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.

The IFU 2016 reduced the anatomic applicability to 34% from 75% for the original IFU 2013. The lack of significant intergroup differences in terms of survival and reinterventions suggests a limited effectiveness of the new IFU 2016.

OBJECTIVES Our goal was to evaluate results of endovascular aortic arch repair using the Relay Branch system. METHODS Forty-three patients with thoracic aortic pathology involving the aortic arch have been treated with the Relay Branch system (Terumo Aortic, Sunrise, FL, USA) in 10 centres. We assessed in-hospital mortality, neurological injury, treatment success according to current reporting standards and the need for secondary interventions. In addition, outcome was analysed according to the underlying pathology: non-dissective disease versus residual aortic dissection (RAD) (defined as remaining dissection after previous type A repair, chronic type B aortic dissections). RESULTS In-hospital mortality was 9% (0% in patients with RAD). Disabling stroke occurred in 7% (0% in patients with RAD); non-disabling stroke occurred in 19% (7% in patients with RAD). Early type IA and B endoleak formation occurred in 4%. Median follow-up was 16 ± 18 months. During the follow-up period, 23% of the patients died. Aortic-related deaths were low (3% in patients with RAD). CONCLUSIONS The results of endovascular aortic arch repair using the Relay Branch system in a selected patient population with regard to technical success are good. In-hospital mortality is acceptable, the number of disabling strokes is low and technical success is high. Non-disabling stroke is a major concern, and every effort has to be taken to reduce this to a minimum. The best outcome is seen in patients with underlying RAD. Finally, more data are needed.

Zusammenfassung Hintergrund Die Inzidenz tiefer Beinvenenthrombosen (TVT) bei intensivpflichtigen CoViD-19-Patienten wurde bisher nur in wenigen Studien untersucht. Prospektive vergleichende Studien mit Non-CoViD-19-Intensivpatienten fehlen gänzlich. Fragestellung Die Inzidenz TVT bei an CoViD-19 erkrankten Intensivpatienten verglichen mit Non-CoViD-19-Patienten, die im selben Zeitraum auf den Intensivstationen des Universitätsklinikums Augsburg behandelt wurden, wurden erhoben. Zudem soll untersucht werden, welche Art der Antikoagulation zum Zeitpunkt des Auftretens der TVT bei CoViD-19-Patienten vorlag und inwiefern eine TVT bei diesem Patientengut mit einer erhöhten Letalität vergesellschaftet ist. Material und Methoden In der prospektiven Single-Center Studie wurden im Zeitraum vom 18.04.2020 bis 30.04.2020 20 SARS-CoV2-positive Patienten mit 20 Non-CoViD-Patienten auf Intensivstation bezüglich des Auftretens tiefer Beinvenenthrombosen verglichen. Hierzu wurden demographische Daten, Laborparameter und klinische Verläufe erfasst und ausgewertet. Ergebnisse Die Rate an TVT war im untersuchten Kollektiv bei Patienten mit SARS-CoV2 deutlich erhöht (CoViD-19-Patienten: 20 % vs. Non-CoViD-19-Patienten: 5 %). Sowohl das Vorliegen einer TVT sowie deutlich erhöhte D‑Dimer-Werte waren in der vorliegenden Studie mit erhöhter Letalität vergesellschaftet. Diskussion Wir empfehlen bei der stationären Aufnahme von Patienten mit SARS-CoV2-Verdacht oder Nachweis die Bestimmung der D‑Dimere und im Falle erhöhter Werte die großzügige Indikationsstellung zur Kompressionssonographie der tiefen Beinvenen. So können TVT früh erkannt und eine therapeutische Antikoagulation begonnen werden. Alle stationären CoViD-19-Patienten sollten eine Thromboseprophylaxe mit NMH erhalten. Weitere Studien zu Point-of-care-Methoden (TEG®, ROTEM®) zur Erkennung einer Hyperkoagulabilität bei SARS-CoV2 sind notwendig.