SARS-CoV-2 causes secretory diarrhea with an enterotoxin-like mechanism, which is reduced by diosmectite.

Background and aims: The pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2-associated diarrhea is unknown. Using an experimental model validated for rotavirus-induced diarrhea, we investigated the effects of SARS-CoV-2 on transepithelial ion fluxes and epithelial integrity of human intestinal cells. The effect of the antidiarrheal agent diosmectite on secretion was also evaluated following its inclusion in COVID-19 management protocols. Methods: We evaluated electrical parameters (intensity of short-circuit current [Isc] and transepithelial electrical resistance [TEER]) in polarized Caco-2 cells and in colonic specimens mounted in Ussing chambers after exposure to heat-inactivated (hi) SARS-CoV-2 and spike protein. Spectrofluorometry was used to measure reactive oxygen species (ROS), a marker of oxidative stress. Experiments were repeated after pretreatment with diosmectite, an antidiarrheal drug used in COVID-19 patients. Results: hiSARS-CoV-2 induced an increase in Isc when added to the mucosal (but not serosal) side of Caco-2 cells. The effect was inhibited in the absence of chloride and calcium and by the mucosal addition of the Ca2+-activated Cl- channel inhibitor A01, suggesting calcium-dependent chloride secretion. Spike protein had a lower, but similar, effect on Isc. The findings were consistent when repeated in human colonic mucosa specimens. Neither hiSARS-CoV-2 nor spike protein affected TEER, indicating epithelial integrity; both increased ROS production. Pretreatment with diosmectite inhibited the secretory effect and significantly reduced ROS of both hiSARS-CoV-2 and spike protein. Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 induces calcium-dependent chloride secretion and oxidative stress without damaging intestinal epithelial structure. The effects are largely induced by the spike protein and are significantly reduced by diosmectite. SARS-CoV-2 should be added to the list of human enteric pathogens.

Smoke Evacuation During Laparoscopic Surgery: A Problem Beyond the COVID-19 Period. A Quantitative Analysis of CO2 Environmental Dispersion Using Different Devices.

Background. The COVID-19 pandemic leads to several debates regarding the possible risk for healthcare professionals during surgery. SAGES and EAES raised the issue of the transmission of infection through the surgical smoke during laparoscopy. They recommended the use of smoke evacuation devices (SEDs) with CO2 filtering systems. The aim of the present study is to compare the efficacy of different SEDs evaluating the CO2 environmental dispersion in the operating theater. Methods. We prospectively evaluated the data of 4 group of patients on which we used different SEDs or standard trocars: AIRSEAL system (S1 group), a homemade device (S2 group), an AIRSEAL system + homemade device (S3 group), and with standard trocars and without SED (S4 group). Quantitative analysis of CO2 environmental dispersion was carried out associated to the following data in order to evaluate the pneumoperitoneum variations: a preset insufflation pressure, real intraoperative pneumoperitoneum pressure, operative time, total volume of insufflated CO2, and flow rate index. Results. 16 patients were prospectively enrolled. The [CO2] mean value was 711 ppm, 641 ppm, 593 ppm, and 761 ppm in S1, S2, S3, and S4 groups, respectively. The comparison between data of all groups showed statistically significant differences in the measured ambient CO2 concentration. Conclusion. All tested SEDs seem to be useful to reduce the CO2 environmental dispersion respect to the use of standard trocars. The association of AIRSEAL system and a homemade device seems to be the best solution combining an adequate smoke evacuation and a stable pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic surgery.

Changes in surgicaL behaviOrs dUring the CoviD-19 pandemic. The SICE CLOUD19 Study.

BACKGROUND: The spread of the SARS-CoV2 virus, which causes COVID-19 disease, profoundly impacted the surgical community. Recommendations have been published to manage patients needing surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. This survey, under the aegis of the Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery, aims to analyze how Italian surgeons have changed their practice during the pandemic. METHODS: The authors designed an online survey that was circulated for completion to the Italian departments of general surgery registered in the Italian Ministry of Health database in December 2020. Questions were divided into three sections: hospital organization, screening policies, and safety profile of the surgical operation. The investigation periods were divided into the Italian pandemic phases I (March-May 2020), II (June-September 2020), and III (October-December 2020). RESULTS: Of 447 invited departments, 226 answered the survey. Most hospitals were treating both COVID-19-positive and -negative patients. The reduction in effective beds dedicated to surgical activity was significant, affecting 59% of the responding units. 12.4% of the respondents in phase I, 2.6% in phase II, and 7.7% in phase III reported that their surgical unit had been closed. 51.4%, 23.5%, and 47.8% of the respondents had at least one colleague reassigned to non-surgical COVID-19 activities during the three phases. There has been a reduction in elective (> 200 procedures: 2.1%, 20.6% and 9.9% in the three phases, respectively) and emergency (< 20 procedures: 43.3%, 27.1%, 36.5% in the three phases, respectively) surgical activity. The use of laparoscopy also had a setback in phase I (25.8% performed less than 20% of elective procedures through laparoscopy). 60.6% of the respondents used a smoke evacuation device during laparoscopy in phase I, 61.6% in phase II, and 64.2% in phase III. Almost all responders (82.8% vs. 93.2% vs. 92.7%) in each analyzed period did not modify or reduce the use of high-energy devices. CONCLUSION: This survey offers three faithful snapshots of how the surgical community has reacted to the COVID-19 pandemic during its three phases. The significant reduction in surgical activity indicates that better health policies and more evidence-based guidelines are needed to make up for lost time and surgery not performed during the pandemic.