Background The Fontan procedure has been applied in many patients with single-ventricle physiology, with quite low mortality rates all over the world, and a 8.6%–9.1% rate in Indonesia. Structural and characteristic differences in the morphologically left and right ventricles influence the role of the systemic ventricle in the functionally univentricular heart and impact on postoperative outcomes. Mid- and long-term survival based on systemic ventricle morphology remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the impact of systemic ventricle morphology on ten-year survival after the Fontan procedure. Methods The 162 patients who underwent a Fontan operation at our institution between 2008 and February 2018 and survived to discharge were reviewed and followed up until March 2018. Data were extracted from the registry and pediatric surgical conferences, medical records, surgery reports, echocardiography and catheterization reports, and follow-up to the end of the study period. Median follow-up was 26.5 months (range 10.75–54 months). Results The patients were divided into 2 groups based on systemic ventricle morphology. Seventy-four patients were included in the left morphology group and 88 in the right morphology group. There was no difference in 10-year survival rates between the two type of systemic ventricle morphology. Postoperative thromboembolic events influenced the 10-year survival rate after the Fontan procedure (hazard ratio 4.84, 95% confidence interval: 1.26–18.55, p = 0.021). Conclusion Systemic ventricle morphology was not associated with the 10-year survival rate after the Fontan procedure. Postoperative thromboembolic events accounted for a 4.84-times higher mortality risk after the Fontan procedure.

Background To date, no recommendations have been published on when and how to start again carrying out elective, non-urgent surgery on COVID-19-negative patients after the epidemic peak has been reached in a given country or region and the pressure on healthcare facilities, healthcare workers and resources has been released by so far that elective surgery procedures can be safely and ethically programmed again. This study aims to investigate whether elective orthopaedic surgery will increase the risk of developing COVID-19. Materials and methods This was a combined retrospective and prospective studies performed at a national tertiary hospital in Jakarta, Indonesia. Subjects were patients who underwent elective orthopaedic surgeries at our institution from April to May 2020. Those who were previously infected with COVID-19 from polymerase chain reaction (PCR) reverse transcriptase (RT) examination obtained via nasopharynx and oropharynx swab, as well as those who were reluctant to participate were excluded from the study. Results A total of 35 subjects (mean age 32.89 ± 17.42) were recruited. Fifteen (42.9%) subjects were male, and 20 subjects (57.1%) were female. Mean duration of surgery was 240 min with the longest and shortest duration of 690 and 40 min, respectively. General anaesthesia was performed in the majority of cases in 18 surgeries (51.4%) with local anaesthesia as the least in 2 surgeries (5.7%). Length of stay of our study was 6 days of average. None of the patients developed symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 infection. Conclusion We found that elective orthopaedic surgery may not be associated with increased cases of COVID-19 cases. However, our study was limited by short duration of follow-up. Further studies are required in order to investigate the affect of undergoing elective surgery and the number of COVID-19 cases.

Background: Heart failure remains a considerable burden to healthcare in Asia. Early intervention, mainly using echocardiography, to assess cardiac function is crucial. However, due to limited resources and time, the procedure has become more challenging during the COVID-19 pandemic. On the other hand, studies have shown that artificial intelligence (AI) is highly potential in complementing the work of clinicians to diagnose heart failure accurately and rapidly. Methods: We systematically searched Europe PMC, ProQuest, Science Direct, PubMed, and IEEE following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and our inclusion and exclusion criteria. The 14 selected works of literature were then assessed for their quality and risk of bias using the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies). Results: A total of 2105 studies were retrieved, and 14 were included in the analysis. Five studies posed risks of bias. Nearly all studies included datasets in the form of 3D (three dimensional) or 2D (two dimensional) images, along with apical four-chamber (A4C) and apical two-chamber (A2C) being the most common echocardiography views used. The machine learning algorithm for each study differs, with the convolutional neural network as the most common method used. The accuracy varies from 57% to 99.3%. Conclusions: To conclude, current evidence suggests that the application of AI leads to a better and faster diagnosis of left heart failure through echocardiography. However, the presence of clinicians is still irreplaceable during diagnostic processes and overall clinical care; thus, AI only serves as complementary assistance for clinicians.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant morbidity and mortality worldwide, especially among health-care workers. One of the most important preventive measures is vaccination. This study examined factors associated with the incidence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection after mRNA-1273 booster vaccination (preceded by the CoronaVac primary vaccination) and the antibody profile of health-care workers at one of the tertiary hospitals in Indonesia. This was a combined retrospective cohort and cross-sectional study. Three hundred health-care workers who were given the mRNA-1273 booster vaccine a minimum of 5 months prior to this study were randomly selected. Participants were then interviewed about their history of COVID-19 vaccination, history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and comorbidities. Blood samples were taken to assess IgG sRBD antibody levels. The median antibody level was found to be 659 BAU/mL (min 37 BAU/mL, max 5680 BAU/mL, QIR 822 BAU/mL) after the booster, and this was not related to age, sex, comorbidities, or adverse events following immunization (AEFI) after the booster. SARS-CoV-2 infection after the booster was correlated with higher antibody levels. In sum, 56 participants (18.6%) experienced SARS-CoV-2 infection after the mRNA-1273 booster vaccination within 5 months. Incidence per person per month was 3.2%. Age, sex, diabetes mellitus type 2, hypertension, obesity, and post-booster AEFI were not related to COVID-19 incidence after the booster. History of SARS-CoV-2 infection before the booster vaccination was significantly associated with a reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection after booster vaccination, with a relative risk (RR) of 0.21 (95% CI 0.09–0.45, p < 0.001).