To support the global restart of elective surgery, data from an international prospective cohort study of 8492 patients (69 countries) was analysed using artificial intelligence (machine learning techniques) to develop a predictive score for mortality in surgical patients with SARS-CoV-2. We found that patient rather than operation factors were the best predictors and used these to create the COVIDsurg Mortality Score (https://covidsurgrisk.app). Our data demonstrates that it is safe to restart a wide range of surgical services for selected patients.

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:The primary objective of this review is to assess whether mechanical assist devices improve survival in individuals with acute cardiogenic shock.

Background The SARS‐CoV‐2 was first reported in December 2019 in Wuhan, China and has been declared a pandemic in March 2020. COVID‐19 has caused unprecedented and lasting biopsychosocial effects worldwide. All healthcare professionals have faced life‐threatening risks by attending their daily jobs. The daily emergence of advice and guidelines was necessary to ensure the safety of patients and staff. To this effect, all elective services came to a halt to preserve hospitals’ capacity for dealing with the sickest. This retrospective, descriptive review aims to assess the volume and timing of the advice released specifically relevant to UK ENT specialists. Methods Two separate searches were performed. One involved online advice published in English by international, national and ENT‐specific organisations between January 1 and May 31. The date, title, source, type of advice and link to the advice were recorded in Excel. The resources were analysed per week of publication. A second separate search for peer‐reviewed publications was conducted using PubMed Central and Cochrane databases. Findings COVID‐19‐related guidance was considered, of which 175 were identified. 52/175 (29.7%) articles were published by international organisations. 56/175 (32%) were produced by national organisations, and 67/175 (38.28%) were produced by ENT specific organisations. The peak guidance production took place in the third and fourth week of March (16/03/2020‐29/03/2020) with 72/175 publications. Of these, 27/70 came from the international category, 17/70 from national bodies and 26/70 from ENT‐specific organisations. 13 863 total publications relating to COVID‐19 were found using PubMed and Cochrane search strategies; 76% were relevant to ENT. Conclusion The challenges faced by ENT relate to the unprecedented, sudden and daily changes to clinical practice. Multiple bodies interpreted the guidance, giving an opportunity for confusion and delay in treatments for patients. Implementing a system with clear lines of communication and dissemination of information will improve our response to future pandemic events whilst maintaining a commercial awareness to better use the human and financial resources of an already financially restricted NHS.

BackgroundCardiogenic shock (CS) is a state of critical end-organ hypoperfusion due to a primary cardiac disorder. For people with refractory CS despite maximal vasopressors, inotropic support and intra-aortic balloon pump, mortality approaches 100%. Mechanical assist devices provide mechanical circulatory support (MCS) which has the ability to maintain vital organ perfusion, to unload the failing ventricle thus reduce intracardiac filling pressures which reduces pulmonary congestion, myocardial wall stress and myocardial oxygen consumption. This has been hypothesised to allow time for myocardial recovery (bridge to recovery) or allow time to come to a decision as to whether the person is a candidate for a longer-term ventricular assist device (VAD) either as a bridge to heart transplantation or as a destination therapy with a long-term VAD. ObjectivesTo assess whether mechanical assist devices improve survival in people with acute cardiogenic shock. Search methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid) and Web of Science Core Collection in November 2019. In addition, we searched three trials registers in August 2019. We scanned reference lists and contacted experts in the field to obtain further information. There were no language restrictions. Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials on people with acute CS comparing mechanical assist devices with best current intensive care management, including intra-aortic balloon pump and inotropic support. Data collection and analysisWe performed data collection and analysis according to the published protocol.Primary outcomes were survival to discharge, 30 days, 1 year and secondary outcomes included, quality of life, major adverse cardiovascular events (30 days/end of follow-up), dialysis-dependent (30 days/end of follow-up), length of hospital stay and length of intensive care unit stay and major adverse events.We used the five GRADE considerations (study limitations, consistency of e ect, imprecision, indirectness, and publication bias) to assess the quality of a body of evidence as it relates to the studies which contribute data to the meta-analyses for the prespecified outcomes Mechanical assist devices for acute cardiogenic shock (Review)

No abstract