Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32428115›Full record

SynthesisClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2020

Surgical Practice in the Current COVID-19 Pandemic: A Rapid Systematic Review.

Flávio Carneiro Hojaij, Lucas Albuquerque Chinelatto, Gustavo Henrique Pereira Boog, Júlia Adriana Kasmirski, João Vitor Ziroldo Lopes, Fernando Mauad Sacramento

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Impact of COVID-19 on the efficacy of meeting the transfusion demand by a Brazilian blood banks network.Transfusion and apheresis science : official journal of the World Apheresis Association : official journal of the European Society for Haemapheresis · 2022
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Awake craniotomy in a Covid-19 positive patient: The challenges and outcome.Interdisciplinary neurosurgery : Advanced techniques and case management · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Flávio Carneiro HojaijDepartamento de Cirurgia, Laboratorio de Investigacao Medica (LIM 02), Faculdade de Medicina FMUSP, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Lucas Albuquerque ChinelattoFaculdade de Medicina FMUSP, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Gustavo Henrique Pereira BoogFaculdade de Medicina FMUSP, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Júlia Adriana KasmirskiFaculdade de Medicina FMUSP, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
João Vitor Ziroldo LopesFaculdade de Medicina FMUSP, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Fernando Mauad SacramentoFaculdade de Medicina FMUSP, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak </mac_aq>started in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, and evolved into a global problem in a short period. The pandemic has led to many social and health-care challenges. In this context, surgery is an area that is facing the need for many adaptations. In this systematic literature review, we analyzed different perspectives concerning this situation, aiming to provide recommendations that could guide surgeons and </mac_aq>entities toward screening, elective and emergency surgeries, decision making, and operating room management. A computerized search in PubMed, Scopus, and Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) for relevant literature up to April 4, 2020, was performed. Articles were included if they were related to surgery dynamics in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of the 281 articles found in our initial search and 15 articles from alternative sources, 39 were included in our review after a systematic evaluation. Concerning preoperative testing </mac_aq>for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, 29 (74.4%) articles recommended some kind of </mac_aq>screening. Another major suggestion was postponing all (or at least selected) elective operations (29 articles, </mac_aq>74.4%). Several additional recommendations with respect to surgical practice or surgical staff were also assessed and discussed, such as performing laparoscopic surgeries and avoiding the use of electrocauterization. On the basis of the current literature, we concluded that any surgery that can be delayed should be postponed. COVID-19 screening is strongly recommended for all surgical cases. Moreover, surgical staff should be reduced to the essential members and provided with institutional psychological support.

Indexed as

BetacoronavirusDecision MakingCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19HumansOperating RoomsPandemicsPneumonia, ViralSARS-CoV-2Surgical Procedures, OperativeTriage

Identifiers

PMID32428115
PMCPMC7213672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.