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.

Background and Aims:Difficult tracheal intubation is associated with serious morbidity and mortality and cannot be always predicted based on preoperative airway assessment using conventional clinical predictors. Ultrasonographic airway assessment could be a useful adjunct, but at present, there are no well-defined sonographic criteria that can predict the possibility of encountering a difficult airway. The present study was conducted with the aim of finding some correlation between preoperative sonographic airway assessment parameters and the Cormack–Lehane (CL) grade at laryngoscopic view in adult patients.Material and Methods:This was a prospective, double-blinded study on 130 patients undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia. Preoperative clinical and ultrasonographic assessment of the airway was done to predict difficult intubation and was correlated with the CL grade noted at laryngoscopy. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values of the parameters were assessed.Results:The incidence of difficult intubation was 9.2%. Among the clinical predictors, the modified Mallampati classification had the maximum sensitivity and specificity, and among the sonographic parameters, the skin to epiglottis distance had the maximum sensitivity and specificity to predict difficult laryngoscopy. A combination of these two tests improved the sensitivity in predicting a difficult laryngoscopy.Conclusions:The skin to epiglottis distance, as measured at the level of the thyrohyoid membrane, is a good predictor of difficult laryngoscopy. When combined with the modified Mallampati classification, the sensitivity of the combined parameter was found to be greater than any single parameter taken alone.

SARS-CoV-2 has been associated with an increased rate of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients. Since surgical patients are already at higher risk of venous thromboembolism than general populations, this study aimed to determine if patients with peri-operative or prior SARS-CoV-2 were at further increased risk of venous thromboembolism. We conducted a planned sub-study and analysis from an international, multicentre, prospective cohort study of elective and emergency patients undergoing surgery during October 2020. Patients from all surgical specialties were included. The primary outcome measure was venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis) within 30 days of surgery. SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was defined as peri-operative (7 days before to 30 days after surgery); recent (1-6 weeks before surgery); previous (≥7 weeks before surgery); or none. Information on prophylaxis regimens or pre-operative anti-coagulation for baseline comorbidities was not available. Postoperative venous thromboembolism rate was 0.5% (666/123,591) in patients without SARS-CoV-2; 2.2% (50/2317) in patients with peri-operative SARS-CoV-2; 1.6% (15/953) in patients with recent SARS-CoV-2; and 1.0% (11/1148) in patients with previous SARS-CoV-2. After adjustment for confounding factors, patients with peri-operative (adjusted odds ratio 1.5 (95%CI 1.1-2.0)) and recent SARS-CoV-2 (1.9 (95%CI 1.2-3.3)) remained at higher risk of venous thromboembolism, with a borderline finding in previous SARS-CoV-2 (1.7 (95%CI 0.9-3.0)). Overall, venous thromboembolism was independently associated with 30-day mortality ). In patients with SARS-CoV-2, mortality without venous thromboembolism was 7.4% (319/4342) and with venous thromboembolism was 40.8% (31/76). Patients undergoing surgery with peri-operative or recent SARS-CoV-2 appear to be at increased risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism compared with patients with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Optimal venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment are unknown in this cohort of patients, and these data should be interpreted accordingly.

, we conducted a crosssectional survey of primary care prescribers in SA using a 14-point self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire (Appendix 1) recorded basic demographic information, perceptions of antibiotic use and resistance and sources of current education about antibiotic use. Knowledge about antibiotic use was tested by seven multiplechoice questions. The structure and content of the survey were based on those used in previously conducted studies [7] and adapted for our setting after discussion with infectious disease specialists and general practitioners (GPs). Depending on the category, there were either single or multiple answer responses such as agree/disagree/unsure or often/sometimes/never. A convenience sampling approach was used. GPs were invited by Medicross (a primary care provider that manages 92 medical and This open-access article is distributed under Creative Commons licence CC-BY-NC 4.0.