Disease recurrence after right hemicolectomy in Scotland: Is there rationale to adopt complete mesocolic excision (CME)?

AIMS: Complete mesocolic excision (CME) has been proposed as a way to improve the oncological outcomes in patients with colon cancer. To investigate whether there is rationale for adopting the technique in Scotland, our aim was to define the incidence of disease recurrence following standard right hemicolectomy and to compare this with published CME outcomes. METHODS: Data was collected on consecutive patients undergoing right or extended right hemicolectomy for colonic adenocarcinoma (2012-2017) at three hospitals in Scotland (Raigmore Hospital, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary and Glasgow Royal Infirmary). Emergency or palliative surgery was excluded. Patients were followed up with CT scans and colonoscopy for a minimum of 3 years. RESULTS: 689 patients (M 340, F 349) were included. 30-day mortality was 1.6%. Final pathological stage was Stage I (14%), Stage II (49.8%) and Stage III (36.1%). During follow-up, 10.5% developed loco-regional recurrence and 12.2% developed distant metastases. The 1, 3 and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 94%, 84% and 82% respectively. Primary determinants of recurrence were T stage (p < 0.001), N stage (p < 0.001), apical node involvement (p < 0.001) and EMVI (p < 0.001). When compared to the literature, 30-day mortality was lower than many published series and DFS rates were similar to the largest CME study to date (4 year DFS 85.8% versus 83%). CONCLUSION: The outcomes of patients undergoing right hemicolectomy in Scotland compare favourably with many published CME studies. The technique demands further evaluation before it can be recommended for adoption into routine surgical practice.

Incidence of Ureteroenteric Anastomotic Strictures After Robotic vs Open Cystectomy in Adults.

To synthesise the evidence comparing the incidence rates of UAS post-RARC vs Open Radical cystectomy (ORC) in adults undergoing cystectomy and to compare differential stricture rates between Extracorporeal and Intracorporeal urinary diversion (ECUD vs ICUD). The primary outcome was incidence rate of UAS post RARC vs ORC and the secondary outcome was incidence rate of UAS in RARC post ECUD vs ICUD. Review authors conducted comprehensive search for studies comparing RARC with ORC in terms of incidence of UAS. Furthermore, we conducted a secondary search for studies which compared UAS incidence comparing ECUD and ICUD. We found that RARC may have higher incidence of UAS [OR: 1.39; 95% CI 1.11-1.75; p < 0.0001]. ECUD may result in lower rate of UAS as compared to ICUD [OR: 0.74; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.98; p= 0.04].

A Systematic Review on the Therapeutic Relevance of Hydroxychloroquine/Chloroquine in the Management of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is coming to the fore and has surfaced as a public health emergency of international concern. The lack of vaccines or an effective treatment has led to the global hunt for potential pharmaceuticals in adequately managing this disease. This systematic review highlights the efficacy of chloroquine and its derivative hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 and also explores the safety profile of these drugs. METHODS: EMBASE, COCHRANE, and PubMed databases were searched for studies on the use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19. RESULTS: Twenty articles were selected including expert opinions, National Guidelines, three small randomized controlled trials, and one prospective study. Both hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have shown promising results including reduction in hospital length of stay and overall mortality. Moreover, concomitant use with azithromycin seems to reduce viral load to a greater extent. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the known safety profile of these drugs in the treatment of other diseases, their availability and affordability, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are potential antiviral agents in the treatment of COVID-19. However, reported side effects of these drugs when used in conjunction with azithromycin in patients with comorbidities have raised significant safety concerns. High-quality randomized clinical trials are warranted to provide more comprehensive evidence of the safety of these drugs in patients infected with COVID-19.