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.

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.

Key content Uterine perforation is an uncommon but potentially serious complication of uterine manipulation, evacuation of retained products of conception or termination of pregnancy (TOP), hysteroscopic procedures and during coil insertion. Factors that increase the risk of uterine perforation include uterine anomalies, infection, recent pregnancy and postmenopause. TOP is the most common procedure associated with uterine perforation. Prevention of uterine perforation is favoured, although if it occurs, initial recognition together with immediate and ongoing management is key to reducing morbidity, mortality and long‐term consequences. It is important that surgeons performing surgical TOP are adequately trained. The experience of the surgeon results not only in fewer perforations but also in the early recognition of uterine injury. Uterine perforation is a complication that is well recognised by all gynaecologists, although subsequent assessment and management needs to be standardised. Learning objectives To be aware of the incidence of uterine perforation and the potential serious complications that can result. To identify the risk factors of uterine perforation, the mechanism of injury and how to potentially prevent it from occurring. To increase awareness of this complication and to propose a standardised management protocol if a uterine perforation occurs, together with risk management issues. Ethical issues Are women at increased risk of uterine perforation counselled adequately about the complications and consequences? Are women at increased risk given the full range of alternative treatment options?

AimThe primary objective of this review was to study and analyze techniques of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy so as to be able to characterize and elucidate intricate steps for the dissection of each component of the pelvic autonomic nerve plexuses during nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy.MethodsThis review was based on a five-step study design that included searching for relevant publications, selecting publications by applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, quality assessment of the identified studies, data extraction, and data synthesis.ResultsThere are numerous differences in the published literature concerning nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy including variations in techniques and surgical approaches. Techniques that claim to be nerve-sparing by staying above the dissection level of the hypogastric nerves do not highlight the pelvic splanchnic nerve, do not take into account the intra-operative patient position, nor the fact that the bladder branches leave the inferior hypogastric plexus in a ventrocranial direction, and the fact that inferior hypogastric plexus will be drawn cranially with the vaginal walls (if this is not recognized and isolated earlier) above the level of hypogastric nerves by drawing the uterus cranially during the operation.ConclusionsThe optimal nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy technique has to be radical (type C1) and must describe surgical steps to highlight all three components of the pelvic autonomic nervous system (hypogastric nerves, pelvic splanchnic nerves, and the bladder branches of the inferior hypogastric plexus). Recognizing the pelvic splanchnic nerves in the caudal parametrium and the isolation of the bladder branches of the inferior hypogastic plexus requires meticulous preparation of the caudal part of the ventral parametrium.

The current understanding of radical hysterectomy is more centered on the uterus and little is discussed regarding the resection of the vaginal cuff and the paracolpium as an essential part of this procedure. The anatomic dissections of two fresh and 17 formalin-fixed female pelvis cadavers were utilized to understand and decipher the anatomy of the pelvic autonomic nerve system (PANS) and its connections to the surrounding anatomical structures, especially the paracolpium. The study mandates the recognition of the three-dimensional (3D) anatomic template of the parametrium and paracolpium and provides herewith an enhanced scope during a nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy procedure by precise description of the paracolpium and its close anatomical relationships to the components of the PANS. This enables the medical fraternity to distinguish between direct infiltration of the paracolpium, where the nerve sparing technique is no longer possible, and the affected lymph node in the paracolpium, where nerve sparing is still an option. This study gives rise to a tailored surgical option that allows for abandoning the resection of the paracolpium by FIGO stage IB1, where less than 2 cm vaginal vault resection is demanded.