Following the spread of the infection from the new SARS-CoV2 coronavirus in March 2020, several surgical societies have released their recommendations to manage the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for the daily clinical practice. The recommendations on emergency surgery have fueled a debate among surgeons on an international level. We maintain that laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains the treatment of choice for acute cholecystitis, even in the COVID-19 era. Moreover, since laparoscopic cholecystectomy is not more likely to spread the COVID-19 infection than open cholecystectomy, it must be organized in such a way as to be carried out safely even in the present situation, to guarantee the patient with the best outcomes that minimally invasive surgery has shown to have.

Background/AimsThe prognosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) is poor. The serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) level has been identified as a prognostic indicator of recurrence and reduced overall survival. The aim of this study was to identify preoperative prognostic factors and to create a prognostic model able to assess the early recurrence risk for patients with resectable PAC.MethodsA series of 177 patients with PAC treated surgically at the St. Andrea Hospital of Rome between January 2003 and December 2011 were reviewed retrospectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses were utilized to identify preoperative prognostic indicators.ResultsA preoperative CA 19-9 level >228 U/mL, tumor size >3.1 cm, and the presence of pathological preoperative lymph nodes statistically correlated with early recurrence. Together, these three factors predicted the possibility of an early recurrence with 90.4% accuracy. The combination of these three preoperative conditions was identified as an independent parameter for early recurrence based on multivariate analysis (p=0.0314; hazard ratio, 3.9811; 95% confidence interval, 1.1745 to 15.3245).ConclusionsPAC patient candidates for surgical resection should undergo an assessment of early recurrence risk to avoid unnecessary and ineffective resection and to identify patients for whom palliative or alternative treatment may be the treatment of choice.

No abstract

Background Since the introduction of minimally invasive surgery, new techniques like transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repair have progressively gained acceptance for the treatment of groin hernia. Laparoscopic TAPP (LTAPP) is recommended for bilateral repairs. Likewise, the introduction of robotic platforms has promised additional surgical benefits for robotic TAPP (RTAPP), which are yet to be confirmed. This study compared multicenter data obtained from patients undergoing bilateral inguinal hernia repair with RTAPP, performed during the preliminary learning curve period, versus conventional LTAPP. Materials and methods All consecutive bilateral inguinal hernia patients from four Italian centers between June 2015 and July 2020 were selected. A propensity score model was used to compare patients treated with LTAPP versus RTAPP, considering sex, age, body mass index, current smoking status, overall comorbidity, hernia classification (primary or recurrent), and associated procedures as covariates. After matching, intraoperative details and postoperative outcomes were evaluated. Results In total, 275 LTAPP and 40 RTAPP were performed. After matching, 80 and 40 patients were allocated to the LTAPP and RTAPP cohorts, respectively. No intraoperative complications or conversion to open surgery occurred. However, a longer operative time was recorded in the RTAPP group (79 ± 21 versus 98 ± 29 min; p < 0.001). Postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores (p = 0.13) did not differ and complication rates were similar. There were no clinical recurrences in either group, with mean follow-up periods of 52 ± 14 (LTAPP) and 35 ± 8 (RTAPP) months. A statistical difference in length of hospital stay was found between the groups (1.05 ± 0.22 vs 1.50 ± 0.74 days; p < 0.001). Conclusion In this patient population, outcomes for bilateral inguinal hernia repair appear comparable for RTAPP and LTAPP, except for a shorter recovery after laparoscopic surgery. A longer operative time for robotic surgery could be attributable to the learning curve period of each center.