IMPORTANCE There are limited data on mortality and complications rates in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who undergo surgery. OBJECTIVE To evaluate early surgical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 in different subspecialties. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This matched cohort study conducted in the general, vascular and thoracic surgery, orthopedic, and neurosurgery units of Spedali Civili Hospital (Brescia, Italy) included patients who underwent surgical treatment from February 23 to April 1, 2020, and had positive test results for COVID-19 either before or within 1 week after surgery. Gynecological and minor surgical procedures were excluded. Patients with COVID-19 were matched with patients without COVID-19 with a 1:2 ratio for sex, age group, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and comorbidities recorded in the surgical risk calculator of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Patients older than 65 years were also matched for the Clinical Frailty Scale score. EXPOSURES Patients with positive results for COVID-19 and undergoing surgery vs matched surgical patients without infection. Screening for COVID-19 was performed with reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction assay in nasopharyngeal swabs, chest radiography, and/or computed tomography. Diagnosis of COVID-19 was based on positivity of at least 1 of these investigations. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end point was early surgical mortality and complications in patients with COVID-19; secondary end points were the modeling of complications to determine the importance of COVID-19 compared with other surgical risk factors. RESULTS Of 41 patients (of 333 who underwent operation during the same period) who underwent mainly urgent surgery, 33 (80.5%) had positive results for COVID-19 preoperatively and 8 (19.5%) had positive results within 5 days from surgery. Of the 123 patients of the combined cohorts (78 women [63.4%]; mean [SD] age, 76.6 [14.4] years), 30-day mortality was significantly higher for those with COVID-19 compared with control patients without COVID-19 (odds ratio [OR], 9.5; 95% CI, 1.77-96.53). Complications were also significantly higher (OR, 4.98; 95% CI, 1.81-16.07); pulmonary complications were the most common (OR, 35.62; 95% CI, 9.34-205.55), but thrombotic complications were also significantly associated with COVID-19 (OR, 13.2; 95% CI, 1.48-ϱ). Different models (cumulative link model and classification tree) identified COVID-19 as the main variable associated with complications. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this matched cohort study, surgical mortality and complications were higher in patients with COVID-19 compared with patients without COVID-19. These data suggest that, whenever possible, surgery should be postponed in patients with COVID-19.

In acute cholecystitis, post-operative morbidity, mortality and hospital stay were reduced by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Moreover pneumonia and wound infection rate were reduced by LC. Severe hemorrhage and bile leakage rates were not influenced by the technique. Cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis should be attempted laparoscopically first.

Bile duct injury (BDI) is a dangerous complication of cholecystectomy, with significant postoperative sequelae for the patient in terms of morbidity, mortality, and long-term quality of life. BDIs have an estimated incidence of 0.4–1.5%, but considering the number of cholecystectomies performed worldwide, mostly by laparoscopy, surgeons must be prepared to manage this surgical challenge. Most BDIs are recognized either during the procedure or in the immediate postoperative period. However, some BDIs may be discovered later during the postoperative period, and this may translate to delayed or inappropriate treatments. Providing a specific diagnosis and a precise description of the BDI will expedite the decision-making process and increase the chance of treatment success. Subsequently, the choice and timing of the appropriate reconstructive strategy have a critical role in long-term prognosis. Currently, a wide spectrum of multidisciplinary interventions with different degrees of invasiveness is indicated for BDI management. These World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) guidelines have been produced following an exhaustive review of the current literature and an international expert panel discussion with the aim of providing evidence-based recommendations to facilitate and standardize the detection and management of BDIs during cholecystectomy. In particular, the 2020 WSES guidelines cover the following key aspects: (1) strategies to minimize the risk of BDI during cholecystectomy; (2) BDI rates in general surgery units and review of surgical practice; (3) how to classify, stage, and report BDI once detected; (4) how to manage an intraoperatively detected BDI; (5) indications for antibiotic treatment; (6) indications for clinical, biochemical, and imaging investigations for suspected BDI; and (7) how to manage a postoperatively detected BDI.

BackgroundMinimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) was introduced in the attempt to improve the outcomes of the open approach. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) was first reported by Gagner and Pomp (Surg Endosc 8:408–410, 1994). Unfortunately, due to its complexity and technical demand, LPD never reached widespread popularity. Since it was first performed by P. C. Giulianotti in 2001, Robotic PD (RPD) has been gaining ground among surgeons. MIPD is included as a surgical option in the latest NCCN Guidelines. However, lack of surgical standardization, however, has limited the reproducibility of MIPD and made the acquisition of the technique by other surgeons difficult. We provide an accurate description of our standardized step-by-step RDP technique.MethodsWe took advantage of our 15-year long experience and > 150 cases performed to provide a step-by-step guidance of our RPD standardized technique. The description includes practical “tips and tricks” to facilitate the learning curve and assist with the teaching/evaluation process.Results17 surgical steps were identified as key components of the RPD procedure. The steps reflect the subdivision of the RPD into several parts which help to understand a strategy that takes into accounts specific anatomical landmarks and the demands of the robotic platform.ConclusionsStandardization is a key element of the learning curve of RPD. It can potentially provide consistent, reproducible results that can be more easily evaluated. Despite promising results, full acceptance of RPD as the ‘gold standard’ is still work in progress. Randomized-controlled trials with the application of a standardized technique are necessary to better define the role of RPD.

Background Primary hyperparathyroidism is an endocrine pathology that affects calcium metabolism. Patients with primary hyperparathyroidism have high concentrations of serum calcium or high concentrations of parathyroid hormone, or incorrect parathyroid hormone levels for serum calcium values. Primary hyperparathyroidism is due to the presence of an adenoma/single-gland disease in 80–85%. Multiple gland disease or hyperplasia accounts for 10–15% of cases of primary hyperparathyroidism. Atypical parathyroid adenoma and parathyroid carcinoma are both responsible for about 1.2–1.3% and 1% or less of primary hyperparathyroidism, respectively. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study and enrolled 117 patients with primary hyperparathyroidism undergoing minimally invasive parathyroidectomy. Histological and immunohistochemical examination showed that 107 patients (91.5%) were diagnosed with typical adenoma (group A), while 10 patients (8.5%) were diagnosed with atypical parathyroid adenoma (group B). None of the patients were affected by parathyroid carcinoma. Results Significant statistical differences were found in histological and immunohistochemical parameters as pseudocapsular invasion (p <  0.001), bands of fibrosis (p <  0.001), pronounced trabecular growth (p <  0.001), mitotic rates of > 1/10 high-power fields (HPFs) (p <  0.001), nuclear pleomorphism (p = 0.036), thick capsule (p <  0.001), Ki-67+ > 4% (p <  0.001), galectin-3 + (p = 0.002), and protein gene product (PGP) 9.5 + (p = 0.038). Conclusions Atypical parathyroid adenoma is a tumor that has characteristics both of typical adenoma and parathyroid carcinoma. The diagnosis is reached by excluding with strict methods the presence of malignancy criteria. Atypical parathyroid adenoma compared to typical adenoma showed significant clinical, hematochemical, histological, and immunohistochemical differences. We did not find any disease relapse in the 10 patients with atypical parathyroid adenoma during 60 months of follow-up time.