The COVID-19 pandemic shifted pathology education in medical schools worldwide towards online delivery. To achieve this goal, various innovative platforms were used by pathology educators and medical students, facilitating both synchronous and asynchronous learning. The aim of this study was to review the published evidence regarding remote pathology teaching at the medical school level during this period, present our own experience, and provide some perspectives regarding the best mode of pathology teaching post-pandemic. Among its advantages, virtual pathology education was considered among students and educators as convenient, flexible, and engaging, while learning outcomes were met and students’ academic performance was in general satisfactory. However, several challenges were faced. For instance, suboptimal internet connection compromised the flow of classes and was even associated with a lower academic performance. The lack of hands-on laboratory activities, such as operating the light microscope and tissue grossing, and the reduced student interactions among themselves and their instructors, were also pointed out as significant drawbacks of remote pathology education. Whereas online education has multiple advantages, experiencing the physical university environment, in-person interactions and teamwork, exposure to the “hidden curriculum”, and hands-on activities are vital for medical school education and future student development. In conclusion, the implementation of a blended approach in pathology education—where online and face-to-face sessions are jointly used to promote students’ engagement, interaction with their instructors and peers, and learning—could be the most optimal approach to pathology teaching in medical schools post-pandemic.

Accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2, the pathogen causing the global pandemic of COVID-19, is essential for disease surveillance and control. Quantitative reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) is considered the reference standard test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 by the World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. However, its limitations are a prompt for a more accurate assay to detect SARS-CoV-2, quantify its levels, and assess the prognosis. This article aimed to systematically review the literature and assess the diagnostic performance of droplet digital PCR (ddPCR), also to evaluate its potential role in prognosis and management of COVID-19 patients. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched to identify relevant articles published until 13 July 2021. An additional PubMed search was performed on 21 October 2021. Data from the 39 eligible studies were extracted and an overall 3651 samples from 2825 patients and 145 controls were used for our qualitative analysis. Most studies reported ddPCR was more accurate than RT-qPCR in detecting and quantifying SARS-CoV-2 levels, especially in patients with low viral loads. ddPCR was also found highly effective in quantifying SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia levels in hospitalized patients, monitoring their disease course, and predicting their response to therapy. These findings suggest ddPCR could serve as a complement or alternative SARS-CoV-2 tool with emerging diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic value, especially in hospital settings. Additional research is still needed to standardize its laboratory protocols, also to accurately assess its role in monitoring COVID-19 therapy response and in identifying SARS-CoV-2 emerging variants.

Paragangliomas are rare, non-epithelial neuroendocrine neoplasms originating in paraganglia, for instance the adrenal medulla, or at extra-adrenal locations. The aim of this study was to review the literature regarding abdominal extra-adrenal paragangliomas diagnosed pre-operatively with fine-needle biopsy (FNA and/or FNB). The PubMed database was searched to identify such cases, using a specific algorithm and inclusion/exclusion criteria. An unpublished case from our practice was also added to the rest of the data, resulting in a total of 36 cases for analysis. Overall, 24 (67%) lesions were found in females, whereas 12 (33%) in males. Most (21/36; 58.33%) were identified around and/or within the pancreatic parenchyma. FNA and/or FNB reached or suggested a paraganglioma diagnosis in 17/36 cases (47.22%). Of the preoperative misdiagnoses, the most common was an epithelial neuroendocrine tumor (NET). Regarding follow-up, most patients were alive with no reported recurrence; however, 5/36 patients exhibited a recurrence or a widespread disease, whereas one patient died 48 months following her diagnosis. In two patients, transient hypertension was reported during the EUS-FNA procedure. In conclusion, this study showed that the preoperative diagnosis of these lesions is feasible and, while diagnostic pitfalls exist, they could significantly be avoided with the application of immunochemistry.