Search

The sublingual mucosa is a commonly used intraoral location for identifying microcirculatory alterations using handheld vital microscopes (HVMs). The anatomic description of the sublingual cave and its related training have not been adequately introduced. The aim of this study was to introduce anatomy guided sublingual microcirculatory assessment. Measurements were acquired from the floor of the mouth using incident dark-field (IDF) imaging before (T0) and after (T1) sublingual cave anatomy instructed training. Instructions consists of examining a specific region of interested identified through observable anatomical structures adjacent and bilaterally to the lingual frenulum which is next to the sublingual papilla. The anatomical location called the sublingual triangle, was identified as stationed between the lingual frenulum, the sublingual fold and ventrally to the tongue. Small, large, and total vessel density datasets (SVD, LVD and TVD respectively) obtained by non-instructed and instructed measurements (NIN (T0) and IM (T1) respectively) were compared. Microvascular structures were analyzed, and the presence of salivary duct-related microcirculation was identified. A total of 72 video clips were used for analysis in which TVD, but not LVD and SVD, was higher in IM compared to NIM (NIM vs. IM, 25 ± 2 vs. 27 ± 3 mm/mm2 (p = 0.044), LVD NIM vs. IM: 7 ± 1 vs. 8 ± 1mm/mm2 (p = 0.092), SVD NIM vs. IM: 18 ± 2 vs. 20 ± 3 mm/mm2 (p = 0.103)). IM resulted in microcirculatory assessments which included morphological properties such as capillaries, venules and arterioles, without salivary duct-associated microcirculation. The sublingual triangle identified in this study showed consistent network-based microcirculation, without interference from microcirculation associated with specialized anatomic structures. These findings suggest that the sublingual triangle, an anatomy guided location, yielded sublingual based measurements that conforms with international guidelines. IM showed higher TVD values, and future studies are needed with larger sample sizes to prove differences in microcirculatory parameters.

Additional file 1: Figure S1. Duration of symptoms at presentation, cohort 2019 versus 2020. Table S1. Comparison of patients with uncomplicated appendicitis for 2019 pre-COVID cohort vs. 2020 COVID cohort. Table S2. Comparison of patients with complicated appendicitis and with symptoms for more than 24 h, 2019 pre-COVID cohort versus 2020 COVID cohort. Table S3. Comparison of patients with an age of 60 years or higher of the 2019 pre-COVID cohort and 2020 COVID cohort. Table S4. Comparison of conservatively treated patients with appendicitis, 2019 pre-COVID cohort versus 2020 COVID cohort. Table S5. Comparison of conservatively treated patients by final (imaging) diagnosis and imaging modality, 2019 pre-COVID cohort versus 2020 COVID cohort. Table S6. COVID-19 positive appendicitis patients.

BACKGROUND Preoperative biliary drainage in patients with presumed resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) is hypothesized to promote the occurrence of seeding metastases. Seeding metastases can occur at the surgical scars or at the site of postoperative drains, and in case of percutaneous biliary drainage, at the catheter port-site. To prevent seeding metastases after resection, we routinely treated PHC patients with preoperative radiotherapy (RT) for over 25 years until January 2018. AIM To investigate the incidence of seeding metastases following resection of PHC. METHODS All patients who underwent resection for pathology proven PHC between January 2000 and March 2019 were included in this retrospective study. Between 2000-January 2018, patients received preoperative RT (3 × 3.5 Gray). RT was omitted in patients treated after January 2018. RESULTS A total of 171 patients underwent resection for PHC between January 2000 and March 2019. Of 171 patients undergoing resection, 111 patients (65%) were treated with preoperative RT. Intraoperative bile cytology showed no difference in the presence of viable tumor cells in bile of patients undergoing preoperative RT or not. Overall, two patients (1.2%) with seeding metastases were identified, both in the laparotomy scar and both after preoperative RT (one patient with endoscopic and the other with percutaneous and endoscopic biliary drainage). CONCLUSION The incidence of seeding metastases in patients with resected PHC in our series was low (1.2%). This low incidence and the inability of providing evidence that preoperative low-dose RT prevents seeding metastases, has led us to discontinue preoperative RT in patients with resectable PHC in our center.