Search

Background/aim: Awake surgery has become a valid alternative to general anesthesia in many surgery fields. This technique played a very important role during the COVID-19 period. The growing use of this technique has many advantages. We performed a systematic review to study the potentialities of awake breast surgery., Materials and Methods: We searched Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane library database and retrieved a total of 109 records. Forty-nine of them were excluded as unsuitable. Finally, we selected a total of 12 records concerning different types of studies for topic appropriateness. Three reviewers reviewed independently each record., Results: Five articles analyzing the sustainability of awake surgery during the COVID-19 period were selected. In addition, one article analyzing the impact on the immune system and six articles and eight case reports analyzing anesthetic techniques were also selected. The studies analyzing awake breast surgery during the COVID-19 period showed advantages in terms of sustainability and length of hospitalization. The study analyzing the immune response after awake breast surgery showed lesser lymphocyte response than the general anesthesia group. The studies analyzing anesthetic techniques in awake breast surgery showed that the nerve blocks allow good level of safety and postoperative pain control., Conclusion: The awake breast surgery and fast track implementation shortened hospital stays and reduced costs, without influencing the surgical results. Furthermore, awake breast surgery reduced surgical stress compared to general anesthesia. Among the various anesthetic techniques, nerve blocks are the most advantageous in terms of safety and efficacy compared to epidural anesthesia., (Copyright © 2023, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Introduction: COVID-19 is a declared worldwide pandemic. In our country, due to shortage of hospitals and beds in intensive care unit, oncological and breast cancer (BC) resources are temporarily shifted to COVID-19 patients. In addition, risk of cross-infections should be considered in these frail patients. To accomplish more surgical procedures and to reduce the length of hospital stay (LOS), fast track awake BC surgery should be implemented. The aim of the study is to estimate the effects of surgical shift in our facility during the early COVID-19 outbreak., Materials and Methods: From 30th January 2020 to 30th of March 2020, 86 consecutive patients were retrospectively enrolled and divided into pre-COVID-19-BC and COVID-19-BC. Clinical parameters and anamnestic data were collected and analyzed. Surgical procedures, relative complications and type of anaesthesia were reported. The effect on surgical time (ST), operative room time (ORT) and length of stay (LOS) were described and examined., Results: No statistical difference was found in complications rate, clinical data and surgical procedures (p > 0.05). Awake breast conservative surgery (BCS) was the most frequent procedure in COVID-19-BC (p = 0.006). A statistically significant decrease in ORT and LOS was reported in COVID-19-BC (p = 0.040 and p = 0.0015 respectively), while comparable time resulted for ST (p = 0.976). Mean ORT and LOS reduction were 20.79 min and 0.57 hospital bed days., Conclusion: In the "COVID-19 era", fast track awake breast surgery provides a reduction of ORT, LOS and potentially surgical treatment for a wider number of oncological patients.

The recent global COVID-19 public health emergency is caused by SARS-CoV-2 infections and can manifest extremely variable clinical symptoms. Host human genetic variability could influence susceptibility and response to infection. It is known that ACE2 acts as a receptor for this pathogen, but the viral entry into the target cell also depends on other proteins. The aim of this study was to investigate the variability of genes coding for these proteins involved in the SARS-CoV-2 entry into the cells. We analyzed 131 COVID-19 patients by exome sequencing and examined the genetic variants of TMPRSS2, PCSK3, DPP4, and BSG genes. In total we identified seventeen variants. In PCSK3 gene, we observed a missense variant (c.893G>A) statistically more frequent compared to the EUR GnomAD reference population and a missense mutation (c.1906A>G) not found in the GnomAD database. In TMPRSS2 gene, we observed a significant difference in the frequency of c.331G>A, c.23G>T, and c.589G>A variant alleles in COVID-19 patients, compared to the corresponding allelic frequency in GnomAD. Genetic variants in these genes could influence the entry of the SARS-CoV-2. These data also support the hypothesis that host genetic variability may contribute to the variability in infection susceptibility and severity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic (COVID-19) affected digestive endoscopic activity worldwide. Resumption and maintenance of elective endoscopic activity are crucial to containing the impact of COVID-19 on mortality and prognosis of gastrointestinal disorders, primarily cancers. Aim: To assess the impact of COVID-19 during and after the lockdown period on endoscopic activity. Material and methods: The endoscopic activity undertaken during the COVID-19-related lockdown (March 2020-May 2020) and in the post-lockdown period (June 2020-March 2021) was compared with that in the corresponding periods of the year before COVID-19 in a gastroenterology centre in Italy. Results: During the lockdown period, there was a reduction in esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy (CSPY), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and endoscopic-retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) of 75.8%, 74.8%, 60%, and 42%, respectively, compared with the corresponding period of the year before COVID-19. During the post-lockdown period to date, EGD, CSPY, EUS, and ERCP increased as compared to the lockdown period (30.6%, 50.6%, 33.6%, and 65.4%, respectively), but only ERCP showed a full recovery when compared with the corresponding period of the year before COVID-19. Conclusions: Endoscopic activity decreased significantly during the COVID-19 lockdown, and only ERCP had a full recovery in the post-lockdown period. The pandemic-related limitations and the backlog of endoscopic procedures represent important reasons for the increased risk or delayed diagnosis of GI cancers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]