Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index <20), moderate lockdowns (20–60), and full lockdowns (>60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04384926 . Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include...

An acute respiratory disease caused by a novel coronavirus [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), previously known as 2019-nCoV], the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first detected in Wuhan, China. Since then, the virus has spread rapidly worldwide leading to a global public health crisis. Due to its devastating effect on public health, it is crucial to identify a viable therapeutic option to mitigate the damage the disease causes. In spite of various governments implementing aggressive global lock-down and quarantine protocols, the number of cases continues to follow an upward trend. At present, the therapeutic strategies are supportive or preventative, focusing on reducing transmission. Given the gravity of the situation, we aim to explore the drugs that have been tried so far and their efficacy when applied in clinical trials. Since newer interventions would take months to years to develop, by looking at the pool of existing therapeutic options, including remdesivir (RDV), plasma exchange or cytapheresis, hydroxychloroquine, baricitinib, and lopinavir (LPV), we have tried to detail the principles behind their use to treat COVID-19, current application, and adverse effects. Many coronaviruses have a highly mutable single-stranded RNA genome and hence discovering new drugs against the virus is going to be challenging owing to the possible viral genetic recombination. Extensive research is still needed to safely advocate the efficacy of the currently available therapeutic options.

No abstract

Aim of the study: Biliary complications are the leading causes of morbidity and mortality after liver transplant (LT). However, national data on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) usage and outcomes in LT patients are lacking. Our study aims to identify the trends, outcomes, and predictors of ERCP and related complications in this patient subgroup. Material and methods: We derived our study cohort from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) between 2007 and 2017. LT patients were identified using ICD-9/10-CM diagnosis codes and patients who underwent ERCP were identified by ICD-9/10-CM procedure codes. We utilized the Cochrane-Armitage trend test and multivariate logistic regression to analyze temporal trends, outcomes, and predictors. Results: A total of 372,814 hospitalizations occurred in LT patients between 2007 and 2017. ERCP was performed in 2.05% (n = 7632) of all hospitalizations. There was a rise in ERCP procedures from 1.96% (n = 477) in 2007 to 2.05% (n = 845) in 2017. Among LT patients who underwent ERCP, the in-hospital mortality rate was 1% (n = 73) and 8% (n = 607) were discharged to facilities. Mean length of hospital stay was 7 ±0.3 days. Septicemia was the most common periprocedural complication (18.3%, n = 1399) followed by post-ERCP pancreatitis (8.8%, n = 674). Conclusions: There has been an increase in ERCP procedures over the past decade among LT patients. Our study highlights the periprocedural complications and outcomes of ERCP in LT patients from a nationally representative dataset.