Constrictive pericarditis is a rare disease with poorly understood epidemiology. A systematic literature search was adopted to assess the region- and period-specific traits of constrictive pericarditis through Pubmed, EMBASE, and Scopus. Case reports and studies including less than 20 patients were excluded. The risk of bias was assessed through the Study Quality Assessment Tools developed by the National Heart Lung Blood Institute by 4 reviewers. Patient demographics, disease etiology, and mortality were the primary assessed outcomes. One hundred thirty studies with 11,325 patients have been included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The age at diagnosis of constrictive pericarditis has markedly increased after 1990. Patients from Africa and Asia are considerably younger compared with those from Europe and North America. Moreover, there are differences in etiology, as tuberculosis remains the dominant cause of constrictive pericarditis in Africa and Asia but has been surpassed by history of previous chest surgery in North America and Europe. The human immunodeficiency virus affects 29.1% of patients from Africa diagnosed with constrictive pericarditis, a feature that is not observed on any other continent. The early mortality rate after hospitalization has improved. The variances of age at diagnosis and etiology of constrictive pericarditis should be considered by the clinician during the work-up of cardiac and pericardial diseases. An underlying human immunodeficiency virus infection complicates a significant portion of constrictive pericarditis cases in Africa. Early mortality has improved across the world but remains high.

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a term used to compositely describe deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Overall, the incidence of VTE after major abdominal and pelvic surgery has been reported to be between 10% and 40%. Objective: The aim of this study is to estimate the incidence of post-operative VTE in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery for cancer, to identify risk factors associated with VTE, and to assess available thromboprophylaxis tools. Methods: A Medline and Cochrane literature search from database inception until February 1st, 2021 was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Results: Thirty-one studies met our eligibility criteria and were included in the current review. In total, 435,492 patients were identified and the overall incidence of VTE was 2.19% (95% CI: 1.82-2.38). Τhe following risk factors were associated with VTE: smoking, advanced age (>70 years), a history of diabetes mellitus, American Society of Anesthesiologists’ (ASA) classification of Physical Health class III or IV, a history of cardiovascular or pulmonary disease, a history of DVT or PE, elevated plasma fibrinogen level, c-reactive protein (CRP) level, cancer stage III or IV, postoperative acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), prolonged postoperative hospital stay, previous steroid use, history of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), heart failure and neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusion: VTE remains an important complication after major abdominal surgery for cancer and seems to increase mortality rates.

Thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 has been associated with a survival benefit and is strongly recommended. However, the optimal dose of thromboprophylaxis remains unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis (PubMed/EMBASE) of studies comparing high (intermediate or therapeutic dose) versus standard (prophylactic dose) intensity of thrombo-prophylaxis with regard to outcome of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was performed. Randomized and non-randomized studies that provided adjusted effect size estimates were included. Meta-analysis of 7 studies comparing intermediate versus prophylactic dose of thromboprophylaxis (2 randomized and 5 observational, n = 2009, weighted age 61 years, males 61%, ICU 53%) revealed a pooled adjusted relative risk (RR) for death at 0.56 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.34, 0.92) in favor of the intermediate dose. For the same comparison arms, the pooled RR for venous thromboembolism was 0.84 (95% CI 0.54, 1.31), and for major bleeding events was 1.63 (95% CI 0.79, 3.37). Meta-analysis of 17 studies comparing therapeutic versus prophylactic dose of thromboprophylaxis (2 randomized and 15 observational, n = 7776, weighted age 64 years, males 54%, ICU 21%) revealed a pooled adjusted RR for death at 0.73 (95% CI 0.47, 1.14) for the therapeutic dose. An opposite trend was observed in the unadjusted analysis of 15 observational studies (RR 1.24 (95% CI 0.88, 1.74)). For the same comparison arms, the pooled RR for venous thromboembolism was 1.13 (95% CI 0.52, 2.48), and for major bleeding events 3.32 (95% CI 2.51, 4.40). In conclusion, intermediate compared with standard prophylactic dose of thromboprophylaxis appears to be rather safe and is associated with additional survival benefit, although most data are derived from observational retrospective analyses. Randomized studies are needed to define the optimal thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Background and Objectives: Encouraging data have been reported from referral centers following gastrointestinal cancer surgery. Our goal was to retrospectively review patient outcomes following gastrectomy for gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer at a high-volume unit of the University of Athens. Methods: The enrollment period was from June 2003 to September 2018. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazard models were constructed to identify variables independently associated with time-to-event outcomes. Results: A total of 205 patients were analyzed. R0 resection was achieved in 183 (89.3%) patients and was more likely to occur following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.008). Recurrence developed in 46.6% of our cohort and the median disease-free survival was 31.2 months. On multivariate analysis, only staging (HR = 2.15; 95% CI: 1.06–4.36) was independently associated with increased risk of recurrence. All-cause mortality was 57.2% and the median time of death was 40.9 months. On multivariate regression, staging (HR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.11–1.65) and recurrence (HR: 2.87; 95% CI: 1.32–6.22) predicted inferior prognosis. Conclusions: Gastrectomy at the University of Athens has yielded favorable outcomes for patients with GEJ cancer.