Background: Computed tomography (CT) evaluation systematics has become necessary to eliminate the difference of opinion among radiologists in evaluating COVID-19 CT findings. Introduction: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the efficiency of CO-RADS scoring system in our patients with COVID-19 as well as to examine its correlation with clinical and laboratory findings. Method: The CO-RADS category of all patients included in the study was determined by a radiologist who did not know the rtRT-PCR test result of the patients, according to the Covid-19 reporting and data system of Mathias Prokop et al. Results: A total of 1338 patients were included. CT findings were positive in 66.3%, with a mean CO-RADS score of 3,4 ± 1,7. 444 (33.1%) of the patients were in the CO-RADS 1-2, 894 (66.9%) were in the CO-RADS 3-5 group. There were positive correlations between CO-RADS score and age, CMI, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic pulmonary diseases presence of symptoms, symptom duration, presence of cough, shortness of breath, malaise, CRP, and LDH, while CORADS score was negatively correlated with lymphocyte count. The results of the ROC analysis suggested that those with age ≥40 years, symptom duration >2 days, CMI score >1 and/or comorbid conditions were more likely to have a CO-RADS score of 3-5. Conclusion: The CO-RADS classification system is a CT findings assessment system that can be used to diagnose COVID-19 in patients with symptoms of cough, shortness of breath, myalgia and fatigue for more than two days.

Background and Objectives: This study was designed to evaluate the potential cardioprotective effect of Exenatide against doxorubicin (DOX)-induced myocardial injury in rats by assessing scintigraphic alterations together with oxidative stress and inflammation. Materials and Methods: This study included 28 adult male Wistar albino rats that were randomized to 4 groups (n = 7): control, Exenatide alone, DOX (receiving DOX (18 mg/kg, i.p) on days 5–7; Exenatide + DOX (treated with Exenatide together with the DOX). On day 8, ECG, 99mTc-PYP scintigraphy, and biochemical parameters were evaluated. Results: DOX caused ECG abnormalities—bradycardia, significant QT prolongation, and elevated ST-segment amplitude—along with increased myocardial PYP uptake. Exenatide + DOX group significantly improved ECG changes. Biochemically, DOX markedly increased cardiac injury biomarkers (cTnT, CK, CK-MB), hepatic and renal injury markers (ALT, AST, LDH, BUN, creatinine), SIRT-1 level, inflammatory marker (NF-κB, TNF-α, IL-6, NO) and oxidative stress indicators (MDA, TOS), while decreasing antioxidant defenses (GSH, TAS, Nrf2). Exenatide co-treatment significantly attenuated all DOX-induced changes. Conclusions: Exenatide markedly attenuates DOX-induced cardiotoxicity by improving electrical conduction, reducing myocardial radiotracer uptake, and restoring oxidative–inflammatory balance through partial recovery of the SIRT-1/Nrf2/NF-κB pathway.

Objective: Diaphragma rupture is an insidious case following thoracoabdominal trauma with significant morbidity and mortality rates, if left untreated. Its symptoms might be masked by other associated injuries, which are often present, especially following blunt trauma. Modern imaging modalities might overlook a present diaphragmatic rupture. The real challenge, therefore, lies in diagnosis rather than treatment. To shed more light on this entity, we shared our experience in this regard. Material and Methods: A total of 51 patients were enrolled in the study between January, 2008 and October, 2023, with a diagnosis of diaphragma rupture. Two groups were created, namely patients with blunt trauma (PwBT) and patients with penetrating trauma (PwPT). They were evaluated in terms of demographics, clinical and laboratory findings, trauma associated variables, mechanism of injury, accompanying injuries, imaging results, operative approaches and mortality rates. Results: Mean age was 26 (22-33). 21.6% of the patients had blunt trauma. PwBT had significantly more extraabdominal site injuries and additional abdominal organ injuries (p< 0.05). Glasgow coma scale and calculated revised trauma score values were significantly lower and injury severity scores values were significantly higher in PwBT (p< 0.05). Significant thorax trauma accompanied 81.8% of PwBT and 40% of PwPT. Mortality was observed in 11.8% of the patients, with hemodynamic instability being the leading cause of death. Conclusion: A trauma surgeon must exercise great caution not to overlook a diaphragma rupture following, especially, blunt thoracoabdominal trauma since it is both a consequence and reason of significantly increased mortality and morbidity rates. Future studies should focus on various aspects of both diagnosis and management of this entity, such as increasing the preoperative diagnosis accuracy and requirement of mesh usage during defect closure and optimal approach to especially right sided penetrating thoracoabdominal injuries.

Background/Objectives: Risk stratification of thyroid nodules classified as categories III–IV in The Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology (TBSRTC) remains challenging. This study evaluated the incremental diagnostic value of cell-block-based targeted molecular testing beyond TBSRTC cytology within the 2023 TBSRTC and WHO 2022 frameworks. Methods: This retrospective study included 126 TBSRTC category III–VI thyroid fine-needle aspiration samples. BRAF exon 15 and KRAS/NRAS exons 2–4 were assessed by bidirectional Sanger sequencing; TERT testing was limited to six selected cases. Histopathology was available for 69 nodules, including 59 TBSRTC category III–IV nodules in the primary diagnostic-performance cohort. Logistic regression, ROC analysis, bootstrap correction, repeated stratified five-fold cross-validation, calibration, and exploratory decision curve analysis were performed. Results: BRAF/KRAS/NRAS mutations were detected in 35 of 126 nodules (27.8%). Among resected nodules, mutations occurred in 23 of 32 malignant (71.9%) and 10 of 37 benign/NIFTP cases (27.0%; p < 0.001); BRAF showed the strongest association with malignancy (50.0% vs. 2.7%; p < 0.001). In the resected cohort, combined cytology and molecular testing yielded an AUC of 0.81 versus 0.70 for cytology alone (bootstrap ΔAUC 0.10; 95% CI, 0.03–0.18). In the surgically verified, surgery-enriched TBSRTC category III–IV subgroup (n = 59), the combined model improved AUC from 0.65 to 0.81 (bootstrap ΔAUC 0.15; 95% CI, 0.01–0.29) and achieved 57.7% sensitivity, 90.9% specificity, 83.3% positive predictive value, and 76.3% accuracy. Conclusions: In the surgically verified TBSRTC category III–IV subgroup, targeted BRAF/RAS testing provided incremental rule-in information beyond cytology but had limited rule-out capability. BRAF V600E was strongly associated with malignancy, whereas non-V600 BRAF and RAS alterations required morphologic and clinical context. Negative molecular results should not be used in isolation to exclude malignancy. External validation is required.