PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of recirculation rate according to cannulation direction and interval among hemodialysis patients with arteriovenous fistula (AVF).METHOD: The research used repeated measures design. This study was conducted among thirty patients who received hemodialysis three times a week for longer than a year through AVF at the I University hospital. Three different types of interventions were administered to the participants each week for three weeks. Needles were placed at a different distance and in a different direction each week: 7 cm apart from each other in antegrade direction during the first week, 5 cm apart in retrograde direction in the following week, and 7 cm apart in retrograde direction in the third week.RESULTS: No significant differences in the recirculation rate were found due to any of the three tested methods (p = 1.00).CONCLUSION: This finding suggests that, if the patients have well-functioned AVF, we can choose an appropriate intervention from among the three methods in consideration of the patient's diverse needs.
Arteriovenous Fistula ; Catheterization ; Humans ; Methods ; Needles ; Punctures ; Renal Dialysis

Several studies have shown associations between irinotecan toxicity and UGT1A genetic variations in colorectal and lung cancer, but only limited data are available for gastric cancer patients. We evaluated the frequencies of UGT1A polymorphisms and their relationship with clinicopathologic parameters in 382 Korean gastric cancer patients. Polymorphisms of UGT1A1*6, UGT1A1*27, UGT1A1*28, UGT1A1*60, UGT1A7*2, UGT1A7*3, and UGT1A9*22 were genotyped by direct sequencing. In 98 patients treated with irinotecan-containing regimens, toxicity and response were compared according to the genotype. The UGT1A1*6 and UGT1A9*22 genotypes showed a higher prevalence in Korean gastric cancer patients, while the prevalence of the UG1A1*28 polymorphism was lower than in normal Koreans, as has been found in other studies of Asian populations. The incidence of severe diarrhea after irinotecan-containing treatment was more common in patients with the UGT1A1*6, UGT1A7*3, and UGT1A9*22 polymorphisms than in controls. The presence of the UGT1A1*6 allele also showed a significant association with grade III–IV neutropenia. Upon haplotype and diplotype analyses, almost every patient bearing the UGT1A1*6 or UGT1A7*3 variant also had the UGT1A9*22 polymorphism, and all severe manifestations of UGT1A polymorphism-associated toxicity were related to the UGT1A9*22 polymorphism. By genotyping UGT1A9*22 polymorphisms, we could identify high-risk gastric cancer patients receiving irinotecan-containing chemotherapy, who would experience severe toxicity. When treating high-risk patients with the UGT1A9*22 polymorphism, clinicians should closely monitor them for signs of severe toxicity such as intense diarrhea or neutropenia.

Purpose: Microbiota manipulation through selected probiotics may be a promising tool to prevent cancer development as well as onset, to improve clinical efficacy for cancer treatments. The purpose of this study was to evaluate change in microbiota composition after-probiotics supplementation and assessed the efficacy of probiotics in improving quality of life (QOL) in postoperative cancer patients. Methods: Stool samples were collected from 30 cancer patients from February to October 2020 before (group I) and after (group II) 8 weeks of probiotics supplementation. We performed 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing to evaluate differences in gut microbiota between groups by comparing gut microbiota diversity, overall composition, and taxonomic signature abundance. The health-related QOL was evaluated through the EORTC Quality of life Questionnaire Core 30 questionnaire. Results: Statistically significant differences were noted in group II; increase of Shannon and Simpson index (P = 0.004 and P = 0.001), decrease of Bacteroidetes and Fusobacteria at the phylum level (P = 0.032 and P = 0.014, retrospectively), increased of beneficial bacteria such as Weissella (0.096% vs. 0.361%, P < 0.004), Lactococcus (0.023% vs. 0.16%, P < 0.001), and Catenibacterium (0.0% vs. 0.005%, P < 0.042) at the genus level. There was a significant improvement in sleep disturbance (P = 0.039) in group II. Conclusion Gut microbiota in cancer patients can be manipulated by specific probiotic strains, result in an altered microbiota. Microbiota modulation by probiotics can be considered as part of a supplement that helps to increase gut microbiota diversity and improve QOL in cancer patients after surgery.