The aim of this systematic review was to identify the challenges imposed on medical and surgical education by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the proposed innovations enabling the continuation of medical student and resident training. A systematic review on the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was performed on April 18th, 2020, and yielded 1288 articles. Sixty-one of the included manuscripts were synthesized in a qualitative description focused on two major axes, "challenges" and "innovative solutions", and two minor axes, "mental health" and "medical students in the frontlines". Shortage of personal protective equipment, suspension of clinical clerkships and observerships and reduction in elective surgical cases unavoidably affect medical and surgical education. Interesting solutions involving the use of virtual learning, videoconferencing, social media and telemedicine could effectively tackle the sudden cease in medical education. Furthermore, trainee's mental health should be safeguarded, and medical students can be involved in the COVID-19 clinical treatment if needed. In December 2019, a case series of a novel type of pneumonia was reported in Wuhan, China. The causing viral agent was identified as a novel betacoronavirus, named SARS-CoV-2, and the respective infection was named as "Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)". As of today, COVID-19 has affected world health to an unprecedented degree. More than 2.44 million cases and 165,000 deaths worldwide have been reported as of 20th April 2020 (1). The pandemic and subsequent mitigation measures have severely impacted all but the most essential activities, effectively shutting down operations in commerce and services. Education has also been disproportionately affected, as the congregation of the youngest members of the community in closed spaces can significantly contribute to the spread of the virus. In total, more that 900 million learners in all levels of education, including higher education, have been affected (2, 3). Medical education equips clinicians with the knowledge and skills to provide safe healthcare to patients. Those receiving medical education do so, ultimately to provide this service to patients, an essential process to ensure a competent workforce. However, those recipients have responsibilities primarily towards service provision and supporting their health system, particularly in times of crisis. This is exemplified by the shutdown of academic institutions worldwide, reallocation of academic trainees into clinical roles and cessation of mandatory training and teaching. Many trainees have been prevented from rotating into new specialties or training positions and supplementary research and audit work that is not essential has been postponed. The aforementioned measures, whilst drastic for medical education, are seen as necessary to ensure health systems can cope with the burden COVID-19.

Airway injuries are life threatening conditions. A very little number of patients suffering air injuries are transferred live at the hospital. The diagnosis requires a high index of suspicion based on the presence of non-specific for these injuries symptoms and signs and a thorough knowledge of the mechanisms of injury. Bronchoscopy and chest computed tomography with MPR and 3D reconstruction of the airway represent the procedures of choice for the definitive diagnosis. Endotracheal intubation under bronchoscopic guidance is the key point to gain airway control and appropriate ventilation. Primary repair with direct suture or resection and an end to end anastomosis is the treatment of choice for patients suffering from tracheobronchial injuries (TBI). The surgical approach to the injured airway depends on its location. Selected patients, mainly with iatrogenic injuries, can be treated conservatively as long as the injury is small (<2 cm), a secure and patent airway and adequate ventilation are achieved, and there are no signs of sepsis. Patients with delayed presentation airway injuries should be referred for surgical treatment. Intraoperative evaluation of the viability of the lung parenchyma beyond the site of stenosis/obstruction is mandatory to avoid unnecessary lung resection.

BackgroundThe aim of this study is to see how the sutureless, stentless, Perceval S aortic valves behave when implanted in elderly patients with small aortic root and the comparison with a second group of patients with similar characteristics where a conventional stented bioprosthesis was implanted. This is a prospective randomized institutional study.MethodsOur material is composed from 25 patients who underwent aortic valve replacement with sutureless self-anchoring Perceval S valve implantation (LivaNova), compared with 25 patients with conventional stented biological prosthesis implanted (soprano LivaNova group). The two groups of patients have similar demographic and medical characteristics with severe aortic stenosis. The study was conducted from January 2012 to June 2014. Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative parameters were studied in order to investigate the utility of the Perceval S valves in this group of patients.ResultsThe Perceval S valve implantation seems to be an interesting biological valve with good hemodynamic characteristics as compared with the typical biological prosthesis providing shorter ischemia time (40 ± 5.50 min vs 86 ± 15.86 min; p < 0.001), shorter extracorporeal circulation time (73.75 ± 8.12 min vs 120.36 ± 28.31 min p < 0.001), less operation time (149.38 ± 15.22 min vs 206.64 ± 42.85 min; p < 0.001) and better postoperative recovery. The postoperative gradients were 23.5 ± 19.20 mmHg vs 24.5 ± 19.90 mmHg respectively. The postoperative effective orifice area in these two groups were respectively 1.5 =/-0.19 cm2 vs 1.1=/-0.5 cm2 (p 0.002). Among the 25 patients of the Soprano stented valve, 3 (12 %) came back in 6 months with New York Heart Association (NYHA) 3. The PPM of these patients was the cause of readmission in the Hospital required diuresis and supplementary treatment.ConclusionsAortic valve replacement with Perceval aortic valves in geriatric patients with comorbidities and small aortic annulus seems to be an alternative, safe and “fast” intervention with excellent short and mid-term results which provides a better effective orifice area.

Background. Essential Skills in the Management of Surgical Cases (ESMSC) is an international, animal model-based course. It combines interactive lectures with basic ex vivo stations and more advanced wet lab modules, that is, in vivo dissections and Heart Transplant Surgery on a swine model. Materials and Methods. Forty-nine medical students (male, N = 27, female N = 22, and mean age = 23.7 years) from King's College London (KCL) and Greek Medical Schools attended the course. Participants were assessed with Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS), as well as Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs). Paired t-test associations were used to evaluate whether there was statistically significant improvement in their performance. Aim. To evaluate the effectiveness of a combined applied surgical science and wet lab simulation course as a teaching model for surgical skills at the undergraduate level. Results. The mean MCQ score was improved by 2.33/32 (P < 0.005). Surgical skills competences, as defined by DOPS scores, were improved in a statically significant manner (P < 0.005 for all paired t-test correlations). Conclusions. ESMSC seems to be an effective teaching model, which improves the understanding of the surgical approach and the basic surgical skills. In vivo models could be used potentially as a step further in the Undergraduate Surgical Education.

A closed-book, multiple-choice examination following this article tests your under standing of the following objectives:1. Compare and contrast 5 scoring systems and their ability to predict morbidity and mortality in the cardiac patient population. 2. Identify preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables when using a prospective study. 3. Describe the performance of each scoring system. Methods Consecutive patients admitted to a cardiac surgical intensive care unit (CSICU) were prospectively studied. Data on the preoperative condition, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative course were collected. EuroSCORE II, CASUS, and scores from 3 general severityscoring systems (APACHE II, SAPS II, and SOFA) were calculated on the first postoperative day. Clinical outcome was defined as 30-day mortality and in-hospital morbidity. Results A total of 150 patients were included. Thirty-day mortality was 6%. CASUS was superior in outcome prediction, both in relation to discrimination (area under curve, 0.89) and calibration (Brier score = 0.043, c 2 = 2.2, P = .89), followed by EuroSCORE II for 30-day mortality (area under curve, 0.87) and SOFA for morbidity (Spearman ρ = 0.37 and 0.35 for the CSICU length of stay and duration of mechanical ventilation, respectively; Wilcoxon W = 367.5, P = .03 for probability of readmission to CSICU). Conclusions CASUS can be recommended as the most reliable and beneficial option for benchmarking and risk stratification in cardiac surgery patients.