We recommended that the endoscopy examination and procedures should be strictly limited to urgent cases to minimize the risk of virus infection among health care workers.

COVID-19 pandemic has overwhelmed healthcare systems and limited access to surgical care. Urolithiasis can lead to emergencies and affect renal function during long-term follow-up. Therefore, timely and appropriate treatment is essential.

This is a non-systematic review of the recently published recommendations regarding urolithiasis treatment options during COVID-19. Fourteen publications were the basis of our review. Regarding anesthesia methods, the optimal methods are still unknown. During COVID-19, most of the endo-urologists changed their routine clinical practice and elective surgical treatment approaches. Despite decreasing number of emergency visits and admissions for stone disease, patients tend to have leukocytosis, higher creatinine levels, increased grade 3 and 4 hydronephrosis, and higher incidence of complications compared to non-COVID-19 time. Several alarming indications if present, intervention should be performed within 24h to prevent irreversible kidney damage, disease progression, or higher incidence of complications compared to non-COVID-19 time. For non-emergency and non-urgent urolithiasis, endo-urologists should make judicious treatment decision to prioritize urolithiasis treatment, and they should weigh benefits and risks before surgery.

Treatment options for urinary stones have markedly changed during COVID-19 pandemic. The optimal anesthesia methods are still unknown. Emergency intervention is a must if any alarming indications exist. Emergency cases tend to have higher incidence of complications compared to non-COVID-19 time. For non-emergency and non-urgent urolithiasis, endo-urologists should make judicious treatment decision to prioritize urolithiasis treatment, and they should weigh benefits and risks before surgery.

It has been demonstrated experimentally that the coronavirus can enter the central nervous system through olfactory nerves and can even reach medulla. Neurological manifestations are observed more frequently in patients with coronavirus disease.

The aim of the review is to seek evidence for infection of the nervous system by the human coronavirus and study the neurological manifestations of the coronavirus and its treatment. A search was done in PubMed, Google Scholar, CrossRef, and Scopus. PKC-theta inhibitor There is evidence for the coronavirus infection of the nervous system from experimental studies, autopsy reports, and clinical studies. The virus can damage the nervous system either by direct viral damage to the neural cells or by immunopathology. Cerebral edema, neuronal degeneration, encephalitis, meningoencephalitis, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, Guillain-Barré Syndrome, Bickerstaff’s brainstem encephalitis, Miller Fisher syndrome, polyneuritis, toxic encephalopathy, and stroke can occur. The coronavirus haes. The neurological diseases correlate with the severity of the coronavirus disease. The treatment is mainly supportive. The reports of patients with encephalitis, encephalomyelitis, and brainstem encephalitis show slow recovery. But a stroke has a high mortality.

The reported number of COVID-19 patients increases on average along with the increased laboratory tests in Bangladesh implying a possibility of the spread of deadly coronavirus being out of control. Contrary to that, the government claims that it controls the spread of coronavirus through undertaking stringent policy measures. This different scenario leads this study on whether these measures have any positive impact on controlling the pandemic.

The results show that simulated number of patients (without policy measures) surpassed the actual number of patients (with policy measures) from the first week of July 2020 which may provide a signal about the positive impact of policy measures taken by the government.

This study concludes that policy measures taken by the government are useful to some extent in controlling the coronavirus pandemic. As this pandemic lingers, people may lose their patience to stay at home. Consequently, some of the policies need further correction and change.

This study concludes that policy measures taken by the government are useful to some extent in controlling the coronavirus pandemic. As this pandemic lingers, people may lose their patience to stay at home. Consequently, some of the policies need further correction and change.

To review recent clinical evidence surrounding the use of cannabinoids and cannabis in gastrointestinal diseases, particularly inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and functional gut disorders. A second aim is to evaluate the current status of gastrointestinal related adverse effects which have been linked to cannabis use, specifically cannabis hyperemesis syndrome (CHS) and acute pancreatitis.

Observational and prospective studies suggest that cannabinoids improve IBD symptoms. Small prospective clinical trials have not shown any effects on objective inflammatory findings, other than one recent paper in ulcerative colitis, in abstract form only, which suggests endoscopic improvement. Short duration mechanistic studies in functional gut disorders suggest cannabinoids may attenuate gastric emptying and slow colonic motility but appear to have less effect on sensory thresholds in the gut.

In general, while mostly uncontrolled data suggests cannabis may improve symptoms in IBD (and to a lesser degree functional gut disorders), this is not likely due to any substantial anti-inflammatory effect. Much remains unknown about CHS etiology and complete abstinence from cannabinoids remains the generally accepted treatment strategy. Population-based studies do not suggest that cannabis use is related to acute pancreatitis. Further research is certainly warranted.

In general, while mostly uncontrolled data suggests cannabis may improve symptoms in IBD (and to a lesser degree functional gut disorders), this is not likely due to any substantial anti-inflammatory effect. Much remains unknown about CHS etiology and complete abstinence from cannabinoids remains the generally accepted treatment strategy. Population-based studies do not suggest that cannabis use is related to acute pancreatitis. Further research is certainly warranted.