Systematic review and meta-analysis determining the effect of implemented COVID-19 guidelines on surgical oncology volumes and clinical outcomes

Bock, Ellen de; Herman, Eline S.; Bastian, Okan W.; Filipe, Mando D.; Vriens, Menno R.; Richir, Milan C.

doi:10.1016/j.suronc.2022.101859

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the 51 included systematic reviews, 14 articles also included a quantitative analysis/meta-analysis with one being individual participant meta-analysis ( Dhada et al, 2021 ; Teglia et al, 2022a ; Teglia et al, 2022b ; Nikolopoulos et al, 2022 ; Zhang et al, 2022 ; Kirby et al, 2022 ; Donkor et al, 2021 ; Gascon et al, 2022 ; Hojaij et al, 2020 ; Legge et al, 2022 ; Murphy et al, 2022 ; Gadsden et al, 2022 ; Majeed et al, 2022 ; Adham et al, 2022 ; Alom et al, 2021 ; Ayubi et al, 2021 ; Garg et al, 2020 ; Jammu et al, 2021 ; Lu et al, 2021 ; Momenimovahed et al, 2021 ; Mostafaei et al, 2022 ; Moujaess et al, 2020 ; Muls et al, 2022 ; Pacheco et al, 2021 ; Rohilla et al, 2021 ; Salehi et al, 2022 ; Sun et al, 2021 ; Zapała et al, 2022 ; Alkatout et al, 2021 ; Di Cosimo et al, 2022 ; Fancellu et al, 2022 ; Ferrara et al, 2022 ; Hesary and Salehiniya, 2022 ; Lignou et al, 2022 ; Mayo et al, 2021 ; Mazidimoradi et al, 2021 ; Mazidimoradi et al, 2022 ; Ng and Hamilton, 2022 ; Pararas et al, 2022 ; Riera et al, 2021 ; Sarich et al, 2022 ; Sasidharanpillai and Ravishankar, 2022 ; Tang et al, 2022 ; Thomson et al, 2020 ; Vigliar et al, 2020 ; de Bock et al, 2022 ). Other key characteristics of the 51 systematic reviews are shown in Table 1 (more extensive details appear in Supplementary file 1a and Supplementary file 2 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Supplementary file 1d and Table 4 summarize the main findings from the 15 reviewes ( Dhada et al, 2021 ; Teglia et al, 2022b ; Nikolopoulos et al, 2022 ; Gadsden et al, 2022 ; Majeed et al, 2022 ; Jammu et al, 2021 ; Pacheco et al, 2021 ; Zapała et al, 2022 ; Di Cosimo et al, 2022 ; Ferrara et al, 2022 ; Lignou et al, 2022 ; Mazidimoradi et al, 2021 ; Riera et al, 2021 ; de Bock et al, 2022 ; Piras et al, 2022 ) that assessed and reported on treatment delays and cancellations of cancer treatment. Most reviews mentioned that cancellations of treatment were observed, although to what extend this happened was not consistently provided ( Jammu et al, 2021 ; Pacheco et al, 2021 ; Zapała et al, 2022 ; Di Cosimo et al, 2022 ; Ferrara et al, 2022 ; Mazidimoradi et al, 2021 ; Riera et al, 2021 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An umbrella review of systematic reviews on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer prevention and management, and patient needs

Muka

Farahani

et al. 2023

eLife

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic led to relocation and reconstruction of health care resources and systems, and to a decrease in healthcare utilization, and this may have affected the treatment, diagnosis, prognosis, and psychosocial well-being of patients with cancer. We aimed to summarize and quantify the evidence on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the full spectrum of cancer care. An umbrella review was undertaken to summarize and quantify the findings from systematic reviews on impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer treatment modification, delays, and cancellations; delays or cancellations in screening and diagnosis; psychosocial well-being, financial distress, and use of telemedicine as well as on other aspects of cancer care. PubMed and WHO COVID-19 Database was searched for relevant systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis published before November 29th, 2022. Abstract, full text screening and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. AMSTAR-2 was used for critical appraisal of included systematic reviews. 51 systematic reviews evaluating different aspects of cancer care were included in our analysis. Most reviews were based on observational studies judged to be at medium and high risk of bias. Only 2 of the included reviews had high or moderate scores based on AMSTAR-2. Findings suggest treatment modifications in cancer care during the pandemic versus the pre-pandemic period were based on low level of evidence. Different degrees of delays and cancellations in cancer treatment, screening and diagnosis were observed, with low-and-middle income countries and countries that implemented lockdowns being disproportionally affected. A shift from in-person appointments to telemedicine use was observed, but utility of telemedicine, challenges in implementation and cost-effectiveness in different areas of cancer care were little explored. Evidence was consistent in suggesting psychosocial well-being (e.g., depression, anxiety, and social activities) of patients with cancer deteriorated, and cancer patients experienced financial distress, albeit results were in general not compared to pre-pandemic levels. Impact of cancer care disruption during the pandemic on cancer prognosis was little explored. In conclusion, Substantial but heterogenous impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care has been observed. Evidence gaps exist on this topic, with mid- and long-term impact on cancer care being most uncertain.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An umbrella review of systematic reviews on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer prevention and management, and patient needs

Muka

Farahani

et al. 2023

eLife

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The global coronavirus pandemic has had a profoundly negative impact on the healthcare industry [ 11 ]. In addition to the shortage of medical supplies [ 16 ], hospital beds [ 12 ], and personnel [ 17 ], the pandemic has also affected the surgical field [ 18 – 21 ] and caused the postponement of scheduled surgeries [ 14 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this study, the number of inpatient and outpatient surgeries showed a downward trend compared to the numbers in the pre-COVID-19 era, but the number of surgeries for malignant bone and soft tissue tumors for inpatients remained the same compared to the number the previous year. Several reports have shown that the COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to a decrease in the number of surgeries for various carcinomas [ 18 , 20 , 21 ]; conversely, other studies have reported that the number of tumor surgeries has increased [ 22 ], and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgery is controversial. In our hospital, surgeries for malignant bone and soft tissue tumors were actively performed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on bone and soft tissue tumor treatment: A single-institution study

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a great deal of damage to daily medical care. We investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on bone and soft tissue tumor treatment at our hospital. Methods We conducted a retrospective comparative study of two groups of patients at Osaka City University Hospital during the period of increasing COVID-19 infections (February-December 2020, group C) and the same period the previous year (February- December 2019, group NC). Clinical data, including patient’s age, gender, type of tumor, neoplasms, number of surgical cases for inpatients and outpatients, operation time, use of implants, length of hospital stay, inpatient hospital costs, number of inpatients receiving anticancer drugs, and postoperative complications in these two groups were retrospectively evaluated. Results The number of cases of malignant bone and soft tissue tumors that were resected during hospitalization was predominantly higher in group C than in group NC (P = 0.01). There were no significant differences in operation time, use of implants, and postoperative complications between group C and group NC, but there were significant differences in the length of hospital stay and hospital costs (P<0.001). Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic has been recognized throughout the world to have adverse effects in a variety of areas. It had a negative impact on hospital costs and the length of hospital stay in the field of bone and soft tissue tumor treatment.

show abstract

“…However, recent studies have suggested the opposite [ 18 , 19 , 20 ]. Additionally, pooled data from 24 studies that included 6762 patients did not show a significant increase in complications in oncological patients requiring surgery during the pandemic [ 21 ]. However, no studies have investigated the association between a history of COVID-19 and postoperative delirium or neurological complications.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association between COVID-19 and Postoperative Neurological Complications and Antipsychotic Medication Use after Cancer Surgery: A Retrospective Study

Cata

Feng

et al. 2023

JPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Millions of Americans infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) need oncologic surgery. Patients with acute or resolved COVID-19 illness complain of neuropsychiatric symptoms. How surgery affects postoperative neuropsychiatric outcomes such as delirium is unknown. We hypothesize that patients with a history of COVID-19 could have an exaggerated risk of developing postoperative delirium after undergoing major elective oncologic surgery. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study to determine the association between COVID-19 status and antipsychotic drugs during postsurgical hospitalization as a surrogate of delirium. Secondary outcomes included 30 days of postoperative complications, length of stay, and mortality. Patients were grouped into pre-pandemic non-COVID-19 and COVID-19-positive groups. A 1:2 propensity score matching was used to minimize bias. A multivariable logistic regression model estimated the effects of important covariates on the use of postoperative psychotic medication. Results: A total of 6003 patients were included in the study. Pre- and post-propensity score matching demonstrated that a history of preoperative COVID-19 did not increase the risk of antipsychotic medications postoperatively. However, respiratory and overall 30-day complications were higher in COVID-19 individuals than in pre-pandemic non-COVID-19 patients. The multivariate analysis showed that the odds of using postoperative antipsychotic medication use for the patients who had COVID-19 compared to those who did not have the infection were not significantly different. Conclusion: A preoperative diagnosis of COVID-19 did not increase the risk of postoperative antipsychotic medication use or neurological complications. More studies are needed to reproduce our results due to the increased concern of neurological events post-COVID-19 infection.

show abstract

Systematic review and meta-analysis determining the effect of implemented COVID-19 guidelines on surgical oncology volumes and clinical outcomes

Cited by 10 publications

References 45 publications

An umbrella review of systematic reviews on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer prevention and management, and patient needs

An umbrella review of systematic reviews on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer prevention and management, and patient needs

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on bone and soft tissue tumor treatment: A single-institution study

Association between COVID-19 and Postoperative Neurological Complications and Antipsychotic Medication Use after Cancer Surgery: A Retrospective Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About