Differences in terms of presentation and outcomes between patients with lung cancer as opposed to other solid organ cancer after infection with SARS-CoV-2: protocol for a systematic review

Introduction Scholars believe that COVID-19 can be particularly lethal for patients with cancer. Some studies found that COVID-19 appears to be more lethal in patients with lung cancer than in other cancer patients. In order to take appropriate measures to balance a delay in lung cancer treatment against the risk for a potential COVID-19 exposure, we first need to know whether patients with lung cancer have special risks. We aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine differences in terms of presentation and outcomes between patients with lung cancer as opposed to other solid organ cancer after infection with SARS-CoV-2.Methods and analysis A comprehensive search of published original research studies will be performed in Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, WangFangData, CQVIP, COMPENDEX and CNKI. The medRxiv preprint server will also be searched for applicable studies (grey literature). Original research studies will be included if they include patients with: (A) laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and (B) confirmed solid cancer, and (C) measurable clinical presentation or outcome, such as mortality rate, intensive care unit admission rate, incidence of pneumonia. One author will conduct the electronic database searches, two authors will independently screen studies, two will extract data and two will assess study quality. If I² exceeds 60% for the pooled analysis, we will explore sources of heterogeneity in subgroups of studies. We will use fixed-effect, random-effects or mixed-effects models to estimate the relative risk or OR. If the data reporting allows, a subgroup analysis between non-small cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer patients will be performed.Ethics and dissemination The proposed study will not collect individual-level data and, therefore, does not require ethical approval. We will submit our findings to a peer-reviewed scientific journal and will disseminate results through presentations at international scientific conferences.PROSPERO registration number CRD42020190118

The effect of different screw-rod design on the anti-rotational torque: a biomechanical comparison of three conventional screw-rod constructs

Abstract Background Screw-rod constructs have been widely used to correct spinal deformities, but the effects of different screw-rod systems on anti-rotational torque have not been determined. This study aimed to analyze the biomechanical effect of different rod-screw constructs on anti-rotational torque. Methods Three conventional spinal screw-rod systems (Legacy, RF-F-10 and USSII) were used to test the anti-rotational torque in the material test machine. ANOVA was performed to evaluate the anti-rotational capacity of different pedicle screws-rod constructs. Results The anti-rotational torque of Legacy group, RF-F-10 group and USSII group were 12.3 ± 1.9 Nm, 6.8 ± 0.4 Nm, and 3.9 ± 0.8 Nm, with a P value lower than 0.05. This results indicated that the Legacy screws-rod construct could provide a highest anti-rotation capacity, which is 68% and 210% greater than RF-F-10 screw-rod construct and USSII screw-rod respectively. Conclusions The anti-rotational torque may be mainly affected by screw cap and groove design. Our result showed the anti-rotational torque are: Legacy system > RF-F-10 system > USSII system, suggesting that appropriate rod-screw constructs selection in surgery may be vital for anti-rotational torque improvement and preventing derotation correction loss