Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35624026›Full record

Observational studyJournal of healthcare quality research

Analysis of patient outcomes after urological surgery during the second and third waves of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in a high incidence area.

A González-Díaz, J Gil-Moradillo, N Rosillo-Ramírez, C Varela-Rodríguez, A Rodríguez-Antolín, Á Tejido-Sánchez

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of healthcare quality research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

A González-DíazUrology Service, University Hospital 12 de Octubre, Research Institute 12 de Octubre i+12 (imas12), Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), Madrid, Spain. Electronic address: alejandroglezdiaz@gmail.com.
J Gil-MoradilloUrology Service, University Hospital 12 de Octubre, Research Institute 12 de Octubre i+12 (imas12), Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), Madrid, Spain.
N Rosillo-RamírezPreventive Medicine Service, University Hospital 12 de Octubre, Research Institute 12 de Octubre i+12 (imas12), Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), Madrid, Spain.
C Varela-RodríguezQuality Healthcare Unit, University Hospital 12 de Octubre, Research Institute 12 de Octubre i+12 (imas12), Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), Madrid, Spain.
A Rodríguez-AntolínUrology Service, University Hospital 12 de Octubre, Research Institute 12 de Octubre i+12 (imas12), Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), Madrid, Spain.
Á Tejido-SánchezUrology Service, University Hospital 12 de Octubre, Research Institute 12 de Octubre i+12 (imas12), Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo analyze surgical safety through postoperative COVID-19 incidence and mortality at the urology department of a tertiary hospital located in Madrid (Spain).

methodsObservational, prospective study including all patients undergoing urological surgery from 1st March 2020 to 28th February 2021. According to the hospital organization and local epidemiological situation we delimitate three epidemic waves. A set of screening and protective measures was applied from 4th May onwards. Demographic, baseline, surgical and perioperative variables, as well as postoperative outcomes, were collected. Telephone follow-up was performed at least 3 weeks after hospital discharge.

results940 urological surgeries were performed, 12 of them had to be rescheduled due to active or recent SARS-CoV-2 infection identified by the screening protocol. Thirty-one patients developed COVID-19 (3.3% incidence) and 7 died (22.6% mortality). The average time to onset of symptoms was 62.6 days after discharge, being 25 cases attributable to community transmission. The remaining 6 cases, due to in-hospital transmission, had worse outcomes. Five of them were identified during the first wave, especially when no preoperative PCR was obtained. In contrast, during the second and third waves, fewer and milder cases were diagnosed, with just 1 in-hospital transmission among 857 urological patients.

conclusionsAfter implementing complete protective measures, postoperative in-hospital COVID-19 cases almost disappeared, even during the second and third waves. Most of the cases were due to community transmission and thus driven by the general epidemiological situation. While hospitals follow recommendations to avoid COVID-19 infection, urological surgery remains safe and can be maintained.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsHumansIncidenceProspective StudiesSARS-CoV-2CirugíaCOVID-19Infección postoperatoriaPandemiaPandemicPostoperative infectionProtocolo de cribadoSARS-CoV-2Screening protocolSurgery

Identifiers

PMID35624026
PMCPMC9069227

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.