Chronic obstructive pneumonia cancer transformation refers to the malignant transformation of long-term repeated chronic inflammation of the lung. Traditional Chinese Medicine believes that the etiology and pathogenesis of chronic obstructive pneumonia cancer transformation always belong to the deficiency of origin and excess of signs. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease causes damage to the qi of the lung, spleen and kidney. Qi is yang, and qi deficiency leads to yang deficiency. Yang deficiency and abnormal warm would result in qi stagnation, phlegm coagulation and blood stasis. It is the key to the transformation of chronic obstructive pneumonia cancer. Kidney yang is the root of yang qi. Deficiency of kidney yang is the initiating factor for the transformation of chronic obstructive pneumonia cancer. Deficiency of lung yang is the fundamental factor for the transformation of chronic obstructive pneumonia cancer. Deficiency of kidney yang and deficiency of spleen yang are the driving factors for the transformation of chronic obstructive pneumonia cancer. Therefore, this article discussed the role of kidney yang in the transformation of chronic obstructive pneumonia cancer from the theory of "Qi Zhu Xu Zhi", in order to broaden the thinking of clinical diagnosis and treatment of the disease.

Background/Aims: Lyon consensus differentiates acid exposure time (AET) as physiological, borderline, and pathological. Mean nocturnal baseline impedance (MNBI) and post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index (PSPWi) are believed to increase diagnostic yield of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and correlate with symptom outcome of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment. We aim to explore the clinical characteristics and the correlation of pH-impedance parameters with PPI response in Chinese patients with different AET levels. Methods: We retrospectively investigated 177 patients with typical reflux symptoms who received esophageal function tests. The demographics, GERD questionnaire scores, the proportion of esophagitis and PPI responders, and manometric and pH-impedance parameters were compared among patients with AET < 4%, 4-6%, and > 6%. In patients with AET ≥ 4%, manometric and pH-impedance parameters were compared between PPI responders and non-responders. Results: Among 177 patients, 69 (39.0%) had AET 4-6%, and 53 (29.9%) had AET > 6%. The demographics, esophagogastric junction type, and occurrence of ineffective esophageal motility were similar between patients with AET 4-6% and > 6%, but different from AET < 4%. MNBI and PSPWi were different among different AET levels, but similar between PPI responders and non-responders in patientswith AET ≥ 4%. Conclusions It is reasonable to set 4% as a threshold to define pathological AET in Chinese patients. MNBI and PSPWi could identify GERD patients, but may not correlate with PPI response of Chinese GERD patients.

Objective:To establish the normal values of water-perfused high resolution esophageal manometry (HREM)(GAP-36A) at resting period, water swallowing, semisolid swallowing and solid swallowing in Chinese population.Methods:From September 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020, 91 healthy volunteers receiving water-perfused HREM (GAP-36A) at resting period, water swallowing, semisolid swallowing and solid swallowing were selected from 9 hospitals (Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology; the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University; the Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University; the Second Affiliated Hospital, Naval Medical University; the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University; the First Affiliated Hospital, University of Science and Technology of China; Aviation General Hospital of China Medical University; the Affiliated Hospital of Medical School of Nanjing University and the First People′s Hospital of Yichang). Parameters included the position of the upper and lower edges of the upper esophageal sphincter (UES) and lower esophageal sphincter (LES), the length of the LES and UES, the position of the pressure inversion point (PIP), the resting pressure of UES and LES and swallow-related parameters such as the distal contraction integral (DCI), 4 s integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), distal latency (DL) and UES residual pressure. One-way analysis of variance, post-hoc test and sum rank test were used for statistical analysis.Results:A total of 87 healthy volunteers were enrolled, including 40 males and 47 females, aged (38.5±14.2) years old (ranged from 19 to 65 years old). The position of the upper and lower edges of the LES was (42.7±2.8) and (45.6±2.8) cm, respectively, the length of the LES was (2.9±0.4) cm, and the position of PIP was (43.3±2.8) cm. The position of the upper and lower edges of the UES was (18.1±3.0) and (22.6±2.0) cm, respectively, and the length of the UES was (4.8±1.0) cm. The resting pressure of LES and UES was (17.4±10.7) and (84.1±61.1) mmHg (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa), respectively. The DCI value at solid swallowing was higher than those at water swallowing and semisolid swallowing ((2 512.4±1 448.0) mmHg·s·cm vs. (2 183.2±1 441.2) and (2 150.8±1 244.8) mmHg·s·cm), and the differences were statistically significant ( t=-4.30 and -3.74, both P<0.001). The values of 4 s IRP at semisolid swallowing and solid swallowing were lower than that at water swallowing ((4.6±4.1) and (4.9±3.9) mmHg vs. (5.4±3.9) mmHg), and the differences were statistically significant ( t=3.38 and 2.09, P=0.001 and 0.037). The DL at water swallowing was shorter than those at semisolid swallowing and solid swallowing ((8.5±1.8) s vs. (9.8±2.2) and (10.6±2.8) s), and the DL at semisolid swallowing was shorter than that at solid swallowing, and the differences were statistically significant ( t=-10.21, -13.91 and -4.68, all P<0.001). The UES residual pressure at water swallowing was higher than those at semisolid swallowing and solid swallowing (9.5 mmHg, 6.5 to 12.3 mmHg vs. 8.0 mmHg, 4.5 to 11.7 mmHg and 5.5 mmHg, 2.0 to 9.3 mmHg), and the UES residual pressure at semisolid swallowing was higher than that at solid swallowing, and the differences were statistically significant ( t=3.48, 10.30 and 6.35, all P<0.001). Conclusions:The normal values of water-perfused HREM (GAP-36A) in Chinese population at resting period, water swallowing, semisolid swallowing and solid swallowing can provide a reference basis for clinical diagnosis and treatment for patients receiving water-perfused HREM examination.