1.The reliability of ultrasonographic measurements for testicular volume assessment: comparison of three common formulas with true testicular volume.
Ming-Li HSIEH ; Shih-Tsung HUANG ; Hsin-Chieh HUANG ; Yu CHEN ; Yu-Chao HSU
Asian Journal of Andrology 2009;11(2):261-265
The aim of this study was to determine the correlation of ultrasonographic estimates of testicular volume with true testicular volume and to compare the accuracy and precision of the three most commonly utilized formulas. A total of 15 patients underwent high-resolution ultrasonography (US) analysis for testicular volume before orchiectomy. Testicular volume was calculated using three common formulas: (1) length (L) x width (W) x height (H) x 0.52; (2) the empirical formula of Lambert: L x W x H x 0.71; and (3) L x W2 x 0.52. The actual volume of each removed testis was estimated directly by a water displacement method. Thus, four volume measurements were obtained for each of the 30 testes. The obtained data were analyzed by paired t-test and linear regression analysis. All three US formula measurements significantly underestimated the true testicular volume. The largest mean biases were observed with US formula 1, which underestimated the true volume by 3.3 mL (31%). US formula 2 had a smaller mean difference from the true volume, with an underestimation of only 0.6 mL (6%). Regression analysis showed that formulas 1 and 2 had better R2 values than formula 3. However, all three US formulas displayed a strong linear relationship with the true volume (R2= 0.872-0.977; P < 0.001). Among the commonly used US formulas, the empirical formula of Lambert (L x W x H x 0.71) provided better accuracy than the other two formulas evaluated, and better precision than formula 3. Therefore, the formula of Lambert is the optimal choice in clinical practice.
Aged
;
Aged, 80 and over
;
Humans
;
Male
;
Middle Aged
;
Organ Size
;
Reproducibility of Results
;
Testis
;
anatomy & histology
;
diagnostic imaging
;
Ultrasonography
;
methods
2.The Alpha-2A Adrenergic Receptor Gene -1291C/G Single Nucleotide Polymorphism is Associated with the Efficacy of Methylphenidate in Treating Taiwanese Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.
Hui Ching HUANG ; Lawrence Shih Hsin WU ; Shun Chieh YU ; Bo Jian WU ; Ahai Chang LUA ; Shin Min LEE ; Chao Zong LIU
Psychiatry Investigation 2018;15(3):306-312
OBJECTIVE: The therapeutic effect of methylphenidate (MPH) in treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has been related to the alpha-2A adrenergic receptor (ADRA2A) gene -1291C/G single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP). We investigated the effect of MPH in treating Taiwanese children and adolescent with ADHD and its relation to the ADRA2A gene -1291C/G SNP. METHODS: The subjects with DSM-IV ADHD diagnosis underwent a titration period to find out the dose of MPH for maintenance treatment. After 4 weeks maintenance treatment, the effect of MPH was evaluated by the Swanson, Nolan and Pelham version IV total scores. The subjects with more than 25% score reduction were referred to responders and those with ≥50% improvement were considered as better responders. The -1291C/G variant of the ADRA2A gene was identified by DNA sequencing and what relevance it has to the MPH response was examined by binary logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 59 subjects, 44 (74.6%) were responsive to MPH treatment and the responsiveness was not shown to be associated with the ADRA2A gene -1291C/G SNP. As the responsive subjects were categorized as moderate responders and better responders and subjected to statistical analysis, the GG homozygotes showed a greater chance to have a better response to MPH treatment than CC homozygotes (p=0.02), with an odds ratio of 32.14 (95% CI=1.64–627.80). CONCLUSION: The ADRA2A gene -1291C/G SNP is associated with the efficacy of MPH for the treatment of ADHD in Taiwanese children and adolescents. The responsive subjects bearing homozygous -1291G allele are more likely to have a better response to MPH treatment.
Adolescent*
;
Alleles
;
Child*
;
Diagnosis
;
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
;
Homozygote
;
Humans
;
Logistic Models
;
Methylphenidate*
;
Odds Ratio
;
Pharmacogenetics
;
Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide*
;
Receptors, Adrenergic, alpha-2*
;
Sequence Analysis, DNA
3.Protective loop ileostomy or colostomy? A risk evaluation of all common complications
Yi-Wen YANG ; Sheng-Chieh HUANG ; Hou-Hsuan CHENG ; Shih-Ching CHANG ; Jeng-Kai JIANG ; Huann-Sheng WANG ; Chun-Chi LIN ; Hung-Hsin LIN ; Yuan-Tzu LAN
Annals of Coloproctology 2024;40(6):580-587
Purpose:
Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice.
Methods:
Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared.
Results:
There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542).
Conclusion
We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.
4.6-Gingerol Induced Apoptosis and Cell Cycle Arrest in Glioma Cells via MnSOD and ERK Phosphorylation Modulation
Sher-Wei LIM ; Wei-Chung CHEN ; Huey-Jiun KO ; Yu-Feng SU ; Chieh-Hsin WU ; Fu-Long HUANG ; Chien-Feng LI ; Cheng Yu TSAI
Biomolecules & Therapeutics 2025;33(1):129-142
6-gingerol, a bioactive compound from ginger, has demonstrated promising anticancer properties across various cancer models by inducing apoptosis and inhibiting cell proliferation and invasion. In this study, we explore its mechanisms against glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), a notably aggressive and treatment-resistant brain tumor. We found that 6-gingerol crosses the blood-brain barrier more effectively than curcumin, enhancing its potential as a therapeutic agent for brain tumors. Our experiments show that 6-gingerol reduces cell proliferation and triggers apoptosis in GBM cell lines by disrupting cellular energy homeostasis. This process involves an increase in mitochondrial reactive oxygen species (mtROS) and a decrease in mitochondrial membrane potential, primarily due to the downregulation of manganese superoxide dismutase (MnSOD). Additionally, 6-gingerol reduces ERK phosphorylation by inhibiting EGFR and RAF, leading to G1 phase cell cycle arrest. These findings indicate that 6-gingerol promotes cell death in GBM cells by modulating MnSOD and ROS levels and arresting the cell cycle through the ERFR-RAF-1/MEK/ ERK signaling pathway, highlighting its potential as a therapeutic agent for GBM and setting the stage for future clinical research.
5.Protective loop ileostomy or colostomy? A risk evaluation of all common complications
Yi-Wen YANG ; Sheng-Chieh HUANG ; Hou-Hsuan CHENG ; Shih-Ching CHANG ; Jeng-Kai JIANG ; Huann-Sheng WANG ; Chun-Chi LIN ; Hung-Hsin LIN ; Yuan-Tzu LAN
Annals of Coloproctology 2024;40(6):580-587
Purpose:
Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice.
Methods:
Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared.
Results:
There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542).
Conclusion
We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.
6.Protective loop ileostomy or colostomy? A risk evaluation of all common complications
Yi-Wen YANG ; Sheng-Chieh HUANG ; Hou-Hsuan CHENG ; Shih-Ching CHANG ; Jeng-Kai JIANG ; Huann-Sheng WANG ; Chun-Chi LIN ; Hung-Hsin LIN ; Yuan-Tzu LAN
Annals of Coloproctology 2024;40(6):580-587
Purpose:
Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice.
Methods:
Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared.
Results:
There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542).
Conclusion
We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.
7.6-Gingerol Induced Apoptosis and Cell Cycle Arrest in Glioma Cells via MnSOD and ERK Phosphorylation Modulation
Sher-Wei LIM ; Wei-Chung CHEN ; Huey-Jiun KO ; Yu-Feng SU ; Chieh-Hsin WU ; Fu-Long HUANG ; Chien-Feng LI ; Cheng Yu TSAI
Biomolecules & Therapeutics 2025;33(1):129-142
6-gingerol, a bioactive compound from ginger, has demonstrated promising anticancer properties across various cancer models by inducing apoptosis and inhibiting cell proliferation and invasion. In this study, we explore its mechanisms against glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), a notably aggressive and treatment-resistant brain tumor. We found that 6-gingerol crosses the blood-brain barrier more effectively than curcumin, enhancing its potential as a therapeutic agent for brain tumors. Our experiments show that 6-gingerol reduces cell proliferation and triggers apoptosis in GBM cell lines by disrupting cellular energy homeostasis. This process involves an increase in mitochondrial reactive oxygen species (mtROS) and a decrease in mitochondrial membrane potential, primarily due to the downregulation of manganese superoxide dismutase (MnSOD). Additionally, 6-gingerol reduces ERK phosphorylation by inhibiting EGFR and RAF, leading to G1 phase cell cycle arrest. These findings indicate that 6-gingerol promotes cell death in GBM cells by modulating MnSOD and ROS levels and arresting the cell cycle through the ERFR-RAF-1/MEK/ ERK signaling pathway, highlighting its potential as a therapeutic agent for GBM and setting the stage for future clinical research.
8.Protective loop ileostomy or colostomy? A risk evaluation of all common complications
Yi-Wen YANG ; Sheng-Chieh HUANG ; Hou-Hsuan CHENG ; Shih-Ching CHANG ; Jeng-Kai JIANG ; Huann-Sheng WANG ; Chun-Chi LIN ; Hung-Hsin LIN ; Yuan-Tzu LAN
Annals of Coloproctology 2024;40(6):580-587
Purpose:
Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice.
Methods:
Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared.
Results:
There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542).
Conclusion
We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.
9.Protective loop ileostomy or colostomy? A risk evaluation of all common complications
Yi-Wen YANG ; Sheng-Chieh HUANG ; Hou-Hsuan CHENG ; Shih-Ching CHANG ; Jeng-Kai JIANG ; Huann-Sheng WANG ; Chun-Chi LIN ; Hung-Hsin LIN ; Yuan-Tzu LAN
Annals of Coloproctology 2024;40(6):580-587
Purpose:
Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice.
Methods:
Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared.
Results:
There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542).
Conclusion
We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.
10.6-Gingerol Induced Apoptosis and Cell Cycle Arrest in Glioma Cells via MnSOD and ERK Phosphorylation Modulation
Sher-Wei LIM ; Wei-Chung CHEN ; Huey-Jiun KO ; Yu-Feng SU ; Chieh-Hsin WU ; Fu-Long HUANG ; Chien-Feng LI ; Cheng Yu TSAI
Biomolecules & Therapeutics 2025;33(1):129-142
6-gingerol, a bioactive compound from ginger, has demonstrated promising anticancer properties across various cancer models by inducing apoptosis and inhibiting cell proliferation and invasion. In this study, we explore its mechanisms against glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), a notably aggressive and treatment-resistant brain tumor. We found that 6-gingerol crosses the blood-brain barrier more effectively than curcumin, enhancing its potential as a therapeutic agent for brain tumors. Our experiments show that 6-gingerol reduces cell proliferation and triggers apoptosis in GBM cell lines by disrupting cellular energy homeostasis. This process involves an increase in mitochondrial reactive oxygen species (mtROS) and a decrease in mitochondrial membrane potential, primarily due to the downregulation of manganese superoxide dismutase (MnSOD). Additionally, 6-gingerol reduces ERK phosphorylation by inhibiting EGFR and RAF, leading to G1 phase cell cycle arrest. These findings indicate that 6-gingerol promotes cell death in GBM cells by modulating MnSOD and ROS levels and arresting the cell cycle through the ERFR-RAF-1/MEK/ ERK signaling pathway, highlighting its potential as a therapeutic agent for GBM and setting the stage for future clinical research.