OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Shexiang Tongxin Dropping Pill (STDP) in treating stable angina patients with phlegm-heat and blood-stasis syndrome by exercise duration and metabolic equivalents. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial enrolled stable angina patients with phlegm-heat and blood-stasis syndrome from 22 hospitals. They were randomized 1:1 to STDP (35 mg/pill, 6 pills per day) or placebo for 56 days. The primary outcome was the exercise duration and metabolic equivalents (METs) assessed by the standard Bruce exercise treadmill test after 56 days of treatment. The secondary outcomes included the total angina symptom score, Chinese medicine (CM) symptom scores, Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) scores, changes in ST-T on electrocardiogram and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: This trial enrolled 309 patients, including 155 and 154 in the STDP and placebo groups, respectively. STDP significantly prolonged exercise duration with an increase of 51.0 s, compared to a decrease of 12.0 s with placebo (change rate: -11.1% vs. 3.2%, P<0.01). The increase in METs was significantly greater in the STDP group than in the placebo group (change: -0.4 vs. 0.0, change rate: -5.0% vs. 0.0%, P<0.01). The improvement of total angina symptom scores (25.0% vs. 0.0%), CM symptom scores (38.7% vs. 11.8%), reduction of nitroglycerin consumption (100.0% vs. 11.3%), and all domains of SAQ, were significantly greater with STDP than placebo (all P<0.01). The changes in Q-T intervals at 28 and 56 days from baseline were similar between the two groups (both P>0.05). Twenty-five participants (16.3%) with STDP and 16 (10.5%) with placebo experienced AEs (P=0.131), with no serious AEs observed. CONCLUSION STDP could improve exercise tolerance in patients with stable angina and phlegm-heat and blood stasis syndrome, with a favorable safety profile. (Registration No. ChiCTR-IPR-15006020).
Humans ; Double-Blind Method ; Drugs, Chinese Herbal/adverse effects* ; Male ; Female ; Middle Aged ; Angina, Stable/physiopathology* ; Aged ; Syndrome ; Treatment Outcome ; Placebos ; Tablets

The conventional oral drug delivery frequently results in the drug elimination before its complete release due to rapid gastric emptying and short gastrointestinal transport time, thus reducing the bioavailability of drug. In order to maintain an effective concentration of drug in the body and maximize its optimal efficacy, the frequency of administrations often needs to be increased. By contrast, gastric retention drug delivery system (GRDDS), as an innovative method of drug delivery, prolongs the retention time of the drug in the stomach and reduces irritation to the gastrointestinal tract. Consequently, it enhances the bioavailability of drug, reduces dosing frequency for patients and improves treatment adherence. In recent years, domestic and foreign studies have been conducted on gastric retention drug delivery systems. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of the relevant literature published in recent years, examining their current marketing status, various types, as well as in vivo and in vitro evaluation methods.

Objective:To describe demographic,clinical and physiological characteristics,treatment between first-episode major depressive disorder(MDD)and relapse MDD,and to explore characteristics of relapse MDD.Methods:Totally 858 patients who met the diagnostic criteria for depression of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,Fifth Edition(DSM-5),were included by using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview(MINI),Clinician-Rated Dimensions of Psychosis Symptom Severity,and Hamilton Depression Scale etc.Among them,529(58.6％)were first-episode depression and 329(36.0％)were relapsed.The differences of demographic characteristics,clinical and physiological characteristics,treatment were compared byx2test and Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test.Multivariate logistic regression was used to explore the characteristics of MDD recur-rence.Results:Compared to first-episode MDD,relapse MDD had more comorbidity(OR=2.11,95％CI:1.00-4.44),more days out of role(OR=1.26,95％CI:1.01-1.56),more history of using psychiatric drug more than one month(OR=1.41,95％CI:1.02-1.97)and electroconvulsive therapy(OR=3.23,95％CI:1.42-7.36),and higher waist-hip ratio(OR=33.88,95％CI:2.88-399.32).Conclusion:Relapse MDD has positive as-sociation with comorbidity of mental disorders,out of role,and higher waist-hip ratio.

Objective:To explore the epidemiological characteristics and spatiotemporal clustering of foodborne infection of Vibrio ( V.) parahaemolyticus in Ningbo, Zhejiang Province, from 2014 to 2022, and provide reference and evidence for the prevention and control of related diseases. Methods:The incidence data on of foodborne infection of V. parahaemolyticus in Ningbo from 2014 to 2022 were collected from Ningbo Foodborne Disease Surveillance System, and the case counts and the positive rates in different districts (counties, cities) were calculated. Spatial autocorrelation analysis and spatiotemporal scanning analysis were conducted to analyze the spatiotemporal clustering of the diseases. Results:A total of 1 822 cases of foodborne infection of V. parahaemolyticus were reported in Ningbo from 2014 to 2022, with an overall positive rate of 3.78%. Spatial autocorrelation analysis showed that the positive rate of foodborne infection of V. parahaemolyticus in Ningbo was unevenly distributed from 2014 to 2022, Ninghai was a high-high clustering area, while Zhenhai was a high-low clustering area, and Jiangbei was a low-low clustering area. The annual incidence was high during July-September. Spatiotemporal scanning analysis found one class Ⅰ spatiotemporal clustering area and three class Ⅱ spatiotemporal clustering areas, with the class Ⅰ spatiotemporal clustering area being observed in Jiangbei and Zhenhai from 2019 to 2022. Conclusions:Spatiotemporal clustering of foodborne infection of V. parahaemolyticus existed in Ningbo from 2014 to 2022, with an annual high incidence period from July to September. The key areas for the prevention and control of foodborne infection of V. parahaemolyticus are coastal districts (counties, cities) in Ningbo.

Objective:To explore the clinical application and triage management value of using blood circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) (cysteine dioxygenase type 1 gene, CDO1, and Homeobox protein A9 gene, HOXA9) hypermethylation level to detect and diagnose ovarian cancer.Methods:A case-control study was conducted on patients who went for surgery at Chengdu Womens and Childrens Central Hospital from November 2022 to October 2023. Blood samples were collected before surgery for evaluation of cancer antigen 125 (CA125), human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA) score, and DNA methylation testing. The basic clinical information, biomarkers, and transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) information were collected simultaneously. Information from a total of 151 patients was collected, including 122 cases with benign pathology and 29 ovarian cancer cases. The pathologic diagnosis of ovarian tissue was defined as the gold standard. The multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify high-risk factors for ovarian cancer. The clinical efficacy of DNA methylation detection for ovarian cancer was analyzed using the area under curve (AUC).Results:The results showed that the age, menopausal status, CA125 and HE4 detection, ROMA score, positivity rate of CDO1 gene and HOXA9 gene single or combined testing in ovarian cancer patients were higher than those in the benign group and showed significant differences ( P<0.05). Among these detection protocols, the AUC of CDO1 and HOXA9 dual gene methylation testing for ovarian cancer was the highest at 0.936 (95% CI, 0.878-0.994), with 89.7% (95% CI 73.6%-96.4%) sensitivity and 97.5% (95% CI 93.0%-99.2%) specificity, respectively. The positive detection rate of CDO1 and HOXA9 dual gene methylation in early ovarian cancer FOGO I-II stage is 12/14 higher than other tests. Conclusion:Blood cfDNA methylation detection, a simple, non-invasive, and highly sensitive detection method, is superior to the current ovarian cancer testing in the risk assessment and early detection.

Objective:To explore potential predictors of refractory Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia (RMPP) in early stage. Methods:The prospective multicenter study was conducted in Zhejiang, China from May 1 st, 2019 to January 31 st, 2020. A total of 1 428 patients with fever >48 hours to <120 hours were studied. Their clinical data and oral pharyngeal swab samples were collected; Mycoplasma pneumoniae DNA in pharyngeal swab specimens was detected. Patients with positive Mycoplasma pneumoniae DNA results underwent a series of tests, including chest X-ray, complete blood count, C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and procalcitonin. According to the occurrence of RMPP, the patients were divided into two groups, RMPP group and general Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia (GMPP) group. Measurement data between the 2 groups were compared using Mann-Whitney U test. Logistic regression analyses were used to examine the associations between clinical data and RMPP. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to analyse the power of the markers for predicting RMPP. Results:A total of 1 428 patients finished the study, with 801 boys and 627 girls, aged 4.3 (2.7, 6.3) years. Mycoplasma pneumoniae DNA was positive in 534 cases (37.4%), of whom 446 cases (83.5%) were diagnosed with Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia, including 251 boys and 195 girls, aged 5.2 (3.3, 6.9) years. Macrolides-resistant variation was positive in 410 cases (91.9%). Fifty-five cases were with RMPP, 391 cases with GMPP. The peak body temperature before the first visit and LDH levels in RMPP patients were higher than that in GMPP patients (39.6 (39.1, 40.0) vs. 39.2 (38.9, 39.7) ℃, 333 (279, 392) vs. 311 (259, 359) U/L, both P<0.05). Logistic regression showed the prediction probability π=exp (-29.7+0.667×Peak body temperature (℃)+0.004×LDH (U/L))/(1+exp (-29.7+0.667×Peak body temperature (℃)+0.004 × LDH (U/L))), the cut-off value to predict RMPP was 0.12, with a consensus of probability forecast of 0.89, sensitivity of 0.89, and specificity of 0.67; and the area under ROC curve was 0.682 (95% CI 0.593-0.771, P<0.01). Conclusion:In MPP patients with fever over 48 to <120 hours, a prediction probability π of RMPP can be calculated based on the peak body temperature and LDH level before the first visit, which can facilitate early identification of RMPP.

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.