The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was initially seen in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. World Health Organization classified COVID-19 as a pandemic after its rapid spread worldwide in a few months. With the pandemic, all elective surgeries and non-emergency procedures have been postponed in our country, as in others. Most of the endocrine operations can be postponed for a certain period. However, it must be kept in mind that these patients also need surgical treatment, and the delay time should not cause a negative effect on the surgical outcome or disease process. It has recently been suggested that elective surgical interventions can be described as medically necessary, time-sensitive (MeNTS) procedures. Some guidelines have been published on proper and safe surgery for both the healthcare providers and the patients after the immediate onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. We should know that these guidelines and recommendations are not meant to constitute a position statement, the standard of care, or evidence-based/best practice. However, these are mostly the opinions of a selected group of surgeons. Generally, only life-threatening emergency operations should be performed in the stage where the epidemic exceeds the capacity of the hospitals (first stage), cancer and transplantation surgery should be initiated when the outbreak begins to be controlled (second stage), and surgery for elective cases should be performed in a controlled manner with suppression of the outbreak (third stage). In this rapidly developing pandemic period, the plans and recommendations to be made on this subject are based on expert opinions by considering factors, such as the course and biology of the disease, rather than being evidence-based. In the recent reports of many endocrine surgery associations and in various reviews, it has been stated that most of the cases can be postponed to the third stage of the epidemic. We aimed to evaluate the risk reduction strategies and recommendations that can help plan the surgery, prepare for surgery, protect both patients and healthcare workers during the operation and care for the patients in the postoperative period in endocrine surgery.

The findings of the present study suggest that SILA is as safe as conventional transabdominal laparoscopic adrenalectomy. Furthermore, SILA is associated with less pain and better cosmesis than the conventional laparoscopic procedure.

Although this is a limited case series, it demonstrates the potential feasibility of RFA for HPT. Benefits were achieved particularly in patients with small parathyroid lesions.

Objective: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been described in 1983, and its superiority over open appendectomy (OA) is still being debated. Currently, there is no agreement on the advantages of LA. Postoperative pain is reported to be lower along with a faster return to normal activities in LA. However, some studies do not support these findings. In our study, we aimed to compare the outcomes and cost effectiveness of LA and OA. Material and Methods:Patients were prospectively randomized into LA (31 patients) and OA (32 patients) groups. Demographic data, pre-and postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, white blood cell (WBC) count, duration of surgery and hospitalization, complications, and pain scores (VAS) were recorded. Cost was calculated for both groups. Return to normal activities was evaluated by phone calls at the first and second week and 1 month after surgery.Results: There was a significant postoperative decrease in WBC count in the LA group (p<0.01). There were no differences between LA and OA groups in terms of postoperative CRP levels (p>0.05). The rates of wound infection and abscess were similar (p>0.05), while post-operative pain and time to return to normal activities were higher in the OA group (p<0.01). There was a positive correlation between BMI and operative time in the LA group (p<0.01), while BMI and operative time did not show a correlation in the OA group (p>0,05). The average cost in the LA and OA groups were 1960.5±339.05 and 687.115±159.5 TL, respectively. Conclusion:LA is an effective method in the treatment of acute appendicitis due to less pain and faster recovery. LA can be the choice of treatment in acute appendicitis, with utilization of re-useable and cheaper vascular sealing devices.

FVPTC is a common subtype of PTC and has a higher rate of multicentricity with bilobar involvement. Although aggressive histopathologic features, such as thyroid capsule invasion, extrathyroidal extension, and lymph node metastasis, are significantly more frequent in CPTC than in FVPTC, the long-term outcome is similar in both subtypes after appropriate initial surgery and postoperative RAI ablation treatment.

No abstract

We believe that antibiotic prophylaxis is necessary in patients scheduled for Karydakis flap repair. In our study, TCS tended to be associated with a lower rate of infection, but this trend did not achieve statistical significance. Anaerobic micro-organisms dominated the infective isolates.

No abstract