Hofstede’s legacy and separate national responses to the Covid-19 crisis

Now that we need cross-cultural coordination more than ever, we seem to be failing the task, writes Tania Jai

Levamisole-induced leukocytoclastic vasculitis and neutropenia in a patient with cocaine use: An extensive case with necrosis of skin, soft tissue, and cartilage

Abstract Levamisole-induced vasculitis is a relatively new entity in people who use cocaine. We describe a 44-year-old woman with a history of cocaine use who presented with a complaint of a painful rash of 2-3 month’s duration on her extremities, cheeks, nose, and earlobes. She had not experienced fever, weight loss, alopecia, dry eyes, oral ulcers, photosensitivity, or arthralgia. Examination revealed tender purpuric eruptions with central necrosis on her nose, cheeks, earlobes, and extremities. Laboratory investigations revealed neutropenia, an elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), presence of lupus anticoagulant, low complement component 3 (C3), and presence of perinuclear anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (p-ANCA). A urine toxicology screen was positive for cocaine, and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry was positive for levamisole. Skin biopsy showed leukocytoclastic vasculitis and small vessel thrombosis. Necrotic lesions of the nose led to its self-amputation. Large bullae on the lower extremities ruptured, leading to wound infection and extensive necrosis that required multiple surgical debridements. When necrosis progressed despite debridement, bilateral above-knee amputation of the legs was performed. Once new lesions stopped appearing, the patient was discharged home. Two months later, she had a recurrence related to cocaine use. To the best of our knowledge, this is only the second reported case of levamisole-induced vasculitis that required above-knee amputation

Association between the choice of the conditioning regimen and outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for myelofibrosis

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) remains the only curative treatment for myelofibrosis. However, the optimal conditioning regimen either with reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) or myeloablative conditioning (MAC) is not well known. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database, we identified adults aged ≥18 years with myelofibrosis undergoing allo-HCT between 2008-2019 and analyzed the outcomes separately in the RIC and MAC cohorts based on the conditioning regimens used. Among 872 eligible patients, 493 underwent allo-HCT using RIC (Fludarabine/busulfan=166, Fludarabine/melphalan=327) and 379 using MAC (Fludarabine/busulfan=247, Busulfan/cyclophosphamide=132). In multivariable analysis with RIC, Fludarabine/melphalan was associated with inferior overall survival (HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.15-2.81, p=0.009), higher early non-relapse mortality (HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.12-2.91, p=0.01) and higher acute graft versus host disease (GVHD) (grade II-IV- HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.03-2.03, p=0.03; grade III-IV HR 2.21, 95%CI 1.28-3.83, p=0.004) compared to Fludarabine/busulfan. In the MAC setting, Busulfan/cyclophosphamide was associated with a higher acute GVHD (grade II-IV HR 2.33, 95% CI 1.67-3.25, p\u3c0.001; grade III-IV HR 2.31, 95% CI 1.52-3.52, p\u3c0.001) and inferior GVHD-free relapse-free survival (GRFS) (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.49-2.53, p\u3c0.001) as compared to Fludarabine/busulfan. Hence, our study suggests that Fludarabine/busulfan is associated with better outcomes in RIC (better overall survival, lower early non-relapse mortality, lower acute GVHD) and MAC (lower acute GVHD and better GRFS) in myelofibrosis

Correction to: Two years later: Is the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic still having an impact on emergency surgery? An international cross-sectional survey among WSES members

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is still ongoing and a major challenge for health care services worldwide. In the first WSES COVID-19 emergency surgery survey, a strong negative impact on emergency surgery (ES) had been described already early in the pandemic situation. However, the knowledge is limited about current effects of the pandemic on patient flow through emergency rooms, daily routine and decision making in ES as well as their changes over time during the last two pandemic years. This second WSES COVID-19 emergency surgery survey investigates the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on ES during the course of the pandemic. Methods: A web survey had been distributed to medical specialists in ES during a four-week period from January 2022, investigating the impact of the pandemic on patients and septic diseases both requiring ES, structural problems due to the pandemic and time-to-intervention in ES routine. Results: 367 collaborators from 59 countries responded to the survey. The majority indicated that the pandemic still significantly impacts on treatment and outcome of surgical emergency patients (83.1% and 78.5%, respectively). As reasons, the collaborators reported decreased case load in ES (44.7%), but patients presenting with more prolonged and severe diseases, especially concerning perforated appendicitis (62.1%) and diverticulitis (57.5%). Otherwise, approximately 50% of the participants still observe a delay in time-to-intervention in ES compared with the situation before the pandemic. Relevant causes leading to enlarged time-to-intervention in ES during the pandemic are persistent problems with in-hospital logistics, lacks in medical staff as well as operating room and intensive care capacities during the pandemic. This leads not only to the need for triage or transferring of ES patients to other hospitals, reported by 64.0% and 48.8% of the collaborators, respectively, but also to paradigm shifts in treatment modalities to non-operative approaches reported by 67.3% of the participants, especially in uncomplicated appendicitis, cholecystitis and multiple-recurrent diverticulitis. Conclusions: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic still significantly impacts on care and outcome of patients in ES. Well-known problems with in-hospital logistics are not sufficiently resolved by now; however, medical staff shortages and reduced capacities have been dramatically aggravated over last two pandemic years

The impact of immediate breast reconstruction on the time to delivery of adjuvant therapy: the iBRA-2 study

Background: Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is routinely offered to improve quality-of-life for women requiring mastectomy, but there are concerns that more complex surgery may delay adjuvant oncological treatments and compromise long-term outcomes. High-quality evidence is lacking. The iBRA-2 study aimed to investigate the impact of IBR on time to adjuvant therapy. Methods: Consecutive women undergoing mastectomy ± IBR for breast cancer July–December, 2016 were included. Patient demographics, operative, oncological and complication data were collected. Time from last definitive cancer surgery to first adjuvant treatment for patients undergoing mastectomy ± IBR were compared and risk factors associated with delays explored. Results: A total of 2540 patients were recruited from 76 centres; 1008 (39.7%) underwent IBR (implant-only [n = 675, 26.6%]; pedicled flaps [n = 105,4.1%] and free-flaps [n = 228, 8.9%]). Complications requiring re-admission or re-operation were significantly more common in patients undergoing IBR than those receiving mastectomy. Adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy was required by 1235 (48.6%) patients. No clinically significant differences were seen in time to adjuvant therapy between patient groups but major complications irrespective of surgery received were significantly associated with treatment delays. Conclusions: IBR does not result in clinically significant delays to adjuvant therapy, but post-operative complications are associated with treatment delays. Strategies to minimise complications, including careful patient selection, are required to improve outcomes for patients