Introduction Recently, Italy has been heavily hit by COVID-19 pandemic and today it is still one of the most affected countries in the world. The subsequent necessary lockdown decreed by the Italian Government had an outstanding impact on the daily life of the entire population, including that of Italian surgical residents' activity. Our survey aims to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on the training programme of Italian surgical residents. Materials and methods We designed a 12-item-electronic anonymous questionnaire on SurveyMonkey© web application. The survey was composed of different sections concerning demographic characteristics and impacts of COVID-19 on the concrete participation in clinical, surgical and research activities. Future perspectives of responders after the pandemic were also investigated. Results Eighty hundred responses were collected, and 756 questionnaires were considered eligible to be included in the study analysis. Almost 35 and 27% of respondents experienced, respectively, complete interruption of surgical and clinical activities. A subgroup analysis, comparing the COVID-19 impact on clinical activities with demographics data, showed a statistically significant difference related to specialties (p = 0.0062) and Italian regions (p < 0.0001). Moreover, 112 residents have been moved to non-surgical units dealing with COVID-19 or, in some case, they voluntarily decided to interrupt their residency programme to support the ongoing emergency. Conclusion Our survey demonstrated that COVID-19 pandemic has severely impacted the educational programme of Italian surgical residents. Despite many regional differences, this survey highlighted the overall shortage of planning in the reallocation of resources facing this unexpected health emergency.

Background: Duodenal stump fistula (DSF) is a severe complication of gastrectomy. Although nonsurgical therapy is preferred, surgery is still mandatory in one third of DSF patients. The aim of this article is to analyze the surgical management of DSF and factors related to its outcome. Methods: We performed a retrospective multicenter study using data from January 1990 to November 2011 in 16 Italian surgery centers. We collected 8,268 elective gastrectomies for malignancies, 7,987 by the laparotomic and 281 by the laparoscopic approach. Two hundred five patients developed a DSF, 75 of whom underwent surgery for DSF. We analyzed mortality and DSF healing time as well as the impact of clinical, oncological, and surgical characteristics. Results: The laparoscopic approach increased the risk of DSF development (odds ratio 5.6, 95 % confidence interval 2.7–10.6, P < 0.001). The indication for first DSF surgery was intra-abdominal sepsis; the failure rate was over 30 %, associated with the appearance of fistulas of neighboring organs, bleeding, and the need for reoperations. The mortality rate was 28 % and was related to the presence of vascular disease (P = 0.04), more than one reoperation (P = 0.05), sepsis (P < 0.001), and renal failure (P < 0.001). Fifty-four patients recovered after a median of 39 days (interquartile range 22–68 days); the need to perform more reoperations (P < 0.01) and the presence of an abdominal abscess (P < 0.01) led to an increase in healing time. Conclusions: Surgery for DSF has a poor prognosis. Our data will help to identify patients at risk of death, but unfortunately could not establish the best surgical procedure applicable to all cases of DSF

If elderly patients with liver cirrhosis and HCC are appropriately selected and evaluated, they might have favorable prognoses after HR.

The COVID-19 pandemic has spread rapidly, forcing some drastic changes not only in our daily lives, but also in our clinical and surgical activities. Given our extensive Italian experience, we hereby describe how our surgical unit activity has changed and how, in some cases, it was necessary to modify surgical strategies. We hope our experience can be shared with our global colleagues who are suffering under similar condition.

Background COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the Italian National Health Care system at many different levels, causing a complete reorganization of surgical wards. In this context, our study retrospectively analysed the management strategy for patients with acute cholecystitis. Methods We analysed all patients admitted to our Emergency Department for acute cholecystitis between February and April 2020 and we graded each case according to 2018 Tokyo Guidelines. All patients were tested for positivity to SARS-CoV-2 and received an initial conservative treatment. We focused on patients submitted to cholecystostomy during the acute phase of pandemic and their subsequent disease evolution. Results Thirty-seven patients were admitted for acute cholecystitis (13 grade I, 16 grade II, 8 grade III). According to Tokyo Guidelines (2018), patients were successfully treated with antibiotic only, bedside percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PC) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in 29.7%, 21.6% and 48.7% of cases respectively. Therapeutic strategy of three out of 8 cases, otherwise fit for surgery, submitted to bedside percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (37.5%), were directly modified by COVID-19 pandemic: one due to the SARS-CoV-2 positivity, while two others due to unavailability of operating room and intensive care unit for post-operative monitoring respectively. Overall success rate of percutaneous cholecystostomy was of 87.5%. The mean post-procedural hospitalization length was 9 days, and no related adverse events were observed apart from transient parietal bleeding, conservatively treated. Once discharged, two patients required readmission because of acute biliary symptoms. Median time of drainage removal was 43 days and only 50% patients thereafter underwent cholecystectomy. Conclusions Percutaneous cholecystostomy has shown to be an effective and safe treatment thus acquiring an increased relevance in the first phase of the pandemic. Nowadays, considering we are forced to live with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, PC should be considered as a virtuous, alternative tool for potentially all COVID-19 positive patients and selectively for negative cases unresponsive to conservative therapy and unfit for surgery.