1.Percutaneous one-way long tail pedicle screw internal fixation treatment thoracolumbar spine fractures single section
Xiang LI ; Haiyi HE ; Wenhui ZHU ; Pengfei ZHANG ; Qiang GUO ; Fuxiang NIE
International Journal of Surgery 2015;42(10):680-683,封3
Objective Explore the spine fractures treated by percutaneous one-way pedicle screws surgery compared with curative effect of traditional open surgery.Methods From October 2012 to October 2015,to collect 61 patients with single segmental thoracolumbar fractures were retrospectively analyzed,respectively for percutaneous minimally invasive one-way long tail pedicle screw(Observation group,n =32) of internal fixation were compared with traditional open surgery (control group,n =29).Compare two groups of paticnts in the differences of operation time,amount of operative bleeding,operative wound,postoperative VAS scores,the ratio of postoperative injured vertebral front height,and hospitalization expenses.Results All patients were followed up for an average of 9.6 months (from 7 to 14months),neither of the groups showed internal fixation of related complications.Time of operation(min):observation group(87.4 ± 13.6) min,control group (92.3 ± 10.3) min,(t =-1.648,P > 0.05);Mount of operative bleeding:observation group (73 ± 8.8) mL,control group (352 ± 63.7) mL,(t =-23,385,P < 0.05);Wound of operative (cm2):observation group (12.3 ± 2.30) cm2,control group (81.5 ± 14.2) cm2,(t =-25.937,P < 0.05);Expenses of hospitalization (RMB ten thousand):observation group (3.5 ± 0.3),control group(2.3± 0.5),(t =-11.223,P < 0.05);VAS score 2 days and 6 months after surgery:observation group (3.0±0.4) and (1.3±0.6),controlgroup(4.2±0.5) and (2.7±0.7),(t=-10.396 and-8.409,P< 0.05),and comparcd with the preoperative also statistically significant (P < 0.05);2 days and 6 months after surgery in the ratio of injured vertebral front height:observation group(89.6 ±7.2)% and (84.2 ±5.7)%,control group (91.3 ± 5.8) % and (86.3 ± 4.6) %,(t =-1.009 and-1.573,P > 0.05),but in the same group recovery of injured vertebral leading edge height ratio compared with preoperative postoperative were significantly (P < 0.05).Conclusion For a single section of thoracolumbar spine fracture,Compared with the control group,Percutaneous one-way long tail pedicle screw internal fixation technology have the advantage of little trauma,less sequel,rapid postoperative recovery,also in the recovery of vertebral body height and loss of late has achieved the same cur-ative effect,but patients with costly.
2.Optimization of the Preparation Technology of Syzygium aromaticum Oil Dropping Pills
Zhuo DU ; Xiaoyao YU ; Cuiqiong KUANG ; Yufang MO ; Baozhu ZHOU ; Lu LIU ; Haiyi LI ; Jialiang GUO
China Pharmacy 2019;30(24):3360-3363
OBJECTIVE: To establish the method for content determination of eugenol in Syzygium aromaticum oil dropping pills, and to optimize the preparation technology. METHODS: The content of eugenol in S. aromaticum oil dropping pills was determined by UV spectrophotometry. Based on single factor test, using the percentage of drugs in total amount, liquid temperature, falling distance of condensate, liquid drop distance as factors, taking the roundness, weight and hardness difference and comprehensive score as factors, L9(34) orthogonal design test was adopted to optimize the preparation process. RESULTS: The linear range of eugenol was 15.15-45.45 μg/mL(r=0.999 6); RSDs of precision, stability and reproducibility tests were all lower than 1%; the recoveries were 97.41%-100.59%(RSD=1.35%, n=6). The optimal preparation technology included that the percentage of drugs in total amount was 5%; liquid temperature was 80 ℃; falling distance of condensate was 13 cm; liquid drop distance was 6 cm. The dropping pills had smooth appearance, good roundness and moderate hardness; the average content of engenol was 4.073%(RSD=0.35%,n=6). CONCLUSIONS: The established method is simple, and can be used for the content determination of eugenol in S. aromaticum oil dropping pills. The optimal preparation technology is stable and feasible.
3.Comparison of diagnostic performance of Clear Cell Likelihood Score v1.0 and v2.0 for clear renal cell carcinoma.
Yuwei HAO ; Sheng GAO ; Xiaoyue ZHANG ; Mengqiu CUI ; Xiaohui DING ; He WANG ; Dawei YANG ; Huiyi YE ; Haiyi WANG
Journal of Southern Medical University 2023;43(5):800-806
OBJECTIVE:
To compare the performance of Clear Cell Likelihood Score (ccLS) v1.0 and v2.0 in diagnosing clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) from small renal masses (SRM).
METHODS:
We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data and MR images of patients with pathologically confirmed solid SRM from the First Medical Center of the Chinese PLA General Hospital between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2021, and from Beijing Friendship Hospital of Capital Medical University and Peking University First Hospital between January 1, 2019 and May 17, 2021. Six abdominal radiologists were trained for use of the ccLS algorithm and scored independently using ccLS v1.0 and ccLS v2.0. Random- effects logistic regression modeling was used to generate plot receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) to evaluate the diagnostic performance of ccLS v1.0 and ccLS v2.0 for ccRCC, and the area under curve (AUC) of these two scoring systems were compared using the DeLong's test. Weighted Kappa test was used to evaluate the interobserver agreement of the ccLS score, and differences in the weighted Kappa coefficients was compared using the Gwet consistency coefficient.
RESULTS:
In total, 691 patients (491 males, 200 females; mean age, 54 ± 12 years) with 700 renal masses were included in this study. The pooled accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of ccLS v1.0 for diagnosing ccRCC were 77.1%, 76.8%, 77.7%, 90.2%, and 55.7%, as compared with 80.9%, 79.3%, 85.1%, 93.4%, 60.6% with ccLS v2.0, respectively. The AUC of ccLS v2.0 was significantly higher than that of ccLS v1.0 for diagnosis of ccRCC (0.897 vs 0.859; P < 0.01). The interobserver agreement did not differ significantly between ccLS v1.0 and ccLS v2.0 (0.56 vs 0.60; P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
ccLS v2.0 has better performance for diagnosing ccRCC than ccLS v1.0 and can be considered for use to assist radiologists with their routine diagnostic tasks.
Female
;
Male
;
Humans
;
Adult
;
Middle Aged
;
Aged
;
Carcinoma, Renal Cell/diagnosis*
;
Retrospective Studies
;
Kidney
;
Carcinoma
;
Kidney Neoplasms/diagnosis*