Objective To explore the effects of percutaneous renal biopsy(PRB) on the etiological diagnosis and therapeutic regimen of patients with acute renal failure(ARF),so as to further improve the diagnostic and therapeutic levels of ARF.Methods From Nov.1992 to Dec.2007,176 patients were admitted in the Renal Division of Nanfang Hospital.All the patients matched the diagnostic criteria and were clinically diagnosed as ARF:within 48h the serum creatinine(SCr) ascended(≥26.5?mol/L) and increased by more than 50%,and the urine volume of less than 0.5ml/kg?h persisted in 6 hours.All the patients were undergone PRB and the clinical data were analyzed retrospectively.Results The final etiological diagnosis rate elevated from 64.2%(113/176) before PRB to 96.6%(170/176) after PRB.The coincidence of etiological diagnosis before and after PRB was 95.6%(108/113).Of 176 cases,170 were finally diagnosed as ARF,and the 6 remainders who were clinically misdiagnosed as ARF were finally diagnosed as chronic renal insufficiency(CRI).The therapeutic regimen for 83 patients was supplemented and for another 10 patients was modified after PRB,the total adjusted rate was up to 52.8%(93/176).After PRB,8 patients were finally diagnosed as IgA nephropathy,of them one case was specifically diagnosed as IgA protractedly leading to CRI,6 cases were ARF complicated with IgA,and one case was crescent formation induced by IgA nephropathy that leading to ARF.Conclusion PRB is a very useful technique for the etiological diagnosis of ARF on determining the therapeutic regimen and defining the prognosis.

Objective To explore the clinical effect of the elderly far lateral lumbar disc herniation via Quadrant channel system under the Wiltse approach. Methods Thirty-three elderly patients suffering from far lateral lumbar disc herniation were treated by surgery, among whom 18 patients were treated by Quadrant minimally invasive channel system (Quadrant group), and 13 patients were treated by percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED group). The patients were followed up for 12 months, and the operation time, blood loss and length of incision were investigated. The JOA scores were compared preoperatively and postoperatively. Results The patients in two groups were followed up for 24 months, except 1 patient withdrew in Quadrant group. The incision length and blood loss in PTED group were superior to those in the Quadrant group:2.0-2.5 cm vs. 0.7 cm, (46.50± 15.20) ml vs.(23.87±6.58) ml, P<0.01, but the operation time in PTED group was longer than that in Quadrant group: (77.17 ± 8.71) min vs. (63.20 ±10.87) min, P<0.01.The two groups had achieved good curative effect, while JOA score in PTED group was superior to the Quadrant group 1 week after operation ( P<0.05), but in 3 month and 12 month two groups had no significant difference ( P>0.05). Conclusion Surgical treatment on elderly far lateral lumbar disc herniation via quadrant channel under wiltse approach is an effective method, and can achieve similar effect with PTED.

Objective:To investigate the efficacy and prognosis of rituximab (RTX) in the treatment of M-type phospholipase A2 receptor (PLA2R)-associated idiopathic membranous nephropathy (IMN).Methods:It was a retrospective cohort study. The clinical data of PLA2R-associated IMN patients who received RTX treatment in the Shenzhen Second People's Hospital from September 2018 to March 2023 were collected. According to remission status of proteinuria, the patients were divided into proteinuria remission group (24-hour urinary protein quantity < 3.5 g) and non-proteinuria remission group (24-hour urinary protein quantity ≥ 3.5 g), and the clinical data between the two groups were compared. According to baseline 24-hour urinary protein quantity and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), the patients were divided into high-risk disease progression group [24-hour urinary protein quantity ≥ 8 g or eGFR < 60 ml·min -1·(1.73 m 2) -1] and non-high-risk disease progression group [24-hour urinary protein quantity < 8 g or eGFR ≥ 60 ml·min -1·(1.73 m 2) -1]. Kaplan-Meier survival curve was utilized to compare the differences of proteinuria remission rates and renal composite endpoint event survival rates between the two groups. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was utilized to identify the influencing factors of proteinuria remission and renal composite endpoint event. Results:This study included 46 PLA2R-associated IMN patients, with 31 males (67.4%). The baseline eGFR was (78.4±34.1) ml·min -1·(1.73 m 2) -1. The 24-hour urinary protein quantity was 8.33 (6.04, 12.85) g. After 14.95 (7.44, 22.15) months of follow-up, 29 patients (63.0%) achieved proteinuria remission, with remission time of 6.0 (5.0, 9.0) months. Six (20.7%) patients relapsed, with relapsed time of 17.25 (11.75, 18.28) months. CD20 in the proteinuria remission group was lower than that in the non-proteinuria remission group ( Z=2.270, P=0.023). Eleven (23.9%) patients experienced renal composite endpoint events wtih occurrence time of 16.07 (7.87, 29.63) months. Kaplan-Meier survival curve analysis indicated that there was no statistically significant difference in proteinuria remission rates (log-rank χ2=0.26, P=0.612) and renal composite endpoint event survival rates (log-rank χ2=0.25, P=0.619) between baseline 24-hour urinary protein quantity ≥ 8 g and < 8 g groups. There was no statistically significant difference in proteinuria remission rates after RTX treatment (log-rank χ2=0.77, P=0.381) and renal composite endpoint event survival rates (log-rank χ2=1.41, P=0.236) between eGFR ≥ 60 ml·min -1·(1.73 m 2) -1 and < 60 ml·min -1·(1.73 m 2) -1 groups. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that hypertension history ( HR=0.16, 95% CI 0.05-0.55), immunosuppressive therapy history ( HR=0.08, 95% CI 0.01-0.50), baseline eGFR < 60 ml·min -1·(1.73 m 2) -1 ( HR=0.21, 95% CI 0.05-0.92), baseline PLA2R antibody titer ≥ 100 RU/ml ( HR=0.20, 95% CI 0.06-0.69), long time between treatment and first diagnosis ( HR=1.33, 95% CI 1.12-1.57), high baseline triglyceride ( HR=1.46, 95% CI 1.02-2.08), and baseline 24-hour urinary protein quantity ≥ 8 g ( HR=8.54, 95% CI 2.08-35.12) were independent influencing factors of proteinuria remission after RTX treatment. The baseline PLA2R antibody titer ≥ 100 RU/ml was an independent influencing factor of reaching the renal composite endpoint event ( HR=7.31, 95% CI 1.23-43.62). Conclusions:The proteinuria remission rate after RTX treatment of PLA2R-associated IMN is 63.0% and the recurrence rate is 20.7%. The incidence rate of renal composite endpoint event is 23.9%. The hypertension history, immunosuppressant medication history, baseline eGFR < 60 ml·min -1·(1.73 m 2) -1, baseline PLA2R antibody titer ≥ 100 RU/ml, long time between treatment and first diagnosis, high baseline triglyceride, and baseline 24-hour urinary protein quantity ≥ 8 g are independent influencing factors of proteinuria remission, and baseline PLA2R antibody titer ≥ 100 RU/ml is an independent risk factor of renal poor prognosis in PLA2R-associated IMN patients.

Objective:To learn about physicians’ concepts and commonly employed method in hyaluronic acid injection and provide reference data for the standardization of pain management.Methods:This study was a cross-sectional study. Convenient sampling method was used to distribute questionnaires to cosmetic injectors and patients experienced with hyaluronic acid injections to collect data on their views of pain associated with hyaluronic acid injections. The physician portion was collected offline from June 15 to July 20, 2022, and the patient portion was collected from November 14, 2022, to December 6, 2022, via the Questionnaire Star platform. The physician questionnaire consisted of 17 questions, question types included single choice, multiple choice and essay questions. The patient questionnaire consisted of 6 questions, question types included single choice and multiple choice. Relevant data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software for descriptive statistics, and data were presented in the form of cases and percentages (%).Results:Sixty-two physician questionnaires and 123 patient questionnaires were collected. 42 (67.74%) physicians observed from their daily practice that more than 50% of their patients were very concerned about pain during injection; 101 (82.11%) patients scored ≥5 out of 10 for concern about impending pain prior to hyaluronic acid filler injection. At the time of treatment, 48 (77.42%) physicians advised patients to choose a lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid filler for reasons including a significant reduction in injection pain (53 cases, 85.48%) and patient comfort with the treatment experience (59 cases, 95.16%). 60 (48.78%) patients were willing to choose an anesthesia-containing product at the time of injection, but the price of the anesthesia-containing product influenced the patient’ s choice (55 cases 44.72%) .Conclusions:Pain from cosmetic injectable treatments is an important issue to both physicians and patients. Lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid is recognized by physicians and patients for its analgesic effect and high safety profile. There is no perfect solution for pain in cosmetic injection treatment, and multidisciplinary collaboration may be needed to solve the problem.

Objective:To learn about physicians’ concepts and commonly employed method in hyaluronic acid injection and provide reference data for the standardization of pain management.Methods:This study was a cross-sectional study. Convenient sampling method was used to distribute questionnaires to cosmetic injectors from plastic surgery department of public hospitals or medical beauty institutions and patients experienced with hyaluronic acid injections to collect data on their views of pain associated with hyaluronic acid injections. The physician portion was collected offline from June 15 to July 20, 2022, and the patient portion was collected from November 14 to December 6, 2022, via the Questionnaire Star platform. The physician questionnaire consisted of 17 questions, question types included single choice, multiple choice and essay questions. The patient questionnaire consisted of 6 questions, question types included single choice and multiple choice. Relevant data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software for descriptive statistics, and data were presented in the form of cases(%).Results:Sixty-two physician questionnaires and 123 patient questionnaires were collected. 42 (67.74%) physicians observed from their daily practice that more than 50% of their patients were very concerned about pain during injection; 101 (82.11%) patients scored ≥5 out of 10 for concern about impending pain prior to hyaluronic acid filler injection. At the time of treatment, 48 (77.42%) physicians advised patients to choose a lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid filler for reasons including a significant reduction in injection pain (53 cases, 85.48%) and patient comfort with the treatment experience (59 cases, 95.16%). 60 (48.78%) patients were willing to choose an anesthesia-containing product at the time of injection, but the price of the anesthesia-containing product influenced the patient’s choice (55 cases, 44.72%).Conclusion:Pain from cosmetic injectable treatments is an important issue to both physicians and patients. Lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid is recognized by physicians and patients for its analgesic effect and high safety profile. There is no perfect solution for pain in cosmetic injection treatment, and multidisciplinary collaboration may be needed to solve the problem.

Objective:To learn about physicians’ concepts and commonly employed method in hyaluronic acid injection and provide reference data for the standardization of pain management.Methods:This study was a cross-sectional study. Convenient sampling method was used to distribute questionnaires to cosmetic injectors and patients experienced with hyaluronic acid injections to collect data on their views of pain associated with hyaluronic acid injections. The physician portion was collected offline from June 15 to July 20, 2022, and the patient portion was collected from November 14, 2022, to December 6, 2022, via the Questionnaire Star platform. The physician questionnaire consisted of 17 questions, question types included single choice, multiple choice and essay questions. The patient questionnaire consisted of 6 questions, question types included single choice and multiple choice. Relevant data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software for descriptive statistics, and data were presented in the form of cases and percentages (%).Results:Sixty-two physician questionnaires and 123 patient questionnaires were collected. 42 (67.74%) physicians observed from their daily practice that more than 50% of their patients were very concerned about pain during injection; 101 (82.11%) patients scored ≥5 out of 10 for concern about impending pain prior to hyaluronic acid filler injection. At the time of treatment, 48 (77.42%) physicians advised patients to choose a lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid filler for reasons including a significant reduction in injection pain (53 cases, 85.48%) and patient comfort with the treatment experience (59 cases, 95.16%). 60 (48.78%) patients were willing to choose an anesthesia-containing product at the time of injection, but the price of the anesthesia-containing product influenced the patient’ s choice (55 cases 44.72%) .Conclusions:Pain from cosmetic injectable treatments is an important issue to both physicians and patients. Lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid is recognized by physicians and patients for its analgesic effect and high safety profile. There is no perfect solution for pain in cosmetic injection treatment, and multidisciplinary collaboration may be needed to solve the problem.

Objective:To learn about physicians’ concepts and commonly employed method in hyaluronic acid injection and provide reference data for the standardization of pain management.Methods:This study was a cross-sectional study. Convenient sampling method was used to distribute questionnaires to cosmetic injectors from plastic surgery department of public hospitals or medical beauty institutions and patients experienced with hyaluronic acid injections to collect data on their views of pain associated with hyaluronic acid injections. The physician portion was collected offline from June 15 to July 20, 2022, and the patient portion was collected from November 14 to December 6, 2022, via the Questionnaire Star platform. The physician questionnaire consisted of 17 questions, question types included single choice, multiple choice and essay questions. The patient questionnaire consisted of 6 questions, question types included single choice and multiple choice. Relevant data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software for descriptive statistics, and data were presented in the form of cases(%).Results:Sixty-two physician questionnaires and 123 patient questionnaires were collected. 42 (67.74%) physicians observed from their daily practice that more than 50% of their patients were very concerned about pain during injection; 101 (82.11%) patients scored ≥5 out of 10 for concern about impending pain prior to hyaluronic acid filler injection. At the time of treatment, 48 (77.42%) physicians advised patients to choose a lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid filler for reasons including a significant reduction in injection pain (53 cases, 85.48%) and patient comfort with the treatment experience (59 cases, 95.16%). 60 (48.78%) patients were willing to choose an anesthesia-containing product at the time of injection, but the price of the anesthesia-containing product influenced the patient’s choice (55 cases, 44.72%).Conclusion:Pain from cosmetic injectable treatments is an important issue to both physicians and patients. Lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid is recognized by physicians and patients for its analgesic effect and high safety profile. There is no perfect solution for pain in cosmetic injection treatment, and multidisciplinary collaboration may be needed to solve the problem.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to develop a comprehensive instrument for evaluating and ranking clinical practice guidelines, named Scientific, Transparent and Applicable Rankings tool (STAR), and test its reliability, validity, and usability. METHODS: This study set up a multidisciplinary working group including guideline methodologists, statisticians, journal editors, clinicians, and other experts. Scoping review, Delphi methods, and hierarchical analysis were used to develop the STAR tool. We evaluated the instrument's intrinsic and interrater reliability, content and criterion validity, and usability. RESULTS: STAR contained 39 items grouped into 11 domains. The mean intrinsic reliability of the domains, indicated by Cronbach's α coefficient, was 0.588 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.414, 0.762). Interrater reliability as assessed with Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.774 (95% CI: 0.740, 0.807) for methodological evaluators and 0.618 (95% CI: 0.587, 0.648) for clinical evaluators. The overall content validity index was 0.905. Pearson's r correlation for criterion validity was 0.885 (95% CI: 0.804, 0.932). The mean usability score of the items was 4.6 and the median time spent to evaluate each guideline was 20 min. CONCLUSION The instrument performed well in terms of reliability, validity, and efficiency, and can be used for comprehensively evaluating and ranking guidelines.
Reproducibility of Results ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Humans