MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred fifty-eight patients with primary liver tumors who underwent FDG-PET before LDLT were enrolled in this retrospective study. Unfavorable tumor histology was defined as primary liver tumor other than a well- or moderately differentiated HCC. Thirteen patients had unfavorable tumor histology, including 2 poorly differentiated HCC, 2 sarcomatoid HCC, 5 combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma, 3 intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and 1 hilar cholangiocarcinoma.

RESULTS: FDG-PET positivity was significantly associated with unfavorable tumor histology (P < 0.001). Both FDG-PET positivity and unfavorable tumor histology were significant independent predictors of tumor recurrence and overall survival. In a subgroup analysis of patients with FDG-PET-positive tumors, unfavorable tumor histology was a significant independent predictor of tumor recurrence and overall survival. High FDG uptake (tumor to non-tumor uptake ratio ≥ 2) was a significant predictor of unfavorable tumor histology. Patients with high FDG uptake and/or unfavorable tumors had significantly higher 3-year cumulative recurrence rate (70.8% versus 26.2%, P = 0.004) and worse 3-year overall survival (34.1% versus 70.8%, P = 0.012) compared to those with low FDG uptake favorable tumors.

METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were systematically searched for randomized control trials (RCTs) from its inception until April 2020.

RESULTS: Six RCTs (n = 3139 patients) were included. In comparison to the GA alone, our meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the cancer recurrence rate in patients who received the adjunctive use of RA in the routine care of GA (3 studies, n = 2380 patients; odds ratio 0.93, 95%CI 0.63-1.39, ρ = 0.73, certainty of evidence = very low). Our review also showed no significant difference in cancer-related mortality (2 studies, n = 545; odds ratio 1.20, 95%CI 0.83-1.74, ρ = 0.33, certainty of evidence = low), all-cause mortality (3 studies, n = 2653; odds ratio 0.98, 95%CI 0.69-1.39, ρ = 0.89, certainty of evidence = low) and duration of cancer-free survival (2 studies, n = 659; mean difference 0.00 years, 95%CI -0.25-0.25, ρ = 1.00, certainty of evidence = high).

CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis concluded that the adjunctive use of RA in the routine care of GA did not reduce cancer recurrence rate in cancer resection surgery. However, this finding needs to be interpreted with caution due to low level of evidence, substantial heterogeneity and potential risk of bias across the included studies.

METHODS: Based on data collected through PubMed using specified search criteria based on above topics and clinical experience of the authors, this article will review preclinical and clinical safety and efficacy data on the use of povidone iodine in wound healing and its implications for the control of infection and inflammation, together with the authors' advice for the successful treatment of acute and chronic wounds.

METHODS: A steering group was formed to review the existing guideline and propose amendments to the 17-item checklist. A Delphi consensus exercise was utilised to determine agreement across a list of proposed modifications to the STROCSS 2017 guideline. An expert panel of 46 surgeons were invited to assess the proposed updates via Google Forms.

RESULTS: The response rate was 91% (n = 42/46). High agreement was reached across all the items and the guideline was finalised in the first round. The checklist maintained 17-items, with modifications primarily considered to improve content and readability.

OBJECTIVE: The systematic review is aimed at evaluating the value of PRF in different areas of surgery.

DATA SOURCES: A systematic review of articles sourced from MEDLINE-pubmed (2008-2017(July)) was done. Additional articles were searched through GOOGLE SCHOLAR and SCIENCE DIRECT. Search terms such as Platelet rich fibrin; Platelet rich fibrin, surgery; Platelet concentrate; second generation concentrate; Applications of PRF in surgery were used.

STUDY SELECTION: Systematic reviews, Randomized control trials, Pilot studies and Case reports were included. Non English articles, in-vitro and animal studies were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION: Independent sourcing of articles by 3 authors using a set of predefined criteria.

DATA SYNTHESIS: Out of the 25 articles covering various surgical procedures that met the inclusion criteria, positive outcomes were noted in most. Although categorization into one specific type of study was not done, the overall success rate with PRF usage was 78%.No differences between test and control groups were observed in 2 studies and 3 studies showed no significant improvements with the usage of PRF.

LIMITATIONS: The systematic review did not categorize the study designs while evaluating success rates which might be considered as a shortcoming as case reports were also included.

METHODS: A STROCSS 2021 steering group was formed to come up with proposals to update STROCSS 2019 guidelines. An expert panel of researchers assessed these proposals and judged whether they should become part of STROCSS 2021 guidelines or not, through a Delphi consensus exercise.

RESULTS: 42 people (89%) completed the DELPHI survey and hence participated in the development of STROCSS 2021 guidelines. All items received a score between 7 and 9 by greater than 70% of the participants, indicating a high level of agreement among the DELPHI group members with the proposed changes to all the items.

METHODS: The authors evaluated a cohort of adult trauma patients transported to emergency departments. The first vital signs were used to calculate the SI, MSI, and rSIG. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves and test results were used to compare the discriminant performance of the indices on short-term mortality and poor functional outcomes. A subgroup analysis of geriatric patients with traumatic brain injury, penetrating injury, and nonpenetrating injury was performed.

RESULTS: A total of 105 641 patients (49±20 years, 62% male) met the inclusion criteria. The rSIG had the highest areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve for short-term mortality (0.800, CI: 0.791-0.809) and poor functional outcome (0.596, CI: 0.590-0.602). The cutoff for rSIG was 18 for short-term mortality and poor functional outcomes with sensitivities of 0.668 and 0.371 and specificities of 0.805 and 0.813, respectively. The positive predictive values were 9.57% and 22.31%, and the negative predictive values were 98.74% and 89.97%. rSIG also had better discriminant ability in geriatrics, traumatic brain injury, and nonpenetrating injury.