Case Report: Gastric Carcinoma Diagnosed at the Second Trimester of Pregnancy

We report a rare case of gastric cancer in pregnancy. A 26-year-old woman presented at the 20th week of pregnancy complaining of nausea and vomiting. Although the patient considered the condition to be related with pregnancy and underestimated its importance, her complaints persisted over the following weeks and she was hospitalized for investigation. The diagnostic workup revealed a metastatic gastric cancer. Gastric cancer is very rare in pregnancy, and therefore it may be left out of differential diagnosis by physicians. Diagnosis may be further delayed because of overlapping symptoms occurring during normal pregnancy (nausea, vomiting, and fatigue). All these factors may contribute to a very high mortality of this malignancy during pregnancy

Comparison of laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery and conventional multiport laparoscopic (CMPL) surgery for hysterectomy: long-term outcomes of abdominal incisional scar

There is scarcity of data about the long-term results such as port-site hernia, body image scale and cosmesis scale outcomes between laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery and conventional multiport laparoscopy (CMPL) for hysterectomy. Eighty women, who underwent total hysterectomy by the LESS (n = 40) and CMPL (n = 40) technique due to benign and malign gynecological disorders, were evaluated with a cosmesis and body image questionnaire in an age-matched cohort study. Median follow-up time was 25 (6–30) months in both groups. The mean age of the patients was 49.3 ± 6.3 years. The mean body image scale scores were 5.3 ± 0.6 and 5.5 ± 1.2 in the LESS and CMPL groups, respectively (p = 0.268). The mean cosmesis and scar scale scores were significantly higher in the LESS group compared to the CMPL group (p = .011 and p < .001, respectively). Port-site hernia was detected in two patients in the LESS group, but not in the CMPL group. There was no cuff dehiscence in the LESS nor in the CMPL group. The LESS technique provides better cosmesis when compared with the CMPL technique. The body image perceptions in the two groups were similar. Women who wish to undergo the LESS surgery should be informed about the risk of incisional hernia.Impact statement What is already known on this subject? Short-term results of LESS hysterectomy such as complication rates, additional port requirement, conversion to CMPL or laparotomy, pain score and analgesic use were evaluated in various studies. Several studies have been published on the safety and efficacy of single-port laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH); however, it has been unclear whether single-port LH offers benefits over multiport LH regarding long-term patient satisfaction and cosmetic satisfaction. What do the results of this study add? In this prospective cohort study, we aimed to compare long-term results (at least six months) of abdominal incisional scar between LESS and CMPL surgery for hysterectomy. The LESS technique provides better cosmesis when compared with the CMPL technique, although, the body image perceptions in the two groups were similar. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? LESS technique can be offered as an option for hysterectomy since it provides better long-term cosmesis compared to CMPL

Subacute THYROiditis Related to SARS-CoV-2 VAccine and Covid-19 (THYROVAC Study): A Multicenter Nationwide Study.

Context The aims of the study are to compare characteristics of subacute thyroiditis (SAT) related to different etiologies, and to identify predictors of recurrence of SAT and incident hypothyroidism. Methods This nationwide, multicenter, retrospective cohort study included 53 endocrinology centers in Turkey. The study participants were divided into either COVID-19-related SAT (Cov-SAT), SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-related SAT (Vac-SAT), or control SAT (Cont-SAT) groups. Results Of the 811 patients, 258 (31.8%) were included in the Vac-SAT group, 98 (12.1%) in the Cov-SAT group, and 455 (56.1%) in the Cont-SAT group. No difference was found between the groups with regard to laboratory and imaging findings. SAT etiology was not an independent predictor of recurrence or hypothyroidism. In the entire cohort, steroid therapy requirement and younger age were statistically significant predictors for SAT recurrence. C-reactive protein measured during SAT onset, female sex, absence of antithyroid peroxidase (TPO) positivity, and absence of steroid therapy were statistically significant predictors of incident (early) hypothyroidism, irrespective of SAT etiology. On the other hand, probable predictors of established hypothyroidism differed from that of incident hypothyroidism. Conclusion Since there is no difference in terms of follow-up parameters and outcomes, COVID-19- and SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-related SAT can be treated and followed up like classic SATs. Recurrence was determined by younger age and steroid therapy requirement. Steroid therapy independently predicts incident hypothyroidism that may sometimes be transient in overall SAT and is also associated with a lower risk of established hypothyroidism