Background The Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak originating in Wuhan, China, has raised global health concerns and the pandemic has now been reported on all inhabited continents. Hitherto, no antiviral drug is available to combat this viral outbreak. Methods Keeping in mind the urgency of the situation, the current study was designed to devise new strategies for drug discovery and/or repositioning against SARS-CoV-2. In the current study, RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp), which regulates viral replication, is proposed as a potential therapeutic target to inhibit viral infection. Results Evolutionary studies of whole-genome sequences of SARS-CoV-2 represent high similarity (> 90%) with other SARS viruses. Targeting the RdRp active sites, ASP760 and ASP761, by antiviral drugs could be a potential therapeutic option for inhibition of coronavirus RdRp, and thus viral replication. Target-based virtual screening and molecular docking results show that the antiviral Galidesivir and its structurally similar compounds have shown promise against SARS-CoV-2. Conclusions The anti-polymerase drugs predicted here—CID123624208 and CID11687749—may be considered for in vitro and in vivo clinical trials.

Four randomized trials encompassing 449 patients of non-palpable breast cancer undergoing with radio-guided occult lesion localization (ROLL) or wire guided localization (WGL). In the fixed effects model, accurate localization, peri-procedural complications, and reoperation rate were comparable between two techniques. Risk of having positive resection margins following WGL was higher. Duration of localization and surgical excision was shorter for ROLL. Volume and weight of the excised occult breast lesion was similar in WGL and ROLL groups.

INTRODUCTIONThe aim of this review was to systemically analyse trials evaluating the efficacy of routine on-table cholangiography (R-OTC) versus no on-table cholangiography (N-OTC) in patients undergoing cholecystectomy.METHODSRandomised trials evaluating R-OTC versus N-OTC in patients undergoing cholecystectomy were selected and analysed.RESULTSFour trials (1 randomised controlled trial on open cholecystectomy and 3 on laparoscopic cholecystectomy) encompassing 860 patients undergoing cholecystectomy with and without R-OTC were retrieved. There were 427 patients in the R-OTC group and 433 patients in the N-OTC group. There was no significant heterogeneity among trials. Therefore, in the fixed effects model, N-OTC did not increase the risk (p=0.53) of common bile duct (CBD) injury, and it was associated with shorter operative time (p<0.00001) and fewer peri-operative complications (p<0.04). R-OTC was superior in terms of peri-operative CBD stone detection (p<0.006) and it reduced readmission (p<0.03) for retained CBD stones.CONCLUSIONSN-OTC is associated with shorter operative time and fewer peri-operative complications, and it is comparable to R-OTC in terms of CBD injury risk during cholecystectomy. R-OTC is helpful for peri-operative CBD stone detection and there is therefore reduced readmission for retained CBD stones. The N-OTC approach may be adopted routinely for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy providing there are no clinical, biochemical or radiological features suggestive of CBD stones. However, a major multicentre randomised controlled trial is required to validate this conclusion.

No abstract