Heat-shock proteins (HSPs) are a family of proteins that have received considerable attention over the last several years. They have been classified into six prominent families: high-molecular-mass HSP, 90, 70, 60, 40, and small heat shock proteins. HSPs participate in protein folding, stability, and maturation of several proteins during stress, such as in heat, oxidative stress, fever, and inflammation. Due to the immunogenic host’s role in the combat against cancer cells and the role of the inflammation in the cancer control or progression, abnormal expression of these proteins has been associated with many types of cancer, including esophagogastric cancer. This study aims to review all the evidence concerning the role of HSPs in the pathogenesis and prognosis of esophagogastric cancer and their potential role in future treatment options. This narrative review gathers scientific evidence concerning HSPs in relation to esophagus and gastric cancer. All esophagogastric cancer subtypes are included. The role of HSPs in carcinogenesis, prognostication, and therapy for esophagogastric cancer are discussed. The main topics covered are premalignant conditions for gastric cancer atrophic gastritis, Barrett esophagus, and some viral infections such as human papillomavirus (HPV) and Epstein–Barr virus (EBV). HSPs represent new perspectives on the development, prognostication, and treatment of esophagogastric cancer.

No abstract

This study aimed to review the outcomes of redo procedures for failed colorectal or coloanal anastomoses. Methods: A systematic review was performed using the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and LILACS databases (PROSPERO: CRD42021267715). The inclusion criteria were adult patients undergoing colectomy with primary colorectal or coloanal anastomosis and studies that assessed the postoperative results. Results: Eleven articles met the eligibility criteria and were selected. The studied population size ranged from 7 to 78 patients. The overall mortality rate was 0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%-0.01%). The postoperative complication rate was 40% (95% CI, 40%-50%). The length of hospital stay was 13.68 days (95% CI, 11.3-16.06 days). After redo surgery, 82% of the patients were free of stoma (95% CI, 75%-90%), and 24% of patients (95% CI, 0%-39%) had fecal incontinence. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (P = 0.002) was associated with a lower probability of being free of stoma in metaregression. Conclusion: Redo colorectal and coloanal anastomoses are strategies to restore colonic continuity. The decision to perform a redo operation should be based on a proper evaluation of the morbidity and mortality risks, the probability of remaining free of stoma, the quality of life, and a functional assessment.

Introduction To evaluate the possible effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the oncologic results of patients with prostate cancer regarding clinical staging, presence of adverse pathological outcomes, and perioperative complications. Materials and methods This retrospective study included patients who underwent radical prostatectomy. The time between biopsy and surgery, staging tests, final histopathological evaluation after surgery, lymphadenectomy rate, postoperative complications, and prostatic specific antigen (PSA) levels (initial and 30 days after surgery) were analyzed and compared in a group of patients before and during the pandemic period. Results We included 226 patients: 88 in the pre-pandemic period and 138 during the pandemic period. There was no statistically significant difference in mean age, body mass index, ASA, pathological locally advanced disease, the proportion of patients who underwent lymphadenectomy, and ISUP grade in the biopsy between the groups. Positive surgical margins, prostatic extracapsular extension, and PSA levels at 30 days were also similar between the groups. The mean time between medical consultation and surgery was longer in the pandemic period than in the pre-pandemic (124 vs. 107 days, p<0.001), and the mean time between biopsy and medical consultation (69.5 days vs. 114 days, p<0.001) and between biopsy and surgery (198.5 days vs. 228 days, p=0.013) was shorter during the pandemic. The incidence of severe early and late perioperative complications was similar between the periods. Conclusions There was no delay between diagnosis and treatment at our institution during the COVID-19 pandemic period. No worsening of the prostate cancer features was observed.