WSES Jerusalem guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis

Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common cause of acute abdominal pain. Diagnosis of AA is challenging; a variable combination of clinical signs and symptoms has been used together with laboratory findings in several scoring systems proposed for suggesting the probability of AA and the possible subsequent management pathway. The role of imaging in the diagnosis of AA is still debated, with variable use of US, CT and MRI in different settings worldwide. Up to date, comprehensive clinical guidelines for diagnosis and management of AA have never been issued. In July 2015, during the 3rd World Congress of the WSES, held in Jerusalem (Israel), a panel of experts including an Organizational Committee and Scientific Committee and Scientific Secretariat, participated to a Consensus Conference where eight panelists presented a number of statements developed for each of the eight main questions about diagnosis and management of AA. The statements were then voted, eventually modified and finally approved by the participants to The Consensus Conference and lately by the board of co-authors. The current paper is reporting the definitive Guidelines Statements on each of the following topics: 1) Diagnostic efficiency of clinical scoring systems, 2) Role of Imaging, 3) Non-operative treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis, 4) Timing of appendectomy and in-hospital delay, 5) Surgical treatment 6) Scoring systems for intra-operative grading of appendicitis and their clinical usefulness 7) Non-surgical treatment for complicated appendicitis: abscess or phlegmon 8) Pre-operative and post-operative antibiotics.Peer reviewe

Laparoscopic appendectomy outcomes on the weekend and during the week are no different: A national study of 151,774 patients

10.1007/s00268-012-1550-zWorld Journal of Surgery3671527-1533WJSU

Safety and efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced penile cancer: report from the Global Society of Rare Genitourinary Tumors

Background: Treatment options for penile squamous cell carcinoma (PeCa) are limited. We sought to investigate clinical outcomes and safety profiles of patients with PeCa receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Methods: This retrospective study included patients with locally advanced or metastatic PeCa receiving ICIs during 2015-2022 across 24 centers in the United States, Europe, and Asia. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Objective response rates (ORRs) were determined per RECIST 1.1 criteria. Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) were graded per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. Two-sided statistical tests were used for comparisons. Results: Among 92 patients, 8 were Asian (8.7%), 6 (6.5%) were Black, and 24 (29%) were Hispanic/Latinx. Median age was 62 (inter-quartile range: 53 to 70) years. 83 (90%) had metastatic PeCa, and 74 (80%) received ≥2nd line treatment. Most patients received pembrolizumab monotherapy (n = 26, 28%), combination nivolumab/ipilimumab +/- multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (n = 23, 25%), nivolumab (n = 16, 17%) or cemiplimab (n = 15, 16%) monotherapies. Median OS and PFS were 9.8 (95% CI: 7.7-12.8) months and 3.2 (95% CI: 2.5-4.2) months, respectively. ORR was 13% (n = 11/85) in the overall cohort and 35% (n = 7/20) in patients with lymph node-only metastases. Visceral metastases, ECOG performance status ≥1, and higher Neutrophil/Lymphocyte ratio (NLR) were associated with worse OS. TrAEs occurred in 29% (n = 27) and 9.8% (n = 9) were grade ≥3. Conclusions: ICIs are active in a subset of patients with PeCa. Future translational studies are warranted to identify patients more likely to derive clinical benefit from ICIs