METHODOLOGY: Patients undergoing LC in a single centre were randomized into ICGFC-LC and conventional LC. Surgery was performed by a single surgeon and the time taken to achieve CVS from the time of gallbladder fundus retraction was measured. Difficulty level for each surgery was rated and analysed using a modified scoring system (Level 1- Easy to Level 4-Very difficult).
RESULTS: 63 patients were recruited where mean time (min) to achieve CVS was 22.3 ± 12.9 in ICGFC-LC (n = 30) and 22.8 ± 14.3 in conventional LC (p = 0.867). The time taken to achieve CVS was shorter in ICGFC-LC group across all difficulty levels, although not significant (p > 0.05). No major complication was observed in the study.
CONCLUSIONS: This study had shown ICGFC-LC reduces time to CVS across all difficulty levels but not statistically significant. ICGFC-LC maybe useful in difficult LC and in surgical training.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials NCT04228835.
STUDY GRANT: UMMI Surgical - Karl Storz Distributor (Malaysia).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study. All CRC patients who underwent elective and emergency surgery from January until December 2019 (pre-COVID era) and September 2020 until August 2021 (COVID era) were included. Patient demographics, presentation, tumour stage, surgery performed and waiting time for surgery were collected. Data were then compared.
RESULTS: Seventy-seven and 76 new cases of CRC underwent surgery before and during COVID-19, respectively. The proportions of emergency surgery before and during COVID-19 are 29% vs 33% (p=0.562). Of those who required emergency surgery, the proportions of patients who required stoma formation are 59% vs 72% (p= 0.351). There was no difference in median waiting time for patients requiring elective surgery (p= 0.668).
CONCLUSION: The proportion of emergency surgery for CRC patients is not statistically higher during the pandemic.
METHODS: In this study, conducted in Malaysia, we evaluated the seven-gene biomarker panel validated in a North American population using blood samples collected from local patients. The panel employs quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) to analyze gene expression of the seven biomarkers (ANXA3, CLEC4D, TNFAIP6, LMNB1, PRRG4, VNN1 and IL2RB) that are differentially expressed in CRC patients as compared with controls. Blood samples from 210 patients (99 CRC and 111 controls) were collected, and total blood RNA was isolated and subjected to quantitative RT-PCR and data analysis.
RESULTS: The logistic regression analysis of seven-gene panel has an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.76 (95% confidence interval: 0.70 to 0.82), 77% specificity, 61% sensitivity and 70% accuracy, comparable to the data obtained from the North American investigation of the same biomarker panel.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results independently confirm the results of the study conducted in North America and demonstrate the ability of the seven biomarker panel to discriminate CRC from controls in blood samples drawn from a Malaysian population.