Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Cancers (Basel) ; 13(13)2021 Jun 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1288807

ABSTRACT

External factors, such as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), can lead to cancellations and backlogs of cancer surgeries. The effects of these delays are unclear. This study summarised the evidence surrounding expectant management, delay radical prostatectomy (RP), and neoadjuvant hormone therapy (NHT) compared to immediate RP. MEDLINE and EMBASE was searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised controlled studies pertaining to the review question. Risks of biases (RoB) were evaluated using the RoB 2.0 tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A total of 57 studies were included. Meta-analysis of four RCTs found overall survival and cancer-specific survival were significantly worsened amongst intermediate-risk patients undergoing active monitoring, observation, or watchful waiting but not in low- and high-risk patients. Evidence from 33 observational studies comparing delayed RP and immediate RP is contradictory. However, conservative estimates of delays over 5 months, 4 months, and 30 days for low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk patients, respectively, have been associated with significantly worse pathological and oncological outcomes in individual studies. In 11 RCTs, a 3-month course of NHT has been shown to improve pathological outcomes in most patients, but its effect on oncological outcomes is apparently limited.

2.
World J Urol ; 39(12): 4295-4303, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1241604

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the cancellation or deferment of many elective cancer surgeries. We performed a systematic review on the oncological effects of delayed surgery for patients with localised or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the targeted therapy (TT) era. METHOD: The protocol of this review is registered on PROSPERO(CRD42020190882). A comprehensive literature search was performed on Medline, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL using MeSH terms and keywords for randomised controlled trials and observational studies on the topic. Risks of biases were assessed using the Cochrane RoB tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. For localised RCC, immediate surgery [including partial nephrectomy (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN)] and delayed surgery [including active surveillance (AS) and delayed intervention (DI)] were compared. For metastatic RCC, upfront versus deferred cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) were compared. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included for quantitative analysis. Delayed surgery was significantly associated with worse cancer-specific survival (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.23-2.27, p < 0.01) in T1a RCC, but no significant difference was noted for overall survival. For localised ≥ T1b RCC, there were insufficient data for meta-analysis and the results from the individual reports were contradictory. For metastatic RCC, upfront TT followed by deferred CN was associated with better overall survival when compared to upfront CN followed by deferred TT (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.43-0.86, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Noting potential selection bias, there is insufficient evidence to support the notion that delayed surgery is safe in localised RCC. For metastatic RCC, upfront TT followed by deferred CN should be considered.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/mortality , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/surgery , Kidney Neoplasms/mortality , Kidney Neoplasms/surgery , Time-to-Treatment , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/pathology , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Kidney Neoplasms/pathology , Nephrectomy , Survival Rate
3.
Crit Care Med ; 49(7): 1159-1168, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1145199

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess the risk of coronavirus transmission to healthcare workers performing aerosol-generating procedures and the potential benefits of personal protective equipment during these procedures. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched using a combination of related MeSH terms and keywords. STUDY SELECTION: Cohort studies and case controls investigating common anesthetic and critical care aerosol-generating procedures and transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 to healthcare workers were included for quantitative analysis. DATA EXTRACTION: Qualitative and quantitative data on the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus to healthcare workers via aerosol-generating procedures in anesthesia and critical care were collected independently. The Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions tool was used to assess the risk of bias of included studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seventeen studies out of 2,676 yielded records were included for meta-analyses. Endotracheal intubation (odds ratio, 6.69, 95% CI, 3.81-11.72; p < 0.001), noninvasive ventilation (odds ratio, 3.65; 95% CI, 1.86-7.19; p < 0.001), and administration of nebulized medications (odds ratio, 10.03; 95% CI, 1.98-50.69; p = 0.005) were found to increase the odds of healthcare workers contracting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. The use of N95 masks (odds ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.03-0.39; p < 0.001), gowns (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.48-0.73; p < 0.001), and gloves (odds ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.29-0.53; p < 0.001) were found to be significantly protective of healthcare workers from contracting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. CONCLUSIONS: Specific aerosol-generating procedures are high risk for the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 from patients to healthcare workers. Personal protective equipment reduce the odds of contracting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.


Subject(s)
Aerosols , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Critical Care , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/statistics & numerical data , Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus , SARS Virus , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Observational Studies as Topic , Odds Ratio , Personal Protective Equipment , Protective Factors , Risk Factors
4.
World J Urol ; 39(9): 3127-3138, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-381965

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review on COVID-19 and its potential urological manifestations. METHODS: A literature search was performed using combination of keywords (MeSH terms and free text words) relating to COVID-19, urology, faeces and stool on multiple databases. Primary outcomes were the urological manifestations of COVID-19, and SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA detection in urine and stool samples. Meta-analyses were performed when there were two or more studies reporting on the same outcome. Special considerations in urological conditions that were relevant in the pandemic of COVID-19 were reported in a narrative manner. RESULTS: There were a total of 21 studies with 3714 COVID-19 patients, and urinary symptoms were absent in all of them. In patients with COVID-19, 7.58% (95% CI 3.30-13.54%) developed acute kidney injury with a mortality rate of 93.27% (95% CI 81.46-100%) amongst them. 5.74% (95% CI 2.88-9.44%) of COVID-19 patients had positive viral RNA in urine samples, but the duration of viral shedding in urine was unknown. 65.82% (95% CI 45.71-83.51%) of COVID-19 patients had positive viral RNA in stool samples, which were detected from 2 to 47 days from symptom onset. 31.6% of renal transplant recipients with COVID-19 required non-invasive ventilation, and the overall mortality rate was 15.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Acute kidney injury leading to mortality is common amongst COVID-19 patients, likely as a result of direct viral toxicity. Viral RNA positivity was detected in both urine and stool samples, so precautions are needed when we perform transurethral or transrectal procedures.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Urologic Diseases , Acute Kidney Injury/diagnosis , Acute Kidney Injury/etiology , Acute Kidney Injury/mortality , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , RNA, Viral/urine , Urologic Diseases/classification , Urologic Diseases/therapy , Urologic Diseases/virology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...