Explore the vast range of titles available.

The aim of the study was to investigate whether the COVID-19 pandemic and related measures had an influence on colorectal cancer (CRC) presentation, management, and outcomes; it was a retrospective monocentric study. CRC patients undergoing surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic (1 March 2020–28 February 2022) (group B) were compared with patients operated on in the previous two years (1 March 2018–29 February 2020) in the same unit (group A). The primary outcome was to investigate whether there were differences in concern regarding the stage at presentation, as a whole and after dividing groups based on cancer location (right colon cancer, left colon cancer, rectal cancer). Secondary outcomes included differences in the number of patients admitted from emergency departments and emergency surgeries between periods, and differences in the postoperative outcomes. A subanalysis within the pandemic group was conducted on the same outcomes, dividing the aforementioned group based on pandemic trends. Two hundred and eighty (280) were operated on during the study period: 147 in group A and 133 in group B. Stage at presentation was similar between groups; however, the subgroups analysis showed that in the pandemic group, the number of early-stage left colon cancer occurrences almost halves, yet not significantly. Emergency department referral was more common in group B (p-value: 0.003); in group B, they also had longer operations and there was a more frequent use of ostomy. No differences in the number of postoperative complications nor in the postoperative outcomes were found. Patients with CRC were more frequently referred through the emergency department during the COVID-19 pandemic and left-sided cancers appear to be generally diagnosed at a more advanced stage. Postoperative outcomes showed that high specialized colorectal units can deliver standard high-level treatment under high-pressure external conditions.

Background Although complete mesocolic excision (CME) is supposed to be associated with a higher lymph node (LN) yield, decreased local recurrence, and survival improvement, its implementation currently is debated because the evidence level of these data is rather low and still not supported by randomized controlled trials. Method This is a multicenter, randomized, superiority trial (NCT04871399). The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) was the primary end point of the study. The secondary end points were safety (duration of operation, perioperative complications, hospital length of stay), oncologic outcomes (number of LNs retrieved, 3- and 5-year overall survival, 5-year DFS), and surgery quality (specimen length, area and integrity rate of mesentery, length of ileocolic and middle-colic vessels). The trial design required the LN yield to be higher in the CME group at interim analysis. Results Interim data analysis is presented in this report. The study enrolled 258 patients in nine referral centers. The number of LNs retrieved was significantly higher after CME (25 vs. 20; p = 0.012). No differences were observed with respect to intra- or post-operative complications, postoperative mortality, or duration of surgery. The hospital stay was even shorter after CME ( p = 0.039). Quality of surgery indicators were higher in the CME arm of the study. Survival data still were not available. Conclusions Interim data show that CME for right colon cancer in referral centers is safe and feasible and does not increase perioperative complications. The study documented with evidence that quality of surgery and LN yield are higher after CME, and this is essential for continuation of patient recruitment and implementation of an optimal comparison. Trial registration The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with the code NCT04871399 and with the acronym CoME-In trial.

Purpose Routine use of abdominal drain or prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis is no longer part of current clinical practice in colorectal surgery. Nevertheless, in patients undergoing laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA), it may reduce perioperative abdominal contamination. Furthermore, in cancer patients, prolonged surgery with extensive dissection such as central vascular ligation and complete mesocolon excision with D3 lymphadenectomy (altogether radical right colectomy RRC) is called responsible for affecting postoperative ileus. The aim was to evaluate postoperative resumption of gastrointestinal functions in patients undergoing right hemicolectomy for cancer with ICA and standard D2 dissection or RRC, with or without abdominal drain and prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis. Methods Monocentric factorial parallel arm randomized pilot trial including all consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic right hemicolectomy and ICA for cancer, in 20 months. Patients were randomized on a 1:1:1 ratio to receive abdominal drain, prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis or neither (I level), and 1:1 to receive RRC or D2 colectomy (II level). Patients were not blinded. The primary aim was the resumption of gastrointestinal functions (time to first gas and stool, time to tolerated fluids and food). Secondary aims were length of stay and complications’ rate. ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT04977882. Results Fifty-seven patients were screened; according to sample size, 36 were randomized, 12 for each arm for postoperative management, and 18 for each arm according to surgical techniques. A difference in time to solid diet favored the group without drain or antibiotic independently from standard or RRC. Furthermore, when patients were divided with respect to surgical technique and into matched cohorts, no differences were seen for primary and secondary outcomes. Conclusion Abdominal drainage and prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing right hemicolectomy for cancer with ICA seem to negatively affect the resumption of a solid diet after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with ICA for cancer. RRC does not seem to influence gastrointestinal function recovery.

Introduction The concept of “weekend effect”, that is, substandard healthcare during weekends, has never been fully demonstrated, and the different outcomes of emergency surgical patients admitted during weekends may be due to different conditions at admission and/or different therapeutic approaches. Aim of this international audit was to identify any change of pattern of emergency surgical admissions and treatments during weekends. Furthermore, we aimed at investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the alleged “weekend effect”. Methods The database of the CovidICE-International Study was interrogated, and 6263 patients were selected for analysis. Non-trauma, 18+ yo patients admitted to 45 emergency surgery units in Europe in the months of March–April 2019 and March–April 2020 were included. Demographic and clinical data were anonymised by the referring centre and centrally collected and analysed with a statistical package. This study was endorsed by the Association of Italian Hospital Surgeons (ACOI) and the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES). Results Three-quarters of patients have been admitted during workdays and only 25.7% during weekends. There was no difference in the distribution of gender, age, ASA class and diagnosis during weekends with respect to workdays. The first wave of the COVID pandemic caused a one-third reduction of emergency surgical admission both during workdays and weekends but did not change the relation between workdays and weekends. The treatment was more often surgical for patients admitted during weekends, with no difference between 2019 and 2020, and procedures were more often performed by open surgery. However, patients admitted during weekends had a threefold increased risk of laparoscopy-to-laparotomy conversion (1% vs. 3.4%). Hospital stay was longer in patients admitted during weekends, but those patients had a lower risk of readmission. There was no difference of the rate of rescue surgery between weekends and workdays. Subgroup analysis revealed that interventional procedures for hot gallbladder were less frequently performed on patients admitted during weekends. Conclusions Our analysis revealed that demographic and clinical profiles of patients admitted during weekends do not differ significantly from workdays, but the therapeutic strategy may be different probably due to lack of availability of services and skillsets during weekends. The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic did not impact on this difference.

In two 16-week, placebo-controlled trials enrolling adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, dupilumab, a human monoclonal antibody against interleukin-4 receptor alpha, was effective in controlling the signs and symptoms of atopic dermatitis. Atopic dermatitis is a chronic, relapsing inflammatory skin disease that is characterized by the up-regulation of type 2 immune responses (including those involving type 2 helper T cells), 1 , 2 an impaired skin barrier, and increased Staphylococcus aureus colonization. 3 , 4 In patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, skin lesions can encompass a large body-surface area and are frequently accompanied by intense, persistent pruritus, which leads to sleep deprivation, symptoms of anxiety or depression, and a poor quality of life. 5 – 7 For patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, topical therapies have limited efficacy, and systemic treatments are associated with substantial toxic effects. Thus, there . . .

Treatment of uncontrolled asthma with dupilumab, an anti–interleukin-4 and anti–interleukin-13 receptor monoclonal antibody, in addition to usual therapy, led to a rate of severe exacerbations that was approximately 50% lower than the rate with placebo.

Patients who used oral glucocorticoids for asthma were able to reduce the dose of treatment more successfully when dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting signaling through the interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 receptor, was added to their regimen than when placebo was added.

Dupilumab (an anti-interleukin-4-receptor-α monoclonal antibody) blocks signalling of interleukin 4 and interleukin 13, type 2/Th2 cytokines implicated in numerous allergic diseases ranging from asthma to atopic dermatitis. Previous 16-week monotherapy studies showed that dupilumab substantially improved signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis with acceptable safety, validating the crucial role of interleukin 4 and interleukin 13 in atopic dermatitis pathogenesis. We aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of dupilumab with medium-potency topical corticosteroids versus placebo with topical corticosteroids in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. In this 1-year, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (LIBERTY AD CHRONOS), adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis and inadequate response to topical corticosteroids were enrolled at 161 hospitals, clinics, and academic institutions in 14 countries in Europe, Asia-Pacific, and North America. Patients were randomly assigned (3:1:3) to subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg once weekly (qw), dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (q2w), or placebo via a central interactive voice/web response system, stratified by severity and global region. All three groups were given concomitant topical corticosteroids with or without topical calcineurin inhibitors where inadvisable for topical corticosteroids. Topical corticosteroids could be tapered, stopped, or restarted on the basis of disease activity. Coprimary endpoints were patients (%) achieving Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0/1 and 2-point or higher improvement from baseline, and Eczema Area and Severity Index 75% improvement from baseline (EASI-75) at week 16. Week 16 efficacy and week 52 safety analyses included all randomised patients; week 52 efficacy included patients who completed treatment by US regulatory submission cutoff. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02260986. Between Oct 3, 2014, and July 31, 2015, 740 patients were enrolled: 319 were randomly assigned to dupilumab qw plus topical corticosteroids, 106 to dupilumab q2w plus topical corticosteroids, and 315 to placebo plus topical corticosteroids. 623 (270, 89, and 264, respectively) were evaluable for week 52 efficacy. At week 16, more patients who received dupilumab plus topical corticosteroids achieved the coprimary endpoints of IGA 0/1 (39% [125 patients] who received dupilumab plus topical corticosteroids qw and 39% [41 patients] who received dupilumab q2w plus topical corticosteroids vs 12% [39 patients] who received placebo plus topical corticosteroids; p<0·0001) and EASI-75 (64% [204] and 69% [73] vs 23% [73]; p<0·0001). Week 52 results were similar. Adverse events were reported in 261 (83%) patients who received dupilumab qw plus topical corticosteroids, 97 (88%) patients who received dupilumab q2w, and 266 (84%) patients who received placebo, and serious adverse events in nine (3%), four (4%), and 16 (5%) patients, respectively. No significant dupilumab-induced laboratory abnormalities were noted. Injection-site reactions and conjunctivitis were more common in patients treated with dupilumab plus topical corticosteroids-treated patients than in patients treated with placebo plus topical corticosteroids. Dupilumab added to standard topical corticosteroid treatment for 1 year improved atopic dermatitis signs and symptoms, with acceptable safety. Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Patients receiving a long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) and inhaled glucocorticoid for asthma were given dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody to part of the IL-4 receptor, with the LABA and inhaled glucocorticoid withdrawn. There were fewer exacerbations with dupilumab than with placebo. Recent estimates suggest that 24.6 million people in the United States, or 8.2% of the population, have received a diagnosis of asthma. 1 Despite therapy with inhaled glucocorticoids and long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs), the disease is not adequately controlled in 10 to 20% of patients 2 ; these patients are at risk for poor clinical outcomes, and the cost of their care contributes substantially to the economic burden of asthma. 3 – 5 The mechanisms underlying this inadequate control remain poorly understood. The clinical syndrome of persistent, moderate-to-severe asthma is increasingly recognized as comprising various phenotypes. 6 Data indicate that inflammatory processes associated with type 2 . . .