Objective To study the prescription and preparation technology of breviscapine microemulsion for parenteral injection,and to evaluate its quality.Methods The prescription was selected and optimized through single-factor test and the pseudo-ternary phase diagram method.The preparation technology was investigated,and the particle diameter,drug content,encapsulation efficiency and haemolyticus were evaluated.Results The prescription composition of breviscapine microemulsion was soybean oil:phospholipid:HS15:PEG400:water=1:0.1:0.55:0.55:6.64 (m/m),with the drug content of 4.01 mg·mL-1,the acquired breviscapine microemulsion exhibited light yellow,uniform and transparent,with average particle diameter of 92.1 nm and encapsulation efficiency of 96.8%.The compatibility test showed no drug precipitation and the preparation was no hemolytic crisis.Conclusion The preparation of breviscapine microemulsion injection is correspond to the main index of parenteral injection.

Objective: To investigate the differences of clinicopathological features, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis between patients with extra-gastrointestinal stromal tumors (EGIST) and duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (DGIST). Methods: A retrospective case - control study was performed. Case inclusion criteria: (1) tumor confirmed by histology and pathology; (2) primary tumor locating in the extra - gastrointestinal tract or duodenum; (3) without other synchronous tumors; (4) complete clinical and pathological data. Clinical data of 20 EGIST patients and 32 DGIST patients from March 2011 to September 2016 at Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The observational parameters included clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and prognosis conditions. Continuous data of abnormal distribution were expressed as median (range) and compared using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Survival curves were drawn by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the Log-rank test. Results: Of the 20 EGIST patients, 8 were males and 12 were females with age of 61.0 (30.0 to 86.0) years and of the 32 DGIST patients, 12 were males and 20 were females with age of 55.5 (27.0 to 70.0) years. Compared with DGIST patients, EGIST patients were older (U=188.000, P=0.012], had larger tumor size [10.0 (3.0 to 29.0) cm vs. 4.0 (1.5 to 10.0) cm, U=98.500, P<0.001] and higher ratio of high risk classification [85.0% (17/20) vs. 12.5% (4/32), χ²=26.870, P<0.001]. Among the 20 EGIST patients, 5 were diagnosed with distal metastasis and received imatinib (400 mg/d), and the other 15 patients underwent radical resection who were included in survival analysis. All the 32 DGIST patients underwent radical resection. The median follow-up of whole group was 43 (14 to 76) months. The 3-year recurrence/metastasis-free survival rate of 15 cases undergoing radical resection in the EGIST group was 85.6%, which was lower than that of the DGIST group (88.6%), and the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.745). There was no significant difference in the 3-year overall survival rate between the EGIST group (92.9%) and the DGIST group (100%) (P=0.271). Conclusions As compared to DGIST, EGIST mostly occurs in those with older age, larger tumor size and higher risk grade. The prognosis of EGIST patients after radical resection is similar to that of DGIST patients.

Objective To investigate the differences of clinicopathological features, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis between patients with extra?gastrointestinal stromal tumors (EGIST) and duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (DGIST). Methods A retrospective case?control study was performed. Case inclusion criteria: (1) tumor confirmed by histology and pathology; (2) primary tumor locating in the extra?gastrointestinal tract or duodenum; (3) without other synchronous tumors; (4) complete clinical and pathological data. Clinical data of 20 EGIST patients and 32 DGIST patients from March 2011 to September 2016 at Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The observational parameters included clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and prognosis conditions. Continuous data of abnormal distribution were expressed as median (range) and compared using the Mann?Whitney U?test. Survival curves were drawn by the Kaplan?Meier method and compared with the Log?rank test. Results Of the 20 EGIST patients, 8 were males and 12 were females with age of 61.0 (30.0 to 86.0) years and of the 32 DGIST patients, 12 were males and 20 were females with age of 55.5 (27.0 to 70.0) years. Compared with DGIST patients, EGIST patients were older (U=188.000, P=0.012], had larger tumor size [10.0 (3.0 to 29.0) cm vs. 4.0 (1.5 to 10.0) cm, U=98.500, P<0.001] and higher ratio of high risk classification [85.0% (17/20) vs. 12.5% (4/32), χ2=26.870, P<0.001]. Among the 20 EGIST patients, 5 were diagnosed with distal metastasis and received imatinib (400 mg/d), and the other 15 patients underwent radical resection who were included in survival analysis. All the 32 DGIST patients underwent radical resection. The median follow?up of whole group was 43 (14 to 76) months. The 3?year recurrence/metastasis?free survival rate of 15 cases undergoing radical resection in the EGIST group was 85.6%, which was lower than that of the DGIST group (88.6%), and the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.745). There was no significant difference in the 3?year overall survival rate between the EGIST group (92.9%) and the DGIST group (100%) (P=0.271). Conclusions As compared to DGIST, EGIST mostly occurs in those with older age, larger tumor size and higher risk grade. The prognosis of EGIST patients after radical resection is similar to that of DGIST patients.

Objective To investigate the differences of clinicopathological features, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis between patients with extra?gastrointestinal stromal tumors (EGIST) and duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (DGIST). Methods A retrospective case?control study was performed. Case inclusion criteria: (1) tumor confirmed by histology and pathology; (2) primary tumor locating in the extra?gastrointestinal tract or duodenum; (3) without other synchronous tumors; (4) complete clinical and pathological data. Clinical data of 20 EGIST patients and 32 DGIST patients from March 2011 to September 2016 at Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The observational parameters included clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and prognosis conditions. Continuous data of abnormal distribution were expressed as median (range) and compared using the Mann?Whitney U?test. Survival curves were drawn by the Kaplan?Meier method and compared with the Log?rank test. Results Of the 20 EGIST patients, 8 were males and 12 were females with age of 61.0 (30.0 to 86.0) years and of the 32 DGIST patients, 12 were males and 20 were females with age of 55.5 (27.0 to 70.0) years. Compared with DGIST patients, EGIST patients were older (U=188.000, P=0.012], had larger tumor size [10.0 (3.0 to 29.0) cm vs. 4.0 (1.5 to 10.0) cm, U=98.500, P<0.001] and higher ratio of high risk classification [85.0% (17/20) vs. 12.5% (4/32), χ2=26.870, P<0.001]. Among the 20 EGIST patients, 5 were diagnosed with distal metastasis and received imatinib (400 mg/d), and the other 15 patients underwent radical resection who were included in survival analysis. All the 32 DGIST patients underwent radical resection. The median follow?up of whole group was 43 (14 to 76) months. The 3?year recurrence/metastasis?free survival rate of 15 cases undergoing radical resection in the EGIST group was 85.6%, which was lower than that of the DGIST group (88.6%), and the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.745). There was no significant difference in the 3?year overall survival rate between the EGIST group (92.9%) and the DGIST group (100%) (P=0.271). Conclusions As compared to DGIST, EGIST mostly occurs in those with older age, larger tumor size and higher risk grade. The prognosis of EGIST patients after radical resection is similar to that of DGIST patients.