Microwave coagulation for liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Liver metastases (i.e. secondary hepatic malignancies) are significantly more common than primary liver cancer. Long-term survival after radical surgical treatment is approximately 50%. For people in whom resection for cure is not feasible, other treatments must be considered. One treatment option is microwave coagulation utilising electromagnetic waves. It involves placing an electrode into a lesion under ultrasound or computed tomography guidance. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of microwave coagulation versus no intervention, other ablation methods, or systemic treatments in people with liver metastases regardless of the location of the primary tumour. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest date of search was 14 April 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised clinical trials assessing beneficial or harmful effects of microwave coagulation and its comparators in people with liver metastases, irrespective of the location of the primary tumour. We included trials no matter the outcomes reported. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were: all-cause mortality at the last follow-up and time to mortality; health-related quality of life (HRQoL); and any adverse events or complications. Our secondary outcomes were: cancer mortality; disease-free survival; failure to clear liver metastases; recurrence of liver metastases; time to progression of liver metastases; and tumour response measures. We used risk ratios (RR) and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) to present the results. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 1 tool. We used GRADE methodology to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Three randomised clinical trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The control interventions differed in the three trials; therefore, meta-analyses were not possible. The trials were at high risk of bias. The certainty of evidence of the assessed outcomes in the three comparisons was very low. Data on our prespecified outcomes were either missing or not reported. Microwave coagulation plus conventional transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) versus conventional TACE alone One trial, conducted in China, randomised 50 participants (mean age 60 years, 76% males) with liver metastases from various primary sites. Authors reported that the follow-up period was at least one month. The trial reported adverse events or complications in the experimental group only and for tumour response measures. There were no dropouts in the trial. The trial did not report on any other outcomes. Microwave ablation versus conventional surgery One trial, conducted in Japan, randomised 40 participants (mean age 61 years, 53% males) with multiple liver metastases of colorectal cancer. Ten participants were excluded after randomisation (six from the experimental and four from the control group); thus, the trial analyses included 30 participants. Follow-up was three years. The reported number of deaths from all causes was 9/14 included participants in the microwave group versus 12/16 included participants in the conventional surgery group. The mean overall survival was 27 months in the microwave ablation and 25 months in the conventional surgery group. The three-year overall survival was 14% with microwave ablation and 23% with conventional surgery, resulting in an HR of 0.91 (95% CI 0.39 to 2.15). The reported frequency of adverse events or complications was comparable between the two groups, except for the required blood transfusion, which was more common in the conventional surgery group. There was no intervention-related mortality. Disease-free survival was 11.3 months in the microwave ablationgroup and 13.3 months in the conventional surgery group. The trial did not report on HRQoL. Microwave ablation versus radiofrequency ablation One trial, conducted in Germany, randomised 50 participants (mean age 62.8 years, 46% males) who were followed for 24 months. Two-year mortality showed an RR of 0.62 (95% CI 0.26 to 1.47). The trial reported that, by two years, 76.9% of participants in the microwave ablationgroup and 62.5% of participants in the radiofrequency ablation group survived (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.73). The trial reported no deaths or major complications during the procedures in either group. There were two minor complications only in the radiofrequency ablation group (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.67). The trial reported technical efficacy in 100% of procedures in both groups. Distant recurrence was reported for 10 participants in the microwave ablation group and nine participants in the radiofrequency ablation group (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.08). No participant in the microwave ablation group demonstrated local progression at 12 months, while that occurred in two participants in the radiofrequency ablation group (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.67). The trial did not report on HRQoL. One trial reported partial support by Medicor (MMS Medicor Medical Supplies GmbH, Kerpen, Germany) for statistical analysis. The remaining two trials did not provide information on funding. We identified four ongoing trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of microwave ablation in addition to conventional TACE compared with conventional TACE alone on adverse events or complications. We do not know if microwave ablation compared with conventional surgery may have little to no effect on all-cause mortality. We do not know the effect of microwave ablation compared with radiofrequency ablation on all-cause mortality and adverse events or complications either. Data on all-cause mortality and time to mortality, HRQoL, adverse events or complications, cancer mortality, disease-free survival, failure to clear liver metastases, recurrence of liver metastases, time to progression of liver metastases, and tumour response measures were either insufficient or were lacking. In light of the current inconclusive evidence and the substantial gaps in data, the pursuit of additional good-quality, large randomised clinical trials is not only justified but also essential to elucidate the efficacy and comparative benefits of microwave ablation in relation to various interventions for liver metastases. The current version of the review, in comparison to the previous one, incorporates two new trials in two additional microwave ablation comparisons: 1. in addition to conventional TACE versus conventional TACE alone and 2. versus radiofrequency ablation.

Transarterial (chemo)embolisation versus systemic chemotherapy for colorectal cancer liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: The liver is affected by two groups of malignant tumours: primary liver cancers and liver metastases. Liver metastases are significantly more common than primary liver cancer, and five-year survival after radical surgical treatment of liver metastases ranges from 28% to 50%, depending on primary cancer site. However, R0 resection (resection for cure) is not feasible in most people; therefore, other treatments have to be considered in the case of non-resectability. One possible option is based on the concept that the blood supply to hepatic tumours originates predominantly from the hepatic artery. Transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) of the peripheral branches of the hepatic artery can be achieved by administering a chemotherapeutic drug followed by vascular occlusive agents and can lead to selective necrosis of the cancer tissue while leaving normal liver parenchyma virtually unaffected. The entire procedure can be performed without infusion of chemotherapy and is then called bland transarterial embolisation (TAE). These procedures are usually applied over a few sessions. Another possible treatment option is systemic chemotherapy which, in the case of colorectal cancer metastases, is most commonly performed using FOLFOX (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) and FOLFIRI (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and irinotecan) regimens applied in multiple sessions over a long period of time. These therapies disrupt the cell cycle, leading to death of rapidly dividing malignant cells. Current guidelines determine the role of TAE and TACE as non-curative treatment options applicable in people with liver-only or liver-dominant metastatic disease that is unresectable or non-ablatable, and in people who have failed systemic chemotherapy. Regarding the treatment modalities in people with colorectal cancer liver metastases, we found no systematic reviews comparing the efficacy of TAE or TACE versus systemic chemotherapy. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of transarterial embolisation (TAE) or transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) compared with systemic chemotherapy in people with liver-dominant unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and three additional databases up to 4 April 2024. We also searched two trials registers and the European Medicines Agency database and checked reference lists of retrieved publications. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised clinical trials assessing beneficial and harmful effects of TAE or TACE versus systemic chemotherapy in adults (aged 18 years or older) with colorectal cancer liver metastases. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality; overall survival (time to mortality); and any adverse events or complications. Our secondary outcomes were cancer mortality; health-related quality of life; progression-free survival; proportion of participants dying or surviving with progression of the disease; time to progression of liver metastases; recurrence of liver metastases; and tumour response measures (complete response, partial response, stable disease, and progressive disease). For the purpose of the review and to perform necessary analyses, whenever possible, we converted survival rates to mortality rates, as this was our primary outcome. For the analysis of dichotomous outcomes, we used the risk ratio (RR); for continuous outcomes, we used the mean difference; and for time to event outcomes, we calculated hazard ratios (HRs), all with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used the standardised mean difference with 95% CIs when the trials used different instruments. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. We based our conclusions on outcomes analysed at the longest follow-up. MAIN RESULTS: We included three trials with 118 participants randomised to TACE versus 120 participants to systemic chemotherapy. Four participants were excluded; one due to disease progression prior to treatment and three due to decline in health. The trials reported data on one or more outcomes. Two trials were performed in China and one in Italy. The trials differed in terms of embolisation techniques and chemotherapeutic agents. Follow-up ranged from 12 months to 50 months. TACE may reduce mortality at longest follow-up (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.94; 3 trials, 234 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. TACE may have little to no effect on overall survival (time to mortality) (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.01; 1 trial, 70 participants; very low-certainty evidence), any adverse events or complications (3 trials, 234 participants; very low-certainty evidence), health-related quality of life (2 trials, 154 participants; very low-certainty evidence), progression-free survival (1 trial, 70 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and tumour response measures (presented as the overall response rate) (RR 1.81, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.96; 3 trials, 234 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. No trials reported cancer mortality, proportion of participants dying or surviving with progression of the disease, and recurrence of liver metastases. We found no trials comparing the effects of TAE versus systemic chemotherapy in people with colorectal cancer liver metastases. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence regarding effectiveness of TACE versus systemic chemotherapy in people with colorectal cancer liver metastases is of very low certainty and is based on three trials. Our confidence in the results is limited due to the risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, and imprecision. It is very uncertain whether TACE confers benefits with regard to reduction in mortality, overall survival (time to mortality), reduction in adverse events or complications, improvement in health-related quality of life, improvement in progression-free survival, and tumour response measures (presented as the overall response rate). Data on cancer mortality, proportion of participants dying or surviving with progression of the disease, and recurrence of liver metastases are lacking. We found no trials assessing TAE versus systemic chemotherapy. More randomised clinical trials are needed to strengthen the body of evidence and provide insight into the benefits and harms of TACE or TAE in comparison with systemic chemotherapy in people with liver metastases from colorectal cancer.

The analysis of factors increasing the odds for type 2 diabetes mellitus remission following re-do bariatric surgery after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy- cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Metabolic/bariatric surgery is the only proven treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) with curative intent. However, in a number of patients, the surgery is not effective or they may experience a relapse. Those patients can be offered re-do bariatric surgery (RBS). PURPOSE: The study aimed to determine factors increasing the odds for T2D remission one year after RBS following primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted between January 2010 and January 2020, which included 12 bariatric centers in Poland. The study population was divided into groups: Group 1- patients with T2D remission after RBS (n = 28) and Group 2- patients without T2D remission after RBS (n = 49). T2D remission was defined as HBA1c < 6.0% without glucose-lowering pharmacotherapy and glycemia within normal range at time of follow-up that was completed 12 months after RBS. RESULTS: Fifty seven females and 20 males were included in the study. Patients who achieved BMI < 33 kg/m2 after RBS and those with %EBMIL > 60.7% had an increased chance of T2D remission (OR = 3.39, 95%CI = 1.28-8.95, p = 0.014 and OR = 12.48, 95%CI 2.67-58.42, p = 0.001, respectively). Time interval between primary LSG and RBS was significantly shorter in Group 1 than in Group 2 [1 (1-4) vs. 3 (2-4) years, p = 0.023]. CONCLUSIONS: Shorter time interval between LSG and RBS may ease remission of T2D in case of lack of remission after primary procedure. Significant excess weight loss seems to be the most crucial factor for T2D remission.

Is triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cell 1 (TREM-1) protein a new marker of serious infectious complications in colorectal surgery?: case-matched pilot study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the usefulness of the triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cell 1 (TREM-1) protein as a marker for serious infectious complications during laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: Sixty-four patients with colon or rectal cancer, who underwent an elective laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery from November 2018 to February 2020, were included in the analysis. Blood samples of the TREM-1 protein testing were collected four times from each patient: before and on three following postoperative days (PODs). Patients were divided into two groups according to the presence of infectious complications. Subsequently, patients with infectious complications (group 1) were matched 1:1 with patients without complications (group 2). The case-matched analysis was done by selecting patients from the control group by age, ASA scale, cancer stage, and type of surgery. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in demographic and operative characteristics between the two groups. The median length of hospital stay was longer in group 1 than in group 2 (11 days vs. 5 days, p < 0.001). Preoperative measurements of TREM-1 protein did not differ between the two groups. There were no significant differences in the measurements on the first and third postoperative days. However, the median TREM-1 measurement was higher in group 1 on the second postoperative day (542 pg/ml vs. 399 pg/ml; p = 0.040). The difference was more apparent when only severe postoperative complications were considered. When compared to the group without any complications, the median TREM-1 level was significantly higher in the group with severe infection complications in POD 1, POD 2, and POD 3 (p < 0.05). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve demonstrated that TREM-1 readings in POD 2 had a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 84% for the presence of severe infection complications at a value of 579.3 pg/ml (AUC 0.8, 95%CI 0.65-0.96). CONCLUSION: TREM-1 measurements might become a helpful predictive marker in the early diagnosis of serious infectious complications in patients following laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Duodenal microbiota and weight-loss following sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass - a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery is the most effective method of morbid obesity treatment. Microbiota has many functions in human body and many of them remain to be unknown. The aim of this study was to establish if the composition of duodenal microbiota influences success rate of bariatric surgery. METHODS: It was a prospective cohort study. The data concerning demographics and comorbidities was collected perioperatively. The duodenal biopsies were collected prior to surgery with the gastroscope. Then DNA analysis was conducted. The data connected to the operation outcomes was gathered after 6 and 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: Overall, 32 patients were included and divided into two groups (successful - group 1 and unsuccessful - group 0) based on percentage excess weight loss after 6 months were created. The Total Actual Abundance was higher in group 0. In group 0 there was a significantly higher amount of Roseburia and Arthrobacter (p = 0.024, p = 0.027, respectively). Genus LDA effect size analysis showed Prevotella, Megasphaera and Pseudorhodobacter in group 1 to be significant. Whereas abundance of Roseburia and Arthrobacter were significant in group 0. CONCLUSIONS: Duodenal microbiota composition may be a prognostic factor for the success of the bariatric surgery but further research on the larger group is needed.

Thyroidectomy: is it safe to be performed by general surgery residents? - single centre experience.

BACKGROUND: Thyroidectomy carries a risk of two crucial complications - recurrent nerve palsy and hypocalcaemia. The aim of the study was to assess the safety of thyroidectomy performed by general surgery residents. METHODS: Data of 515 patients, who underwent total thyroidectomy between the years 2015 and 2019, were prospectively collected. Inclusion criteria were as follows: age >18 years old, patients who underwent total thyroidectomy, no change of operator during the surgery. The study group was divided into two groups: operated by general surgery specialists (385 patients-group 1) and operated by residents with the supervision of experienced general surgery specialists as assistants (130 patients-group 2). RESULTS: Demographic factors did not differ statistically between groups. Median operative time was 65 min (55-85 IQR) and 90 min (75-110 IQR) in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p < 0.001). Complications occurred in 97 (18.7%) patients in group 1 and 25 (19.3%) patients in group 2 (p = 0.893). Recurrent nerve palsy diagnosed with laryngoscopy was the most common complication - 10.2% and 9.2% of patients, respectively (p = 0.754). Permanent vocal paresis occurred in 2.3% and 3.2%, respectively (p = 0.786). Postoperative symptomatic hypocalcaemia occurred in 7% of patients in group 1 and 10% of patients in group 2 (p = 0.271). Logistic regression did not show that resident as the operator with or without intraoperative neuromonitoring is a risk factor for any complications. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study show that thyroidectomy performed by a general surgery resident under supervision can be as safe as the one performed by a specialist.

Bowel function after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a randomized controlled trial comparing intracorporeal anastomosis and extracorporeal anastomosis.

BACKGROUND: The laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is the standard surgical treatment for right-sided colon cancer. The continuity of the digestive tract is restored through ileocolic anastomosis which can be performed extracorporeally or intracorporeally. The study aimed to compare both anastomotic techniques in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-blinded two-armed randomized control trial with 1:1 parallel allocation carried out from 2016 to 2020 in a single center. The follow-up period was 30 days. Compared interventions involved extracorporeal and intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. The main outcome of the study was bowel recovery measured as the time to the first stool. Other outcomes involved the time to the first flatus, morbidity, and duration of surgery. RESULTS: One hundred and seventeen patients undergoing a laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with curative intent were eligible for the trial. Eight patients refused to participate. One hundred and two patients were analyzed, 52 in the intracorporeal group and 50 in the extracorporeal group. The groups did not differ in terms of cancer stage or body mass index, but did differ in age and sex. Intracorporeal anastomosis was associated with a shorter time to the first stool than extracorporeal, 32.8 h (26.0-43.7) vs. 41.7 (35.9-50.0), p = 0.017. There was no significant difference in the time to the first flatus, 30 h (23.2-42.3) vs. 26.6 h (21.8-37.3), p = 0.165. Similarly, overall complications did not differ (EC 12/50 vs. IC 10/52, p = 0.56). There were no differences in length of surgery, 190 min (150-230) and 190 min (180-220), p = 0.55. CONCLUSION: Intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis following laparoscopic right hemicolectomy results in slightly faster bowel recovery, with no differences in morbidity and duration of surgery.

External validation of predictive scores for diabetes remission after metabolic surgery.

PURPOSE: Bariatric surgery has proven to be the most efficient treatment for obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Despite detailed qualification, desirable outcome after an intervention is not achieved by every patient. Various risk prediction models of diabetes remission after metabolic surgery have been established to facilitate the decision-making process. The purpose of the study is to validate the performance of available risk prediction scores for diabetes remission a year after surgical treatment and to determine the optimal model. METHODS: A retrospective analysis comprised 252 patients who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) between 2009 and 2017 and completed 1-year follow-up. The literature review revealed 5 models, which were subsequently explored in our study. Each score relationship with diabetes remission was assessed using logistic regression. Discrimination was evaluated by area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve, whereas calibration by the Hosmer-Lemeshow test and predicted versus observed remission ratio. RESULTS: One year after surgery, 68.7% partial and 21.8% complete diabetes remission and 53.4% excessive weight loss were observed. DiaBetter demonstrated the best predictive performance (AUROC 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-0.90; p-value > 0.05 in the Hosmer-Lemeshow test; predicted-to-observed ratio 1.09). The majority of models showed acceptable discrimination power. In calibration, only the DiaBetter score did not lose goodness-of-fit in all analyzed groups. CONCLUSION: The DiaBetter score seems to be the most appropriate tool to predict diabetes remission after metabolic surgery since it presents adequate accuracy and is convenient to use in clinical practice. There are no accurate models to predict T2DM remission in a patient with advanced diabetes.

Electrocoagulation for liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Primary liver tumours and liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma are two of the most common malignant tumours to affect the liver. The liver is second only to the lymph nodes as the most common site for metastatic disease. More than half of the people with metastatic liver disease will die from metastatic complications. Electrocoagulation by diathermy is a method used to destroy tumour tissue, using a high-frequency electric current generating high temperatures, applied locally with an electrode (needle, blade, or ball). The objective of this method is to destroy the tumour completely, if possible, in a single session. With the time, electrocoagulation by diathermy has been replaced by other techniques, but the evidence is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of electrocoagulation by diathermy, administered alone or with another intervention, versus no intervention, other ablation methods, or systemic treatments in people with liver metastases. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, ICTRP, and FDA to October 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered all randomised trials that assessed beneficial and harmful effects of electrocoagulation by diathermy, administered alone or with another intervention, versus comparators, in people with liver metastases, regardless of the location of the primary tumour. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias of the included trial using predefined risk of bias domains, and presented the review results incorporating the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included one randomised clinical trial with 306 participants (175 males; 131 females) who had undergone resection of the sigmoid colon, and who had five or more visible and palpable hepatic metastases. The diagnosis was confirmed by histological assessment (biopsy) and by carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level. The trial was conducted in Iraq. The age of participants ranged between 38 and 79 years. The participants were randomised to four different study groups. The liver metastases were biopsied and treated (only once) in three of the groups: 75 received electrocoagulation by diathermy alone, 76 received electrocoagulation plus allopurinol, 78 received electrocoagulation plus dimethyl sulphoxide. In the fourth intervention group, 77 participants functioning as controls received a vehicle solution of allopurinol 5 mL 4 x a day by mouth; the metastases were left untouched. The status of the liver and lungs was followed by ultrasound investigations, without the use of a contrast agent. Participants were followed for five years. The analyses are based on per-protocol data only analysing 223 participants. We judged the trial to be at high risk of bias. After excluding 'nonevaluable patients', the groups seemed comparable for baseline characteristics. Mortality due to disease spread at five-year follow-up was 98% in the electrocoagulation group (57/58 evaluable people); 87% in the electrocoagulation plus allopurinol group (46/53 evaluable people); 86% in the electrocoagulation plus dimethyl sulphoxide group (49/57 evaluable people); and 100% in the control group (55/55 evaluable people). We observed no difference in mortality between the electrocoagulation alone group versus the control group (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.03; 113 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We observed lower mortality in the electrocoagulation combined with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide group versus the control group (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95; 165 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain regarding post-operative deaths between the electrocoagulation alone group versus the control group (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.12; 152 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and between the electrocoagulation combined with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide groups versus the control group (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.09 to 10.86; 231 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial authors did not report data on number of participants with other adverse events and complications, recurrence of liver metastases, time to progression of liver metastases, tumour response measures, and health-related quality of life. Data on failure to clear liver metastases were not provided for the control group. There was no information on funding or conflict of interest. We identified no ongoing trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence on the beneficial and harmful effects of electrocoagulation alone or in combination with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide in people with liver metastases is insufficient, as it is based on one randomised clinical trial at low to very low certainty. It is very uncertain if there is a difference in all-cause mortality and post-operative mortality between electrocoagulation alone versus control. It is also uncertain if electrocoagulation in combination with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide may result in a slight reduction of all-cause mortality in comparison with a vehicle solution of allopurinol (control). It is very uncertain if there is a difference in post-operative mortality between the electrocoagulation combined with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide group versus control. Data on other adverse events and complications, failure to clear liver metastases or recurrence of liver metastases, time to progression of liver metastases, tumour response measures, and health-related quality of life were most lacking or insufficiently reported for analysis. Electrocoagulation by diathermy is no longer used in the described way, and this may explain the lack of further trials.

When to resume bariatric surgery after COVID-19 pandemic?: results of patients' and surgeons' survey.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus Disease 2019 is affecting most countries around the world, including Poland. In response, all elective surgeries have been postponed. We asked patients and surgeons when they want bariatric surgery to resume after pandemic. The main aim of the study was to determine patients' and surgeons' expectations about when to resume bariatric surgery regarding COVID-19 pandemic state. METHODS: The study was conducted in two groups: Group 1-bariatric patients; Group 2-bariatric surgeons. Two online surveys were distributed. RESULTS: A total of 895 patients, 299 before, 596 after surgery and 32 surgeons took part in survey. All patients and surgeons declared willingness to resume bariatric surgeries after pandemic and responded that they should be resumed immediately the World Health Organization announces end of pandemic (42%). The majority of patients before surgery answered that bariatric procedures should be resumed immediately the number of daily incidents begins to decrease (53%). In the patient group, current body mass index (p < 0.001) and contact with COVID+/quarantined persons (p < 0.001) had impact on the response to resumption of bariatric procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Patients opted to wait for bariatric surgery until the oncological queue has become shorter. Surgeons presented a readiness to resume both procedures in parallel.