Peri-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection increases postoperative mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal duration of planned delay before surgery in patients who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection. This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery during October 2020. Surgical patients with pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality. Logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted 30-day mortality rates stratified by time from diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection to surgery. Among 140,231 patients (116 countries), 3127 patients (2.2%) had a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Adjusted 30-day mortality in patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection was 1.5% (95%CI 1.4-1.5). In patients with a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, mortality was increased in patients having surgery within 0-2 weeks, 3-4 weeks and 5-6 weeks of the diagnosis (odds ratio (95%CI) 4.1 (3.3-4.8), 3.9 (2.6-5.1) and 3.6 (2.0-5.2), respectively). Surgery performed ≥ 7 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was associated with a similar mortality risk to baseline (odds ratio (95%CI) 1.5 (0.9-2.1)). After a ≥ 7 week delay in undertaking surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection, patients with ongoing symptoms had a higher mortality than patients whose symptoms had resolved or who had been asymptomatic (6.0% (95%CI 3.2-8.7) vs. 2.4% (95%CI 1.4-3.4) vs. 1.3% (95%CI 0.6-2.0), respectively). Where possible, surgery should be delayed for at least 7 weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with ongoing symptoms ≥ 7 weeks from diagnosis may benefit from further delay.

SARS-CoV-2 has been associated with an increased rate of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients. Since surgical patients are already at higher risk of venous thromboembolism than general populations, this study aimed to determine if patients with peri-operative or prior SARS-CoV-2 were at further increased risk of venous thromboembolism. We conducted a planned sub-study and analysis from an international, multicentre, prospective cohort study of elective and emergency patients undergoing surgery during October 2020. Patients from all surgical specialties were included. The primary outcome measure was venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis) within 30 days of surgery. SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was defined as peri-operative (7 days before to 30 days after surgery); recent (1-6 weeks before surgery); previous (≥7 weeks before surgery); or none. Information on prophylaxis regimens or pre-operative anti-coagulation for baseline comorbidities was not available. Postoperative venous thromboembolism rate was 0.5% (666/123,591) in patients without SARS-CoV-2; 2.2% (50/2317) in patients with peri-operative SARS-CoV-2; 1.6% (15/953) in patients with recent SARS-CoV-2; and 1.0% (11/1148) in patients with previous SARS-CoV-2. After adjustment for confounding factors, patients with peri-operative (adjusted odds ratio 1.5 (95%CI 1.1-2.0)) and recent SARS-CoV-2 (1.9 (95%CI 1.2-3.3)) remained at higher risk of venous thromboembolism, with a borderline finding in previous SARS-CoV-2 (1.7 (95%CI 0.9-3.0)). Overall, venous thromboembolism was independently associated with 30-day mortality ). In patients with SARS-CoV-2, mortality without venous thromboembolism was 7.4% (319/4342) and with venous thromboembolism was 40.8% (31/76). Patients undergoing surgery with peri-operative or recent SARS-CoV-2 appear to be at increased risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism compared with patients with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Optimal venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment are unknown in this cohort of patients, and these data should be interpreted accordingly.

Introduction: Chronic prostatitis (CP)/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) represents a challenge for the urologist, since the therapeutic efficacy does not always result in a satisfactory quality of life for the patients. Often the side effects of the medications used (antiinflammatories, antibiotics, alpha blockers) far outweighs the benefits gained with their admission. The choice of nutraceutical medications is preferred for their effectiveness, that has been accepted and proven by the scientific community, and for the low incidence of side effects. The objective of this study to compare the therapeutic efficacy of the flower pollen extracts (Deprox®) versus Bioflavonoids in terms of reduction of symptoms, and in the average waiting time of the variation of the National Institute of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI), and to evaluate the quality of life improvement of the patients affected by CP/CPPS. Methods: Among the 68 patients presented with prostatic symptoms to the Hospital “Umberto I” in Rome, Italy between March 2016 and June 2016, 54 patients met the clinical diagnosis of CP/CPPS (class IIIa or IIIb according to the NIH classification). The patients were assigned to either treatment with Deprox® or quercetin based on a randomization scheme previously determined.The NIH- CPSI, IPSS, QoL questionnaires were administered. Every patient underwent bacterial cultures and trans-rectal ultrasound. Results: There was a statistically significant improvement of the NIH-CPSI score and QoL in the Deprox® group (p = < 0.0001 and p = 0.003 respectively). The average waiting time of the variation of the National Institute of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) was statistically significant (p = 0.0019). In the absence of efficacy of the “conventional” medications, which also carries significant side effects, the dietary supplements may represent a valid alternative. Conclusions: DEPROX® has demonstrated a significant improvement of the symptoms and quality of life of patients diagnosed with by CP/CPPS. Furthermore, there was a statistical difference in the average waiting time of the variation of the NIH-CPSI) score without side effects as compared to the bioflavonoids complex with quercetin.

Intestinal and pancreatic metastases are rare and often challenging to recognize and manage. Lung cancer patients with enteric involvement usually display poor outcomes. Hyperprogression to immunotherapy represents a concern, even though there is currently no agreement on its exact definition. Gastrointestinal hyperprogression to immune checkpoint inhibitors has not been described so far. In these cases, distinguishing disease-related symptoms from immune-related adverse events may represent a diagnostic conundrum. Here, we report two cases of non-small-cell lung cancer experiencing a rapid pancreatic and colic progression to immunotherapy, respectively. While further investigations to identify biomarkers associated with hyperprogression are warranted, clinicians should be aware of the potential unusual clinical presentations of this phenomenon.