Background/Aim: Despite the large amount of clinical data available of Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19), not many studies have been conducted about the psychological toll on Health Care Workers (HCWs). Patients and Methods: In this multicentric descriptive study, surveys were distributed among 4 different Breast Cancer Centers (BCC). BCCs were distinguished according to COVID-19 tertiary care hospital (COVID/No-COVID) and district prevalence (DP) (High vs. Low). DASS-21 score, PSS score and demographic data (age, sex, work) were evaluated. Results: A total of 51 HCWs were analyzed in the study. Age, work and sex did not demonstrate statistically significant values. Statistically significant distribution was found between DASS-21-stress score and COVID/No-COVID (p=0.043). No difference was found in the remaining DASS-21 and PSS scores, dividing the HCWs according to COVID-19-hospital and DP. Conclusion: Working in a COVID-19-hospital represents a factor that negatively affects psychosocial wellbeing. However, DP seems not to affect the psychosocial well-being of BCC HCWs. During the outbreak, psychological support for low risk HCWs should be provided regardless DP. The first case of atypical pneumonia previously named as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus 2 (COVID-19) was recorded in December 2019 in China. Italy has been the first European country to be involved in this outbreak. The national health care system (NHS) is currently reallocating resources from elective and semi-elective patients toward severe COVID-19 patients (1, 2). Italy has exceeded the cases recorded in China and unfortunately, up to now (May, 17th), 225,435 cases and 31908 deaths have been registered with still over 700 admitted to intensive care units (3). The Italian outbreak is mainly located in clusters along the north of Italy (Lombardia, Veneto and Emilia Romagna) and a low incidence in central and southern regions (1, 3, 4). In order to control COVID-19, resource reallocation eventually led to the creation of hospitals partially or totally dedicated to COVID-19 patients (COVID-hospital), therefore 1685 This article is freely accessible online.

We reported the cases of two adult male patients who were admitted to our emergency room with abdominal pain and dyspnea caused by gallstones and pulmonary embolism respectively. During the radiological investigations, as collateral findings, we found two anomalous development of the inferior vena cava. These conditions affect about 4% of population and, although asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic, are associated with thrombotic manifestations as deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. The prompt recognition of these anomalies is necessary in order to prevent the complications associated with these conditions and to set the best therapy for patients.

No abstract

Aim: To assess the ability of ultrasound (US)-guided vacuum-assisted breast excision (VAE) to remove Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) ≥3 breast lesions in order to analyze US features most frequently associated with complete excision. Materials and Methods: A total of 266 BI-RADS ≥3 lesions without microcalcifications underwent US-VAE. US-VAE and gold standard pathological results were compared. US features of lesions were analyzed. Results:The complete excision rate was 93.61%; the VAE agreement rate was 99.62%. Circumscribed margins, regular shape, parallel orientation, and the absence of posterior features were favorable US features associated with complete excision. Lesions completely excised were: BI-RADS 3 ≤21.10 mm and BI-RADS 4 ≤18.70 mm with one unfavorable US characteristic, and BI-RADS 4 lesions ≤13.5 mm with two unfavorable US features hindered complete removal. Two atypical ductal hyperplasias (<10 mm, one unfavorable feature) and eight ductal carcinomas in situ (≤8.7 mm, one/two unfavorable features) were completely removed. Conclusion: US-VAE is highly accurate for diagnostic purpose and, in some cases, highly successful for complete lesion excision. This success also depends on the US characteristics and size of the lesion.

Background/Aim: The research objectives of this study were the estimation of the number of misdiagnosed breast lesions by non-expert-center-breast-radiologists (NEBR) and the investigation of the discordant rate (DR) calculated between initial and second opinion. Moreover, this study evaluated the impact of second opinion and the factors associated with DR. Materials and Methods: A total of 399 patients were sent to our Tertiary Breast Cancer (BC) Center to perform fine needle aspiration/core needle biopsy (FNAC/CNB) after external examination. Lesions were reclassified according to Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). External examinations were classified as breast-expert, not-breast-expert and physicians as expert-center-breast-radiologists (EBR), NEBR, and non-radiologists (NR). Personal/family history of breast cancer (BC), breast-density and presence of prior imaging were collected. Results: DR was 74.3%. After second opinion, FNAC/CNB was proposed in 25.7% of cases and 2 additional cancers were detected. About 59.5% of unnecessary FNAC/CNB were avoided. Dense breast, no prior imaging examination and BC family-history were associated with higher DR (p-value<0.001); personal BC-history was associated in NEBR evaluations (p-value=0.0383). Conclusion: Second opinion review of outside examinations at expert BC Center may decrease unneeded biopsy, reducing health-care costs.