in-lieu of operative management. This is thought to be appropriate since it protects the overall resources used to manage patients in this pandemic. It goes without saying that healthcare providers performing any high-risk procedure should be equipped and follow strict PPE precautions as outlined in other recommendations. [https://www.sages.org/recommendations-surgical-response-covid-19/]

In the table below are various treatment options that are employed in treating HPB disease.

Treatment options in the HPB cancer patient include:

Liver
  • Resection (MIS, Open)
  • Transplantation
  • Chemotherapy
  • Ablation (percutaneous, MIS, open) (thermal, non-thermal)
  • Embolic therapies (radio-embolization, TACE)
  • Radiosurgery
  • Biliary stents
Pancreatico-Biliary
  • Resection (MIS, Open)
  • Transplantation (biliary)
  • Chemotherapy
  • Radiation therapy
  • Targeted & immunotherapies

The clinical presentation of the patient along with the stress on hospital resources by the COVID-19 patient volume will determine the best treatment option. While surgery has maintained its primacy in the treatment of HPB cancers, there are clearly roles for each of the above therapies, which may offer a preferred “next-best option” depending on the COVID-19 Phase of the hospital. For the purpose of this discussion we will exclude COVID-19 Phase 0 situations as that essentially falls into a business as usual category.

Treatment of common HPB conditions as it relates to COVID PHASE of Hospital or Healthcare System (see above for phase description):

Organ Clinical Situation Phase I Phase II Phase III
LIVER HCC (12)

Very early stage(0)/ Early Stage (A) / < 3cm *

*For later stages consider TACE, Medical therapy, supportive care as appropriate (e.

Consider ablation/resection/transplant as appropriate Consider TACE, ablation, or observation (ie delay of definitive tx)
Colorectal mets (13, 14)

 

Consider chemotherapy (Tier 2b or greater) vs resection (Tier 2a) Chemotherapy
BILIARY 15 Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma Consider chemotherapy (Tier 2b or greater) vs resection (Tier 2a) Consider chemotherapy, embolic therapy
Hilar cholangiocarcinoma Stenting as indicated.

resection, transplantation as indicated

Stenting as indicated.

consider chemotherapy, chemoradiation, and/or transfer*

PANCREATIC AND EXTRA-HEPATIC BILIARY 16,17,18 Resectable Resection or consider chemotherapy Neoadjuvant chemotherapy
Borderline Neoadjuvant chemotherapy
Pancreatic IPMN, Cysts, low-mod grade neuroendocrine neoplasms All: observation (i.e. delay surgical management)

Neuroendocrine: if metastatic or progressing, consider targeted therapy

*transfer to a facility in a region in Phase 0 – II

Patients who have completed neoadjuvant treatment and are waiting for surgery – these patients are difficult to manage although from last chemotherapy to operation there is a window of up to 12 weeks during which surgery can be planned without losing the opportunity for potential cure. For some patients, consider discussing with the medical oncology team about adding an additional 1-2 cycles of chemotherapy to bridge the patient through the worst of this crisis and plan surgery thereafter (17). Alternatively, patients with borderline tumors who have completed their induction short course chemotherapy can undergo chemoradiation as indicated.(18)

General Comment

Optimally managing cancer patients within the confines of limited medical resources is a hurdle rarely encountered in modern times in the USA. Never before has our Hippocratic Oath come more into play. This document will be updated as new scenarios or suggestions are posted. Again, it is of paramount importance to recognize these as general recommendations are meant to be helpful to the surgeon, while recognizing that the individual surgeon and patient will need to decide upon the course of therapy depending upon local resources and individual situations.

We will all make difficult decisions and all stand behind one another, as we should always strive to do. Prioritizing the patient’s needs and wishes, the family, and standing by them in the surgeon-patient relationship whatever course is necessitated, remains our professional calling and commitment.

References:

  1. Kutikov A, Weinberg DS, Edelman MJ, et al. A War on Two Fronts: Cancer Care in the Time of COVID-19. Ann Intern Med. 2020; [Epub ahead of print 27 March 2020]. doi: https://doi.org/10.7326/M20-1133
  2. COVID-19: Guidance for Triage of Non-Emergent Surgical Procedures. American College of Surgeons, Clinical Issues and Guidance. https://www.facs.org/covid-19/clinical-guidance/triage online March 17 2020 and accessed Apr 1st 2020.
  3. Delaney CP, Chang E, Senagore AJ, et al. Clinical Outcomes and Resource Utilization Associated with Laparoscopic and Open Colectomy Using a Large National Database. Ann Surg. 2008; 247: 819 – 824.
  4. Gerber MH, Delitto D, Crippen CJ, et al. Analysis of the Cost Effectiveness of Laparoscopic Pancreatoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg (2017) 21: 1404 – 1410.
  1. 1: Llovet JM. Updated treatment approach to hepatocellular carcinoma. J Gastroenterol. 2005 Mar;40(3):225-35. Review. PubMed PMID: 15830281.
  2. Nordlinger B, Sorbye H, Glimelius B, Poston GJ, Schlag PM, Rougier P, Bechstein WO, Primrose JN, Walpole ET, Finch-Jones M, Jaeck D, Mirza D, Parks RW, Mauer M, Tanis E, Van Cutsem E, Scheithauer W, Gruenberger T EORTC Gastro-Intestinal Tract Cancer Group; Cancer Research UK; Arbeitsgruppe Lebermetastasen und–tumoren in der Chirurgischen Arbeitsgemeinschaft Onkologie (ALM-CAO); Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group (AGITG); Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive (FFCD) Perioperative FOLFOX4 chemotherapy and surgery versus surgery alone for resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer (EORTC 40983): long-term results of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:1208–1215.
  3. Liu W, Zhou JG, Sun Y, Zhang L, Xing BC. The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget. 2016;7:37277–37287.
  4. 15.McMasters KM, Tuttle TM, Leach SD, Rich T, Cleary KR, Evans DB, Curley SA. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation for extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Am J Surg. 1997 Dec;174(6):605-8; discussion 608-9. PubMed PMID: 9409582.
  5. SWOG S1505: Initial findings on eligibility and neoadjuvant chemotherapy experience with mfolfirinox versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel for resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Davendra Sohal, Shannon McDonough, Syed A. Ahmad, Namita Gandhi, Muhammad Shaalan Beg, Andrea Wang-Gillam, James Lloyd Wade, Katherine A Guthrie, Andrew M. Lowy, Philip Agop Philip, and Howard S. Hochster Journal of Clinical Oncology 2019 37:4_suppl, 414-414.
  6. Rose JB, Rocha FG, Alseidi A, Biehl T, Moonka R, Ryan JA, Lin B, Picozzi V, Helton S. Extended neoadjuvant chemotherapy for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer demonstrates promising postoperative outcomes and survival. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 May;21(5):1530-7. doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-3486-z. Epub 2014 Jan 29. Erratum in: Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 May;21(5):1538.
  7. 1: Oba A, Ho F, Bao QR, Al-Musawi MH, Schulick RD, Chiaro MD. Neoadjuvant Treatment in Pancreatic Cancer. Front Oncol. 2020 Feb 28;10:245. Doi: 10.3389/fonc.2020.00245. eCollection 2020. Review. PubMed PMID: 32185128; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7058791.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19 Tagged With: ahpba, biliary, Cancer, coronavirus, covid-19, hpb, liver, pancreas

SAGES Recommendations Regarding Surgical Management of Colorectal Cancer Patients During the Response to the COVID-19 Crisis

April 11, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

Note: these recommendations are subject to change and update.


Introduction

The care for all patients with cancer requires multidisciplinary review and decision-making, and entails the consideration of many factors in order to develop a sound plan of treatment. This requires a detailed assessment of patient, disease, surgical team, and hospital resources. (1) These principles remain critical and in fact, arguably more important now as we combat the COVID-19 pandemic than ever before. Thus a “one size fits all” recommendation would be unwise due to significant variability in patient presentation, individual comorbidities, disease severity, regional pandemic burden, and hospital-regional resources. It is important to recognize this document presents general recommendations. These are meant to be helpful to the surgeon while recognizing that the individual surgeon and patient will need to decide upon the course of therapy depending on local resources and individual situations.

The recommendations below are aimed to help guide practicing surgeons by providing a framework to address more urgent cancer cases, and to help stratify options that may diminish risk and improve outcomes. To address these concerns, we refer to several resources including the Elective Surgery Acuity Scale (ESAS) (2) as published by the American College of Surgeons (ACS).

As each surgeon assesses their patient, it should be kept in mind that at of the date of this publication, no region in the USA is thought to have peaked in this epidemic. Thus, conditions are expected to get worse before improving. Having said that, when areas experience a “flattening of the curve”, some non-emergent surgeries may be considered.

ESSENTIAL POINTS TO HELP WITH CANCER CARE TRIAGE

Important Considerations for all Cancer Patients:

  1. The comorbidities and age of the patient are paramount in assessing the relative risk and benefit of exposing the patient to coronavirus versus pursuing alternative, next-best options such as neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to operation.
  2. The resources available to the surgeon and hospital at the time of assessment are also critical. Since this pandemic is dynamic in terms of patient acuity, volume, and hospital resources, the current state and immediate potential future state of the hospital system at the time of the proposed operation and anticipated postoperative inpatient recovery needs to be considered.
COVID-19 PHASE of Hospital or Healthcare System:
Phase Condition Description
0 Unaffected No COVID-19 patients, hospital operating as normal
I Semi-urgent COVID-19 patients are in the hospital, but resources and ICU beds/ventilators are not threatened
II Urgent Many COVID-19 patients are in the hospital, ICU beds/ventilator availability is strained and operative and/or PPE resources are limited
III Emergent Crisis situation where most ICU/ventilator resources are directed to COVID-19 patients and operating room and/or PPE equipment are minimally or entirely unavailable
  1. The urgency of the operation proposed. Most hospital systems are endorsing that, as hospital resources allow, patients with cancer should undergo curative resection if delaying surgery by more than 3 months will adversely impact tumor and oncologic outcomes.
  2. Testing for coronavirus prior to operation is strongly encouraged, contingent on testing availability. This is encouraged as a precaution for your patients who may be about to become ill, as well as for staff and the surgical provider, who need to be stewarded as fundamental workforce resources for our patients. A complex surgical procedure will likely affect a patient’s immune system, and deferral should be considered for COVID-positive patients until the COVID disease process has stabilized.
  3. Open surgery and minimally invasive approaches – Consideration should be given when performing open, laparoscopic or robotic surgical approaches to risks of aerosolization of the virus. As long as the patient is negative for the virus either approach is appropriate. However, for patients who are positive for the virus and require more urgent operation, each approach has its own considerations. Concerns exist regarding potential viral contamination with pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Even though there is no clear evidence it occurs with COVID-19, the risk cannot be overlooked and there are ways of mitigating the risk as we previously described (see link below). During open surgery, the risk of viral spread within the plumes generated by electrosurgery or other energy sources is also to be considered. Robotic approaches in confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients also had the added consideration of potential contamination of the robotic equipment. https://www.sages.org/resources-smoke-gas-evacuation-during-open-laparoscopic-endoscopic-procedures/; https://www.sages.org/recommendations-surgical-response-covid-19/
  4. Likelihood for need of ICU – Patients who are expected to require significant time in the hospital, or have a higher risk of peri-operative complications potentially requiring ICU or step-down unit/telemetry services that may be needed for acutely ill COVID patients, should be have their operation timed to avoid surge resource constraints and contamination, if possible.
  5. Length of time for recovery – The benefits of MIS surgery with reduced hospital stay and higher rate of discharge to home, rather than a nursing home, should be considered in planning surgical approaches. (3, 4)
  6. Consenting the patient for surgery – The potential risks and implications of doing surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic, particular to the local institution, should be clearly discussed with the patient and family when obtaining consent for surgery.

General management strategies for patients with cancer during COVID-19 pandemic (Tier-based):

Generally, cancer patients require resources and support services that are typically stressed during pandemics. Further, early reports in this pandemic show that viral infection with COVID-19 tends to be specifically more lethal in cancer patients (5). This highlights that surgeons and systems must recognize that all cancer patients are in a high-risk category.

Tier 1a Tier 1b Tier 2a Tier 2b Tier 3a Tier 3b
Low acuity surgery/healthy patient

Outpatient surgery

Not life- threatening illness

Low acuity surgery/unhealthy patient Intermediate acuity surgery/healthy patient

Not life threatening but potential for future morbidity and mortality.

Requires in hospital stay

Intermediate acuity surgery/unhealthy patient High acuity surgery/healthy patient High acuity surgery/unhealthy patient

Modified from COVID-19: Guidance for Triage of Non-Emergent Surgical Procedures. American College of Surgeons, Clinical Issues and Guidance (2)

General comments on cancer patients as they relate to the ESAS tier system:

  • Tier 3a or 3b (ESAS): All patients in this Tier should undergo appropriate procedures to remedy their urgent or emergent condition.**
  • Tier 2a or 2b (ESAS): The majority of cancer patients will fall in Tier 2. The guiding principle here is that these patients will require multidisciplinary input (done virtually as needed), and also that the surgeon carefully assess all variables listed above . Patients falling in the high-risk category, i.e. personal high-risk features or high-risk due to environment and resource issues (as outlined by the considerations above ), should preferentially be offered non-operative alternative measures in-lieu of surgery . If surgery cannot be avoided, measures to reduce inpatient LOS are recommended.***
  • Tier 1a or 1b (ESAS): All patients in this Tier are considered elective and should be delayed until pandemic is stabilized, resources are rebalanced, and risk is returning to baseline levels.

**When multiple options exist, especially for Tier 3b, the surgeon is encouraged to choose the treatment option that minimizes use of resources and decreases risk to patient and healthcare. (1)

***Disease site specific non-operative alternative measures are outlined below.

Site Specific Recommendations:

I.Management strategies for patients with Colorectal Cancers during COVID-19 pandemic:

Below is a discussion of treatment options and guidelines to consider for patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancers, including patients who are completing or have already completed neoadjuvant treatment. The best treatment for the patient will vary depending on the individual situation as well as the phase of COVID-19 in your region, including patient volume and the resulting strain on the hospital and its resources.

To set the groundwork for the discussion it is worthwhile to list various treatment options and clinical scenarios. It is helpful to categorize conditions surrounding the hospital and healthcare system in an effort to choose treatments wisely.

Treatment options in the colorectal cancer patient include:

  1. 1. Definitive Oncologic Surgery
  2. 2. Delay of Treatment (6, 7)
  3. 3. Stent Placement (8, 9)
  4. 4. Diverting Stoma
  5. 5. Induction Chemotherapy (10)
    1. a. Duration & extended course (1 or 2 more cycles)
  6. 6. Chemoradiation (rectal cancer)
    1. Short course vs. long course (11)

The clinical presentation of the patient along with COVID-related strain on hospital resources will determine the most appropriate plan of action. While surgery maintains its primacy in the treatment of colorectal cancer, there are clearly roles for each of the above therapies, which may offer the preferred “next-best option” based on the COVID-19 Phase of the institution. For the purpose of this discussion we will exclude COVID-19 Phase 0 situations, which fall into a “business as usual” category.

Treatment of common colorectal conditions as it relates to COVID-19 PHASE of Hospital or Healthcare System (see above for phase description):

Clinical Situation Phase I Phase II Phase III
Large or suspicious polyps

Hereditary Syndromes

Dysplasia/Carcinoma in situ in biopsy specimens,

Incomplete, questionable margins on polypectomy

 

 

All of the above categories would be classified as Tier 1or 2a, and for COVID-19 Phase I – III Hospitals surgery would be delayed until the pandemic abates and resources return

Early cancer in resected polyp: (Tier 2) Consider deferring surgery vs resection Defer Surgery
Asymptomatic Cancer

T1-2 N0 (Tier 2)

Resect Resect Vs Deferring surgery Defer Surgery
Asymptomatic Cancer

Colon T3-4, N0 and Tx N+ (Tier 2)

Resect Resect Vs Deferring surgery** Consider Chemotherapy Vs transfer*
Rectal T3-4, N0 and Tx N+ (Tier 2) Induction chemotherapy versus chemoradiation versus radiation, consider extended chemotherapy, also consider delaying surgery up to 12-16 weeks following completion of radiation
Symptomatic Cancers (Tier 3) defined as bleeding requiring transfusion, obstructing or near-obstructing, impending perforation Resect Resect, consider stent versus stoma Stoma vs stent, Consider transfer*

*transfer to a facility in a region in Phase 0-II

**While resection of locally advanced colon malignancies may be feasible during Phase II, the decision to defer may be justified based on anticipated impending COVID-19 surge and critical straining on institutional resources (transition from Phase II to Phase III may occur within days)

General Comment

Optimally managing cancer patients within the confines of limited medical resources is a hurdle rarely encountered in modern times in the USA. Never before has our Hippocratic Oath come more into play. This document will be updated as new scenarios or suggestions are posted. Again, it is of paramount importance to recognize these as general recommendations are meant to be helpful to the surgeon, while recognizing that the individual surgeon and patient will need to decide upon the course of therapy depending upon local resources and individual situations.

We will all make difficult decisions and all stand behind one another, as we should always strive to do. Prioritizing the patient’s needs and wishes, the family, and standing by them in the surgeon-patient relationship whatever course is necessitated, remains our professional calling and commitment.

References

  1. Kutikov A, Weinberg DS, Edelman MJ, et al. A War on Two Fronts: Cancer Care in the Time of COVID-19. Ann Intern Med. 2020; [Epub ahead of print 27 March 2020]. doi: https://doi.org/10.7326/M20-1133
  2. COVID-19: Guidance for Triage of Non-Emergent Surgical Procedures. American College of Surgeons, Clinical Issues and Guidance. https://www.facs.org/covid-19/clinical-guidance/triage online March 17 2020 and accessed Apr 1st 2020.
  3. Delaney CP, Chang E, Senagore AJ, et al. Clinical Outcomes and Resource Utilization Associated with Laparoscopic and Open Colectomy Using a Large National Database. Ann Surg. 2008; 247: 819 – 824.
  4. Gerber MH, Delitto D, Crippen CJ, et al. Analysis of the Cost Effectiveness of Laparoscopic Pancreatoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg (2017) 21: 1404 – 1410.
  5. Liang W, Guan W, Chen R, et al. Cancer patients in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a nationwide analysis in China. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21:335-337. [PMID: 32066541] doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30096-6.
  6. Helewa RM, Turner D, Park J, et al. Longer Waiting Times for Patients Undergoing Colorectal Cancer Surgery Are Not Associated With Decreased Survival. Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2013; 108:378-384.
  7. Simunovic M, Rempel E, Theriault ME, et al. Influence of delays to nonemergent colon cancer surgery on operative mortality, disease specific survival and overall survival. Can J Surg, Vol. 52, No. 4, August 2009.
  8. Allievi N, Ceresoli M, Fugazzola P, et al. Endoscopic Stenting as Bridge to Surgery versus Emergency Resection for Left-Sided Malignant Colorectal Obstruction: An Updated Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2017.
  9. Choi JM, Lee C, Han YM et al (2014) Long-term oncologic outcomes of endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery for malignant colonic obstruction: comparison with emergency surgery. Surg Endosc 28:2649–2655.
  10. Ludmir EB, Palta M, Willet CG, Czito BG. Total neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: An emerging option. Cancer. 2017; 123(9): 1497 – 1506.
  11. “Short-Course RadiationVersus Long-Course Chemoradiation for Rectal Cancer: Making Progress.” Journal of Clinical Oncology, 30(31), pp. 3777–3778.
  12. 12 1: Llovet JM. Updated treatment approach to hepatocellular carcinoma. J Gastroenterol. 2005 Mar;40(3):225-35. Review. PubMed PMID: 15830281.
  13. Nordlinger B, Sorbye H, Glimelius B, Poston GJ, Schlag PM, Rougier P, Bechstein WO, Primrose JN, Walpole ET, Finch-Jones M, Jaeck D, Mirza D, Parks RW, Mauer M, Tanis E, Van Cutsem E, Scheithauer W, Gruenberger T EORTC Gastro-Intestinal Tract Cancer Group; Cancer Research UK; Arbeitsgruppe Lebermetastasen und–tumoren in der Chirurgischen Arbeitsgemeinschaft Onkologie (ALM-CAO); Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group (AGITG); Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive (FFCD) Perioperative FOLFOX4 chemotherapy and surgery versus surgery alone for resectable liver metastases from colorectal

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19 Tagged With: Cancer, Colorectal, coronavirus, covid-19

Notes from the Battlefield – April 6, 2020

April 6, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

Coronavirus Global Surgical Collaborative (CVGSC)*
An initiative sponsored by SAGES in collaboration with EAES, AEC, KSELS, and ELSA


Re-sterilization of N-95 masks

Given the shortage of PPE around the globe, much effort has been placed in extending the life of N95 masks ( https://www.sages.org/n-95-re-use-instructions/ ). The FDA has now approved at least two systems for sterilization of N95 masks which will likely be of significant impact while we await for a larger production of new masks. Both systems use vaporized hydrogen peroxide. The below links are informational of the systems that to our knowledge are currently approved.

    • https://www.asp.com/sites/default/files/covid-19/AP-2000011-Instructions_for_Use_for_Reprocessing_N95_Masks_in_STERRAD_Sterilization_Systems.pdf
    • https://www.asp.com/sites/default/files/covid-19/2000014-Fact_Sheet_for_Healthcare_Personnel_on_Emergency_Use_of_STERRAD_Sterilization_Systems_to_Reprocess_N95_Respirators.pdf
    • https://www.battelle.org/inb/battelle-critical-care-decontamination-system-for-covid19

Closing the backdoor

Many of the healthcare efforts are concentrated at the hospital’s front door, screening patients for COVID symptoms and triaging all patients to areas of the hospital according to their potential of having the disease. From the European experience, it became evident that there is a need to control the spread of the virus originating from the assumed “clean areas” within the hospital. While in an ideal situation all patients coming to a hospital be tested for Covid-19, it is currently occurring only at very few institutions. Despite prior recommendations, the testing of all patients undergoing surgery ( https://www.sages.org/notes-from-the-battlefield-march-30-2020/ ) is still not uniformly practiced because continuing limitations in availability of testing and quick turnaround time. Regular screening of patients in the “clean areas” is therefore essential for early identification and isolation of newly infected cases. This is better done through a formal process. EAES and SAGES have created a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) document that may be of assistance.

Can the “cytokine storm” be curtailed?

SARS-CoV-2 infection induces an excessive and aberrant host immune response that is associated with an acute respiratory distress syndrome characterized by the plasma increase of many cytokines: the so-called “cytokine storm”. The use of anti IL 6 medications, traditionally used in bone marrow transplant patients, may offer potential benefit:

    • Chinese researchers (Xiaoling Xu1, Mingfeng Han, Tiantian Li et al. Effective Treatment of Severe COVID-19 Patients with Tocilizumab. ChinaXiv: 202003.00026v1) treated 21 patients with severe or critical COVID-19 pneumonia with Tocilizumab obtaining a reduction in oxygen requirement (15/20), a resolution of CT lesions (19/21), a normalization of lymphocyte count (10/19), a reduction of C-reactive protein levels (16/19), leading to hospital discharge (19/21) with an average hospitalization duration of 13.5 days. These results are considered by the Chinese authors to be very positive and lead to the design of a randomized trial (Tocilizumab vs control) which will include approximately 190 patients and is expected to reach the planned accrual by mid-May 2020.
    • In Italy a national study is being conducted on the use of Tocilizumab which has already enrolled 300 patients. In particular, in Pavia University Hospital were 30 patients have been treated with non-homogeneous results.
    • The FDA has approved a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous (IV) Tocilizumab (Actemra) plus standard of care in hospitalized adult patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. Timing of administration of the medication may play a role in the variability of the observed results.

Corona Virus in the Gastrointestinal Tract

Covid-19 virus is known to mainly effect the respiratory system. However, there is rapid cumulative information that up to 29% of patients develop gastrointestinal symptoms. Viral RNA and viable virus have been identified in stools. The risk of contamination trough a fecal-oral route is not well known but the potential risk of the GI tract being a source of contamination is evident. Gastrointestinal surgeons and endoscopists should be aware and be vigilant about the possibility when performing endoscopic procedures, procedures were the bowel is entered or divided and during TATME and TEM procedures. Appropriate PPE should be used.

Follow-up on the good news from Italy

On our last week’s report, we stated that despite being too early to make any conclusions, there have been some signs that the slope of COVID-19 new cases in Italy may be starting to slow down and that Italian epidemiologists feel it is the result of the strict social isolation measures. This week it seems clear that indeed the peak is passing in Italy. Spain is now also experiencing positive results from social isolation measures which continue to look as the best preventive measure to emphasize, and possibly the only definite intervention currently available to overcome this epidemic.


Participants:

Drs. Horacio Asbun (Lead), Mohammed Abu Hilal, Jaap Bonjer, Nicolas Demartines, Nader Francis, Ho-Seong Han, Davide Lomanto, Salvador Morales, Andrea Pietrabissa, Aurora Pryor, Christopher Schlachta, Patricia Sylla, Eduardo Targarona, Suthep Udomsawaengsup

Other Surgical Societies/leaders are welcome to participate in future discussions. Please contact SAGES Executive Director, Sallie Matthews at sallie@sages.org if interested in being considered for participation.


*GENERAL DISCLAIMER:  

The following is intended to provide our members with information arising from the experience of our colleagues from Europe and Asia who experienced the pandemic first.  While the information provided is from very reliable sources, it is NOT evidence based data, since there was no time to test its validity on scientific grounds. It is merely an attempt to share practical advice based upon prior experience and current knowledge.


Did you find this information helpful?
Please consider joining SAGES or making a donation to the SAGES Education and Research Foundation so we can continue to bring content like this to the surgical community for free.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19, Notes from the Battlefield Tagged With: coronavirus, covid-19, N95, ppe, sop, standard operating procedure, sterilization

Free Webinar – Surgical Guidelines During COVID-19

April 5, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

The current public health crisis has exposed a gap in physicians’ knowledge, skills and performance. Because the SARS-Cov-2 virus is novel, there are new patient and team safety issues relating to surgery. SAGES has drafted and released a number of statements and resources since March 21, 2020.

As a result of participating in this webinar, learners will be more familiar with the content of the statements and recommendations and will be better prepared to implement SAGES recommendations in their own institution. CME Credit will be available for participants. This webinar will also be recorded and available on the SAGES website for review.


View the recorded webinar here:

https://www.sages.org/video/surgical-guidelines-during-covid-19/

 

COVID-19 Webinar


The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.

SAGES designates this live activity for a maximum of 1.5 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits(TM). Each physician should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.


Did you find this information helpful?
Please consider joining SAGES or making a donation to the SAGES Education and Research Foundation so we can continue to bring content like this to the surgical community for free.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19 Tagged With: coronavirus, covid-19, education, guidelines, recommendations, standards, webinar

SAGES Endorses the ACS Statement on PPE Shortages

April 2, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

SAGES endorses the ACS’ Statement on PPE Shortages during the COVID-19 Pandemic, released April 1, 2020:
https://www.facs.org/covid-19/ppe/acs-statement

Did you find this information helpful?
Please consider joining SAGES or making a donation to the SAGES Education and Research Foundation so we can continue to bring content like this to the surgical community for free.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19

Notes From the Battlefield March 30, 2020

March 30, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

A group of surgical leaders from affected countries have joined to discuss what they are learning during this Covid-19 Global crisis. The following is a brief summary of what they feel may be useful information to disseminate to the surgical community from the week of March 22-29

  1. Aerosolization of virus during laparoscopic surgery

    Concerns for aerosolization of Covid-19 during laparoscopic surgery has created significant confusion. Even though there is no Level 1 evidence to prove its occurrence or lack thereof, SAGES and EAES have joined efforts resulting on a guiding statement based on valuable expert opinion and review of related literature:

    SAGES and EAES Recommendations Regarding Surgical Response to COVID-19 Crisis:
    https://www.sages.org/recommendations-surgical-response-covid-19/ There is also an infographic:

    SAGES-EAES COVID-19 Infographic
    Click image to see full size.

    The publication is accompanied by a very useful summary entitled:

    Resources on Smoke & Gas Evacuation During Open, Laparoscopic and Endoscopic Procedures
    https://www.sages.org/resources-smoke-gas-evacuation-during-open-laparoscopic-endoscopic-procedures/.

  2. Testing for all patients undergoing surgery

    Based on the experience gained on the field, CVGSC recommends that in areas/institutions seeing high volumes of COVID-19 patients, all patients undergoing a surgical or interventional endoscopic procedure, receive some type of screening test, even if asymptomatic and without risk factors. When feasible and available, direct testing for COVID-19 is preferred. Alternatively, a chest ultrasound or a CT of the chest is advised. However cross contamination of CT equipment and patients is to be considered depending on the institutional availability of dedicated CT’s. Please see: https://www.sages.org/the-corona-virus-global-surgical-collaborative-cvgsc/ for more information and video.

  3. COVID plasma trial

    As the number of patients that recover from the disease is increasing, the FDA has approved the emergency use of investigational COVID-19 convalescent plasma to treat severely ill COVID-19 patients. While it will take months to years to develop an effective vaccine, convalescent plasma from recovered COVID-19 patients rich in antibodies may soon be available to boost immunity against the virus, theoretically reducing viral load and lowering mortality. A trial has been started at Mt Sinai,  New York and is expanding to other centers.  If results appear encouraging, SAGES will keep a list of sites that are actively screening volunteers for possible plasma donation.

  4. 3D printing of needed ventilation system parts

    As the number of patients requiring prolonged ventilator support increases, institutions have seen a shortage of ventilator parts contributing to the shortage when there is otherwise a functioning ventilator available. A document entitled Production of 3D printed components for ventilation systems: practical hints is kindly shared by San Matteo Hospital, Pavia. 3D printing for COVID-19

  5. Potential good news from Italy

    Despite that devastation from the disease still continues, and being too early to draw any definitive conclusions, there are some signs that the slope of COVID-19 new cases in Italy may be starting to slow down. Italian epidemiologists feel it is the result of the strict physical distancing measures. As health care provides, this appears to be the best preventive measure to emphasize and possibly the only intervention currently available to overcome this epidemic.


Participants:

Drs. Horacio Asbun (Lead), Mohammed Abu Hilal, Jaap Bonjer, Nicolas Demartines, Nader Francis, Ho-Seong Han, Salvador Morales, Andrea Pietrabissa, Aurora Pryor, Christopher Schlachta, Patricia Sylla, Eduardo Targarona

Other Surgical Societies/leaders are welcome to participate in future discussions. Please contact SAGES Executive Director, Sallie Matthews at sallie@sages.org if interested in being considered for participation.


GENERAL DISCLAIMER

The following is intended to provide our members with information arising from the experience of our colleagues from Europe and Asia who experienced the pandemic first.  While the information provided is from very reliable sources, it is NOT evidence based data, since there was no time to test its validity on scientific grounds. It is merely an attempt to share practical advice based upon prior experience and current knowledge.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19, Notes from the Battlefield Tagged With: covid-19, endoscopy, laparoscopy, plasma therapy, recommendations, surgery, testing

Resources for Smoke & Gas Evacuation During Open, Laparoscopic, and Endoscopic Procedures

March 29, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

Released 3/29/2020 – this document will continue to be updated as needed.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Recently, SAGES, and/or SAGES in conjunction with EAES, published guidelines for surgeons concerning the use of laparoscopy during the current COVID-19 pandemic. We recognize that during this time of challenge to resources and personnel, every surgeon and institution is providing the very best care it can with the circumstances it finds itself in. This document represents a resource for smoke and gas evacuation based on known science, vetted publications, and potential strategies that offer the best protection to both patients and the health care team. This document is designed as a “living document” of resources and will be regularly updated when new evidence presents.

The Science of SARS-CoV-2

There is a constant influx of new information regarding the virology of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the disease, COVID-19.  What we know so far regarding the SARS-CoV-2, is the RNA virus has a size range of 0.06 to 0.14 microns3.  Along with the nasopharynx, the upper respiratory tract and lower respiratory tract, the virus has been found in the entire gastrointestinal tract from the mouth to the rectum. The virus has been found in nasal swabs, saliva, sputum, throat swabs, blood, bile, and feces.  Urine and CSF evaluations have been negative. The virus has also been found within the cells lining the respiratory tract and gastrointestinal tract. It is suspected that the virus has multiple modes of transmission.

The potential of aerosolization as a mode of transmission during endoscopy or minimally invasive surgery is the focus of this document.

Filtration

Filtration may be an effective means of protection from the release of the virus during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and endoscopy.  Masks such as N95 respirators are designed to filter out 95% of particles that are 0.3 microns and larger. Powered Air Purifying Respirators (PAPR) may be beneficial for intubation, extubation, bronchoscopy, endoscopy, and possibly tracheostomy. Intraoperatively, filters are used to remove smoke and particulate matter including viruses. High-Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filters have a minimum 99.97% efficiency rating for removing particles greater than or equal to 0.3 microns in diameter4.  Ultra-Low Particulate Air (ULPA) filters can remove from a minimum of 99.999% of airborne particles with a minimum particle penetration size of 0.05 microns5. The Association of periOperative Registered Nurses (AORN) guidelines define ULPA as filters capable of removing particles of 0.1 microns. Filtration is also essential on a larger scale in the positive pressure operative suites. HEPA filters that are placed in the ceiling provide a terminal cleaning. Clean rooms are favored over HEPA filters placed in the ductwork.

Currently, the best practice for mitigating possible infectious transmission during open, laparoscopic and endoscopic procedures is to use a multi-faceted approach, which includes proper room filtration and ventilation, appropriate PPE, and smoke evacuation devices with a suction and filtration system,6 as available.

Practical Measures for Use of Filtration During Laparoscopy:

  1. All pneumoperitonuem should be safely evacuated from the port attached to the filtration device before closure, trocar removal, specimen extraction or conversion to open.
  2. Once placed, ports should not be vented if possible. If movement of the insufflating port is required, the port should be closed prior to disconnecting the tubing and the new port should be closed until the insufflator tubing is connected. The insufflator should be “on” before the new port valve is opened to prevent gas from back-flowing into the insufflator.
  3. During desufflation, all escaping CO2 gas and smoke should be captured with an ultra-filtration system and desufflation mode should be used on your insufflator if available.
  4. If the insufflator being used does not have a desufflation feature, be sure to close the valve on the working port that is being used for insufflation before the flow of CO2 on the insufflator is turned off (even if there is an in-line filter in the tubing).  Without taking this precaution contaminated intra-abdominal CO2 can be pushed into the insufflator when the intraabdominal pressure is higher than the pressure within the insufflator.
  5. The patient should be flat and the least dependent port should be utilized for desufflation.
  6. Specimens should be removed once all the CO2 gas and smoke is evacuated.
  7. Surgical drains should be utilized only if absolutely necessary.
  8. Suture closure devices that allow for leakage of insufflation should be avoided. The fascia should be closed after desufflation.
  9. Hand-assisted surgery can lead to significant leakage of insufflated CO2 and smoke from ports and should be avoided. If used to remove larger specimens and protect the wound, it can be placed after desufflation. The specimen can then be removed and the closure performed.

Smoke and Gas Evacuation Products

SAGES and EAES do not endorse any of the following products. This is a working list of commercially available products that could potentially be used to filter CO2 gas or smoke evacuated during open, laparoscopic, and endoscopic procedures. Please be aware of the products your facility utilizes and contact your manufacturer’s representative or refer to the product’s instructions for use (IFU) documents for further information. We have sought information from as many companies that we are aware of, but we understand there are many other companies that may have similar products. We will do our best to add information as it becomes available to us.  In addition to smoke evacuation products, the Ultravision system may minimize aerosolized particles within pneumoperitoneum.

Current wall suction devices do not use ultrafiltration.

Summary of Commercially Available Smoke Evacuation Systems

Please see our SAGES Medical Device Repository document for the summary.

References

  1. Surgical smoke and infection control. Alp E, Bijl D, Bleichrodt RP, Hansson B, Voss A. J Hosp Infect. 2006 Jan;62(1):1-5.
  2. Detecting hepatitis B virus in surgical smoke emitted during laparoscopic surgery. Kwak HD, Kim SH, Seo YS, Song KJ. Occup Environ Med. 2016 Dec;73(12):857-863.
  3. China Novel Coronavirus Investigating and Research Team. Zhu N, Zhang D, Wang W1, Li X, Yang B, Song J, Zhao X, Huang B, Shi W, Lu R, Niu P, Zhan F, Ma X, Wang D, Xu W, Wu G, Gao GF, Tan W. N Engl J Med. 2020 Feb 20;382(8):727-733.
  4. Medical Advisory Secretariat. Air cleaning technologies: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2005;5(17):1–52.
  5. SO 29463-1:2017 High Efficiency Filters And Filter Media For Removing Particles From Air – Part 1: Classification, Performance, Testing, And Marking.https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:29463:-1:ed-2:v1:en.
  6. Surgical Smoke and the Orthopedic Implications. The Internet Journal of Orthopedic Surgery. Parsa RS, Dirig NF, Eck IN, Payne III WK. 2015, Volume 24 Number 1.
  7. Practical recommendations for critical care and anesthesiology teams caring for novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) patients. Wax RS, Christian MD. Can J Anaesth. 2020 Feb 12 [Epub ahead of print].
  8. Risk of acquiring human papilloma-virus from the plume produced by the carbon dioxide laser in the treatment of warts. Gloster HM Jr, Roenigk RK. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1995, 32:436–41.
  9. Surgical smoke may be a biohazard to surgeons performing laparoscopic surgery. Choi SH, Kwon TG, Chung SK, Kim TH. Surg Endosc. 2014, 28 (8): 2374-80.
  10. Experimental study of the potential hazards of surgical smoke from powered instruments. In SM, Park DY, Sohn IK, et al. Br J Surg. 2015, 102:1581––1586
  11. Detecting hepatitis B virus in surgical smoke emitted during laparoscopic surgery. Kwak HD, Kim SH, Seo YS, et al. Occup Environ Med. 2016, 73:857––863
  12. Papillomavirus in the vapor of carbon dioxide laser-treated verrucae. Garden JM, O‘Banion MK, Shelnitz LS, et al. JAMA. 1988, 259:1199––1202
  13. Human papillomavirus DNA in CO2 laser-generated plume of smoke and its consequences to the surgeon. Ferenczy A, Bergeron C, Richart RM. Obstet Gynecol. 1990, 75:114-118
  14. Presence of human immunodeficiency virus DNA in laser smoke. Baggish MS, Poiesz BJ, Joret D, Williamson P, Refai A. Lasers Surg Med. 1991;11:197–203
  15. Studies on the transmission of viral disease via the CO2 laser plume and ejecta. Wisniewski PM, Warhol MJ, Rando RF, Sedlacek TV, Kemp JE, Fisher JC. J Reprod Med. 1990, 35:1117–23
  16. Interim Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations for Hospitalized Patients with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV). https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/mers/infection-prevention-control.html
  17. inimally invasive surgery and the novel coronavirus outbreak: lessons learned from Italy. Zheng MH, Boni L, Fingerhut A. Annals of Surgery. 2020. [Accepted for Publication].
  18. COVID-19: Gastrointestinal manifestations and potential fecal-oral transmission. Gu J, Han B, Wang J. Gastroenterology. March 3 2020 [Epub ahead of print].
  19. ASGE | JOINT GI SOCIETY MESSAGE- COVID-19 Clinical insights for our community of gastroenterologists and gastroenterology care providers. https://www.asge.org/home/joint-gi-society-message-covid-19
  20. AORN J. 2017 May;105(5):488-497.
  21. COVID 19 AP 50 30 Information March 30 Lexion Medical
  22. AlwaysPneumo Brochure 8 page 2019 Lexion Medical
  23. Symmetry Surgical Smoke Evacuation Systems

Did you find this information helpful?
Please consider joining SAGES or making a donation to the SAGES Education and Research Foundation so we can continue to bring content like this to the surgical community for free.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19 Tagged With: filtration, smoke, surgical plume, systems

SAGES and EAES Recommendations Regarding Surgical Response to COVID-19 Crisis

March 29, 2020 by Aurora Pryor

Released 3/30/2020
Note: these recommendations are subject to change and update.

SAGES and EAES are committed to the protection and care of patients, their surgeons and staff, and all who are served by the medical community at large. We are making these recommendations based on best available evidence and expert opinion from the global surgical community. We will continue to monitor emerging evidence and support novel research to address these issues.

COVID-19 has demonstrated a propensity to spread at an exponential rate in several countries, significantly impacting many lives and affecting our practice as healthcare professionals. Through this prism, the following recommendations are being made with the aim that they can be of support to you, by addressing a number of uncertainties regarding our practice, own safety, and overall patient care.

Rationing of Services:

  1. All elective surgical and endoscopic cases should be postponed at the current time. These decisions however should be made locally, based on COVID-19 burden and in the context of medical, logistical and organizational considerations. There are different levels of urgency related to patient needs, and judgment is required to discern between them. However, as the numbers of COVID-19 patients requiring care is expected to escalate over the next few weeks, the surgical care of patients should be limited to those whose needs are imminently life threatening. These may include patients with malignancy that could progress, or with active symptoms that require urgent care. All others should be delayed until after the peak of the pandemic is seen. This minimizes the risk to both, patient and health care team, as well as minimizes utilization of necessary resources, such as beds, ventilators, and personal protective equipment (PPE).
  2. All non-essential hospital or office staff should be allowed to stay home and telework. All in-person educational sessions should be cancelled and could be replaced by online resources. The minimum number of necessary providers should attend patients during rounds and other encounters. Adherence to hand washing, antiseptic foaming, and appropriate use of PPE should be strictly enforced. When necessary, in-person surgical consultation should be performed by decision makers only.
  3. All non-urgent in-person clinic/office visits should be cancelled or postponed, unless needed to triage active symptoms or manage wound care. All patient visits should be handled remotely when possible, and in person only when absolutely necessary. Access to clinics should be maintained for those special circumstances to avoid patients seeking care in the ED. Only a minimum of required support personnel should be present for these visits, and PPE should again be appropriately utilized. When in critical need, consideration should be given to redeploying OR resources for intensive care needs.
  4. Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings should be held virtually as possible and/or limited to core team members only, including surgeon, pathologist, Clinical Nurse Specialist, radiologist, oncologist and coordinator. The MDT is responsible for the decision making and classifying the patient’s priority level of need for surgery.

Procedural Considerations:

  1. There is very little evidence regarding the relative risks of Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) versus the conventional open approach, specific to COVID-19. (1) We will therefore continue to monitor emerging evidence and support novel research to address these issues.
  2. It is strongly recommended however, that consideration be given to the possibility of viral contamination to staff during surgery either open, laparoscopic or robotic and that protective measures are strictly employed for OR staff safety and to maintain a functioning workforce.
  3. Although previous research has shown that laparoscopy can lead to aerosolization of blood borne viruses, (2-4) there is no evidence to indicate that this effect is seen with COVID-19, nor that it would be isolated to MIS procedures. Nevertheless, erring on the side of safety would warrant treating the coronavirus as exhibiting similar aerosolization properties. For MIS procedures, use of devices to filter released CO2 for aerosolized particles should be strongly considered.
  4. Proven benefits of MIS of reduced length of stay and complications should be strongly considered in these patients, in addition to the potential for ultrafiltration of the majority or all aerosolized particles. Filtration of aerosolized particles may be more difficult during open surgery.
  5. There may be enhanced risk of viral exposure to proceduralists/ endoscopists from endoscopy and airway procedures. When these procedures are necessary, strict use of PPE should be considered for the whole team, following Centers for Disease Control (CDC, https://www.cdc.gov) or WHO (https://www.who.int) guidelines for droplet or airborne precautions. This likely includes, at a minimum, N95 masks and face shields. (5, 6).

Practical Measures for Surgery:

  1. Consent discussion with patients must cover the risk of COVID-19 exposure and the potential consequences.
  2. If readily available and practical, surgical patients should be tested pre-operatively for COVID-19.
  3. If needed and possible, intubation and extubation should take place within a negative pressure room. (https://www.asahq.org/in-the-spotlight/coronavirus-covid-19-information, https://icmanaesthesiacovid-19.org) (7, 8)
  4. Operating rooms for presumed, suspected or confirmed COVID-19 positive patients should be appropriately filtered and ventilated and if possible, should be different than rooms used for other emergent surgical patients. Negative pressure rooms should be considered, if available.
  5. Only those considered essential staff should be participating in the surgical case and unless there is an emergency, there should be no exchange of room staff.
  6. All members of the OR staff should use PPE as recommended by national or international organization including the WHO or CDC. Appropriate gowns and face shields should be utilized. These measures should be used in all surgical procedures during the pandemic regardless of known or suspected COVID status. Placement and Removal of PPE in should be done according to CDC guidelines.
  7. Electrosurgery units should be set to the lowest possible settings for the desired effect. Use of monopolar electrosurgery, ultrasonic dissectors, and advanced bipolar devices should be minimized, as these can lead to particle aerosolization. (9-15) If available, monopolar diathermy pencils with attached smoke evacuators should be used.
  8. Surgical equipment used during procedures with COVID-19 positive or Persons Under Investigation (PUI) /suspected COVID patients should be cleaned separately from other surgical equipment.

Practical Measures for Laparoscopy

  1. Incisions for ports should be as small as possible to allow for the passage of ports but not allow for leakage around ports.
  2. CO2 insufflation pressure should be kept to a minimum and an ultra-filtration (smoke evacuation system or filtration) should be used, if available.
  3. All pneumoperitoneum should be safely evacuated via a filtration system before closure, trocar removal, specimen extraction or conversion to open.

Practical Measures for Endoscopy (https://www.asge.org/home/joint-gi-society-message-covid-19, https://www.bsg.org.uk)(16, 17)

  1. The ability to control aerosolized virus during endoscopic procedures is lacking, so all members in the endoscopy suite or operating room should wear appropriate PPE, including gowns and face shields. Placement and Removal of PPE should be done according to CDC guidelines.
  2. Since patients can present with gastrointestinal manifestations of COVID-19, all emergent endoscopic procedures performed in the current environment should be considered as high risk.
  3. Since the virus has been found in multiple cells in the gastrointestinal tract and all fluids including saliva, enteric contents, stool and blood, surgical energy should be minimized. (16, 17)
  4. Endoscopic procedures that require additional insufflation of CO2 or room air by additional sources should be avoided until we have better knowledge about the aerosolization properties of the virus. This would include many of the endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoluminal procedures.
  5. Removal of caps on endoscopes could release fluid and/or air and should be avoided.
  6. Endoscopic equipment used during procedures with COVID-19 positive or PUI patients should be cleaned separately from other endoscopic equipment.

REFERENCES:

  1. Minimally invasive surgery and the novel coronavirus outbreak: lessons learned from Italy. Zheng MH, Boni L, Fingerhut A. Annals of Surgery. 2020. [Accepted for Publication].
  2. Surgical smoke and infection control. Alp E, Bijl D, Bleichrodt RP, Hansson B, Voss A. J Hosp Infect. 2006 Jan;62(1):1-5. Epub 2005 Jul 5.
  3. Detecting hepatitis B virus in surgical smoke emitted during laparoscopic surgery. Kwak HD, Kim SH, Seo YS, et al. Occup Environ Med. 2016, 73:857––863.
  4. Surgical smoke may be a biohazard to surgeons performing laparoscopic surgery. Choi SH, Kwon TG, Chung SK, Kim TH. Surg Endosc. 2014, 28 (8): 2374-80.
  5. Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak: what the department of endoscopy should know. Repici A, Maselli R, Colombo M, Gabbiadini R, Spadaccini M, Anderloni A, Carrara S, Fugazza A, Di Leo M, Galtieri PA, Pellegatta G, Ferrara EC, Azzolini E, Lagioia M. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020 Mar 13. pii: S0016-5107(20)30245-5. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.03.019. [Epub ahead of print]
  6. Perioperative Considerations for the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19).
  7. Practical recommendations for critical care and anesthesiology teams caring for novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) patients. Wax RS, Christian MD. Can J Anaesth. 2020 Feb 12 [Epub ahead of print].
  8. Liana Zucco, Nadav Levy, Desire Ketchandji, Mike Aziz, Satya Krishna Ramachandran, Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation, https://www.apsf.org/news-updates/perioperative-considerations-for-the-2019-novel-coronavirus-covid-19/, 2020 Feb 12.
  9. Surgical Smoke and the Orthopedic Implications. The Internet Journal of Orthopedic Surgery. Parsa RS, Dirig NF, Eck IN, Payne III WK. 2015, Volume 24 Number 1.
  10. Risk of acquiring human papilloma-virus from the plume produced by the carbon dioxide laser in the treatment of warts. Gloster HM Jr, Roenigk RK. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1995, 32:436–41.
  11. Papillomavirus in the vapor of carbon dioxide laser-treated verrucae. Garden JM, O‘Banion MK, Shelnitz LS, et al. JAMA. 1988, 259:1199––1202.
  12. Human papillomavirus DNA in CO2 laser-generated plume of smoke and its consequences to the surgeon. Ferenczy A, Bergeron C, Richart RM. Obstet Gynecol. 1990, 75:114-118.
  13. Presence of human immunodeficiency virus DNA in laser smoke. Baggish MS, Poiesz BJ, Joret D, Williamson P, Refai A. Lasers Surg Med. 1991;11:197–203 .
  14. Experimental study of the potential hazards of surgical smoke from powered instruments. In SM, Park DY, Sohn IK, et al. Br J Surg. 2015, 102:1581––1586.
  15. Studies on the transmission of viral disease via the CO2 laser plume and ejecta. Wisniewski PM, Warhol MJ, Rando RF, Sedlacek TV, Kemp JE, Fisher JC. J Reprod Med. 1990, 35:1117–23.
  16. COVID-19: Gastrointestinal manifestations and potential fecal-oral transmission. Gu J, Han B, Wang J. Gastroenterology. March 3 2020 [Epub ahead of print].
  17. ASGE | JOINT GI SOCIETY MESSAGE- COVID-19 Clinical insights for our community of gastroenterologists and gastroenterology care providers. https://www.asge.org/home/joint-gi-society-message-covid-19

Did you find this information helpful?
Please consider joining SAGES or making a donation to the SAGES Education and Research Foundation so we can continue to bring content like this to the surgical community for free.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19 Tagged With: coronavirus, covid19, eaes, surgical recommendations

The Coronavirus Global Surgical Collaborative (CVGSC)

March 24, 2020 by Horacio Asbun

An initiative sponsored by SAGES in collaboration with EAES, AEC, KSELS* 

A group of surgical leaders from affected countries have joined to discuss what they are learning during this Covid-19 Global crisis. The following is a brief summary of what they feel may be useful information to disseminate to the surgical community:

Lack of taste and smell:

A minority of patients present with decreased sense of taste and/or smell as their first symptom. This can precede any other symptom. Several ENT physicians have been exposed to Covid-19 because they unsuspectingly examined these patients in their offices

Abdominal Pain:

A minority of patients can present with abdominal pain and possible associated fever. In some instances, even mimicking appendicitis. They usually have accompanying diarrhea, loss of appetite and or vomiting. When the clinical presentation of a suspected acute abdominal diagnosis appears somewhat atypical, including only mildly raised WBC or CRP, a CT of the abdomen including the chest can be paramount to avoid taking the patient to surgery.

Chest Ultrasound:

As the number of patients increases, a useful diagnostic modality could be thoracic ultrasound. Six areas of the thorax are studied at each side. Please follow this link to see a 5 minute video of how to perform a diagnostic ultrasound or watch it below, courtesy of San Matteo Hospital, Pavia, Italy –

Testing:

There is a wide range of sensitivity and wait times for results of the Covid-19 diagnostic test. The provider swabbing the patient should know how to do it correctly and has the experience in doing it. A superficial, incorrect swabbing is discouraged since it may lead to a false negative result.


Participants:

Drs. Horacio Asbun (Lead), Mohammed Abu Hilal, Jaap Bonjer, Nicolas Demartines, Ho-Seong Han, Salvador Morales, Andrea Pietrabissa, Aurora Pryor, Christopher Schlachta, Eduardo Targarona

Other Surgical Societies/leaders are welcome to participate in future discussions. Please contact SAGES Executive Director, Sallie Matthews at sallie@sages.org if interested in being considered for participation.


*GENERAL DISCLAIMER:  

The following is intended to provide our members with information arising from the experience of our colleagues from Europe and Asia who experienced the pandemic first.  While the information provided is from very reliable sources, it is NOT evidence based data, since there was no time to test its validity on scientific grounds. It is merely an attempt to share practical advice based upon prior experience and current knowledge.

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19, Notes from the Battlefield Tagged With: coronavirus, covid-19, cvgsc, symptoms, ultrasound, video

A Message from the SAGES President

March 23, 2020 by SAGES Webmaster

These are uncertain times for all of us facing the COVID-19 pandemic. As surgeons, we are seeing a halt to our elective practice, a transition to virtual clinic visits, and potential redeployment into areas of the front line in ICUs or medical wards that are outside of our regular practice patterns. Healthcare workers overall are facing potential equipment shortages, including in personal protective equipment. SAGES is working hard to provide resources to help you navigate this unfamiliar landscape. I can’t believe it was only two weeks ago that we postponed our annual meeting until August.

On March 19, we issued a statement recommending considerations for surgical practice during the pandemic, but landscapes are local, and the situation is in rapid evolution. The March 19 statement was written by the Quality, Outcomes and Safety Committee, led by Jonathan Dort, Konstantinos Spaniolas and Deborah Keller with input from a broad group of our other SAGES leaders. Please keep in mind that even though a significant effort is placed in bringing you the best information, our recommendations are not meant to be rigorous scientific guidelines and they may evolve as additional evidence becomes available.

The Acute Care committee led by Rob Lim with co-authors Kim Davis, Andre Campbell and Mike Cripps shared their critical care experience with us in a primer for those of us who will be expanding our scope of practice by necessity. We also have a primer on Telehealth on our site written by Kevin Wasco, Shawn Tsuda, Christopher Schlachta, Caitlin Halbert and Jonathan Dort with input from our SAGES executives. The included codes may help you navigate this useful modality.

Other resources on our webpage come from our global partners. Horacio Asbun, SAGES’ President-elect, has established a coalition called Corona Virus Global Surgical Collaborative of front line COVID-fighters from across the globe. We are meeting virtually weekly to exchange experiences and best practices. We plan to share lessons learned on our website and in publication. The first set of documents from this coalition are from Salvador Morales and the Spanish Association of Surgeons. We are working to translate these into English, but believe many of you will still find them helpful in their current form. They are not formally endorsed. Keep posted as there is more to come!

We have set up a webpage detailing our recommendations and resources with links to other helpful sites for the latest information on COVID-19. Please visit:

https://www.sages.org/category/covid-19/

We are updating it almost daily. To avoid further email saturation, updates and new statements will be posted there instead of emailed.

Thank you for all of the hard work all of you do and your commitment to our SAGES Mission: Innovate, educate and collaborate to improve patient care.

Most sincerely,

Aurora

Filed Under: Blog, COVID-19, President Posts Tagged With: aurora, coronavirus, covid-19, pryor, recommendations, statements

  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Go to Next Page »
  • Foundation
  • SAGES.TV
  • MyCME
  • Educational Activities

Copyright © 2025 Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons