Medicine is a rapidly-evolving discipline, with progress picking up pace with each passing decade. This constant evolution results in the introduction of new tools and methods, which in turn occasionally leads to paradigm shifts across the affected medical fields. The following review attempts to showcase how 3D printing has begun to reshape and improve processes across various medical specialties and where it has the potential to make a significant impact. The current state-of-the-art, as well as real-life clinical applications of 3D printing, are reflected in the perspectives of specialists practicing in the selected disciplines, with a focus on pre-procedural planning, simulation (rehearsal) of non-routine procedures, and on medical education and training. A review of the latest multidisciplinary literature on the subject offers a general summary of the advances enabled by 3D printing. Numerous advantages and applications were found, such as gaining better insight into patient-specific anatomy, better pre-operative planning, mock simulated surgeries, simulation-based training and education, development of surgical guides and other tools, patient-specific implants, bioprinted organs or structures, and counseling of patients. It was evident that pre-procedural planning and rehearsing of unusual or difficult procedures and training of medical professionals in these procedures are extremely useful and transformative.

Robotic-assisted surgery is expected to have advantages over standard laparoscopic approach in patients undergoing curative surgery for rectal cancer. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar were searched from database inception to 10 November 2021, for both RCTs and observational studies comparing robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer resection. Where possible, data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. Forty-Two were considered eligible for the meta-analysis. Survival to hospital discharge or 30-day overall survival rate was 99.6% for RG and 98.8% for LG (OR = 2.10; 95% CI: 1.00 to 4.43; p = 0.05). Time to first flatus in the RG group was 2.5 ± 1.4 days and was statistically significantly shorter than in LG group (2.9 ± 2.0 days; MD = −0.34; 95%CI: −0.65 to 0.03; p = 0.03). In the case of time to a liquid diet, solid diet and bowel movement, the analysis showed no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05). Length of hospital stay in the RG vs. LG group varied and amounted to 8.0 ± 5.3 vs. 9.5 ± 10.0 days (MD = −2.01; 95%CI: −2.90 to −1.11; p < 0.001). Overall, 30-days complications in the RG and LG groups were 27.2% and 19.0% (OR = 1.11; 95%CI: 0.80 to 1.55; p = 0.53), respectively. In summary, robotic-assisted techniques provide several advantages over laparoscopic techniques in reducing operative time, significantly lowering conversion of the procedure to open surgery, shortening the duration of hospital stay, lowering the risk of urinary retention, improving survival to hospital discharge or 30-day overall survival rate.

Coronaviruses cause disease in animals and people around the world. Human coronaviruses (HCoV) are mainly known to cause infections of the upper and lower respiratory tract but the symptoms may also involve the nervous and digestive systems. Since the beginning of December 2019, there has been an epidemic of SARS-CoV-2, which was originally referred to as 2019-nCoV. The most common symptoms are fever and cough, fatigue, sputum production, dyspnea, myalgia, arthralgia or sore throat, headache, nausea, vomiting or diarrhea (30%). The best prevention is to avoid exposure. In addition, contact persons should be subjected to mandatory quarantine. COVID-19 patients should be treated in specialist centers. A significant number of patients with pneumonia require passive oxygen therapy. Non-invasive ventilation and high-flow nasal oxygen therapy can be applied in mild and moderate non-hypercapnia cases. A lung-saving ventilation strategy must be implemented in acute respiratory distress syndrome and mechanically ventilated patients. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is a highly specialized method, available only in selected centers and not applicable to a significant number of cases. Specific pharmacological treatment for COVID-19 is not currently available. Modern medicine is gearing up to fight the new coronavirus pandemic. The key is a holistic approach to the patient including, primarily, the use of personal protective equipment to reduce the risk of further virus transmission, as well as patient management, which consists in both quarantine and, in the absence of specific pharmacological therapy, symptomatic treatment. Coronaviruses cause disease in animals and people around the world. Human coronaviruses (HCoV) are mainly known to cause infections of the upper and lower respiratory tract but the symptoms may also involve the nervous and digestive systems. Since the beginning of December 2019, there has been an epidemic of SARS-CoV-2, which was originally referred to as 2019-nCoV. The most common symptoms are fever and cough, fatigue, sputum production, dyspnea, myalgia, arthralgia or sore throat, headache, nausea, vomiting or diarrhea (30%). The best prevention is to avoid exposure. In addition, contact persons should be subjected to mandatory quarantine. COVID-19 patients should be treated in specialist centers. A significant number of patients with pneumonia require passive oxygen therapy. Non-invasive ventilation and high-flow nasal oxygen therapy can be applied in mild and moderate non-hypercapnia cases. A lung-saving ventilation strategy must be implemented in acute respiratory distress syndrome and mechanically ventilated patients. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is a highly specialized method, available only in selected centers and not applicable to a significant number of cases. Specific pharmacological treatment for COVID-19 is not currently available. Modern medicine is gearing up to fight the new coronavirus pandemic. The key is a holistic approach to the patient including, primarily, the use of personal protective equipment to reduce the risk of further virus transmission, as well as patient management, which consists in both quarantine and, in the absence of specific pharmacological therapy, symptomatic treatment.

Background: This meta-analysis outlines the role of elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels in assessing the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: The current study was designed as a systematic review and meta-analysis. Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify the usefulness of LDH as a marker of COVID-19 severity. All extracted data were analyzed using RevMan V.5.4 or STATA V.14 software. Results: A total of 264 records were selected for this meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed that LDH levels were statistically significantly lower in the group of survivors compared to patients who died in hospital (standardized mean differences [SMD] = –3.10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: –3.40 to –2.79; I² = 99%; p < 0.001). Lower LDH levels were observed in non-severe groups compared to severe course of COVID-19 (SMD = –2.38; 95% CI: –2.61 to –2.14; I² = 99%; p < 0.001). The level of LDH was statistically significantly lower in the severe group compared to the critical group (SMD = –1.48; 95% CI: –2.04 to –0.92; I² = 98%; p < 0.001). Patients who did not require treatment in the intensive care unit (ICU) showed significantly lower levels of LDH compared to patients who required treatment in the ICU (SMD = –3.78; 95% CI: –4.48 to –3.08; I² = 100%; p < 0.001). Conclusions: This meta-analysis showed that elevated LDH was associated with a poor outcome in COVID-19. Background: This meta-analysis outlines the role of elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels in assessing the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: The current study was designed as a systematic review and meta-analysis. Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify the usefulness of LDH as a marker of COVID-19 severity. All extracted data were analyzed using RevMan V.5.4 or STATA V.14 software. Results: A total of 264 records were selected for this meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed that LDH levels were statistically significantly lower in the group of survivors compared to patients who died in hospital (standardized mean differences [SMD] = –3.10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: –3.40 to –2.79; I² = 99%; p < 0.001). Lower LDH levels were observed in non-severe groups compared to severe course of COVID-19 (SMD = –2.38; 95% CI: –2.61 to –2.14; I² = 99%; p < 0.001). The level of LDH was statistically significantly lower in the severe group compared to the critical group (SMD = –1.48; 95% CI: –2.04 to –0.92; I² = 98%; p < 0.001). Patients who did not require treatment in the intensive care unit (ICU) showed significantly lower levels of LDH compared to patients who required treatment in the ICU (SMD = –3.78; 95% CI: –4.48 to –3.08; I² = 100%; p < 0.001). Conclusions: This meta-analysis showed that elevated LDH was associated with a poor outcome in COVID-19.

Unmanned aerial vehicles, also known as drones, can play a significant role in military and civil emergency medicine. The aim of the study was to present the real possibilities of using them in rescue operations and to provide examples from all over the world. Unmanned aerial vehicles can be applied to transport goods on demand, provide blood in urban areas, save sinking people, analyse the scale of damages, monitor large human gatherings, perform exploration activities, deliver blood samples and other analysis material, provide automated external defibrillators, support rescue operations and air transport, and perform agricultural activities. One must, however, be aware of the existing regulations regarding drone flights as an appearance of an unreported unmanned aircraft in the controlled space is identified worldwide as affecting aviation safety.