In a cross-sectional analysis of a case-control study in 2015, we revealed the association between increased arterial stiffness (pulse wave velocity) and aircraft noise exposure. In June 2020, we evaluated the long-term effects, and the impact of a sudden decline in noise exposure during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown, on blood pressure and pulse wave velocity, comparing 74 participants exposed to long-term day-evening-night aircraft noise level > 60 dB and 75 unexposed individuals. During the 5-year follow-up, the prevalence of hypertension increased in the exposed (42% versus 59%, P =0.048) but not in the unexposed group. The decline in noise exposure since April 2020 was accompanied with a significant decrease of noise annoyance, 24-hour systolic (121.2 versus 117.9 mm Hg; P =0.034) and diastolic (75.1 versus 72.0 mm Hg; P =0.003) blood pressure, and pulse wave velocity (10.2 versus 8.8 m/s; P =0.001) in the exposed group. Less profound decreases of these parameters were noticed in the unexposed group. Significant between group differences were observed for declines in office and night-time diastolic blood pressure and pulse wave velocity. Importantly, the difference in the reduction of pulse wave velocity between exposed and unexposed participants remained significant after adjustment for covariates (−1.49 versus −0.35 m/s; P =0.017). The observed difference in insomnia prevalence between exposed and unexposed individuals at baseline was no more significant at follow-up. Thus, long-term aircraft noise exposure may increase the prevalence of hypertension and accelerate arterial stiffening. However, even short-term noise reduction, as experienced during the COVID-19 lockdown, may reverse those unfavorable effects.

No abstract

Purpose Despite the improvement in treatment and prognosis of primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) over the last decades, the 5-year survival rate is approximately 30%; thus, new therapeutic approaches are needed to improve patient survival. The study’s aim was to evaluate the role of surgical resection of PCNSL. Methods Primary outcomes were the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with PCNSL who underwent surgical resection versus biopsy alone. The meta-analysis was conducted to calculate pooled hazard ratios (HRs) under a random-effects model for the time-to-event variables. The odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for binary, secondary outcome parameters. Results Seven studies (n = 1046) were included. We found that surgical resection was associated with significantly better OS (HR 0.63 [95% CI 0.51–0.77]) when compared with biopsy. PFS was also significantly improved (HR 0.64 [95% CI 0.49–0.85]) in patients who underwent resection compared with those who underwent biopsy. The heterogeneity for OS and PFS was low (I2 = 7% and 24%, respectively). We also found that patients who underwent biopsy more often had multiple (OR 0.38 [95% CI 0.19–0.79]) or deep-seated (OR 0.20 [95% CI 0.12–0.34]) lesions compared with those who underwent surgical resection. There were no significant differences in chemotherapy or radiotherapy use or the occurrence of postoperative complications between the two groups. Conclusion In selected patients, surgical resection of PCNSL is associated with significantly better overall survival and progression-free survival compared with biopsy alone.