The effect of racemic gossypol and AT-101 on angiogenic profile of OVCAR-3 cells: a preliminary molecular framework for gossypol enantiomers

To compare the effect of racemic gossypol with its (–)/(–) enantiomer (AT-101) on expression profiles of angiogenic molecules by mRNA levels in human ovarian cancer cell line OVCAR-3. Methods: Cell viability assay (2,3-bis (2-methoxy-4-nitro-5- sulfophenyl)-5-[(phenylamino) carbonyl]-2H-tetrazolium hydroxide) was used to detect cytotoxicity of gossypol enantiomers. DNA fragmentation by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent (ELISA) assay was used to evaluate the rate of apoptosis. The mRNA expression levels of angiogenic molecules were investigated by Human Angiogenesis RT2 ProfilerTM PCR Array (SuperArray, Frederick, MD). Results: Both racemic form and AT-101 resulted in a significant cytotoxicity and induced apoptosis. This effect was observed in a dose- and time dependent manner. However, AT-101 was much more potent. In addition, the treatment of 10 μM of racemic gossypol alone and 3 μM of AT-101 alone resulted in significant down-regulation (≥ 3 fold) in mRNA levels of some pivotal angiogenic molecules in OVCAR-3, but altered gene profiles were different by the treatment of each enantiomer. Conclusion: The efficacy of two gossypol enantiomers in OVCAR-3 cells showed distinction. AT-101 was much more potent than racemic gossypol, not only by means of cell death and apoptosis, but also by modulation of angiogenic molecules released from OVCAR-3 cells. Further studies with endothelial cells should be done to verify the anti-angiogenic effect of gossypol enantiomers in cancer treatment

Acute diverticulitis in immunocompromised patients: evidence from an international multicenter observational registry (Web-based International Register of Emergency Surgery and Trauma, Wires-T)

Background: Immunocompromised patients with acute diverticulitis are at increased risk of morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to compare clinical presentations, types of treatment, and outcomes between immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients with acute diverticulitis. Methods: We compared the data of patients with acute diverticulitis extracted from the Web-based International Registry of Emergency Surgery and Trauma (WIRES-T) from January 2018 to December 2021. First, two groups were identified: medical therapy (A) and surgical therapy (B). Each group was divided into three subgroups: nonimmunocompromised (grade 0), mildly to moderately (grade 1), and severely immunocompromised (grade 2). Results: Data from 482 patients were analyzed—229 patients (47.5%) [M:F = 1:1; median age: 60 (24–95) years] in group A and 253 patients (52.5%) [M:F = 1:1; median age: 71 (26–94) years] in group B. There was a significant difference between the two groups in grade distribution: 69.9% versus 38.3% for grade 0, 26.6% versus 51% for grade 1, and 3.5% versus 10.7% for grade 2 (p < 0.00001). In group A, severe sepsis (p = 0.027) was more common in higher grades of immunodeficiency. Patients with grade 2 needed longer hospitalization (p = 0.005). In group B, a similar condition was found in terms of severe sepsis (p = 0.002), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score > 2 (p = 0.0002), and Mannheim Peritonitis Index (p = 0.010). A Hartmann’s procedure is mainly performed in grades 1–2 (p < 0.0001). Major complications increased significantly after a Hartmann’s procedure (p = 0.047). Mortality was higher in the immunocompromised patients (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Immunocompromised patients with acute diverticulitis present with a more severe clinical picture. When surgery is required, immunocompromised patients mainly undergo a Hartmann’s procedure. Postoperative morbidity and mortality are, however, higher in immunocompromised patients, who also require a longer hospital stay

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Outcomes from elective colorectal cancer surgery during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

This study aimed to describe the change in surgical practice and the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on mortality after surgical resection of colorectal cancer during the initial phases of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

AIM: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. METHODS: This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. RESULTS: Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. CONCLUSION: One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease

Physiological parameters for Prognosis in Abdominal Sepsis (PIPAS) Study : a WSES observational study

BackgroundTiming and adequacy of peritoneal source control are the most important pillars in the management of patients with acute peritonitis. Therefore, early prognostic evaluation of acute peritonitis is paramount to assess the severity and establish a prompt and appropriate treatment. The objectives of this study were to identify clinical and laboratory predictors for in-hospital mortality in patients with acute peritonitis and to develop a warning score system, based on easily recognizable and assessable variables, globally accepted.MethodsThis worldwide multicentre observational study included 153 surgical departments across 56 countries over a 4-month study period between February 1, 2018, and May 31, 2018.ResultsA total of 3137 patients were included, with 1815 (57.9%) men and 1322 (42.1%) women, with a median age of 47years (interquartile range [IQR] 28-66). The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 8.9%, with a median length of stay of 6days (IQR 4-10). Using multivariable logistic regression, independent variables associated with in-hospital mortality were identified: age > 80years, malignancy, severe cardiovascular disease, severe chronic kidney disease, respiratory rate >= 22 breaths/min, systolic blood pressure 4mmol/l. These variables were used to create the PIPAS Severity Score, a bedside early warning score for patients with acute peritonitis. The overall mortality was 2.9% for patients who had scores of 0-1, 22.7% for those who had scores of 2-3, 46.8% for those who had scores of 4-5, and 86.7% for those who have scores of 7-8.ConclusionsThe simple PIPAS Severity Score can be used on a global level and can help clinicians to identify patients at high risk for treatment failure and mortality.Peer reviewe

Reduced order modelling and controller design for boundary element discretised flow around cylinders

Available from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:DXN052551 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreSIGLEGBUnited Kingdo