OSNA is as good as routine HE. It may avoid TAB and offer a more objective and standardised assay of LNM. However, for upstaging, its usefulness as an adjunct to HE or superiority to HE requires further assessment of the benefits, if any, of adjuvant therapy in patients upstaged by OSNA.

Introduction The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to hospitals in the UK substituting face-to-face (FtF) clinics with virtual clinic (VC) appointments. We evaluated the use of virtual two-week wait (2-ww) lower gastrointestinal (LGI) clinic appointments, conducted using telephone calls at a district general hospital in England. Methods Patients undergoing index outpatient 2-ww LGI clinic assessment between 1 June 2019 and 31 October 2019 (FtF group) and 1 June 2020 and 31 October 2020 (VC group) were identified. Relevant data were obtained using electronic patient records. Compliance with national cancer waiting time targets was assessed. Environmental and financial impact analyses were performed. Results In total, 1,531 patients were analysed (median age=70, male=852, 55.6%). Of these, 757 (49.4%) were assessed virtually via telephone; the remainder were seen FtF (n=774, 50.6%). Ninety-two (6%, VC=44, FtF=48) patients had malignant pathology and 64 (4.2%) had colorectal cancer (CRC); of these, 46 (71.9%, VC=26, FtF=20) underwent treatment with curative intent. The median waiting times to index appointment, investigation and diagnosis were significantly lower following VC assessment (p<0.001). The cancer detection rates (p=0.749), treatments received (p=0.785) and median time to index treatment for CRC patients (p=0.156) were similar. A significantly higher proportion of patients were seen within two weeks of referral in the VC group (p<0.001). VC appointments saved patients a total of 9,288 miles, 0.7 metric tonnes of CO2 emissions and £7,482.97. Taxpayers saved £80,242.00 from VCs. No formal complaints were received from patients or staff in the VC group. Conclusion Virtual 2-ww LGI clinics were effective, safe and were associated with tangible environmental and financial benefits.

Introduction Surgeons are increasingly performing surgery on older patients. There are currently no tools specifically for risk prediction in this group. The aim of this study was to review general surgical operations carried out on patients aged over 90 years and their outcome, before comparing these with predictors of morbidity and mortality. Methods A retrospective review was carried out at our district general hospital of all general surgery patients aged over 90 years who underwent a general surgical operation over a period of 14 years. Information collected included demographics, details of procedures, P-POSSUM (Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and morbidity), complications and outcomes. Results A total of 119 procedures were carried out, 72 involving entry into the peritoneal cavity. Overall, 14 patients (12%) died within 30 days and 34 (29%) died within one year. Postoperative complications included infection (56%), renal failure (24%), need for transfusion (17%) and readmission within 30 days (11%). Logistical regression analysis showed that the P-POSSUM correlated well with observed mortality and infection was a significant predictor of in-hospital mortality (p=0.003). Conclusions The P-POSSUM correlates significantly with outcome and should be used when planning major elective or emergency surgery in patients over 90 years of age. Infective complications appear to be a significant predictor of postoperative mortality. This study supports operative intervention as an option in this extreme age group but we emphasise the importance of appropriate patient selection and judicious clinical care.

No abstract

No abstract