An estimated five billion people worldwide lack access to surgical care, while LMICs including African nations require an additional 143 million life-saving surgical procedures each year.African hospitals are under-resourced and understaffed, causing global attention to be focused on improving surgical access in the continent. The African continent saw its first telesurgery application when the United States Army Special Operations Forces in Somalia used augmented reality to stabilize lifethreatening injuries.Various studies have been conducted since the first telesurgery implementation in 2001 to further optimize its application.In context of a relative shortage of healthcare resources and personnel telesurgery can considerably improve quality and access to surgical services in Africa.telesurgery can provide remote African regions with access to knowledge and tools that were previously unavailable, driving innovative research and professional growth of surgeons in the region.At the same time, telesurgery allows less trained surgeons in remote areas with lower social determinants of health, such as access, to achieve better health outcomes. However, lack of stable internet access, expensive equipment costs combined with low expenditure on healthcare limits expansive utilization of telesurgery in Africa. Regional and international policies aimed at overcoming these obstacles can improve access, optimize surgical care and thereby reduce disease burden associated with surgical conditions in Africa.

An abstract is unavailable. This article is available as a PDF only.

Objective: bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) stands as the most prevalent congenital heart condition intricately linked to aortic pathologies encompassing aortic regurgitation (AR), aortic stenosis, aortic root dilation, and aortic dissection. The aetiology of BAV is notably intricate, involving a spectrum of genes and polymorphisms. Moreover, BAV lays the groundwork for an array of structural heart and aortic disorders, presenting varying degrees of severity. Establishing a tailored clinical approach amid this diverse range of BAV-related conditions is of utmost significance. In this comprehensive review, we delve into the epidemiology, aetiology, associated ailments, and clinical management of BAV, encompassing imaging to aortic surgery. Our exploration is guided by the perspectives of the aortic team, spanning six distinct guidelines. Methods: We conducted an exhaustive search across databases like PubMed, Ovid, Scopus, and Embase to extract relevant studies. Our review incorporates 84 references and integrates insights from six different guidelines to create a comprehensive clinical management section. Results: BAV presents complexities in its aetiology, with specific polymorphisms and gene disorders observed in groups with elevated BAV prevalence, contributing to increased susceptibility to other cardiovascular conditions. The altered hemodynamics inherent to BAV instigate adverse remodelling of the aorta and heart, thus fostering the development of epigenetically linked aortic and heart diseases. Employing TTE screening for first-degree relatives of BAV patients might be beneficial for disease tracking and enhancing clinical outcomes. While SAVR is the primary recommendation for indicated AVR in BAV, TAVR might be an option for certain patients endorsed by adept aortic teams. In addition, proficient teams can perform aortic valve repair for AR cases. Aortic surgery necessitates personalized evaluation, accounting for genetic makeup and risk factors. While the standard aortic replacement threshold stands at 55 mm, it may be tailored to 50 mm or even 45 mm based on patient-specific considerations. Conclusion: This review reiterates the significance of considering the multifactorial nature of BAV as well as the need for further research to be carried out in the field.

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are increasingly used in the diagnosis and management of bone metastases, spanning lesion detection, segmentation, prognostic modeling, fracture risk assessment, and surgical decision support. However, the literature is heterogeneous and rapidly evolving, making it difficult for clinicians to contextualize these developments. Methods: We performed a narrative review of the literature on AI/ML applications in bone metastasis management, focusing on studies that address clinically relevant problems such as detection and segmentation of metastatic lesions, prediction of skeletal-related events and survival, and support for reconstructive decision-making. We prioritized recent, peer-reviewed work that reports model performance and highlights opportunities for clinical translation. Results: Most published studies center on imaging-based diagnosis and lesion segmentation using radiomics and deep learning, with generally high internal performance but limited external validation. Emerging work explores prognostic models and biomechanically informed fracture risk estimation, yet these remain at an early proof-of-concept stage. Very few frameworks are integrated into routine workflows, and explainability, bias mitigation, and health-economic impacts are rarely evaluated. Conclusions: AI and ML tools have substantial potential to standardize imaging assessment, refine risk stratification, and ultimately support personalized management of bone metastases. Future research should focus on externally validated, multimodal models; development of AI-augmented alternatives to the Mirels score; federated multicenter collaboration; and routine incorporation of explainability and cost-effectiveness analyses.

Introduction: Obesity is a chronic disease associated with increased risk for several cancers, including colorectal cancer (CRC), a leading cause of cancer-related mortality. The majority of CRC cases are associated with modifiable risk factors. Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is a proven, durable, and successful intervention for obesity. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of MBS on CRC risk through measures of association, such as relative risk (RR) and odds ratio (OR). Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Embase was conducted to identify systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses examining the relationship between obesity treated with MBS and CRC incidence. The PICO framework guided inclusion criteria, and three independent reviewers screened articles using Rayyan software. Quality assessment was performed using AMSTAR2. Results: Of 1336 screened articles, 10 SR met inclusion criteria, encompassing 53,452,658 patients. Meta-analyses consistently showed a significant reduction in CRC risk following MBS in patients with severe obesity. Risk reductions were reported by Liu et al. (RR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.32–0.67, p < 0.01), Chierici et al. (RR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.28–0.75, p = 0.018), Wilson et al. (RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.53–0.88, p = 0.003), and Pararas et al. (RR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.40–0.80, p < 0.001). Sensitivity analyses supported these findings. For colon cancer, Liu and Chierici both reported an RR of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.46–1.21, p = 0.2444) with significant heterogeneity (I² = 89%). A trend towards reduced rectal cancer risk (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.40–1.39, p = 0.3523) was noted but limited by fewer studies. Sex-specific analyses revealed protective effects in both sexes, with a more pronounced impact in females (RR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.37–0.79, p = 0.0014). Conclusions: This umbrella review synthesizes current evidence on the impact of MBS on CRC risk, highlighting a consistent protective association. The findings also indicate a potential risk reduction for both colon and rectal cancer, with a more pronounced effect observed among females compared to males. Given the profound implications of MBS on cancer incidence, morbidity, and mortality, further high-quality, long-term studies are essential to deepen our understanding and optimize its role in cancer prevention and patient care.