Background: To investigate the resilience of non-local medical workers sent to support local medical workers in treating the outbreak of 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Methods: In February 2020, non-local medical workers who had been sent to Wuhan as support staff to respond to the COVID-19 outbreak were asked to complete an online survey composed of the Connor Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC), Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS) and Simplified Coping Style Questionnaire (SCSQ). Results: Survey responses from 114 non-local medical workers were analyzed. CD-RISC scores were high (67.03 ± 13.22). The resilience level was highest for physicians (73.48 ± 11.49), followed by support staff, including health care assistants, technicians (67.78 ± 12.43) and nurses (64.86 ± 13.46). Respondents differed significantly in the levels of education, training/support provided by the respondent's permanent hospital (where he or she normally works), and in their feelings of being adequately prepared and confident to complete tasks (P < 0.05). Resilience correlated negatively with anxiety (r = −.498, P < 0.01) and depression (r = −.471, P < 0.01) but positively with active coping styles (r = .733, P < 0.01). Multiple regression analysis showed that active coping (β = 1.314, p < 0.05), depression (β = −.806, p < 0.05), anxiety (β = − 1.091, p < 0.05), and training/support provided by the respondent's permanent hospital (β = 3.510, p < 0.05) were significant associated with resilience. Conclusion: Our data show that active coping, depression, anxiety, and training/support provided by the respondent's permanent hospital are associated with resilience. Managers of medical staff should use these data to develop psychosocial interventions aimed at reinforcing the resilience of medical workers during highly stressful and prolonged medical emergencies, as seen during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Background & AimsOfficial guidelines do not recommend hepatic resection (HR) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and portal hypertension (PHT). This study aims to investigate the safety and efficacy of HR for patients with HCC and PHT.MethodsMortality and survival after HR were analyzed retrospectively in a consecutive sample of 1738 HCC patients with PHT (n = 386) or without it (n = 1352). To assess the robustness of findings, we repeated the analysis using propensity score-matched analysis. We also comprehensively searched the PubMed database for studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of HR for patients with HCC and PHT.ResultsThe 90-day mortality rate was 6.7% among those with PHT and 2.1% among those without it (P<.001). Patients without PHT had a survival benefit over those with PHT at 1, 3, and 5 years (96% vs 90%, 75% vs 67%, 54% vs 45%, respectively; P = .001). In contrast, PHT was not associated with worse short- or long-term survival when only propensity score-matched pairs of patients and those with early-stage HCC or those who underwent minor hepatectomy were included in the analysis (all P>.05). Moreover, the recurrence rates were similar between the two groups. Consistent with our findings, all 9 studies identified in our literature search reported HR to be safe and effective for patients with HCC and PHT.ConclusionsHR is safe and effective in HCC patients with PHT and preserved liver function. This is especially true for patients who have early-stage HCC or who undergo minor hepatectomy.

No abstract

Aim: Conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE)is widely used for treating patients with inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A variation on the technique based on drug-eluting beads (DEB-TACE) has recently entered the clinic, but trials of its safety and efficacy have given conflicting results. This systematic review aimed to gain a current, comprehensive picture of how DEB-TACE compares with cTACE.Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure database and clinical trial registries were searched through June 2014. Risk ratios (RR), hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Results:The analysis included four randomized controlled trials, one uncontrolled prospective study and one prospective case-control study, altogether involving 652 patients. Overall survival benefit was similar between cTACE and DEB-TACE patients (HR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.82-1.40, P = 0.875). However, DEB-TACE was associated with a significantly higher objective tumor response rate (RR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.01-1.29, P = 0.03) and a slightly lower incidence of adverse events. Conclusion:Though the available evidence suggests that although DEB-TACE is associated with better tumor response and potentially fewer adverse events, it does not provide greater survival benefit than cTACE. These results need to be validated in high-quality trials with large sample size.

Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) is thought to play a critical role in immune escape by cancer, but whether PD-L1 expression can influence prognosis of patients with solid tumors is controversial. Therefore, we meta-analyzed available data on whether PD-L1 expression correlates with overall survival (OS) in such patients. PubMed, EMBASE and other databases were systematically searched for cohort or case-control studies examining the possible correlation between PD-L1 expression and OS of patients with solid tumors. OS was compared between patients positive or negative for PD-L1 expression using scatter plots, and subgroup analyses were performed based on tumor type and patient characteristics. Data from 59 studies involving 20,004 patients with solid tumors were meta-analyzed. The median percentage of tumors positive for PD-L1 was 30.1%. OS was significantly lower in PD-L1-positive patients than in PD-L1-negative patients at 1 year (P = 0.039), 3 years (P < 0.001) and 5 years (P < 0.001). The risk ratios of OS (and associated 95% confidence intervals) were 2.02 (1.56-2.60) at 1 year, 1.57 (1.34-1.83) at 3 years and 1.43 (1.24-1.64) at 5 years. Similar results were obtained in subgroup analyses based on patient ethnicity or tumor type. The available evidence suggests that PD-L1 expression negatively affects the prognosis of patients with solid tumors. PD-L1 might serve as an efficient prognostic indicator in solid tumor and may represent the important new therapeutic target.