Robotic and laparosocpic urological surgery during COVID-19 pandemia.

• Published in: Archivos españoles de urología Vol. 73; no. 5; p. 463
• Main Authors: Carracedo, David, Alcaraz, Antonio, Allona, Antonio, Gutierrez, José Luis, López-Fando, Luis, Medina, Rafael Antonio, Moncada, Ignacio, Moreno, Jesús, Palou, Joan, Pereira, Jose Gregorio, Ruibal, Manuel, Sánchez, María Dolores, Trilla, Enrique, Sánchez, Miguel
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: Spanish
• Published: Spain 01.06.2020
• Subjects: Aerosols; Betacoronavirus; Coronavirus Infections - epidemiology; Coronavirus Infections - prevention & control; Coronavirus Infections - transmission; COVID-19; Humans; Infection Control; Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional; Pandemics - prevention & control; Pneumonia, Viral - epidemiology; Pneumonia, Viral - prevention & control; Pneumonia, Viral - transmission; Robotic Surgical Procedures; SARS-CoV-2; Urologic Surgical Procedures; COVID-19; Cirugía laparoscópica; Robotic surgery; Minimally invasive surgery; SARS-CoV-2; Cirugía mínimamente invasiva; Laparoscopic surgery; Cirugía robótica
• ISSN: 0004-0614

SARS-CoV-2 pandemic hashigh repercussion on urologic minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Controversy about safety of MIS procedures during COVID-19 pandemic has been published. Nowadays, our priority should be create agreement in order to restart and organize MIS with safety conditions for patients and healthcare workers. METHODS: Pubmed and web search was conducted with following terms: "SARS-CoV-2", "COVID19", "COVID19 Urology", COVID19 Surgery", "COVID19 transmission", "SARS-CoV-2 transmission", "COVID19 nd minimally invasive surgery", "SARS-CoV-2 and CO 2insuflation". A narrative review of available literature and scientific evidence summary was done. A modify nominal group technique was used to achieve an expert consensus. First draft was circulated amongst authors. Definitive document was approved in May 26th. RESULTS: Non evidence supports higher risk of SARSCoV-2 healthcare workers infection with MIS compared to open surgery. MIS is associated with shorter hospital stay than open surgery. Modify MIS indications to open surgery, with no scientific evidence, could spend valuable resources in detriment to COVID-19 patients. MIS indications should be prioritized attending to available resources and pandemic intensity. SARS-CoV-2screening 72 hours prior to surgery by clinical and epidemiological questionnaire and nasopharyngeal PCRis recommended, in order to prevent nosocomial transmission, professional infections and to minimize postoperative complications. Intraoperative steps should be established to reduce professional exposure to surgical aerosols, including: surgical room reorganization, adequate personal protective equipment, surgical technique optimization and management of CO2 and surgical smoke. In COVID-19 pandemic de-escalation, MIS carried out with optimal safety measurements, could contribute to reduce hospital resources utilization. With current evidence, MIS should not be limited or reconverted to open surgery during COVID-19 pandemic.