No abstract available.
Risk Factors*

No Abstract available.
Transcription Factors*

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), the most common liver disease, represents a spectrum of disease including steatohepatitis, fibrosis, and irreversible cirrhosis. Although a "benign" condition, NAFLD is a risk factor eventually leading to fibrosis and to non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). A number of evidences support an association between NAFLD/NASH and metabolic syndrome. The pathogenesis of NAFLD/NASH and metabolic syndrome seems to have common pathophysiological mechanisms, with focus on insulin resistance as a key factor. This review discusses the new aspects of NAFLD/NASH pathogenesis, and anticipate that such knowledge will eventually serve to the deveolpment of novel treatment strategies for this disease.
Risk Factors

No abstract available.
Socioeconomic Factors

No abstract available.
Transcription Factors*

BACKGROUND/AIMS: This study compared the therapeutic efficacy of endoscopic band ligation (EBL) with that of electrocoagulation for treating non-variceal, non-ulcer (NVNU) upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding. METHODS: This study included 89 patients who underwent EBL and 56 patients in whom monopolar electrocoagulation was performed for NVNU UGI bleeding. The lesions treated were Mallory-Weiss tear in 91 patients, Dieulafoy's lesion in 42 patients and angiodysplasia in 12 patients. RESULTS: The initial hemostatic rate was 97% in the EBL group and 91% in the electrocoagulation group, but this was not statistically different. Rebleeding occurred in 5 of 89 patients (5.6%) in the EBL group and in 8 of 56 patients (14.3%) in the electrocoagulation group (p=0.07). Thrombocytopenia or prothrombin time prolongation was confirmed to be a significant risk factor for rebleeding. The rebleeding rate in the high risk group was significantly lower than in the EBL group (9% vs. 30%, respectively, p=0.03). The median procedure time was significantly shorter in the EBL group compared with that in the electrocoagulation group (median 5.6 minutes vs. 8.3 minutes, respectively, p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: EBL and electrocoagulation are both effective for treating NVNU UGI bleeding, and EBL is especially safe and effective for the cases with a high risk for rebleeding.
Risk Factors

No abstract available.
Risk Factors*

PURPOSE: The supply of donor organs does not meet the demand of transplantation. To find a possible way of expanding the donor pool, we have evaluated the risk factors of cadaveric donors that influence the graft survival. METHODS: Between Feb. 1995 and Dec. 1999, we performed 200 cases of cadaveric kidney transplantation. The graft survival rates in 1 yr, 2 yr, & 3 yr are 93.0%, 91.1%, & 89.9%, respectively. We defined the marginal donor as a donor who possesses one of the risk factors of donor age > or = 50, or < or =5 year old (n=18), ICU stay > or =10 days (n=46), history of hypertension (n=30), CPR > or =20 min (n=7), prolonged hypotension (SBP < or =80 mmHg, over 6 hr) (n=40), high dose inotropic support (dopamine > or =20microgram/kg/min, or dobutamine > or =15microgram/kg/min) (n=78), serum creatinine level > or =2.5 mg/dl (n=16), or cold ischemic time > or =12 hr (n=34). We compared graft survival rates between the marginal donor group and the non-marginal donor group, and analyzed risk factors affecting graft survival by univariate and multivariate methods. RESULTS: CPR > or =20 min (71.5%, 71.5%, - vs 93.8%, 91.8%, 90.6%, p=0.027), prolonged hypotension (85.0%, 85.0%, 80.3% vs 95.0%, 92.6%, 92.6%, p=0.028) and serum creatinine > or =2.5 mg/dl (75.0%, 75.0%, 75.0% vs 94.6%, 92.4%, 91.0%, p=0.001) affect graft survival in univariate analysis. There is, However, no risk factor that affects graft survival in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: We can increase the supply of donor organs for kidney transplantation by the selective use of high-risk cadaver donor. However, a prospective randomized study including recipient factors is needed to define the acceptable conditions better.
Risk Factors

No abstract available.
Risk Factors*

No abstract available.
Risk Factors*