IMPORTANCE There are limited data on mortality and complications rates in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who undergo surgery. OBJECTIVE To evaluate early surgical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 in different subspecialties. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This matched cohort study conducted in the general, vascular and thoracic surgery, orthopedic, and neurosurgery units of Spedali Civili Hospital (Brescia, Italy) included patients who underwent surgical treatment from February 23 to April 1, 2020, and had positive test results for COVID-19 either before or within 1 week after surgery. Gynecological and minor surgical procedures were excluded. Patients with COVID-19 were matched with patients without COVID-19 with a 1:2 ratio for sex, age group, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and comorbidities recorded in the surgical risk calculator of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Patients older than 65 years were also matched for the Clinical Frailty Scale score. EXPOSURES Patients with positive results for COVID-19 and undergoing surgery vs matched surgical patients without infection. Screening for COVID-19 was performed with reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction assay in nasopharyngeal swabs, chest radiography, and/or computed tomography. Diagnosis of COVID-19 was based on positivity of at least 1 of these investigations. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end point was early surgical mortality and complications in patients with COVID-19; secondary end points were the modeling of complications to determine the importance of COVID-19 compared with other surgical risk factors. RESULTS Of 41 patients (of 333 who underwent operation during the same period) who underwent mainly urgent surgery, 33 (80.5%) had positive results for COVID-19 preoperatively and 8 (19.5%) had positive results within 5 days from surgery. Of the 123 patients of the combined cohorts (78 women [63.4%]; mean [SD] age, 76.6 [14.4] years), 30-day mortality was significantly higher for those with COVID-19 compared with control patients without COVID-19 (odds ratio [OR], 9.5; 95% CI, 1.77-96.53). Complications were also significantly higher (OR, 4.98; 95% CI, 1.81-16.07); pulmonary complications were the most common (OR, 35.62; 95% CI, 9.34-205.55), but thrombotic complications were also significantly associated with COVID-19 (OR, 13.2; 95% CI, 1.48-ϱ). Different models (cumulative link model and classification tree) identified COVID-19 as the main variable associated with complications. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this matched cohort study, surgical mortality and complications were higher in patients with COVID-19 compared with patients without COVID-19. These data suggest that, whenever possible, surgery should be postponed in patients with COVID-19.

Peri-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection increases postoperative mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal duration of planned delay before surgery in patients who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection. This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery during October 2020. Surgical patients with pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality. Logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted 30-day mortality rates stratified by time from diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection to surgery. Among 140,231 patients (116 countries), 3127 patients (2.2%) had a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Adjusted 30-day mortality in patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection was 1.5% (95%CI 1.4-1.5). In patients with a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, mortality was increased in patients having surgery within 0-2 weeks, 3-4 weeks and 5-6 weeks of the diagnosis (odds ratio (95%CI) 4.1 (3.3-4.8), 3.9 (2.6-5.1) and 3.6 (2.0-5.2), respectively). Surgery performed ≥ 7 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was associated with a similar mortality risk to baseline (odds ratio (95%CI) 1.5 (0.9-2.1)). After a ≥ 7 week delay in undertaking surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection, patients with ongoing symptoms had a higher mortality than patients whose symptoms had resolved or who had been asymptomatic (6.0% (95%CI 3.2-8.7) vs. 2.4% (95%CI 1.4-3.4) vs. 1.3% (95%CI 0.6-2.0), respectively). Where possible, surgery should be delayed for at least 7 weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with ongoing symptoms ≥ 7 weeks from diagnosis may benefit from further delay.

The endoscopic technique allows results comparable with the best microscopic series. We think that this technique increases the safety of the procedure because of improved vision. Further studies are required to better define the exact location of the tumor with respect to the arachnoidal plane, the extra-arachnoidal craniopharyngioma being the most suitable for a radical removal using a transsphenoidal supradiaphragmatic approach.

Chordomas are rare, malignant bone tumors of the skull-base and axial skeleton. Until recently, there was no consensus among experts regarding appropriate clinical management of chordoma, resulting in inconsistent care and suboptimal outcomes for many patients. To address this shortcoming, the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the Chordoma Foundation, the global chordoma patient advocacy group, convened a multi-disciplinary group of chordoma specialists to define by consensus evidence-based best practices for the optimal approach to chordoma. In January 2015, the first recommendations of this group were published, covering the management of primary and metastatic chordomas. Additional evidence and further discussion were needed to develop recommendations about the management of local-regional failures. Thus, ESMO and CF convened a second consensus group meeting in November 2015 to address the treatment of locally relapsed chordoma. This meeting involved over 60 specialists from Europe, the United States and Japan with expertise in treatment of patients with chordoma. The consensus achieved during that meeting is the subject of the present publication and complements the recommendations of the first position paper.

The history of the endoscope exemplifies the manner in which technological advances influence medicine and surgery. Endoscopic systems have evolved and improved, and they currently provide detailed visualization of a variety of deep organ structures. Otorhinolaryngological surgeons have used the endoscope for more than 30 years. In the 1990s, a number of influential neurosurgeons and otorhinolaryngological surgeons began performing purely endoscopic pituitary surgery. Endoscopic transsphenoidal operations are now extending beyond the sella. The collaboration between otorhinolaryngologists and neurosurgeons has produced a new subspecialty of "endoscopic skull base surgery." There is a great deal of progress still to be made in developing skills, instruments, and improving skull base repair. The extended skull base approaches allow surgical exposures from the olfactory groove to C-2 and to the infratemporal region and jugular fossa laterally. This article discusses the history of the endoscope, the pivotal technological advances, and the key figures in the burgeoning field of endoneurosurgery.