Drug Compounding ; Ivermectin ; analogs & derivatives ; toxicity ; Neurotoxicity Syndromes ; etiology ; therapy ; Pyridazines ; toxicity

AIM To compare the protective effects of norepinephrine preconditioning(NEPC)and ischemic preconditioning(IPC)on myocardial ischemic/reperfused injury in rats in vivo . METHODS Rats were divided into control, ischemia/ reperfusion, classic IPC and NEPC groups. After 20 min reperfusion, several indexes including cardiac function indexes, MDA were tested, the myocardial ultrastr ucture and the injury reaction of catalase observed. RESULTS Both IPC and NEPC could protect myocardial ultra structure, ameliorate left heart function, decrease cardiac MDA content and protect the activity of catalase. CONCLUSION Extra micro norepinephrine preconditioning as a non injury method can mimic the protective effects of classic IPC and shows its clinical values.

Objective To study the effects of dichloroacetate (DCA) on cell colony-forming,cell invasion and cell migration of the bladder cancer cells and to study the underlying mechanism.Methods The bldder cancer cells T24 were randomly divided into two groups:the observation group and the control group.Cells in the observation groups were treated with 5 mmol/L,10 mmol/L and 20 mmol/L dichloroacetate,and the control group was treated with the same amount of dimethyl sulfoxide.Colony formation assays were detected with Giemsa staining.Cell wound scratch assay and Transwell assay were applied to evaluate the ability of the T24 cell invasion and migration.Realtime PCR and Western blot were applied to detect the expression of the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT)-related marker,including E-cadherin,N-cadherin,vimentin,Snail and Slug.Results Compared with the control group,the colony formation assays of T24 cells constantly decreased along with the increased doses in the observation group(P ＜ 0.01).The cell wound scratch assay showed that the scratch width of the observation groups were significantly higher along with the increased doses and prolonged time than that in the control group (P ＜ 0.01).The transwell assay showed that the invasion ability of the observation groups were significantly discreased along with the increased doses than that in the the control group (P ＜ 0.01).The expression levels of E-cadherin mRNA and protein in combination the control group were higher than those in the the observation groups (P ＜ 0.05).However,the expression levels of N-cadherin,vimentin,Snail and Slug mRNAs and proteins in combination the control group were lower than those in the the observation groups (P ＜ 0.05).Conclusion Dichloroacetate can inhibit the colony-forming,invasion and migration of bladder cancer T24 cells,and its mechanism may inhibit the expression of epithelial mesenchymal transition in T24 cells by down-regulating the expression of nuclear transcription factor Snail and Slug.

Fertility preservation technology provides an effective method for protecting the reproductive resources of patients with malignant tumors.At the same time,it is inevitable to face great ethical dilemmas in the process of technological implementation.From an ethical perspective,this paper sorted out the research on fertility preservation in tumor patients abroad,as well as analyzed the ethical issues faced by tumor patients in the communication decision-making and implementation stages of fertility protection.Specifically,these included informing and discussing the reproductive information and preservation choices of tumor patients,fertility decision-making of adolescent tumor patients,psychological support for fertility in tumor patients,ownership and use rights of reproductive materials and their disposal methods,fairness in the allocation of social health resources and other ethical issues.Combining with the actual situation in China,this paper further discussed how to put forward corresponding countermeasures based on following ethical principles such as favorable without harm,informed consent,cautious application,and ethical supervision,with a view to promoting the further development and application of fertility preservation technology in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy and safety of Cefazolin sodium for injection， Cefuroxime sodium for injection， and Ceftazidime for injection from nationally organized centralized drug procurement （hereinafter referred to as “centralized procurement”） and non-centralized procurement in patients with bacterial infection. METHODS The case data of hospitalized patients who had used 3 kinds of Cephalosporins for injection from centralized procurement or non-centralized procurement in the treatment of bacterial infections were retrospectively collected from 19 medical institutions in Kunming from January 2020 to September 2022. After balancing the baseline differences between the groups with the propensity score matching method， the effectiveness and safety differences of 3 kinds of Cephalosporins for injection from centralized procurement or non- centralized procurement were compared respectively. RESULTS After balancing the baseline differences among the groups， 394 cases in each group of Cefazolin sodium for injection from centralized procurement or non-centralized procurement， 472 cases in each group of Cefuroxime sodium for injection from centralized procurement or non-centralized procurement， 504 cases in group of Ceftazidime for injection from centralized procurement and 590 cases in group of non-centralized procurement were included in the analysis. In terms of effectiveness， there were no significant differences in clinical response rate， 72 h response rate， bacterial clearance rate， and the recovery rate of body temperature， white blood cell count， neutrophil count， neutrophil percentage， C-reactive protein， procalcitonin recovery between the centralized procurement group and non-centralized procurement group of Cefazolin sodium for injection and Cefuroxime sodium for injection （P＞0.05）. The proportion of patients in centralized procurement group of Ceftazidime for injection with C-reactive protein restored to normal reference range was significantly higher than that in non-centralized procurement group （46.9% vs. 27.9%， P＜0.05）， but there were no statistically significant differences in other effectiveness indicators among groups （P＞0.05）. In terms of safety， there was no statistical difference in the incidence of adverse drug reactions between centralized procurement group and non-centralized procurement group of 3 kinds of Cephalosporins for injection （P＞0.05）； the incidence of platelet count reduction in centralized procurement group of Cefazolin sodium for injection was significantly higher than non-centralized procurement group （20.7% vs. 7.1%， P＜0.05）， the incidence of eosinophilia elevation in centralized procurement group of Ceftazidime for injection was significantly higher than non-centralized procurement group （5.3% vs. 1.9%， P＜0.05）. In addition， there was no statistically significant difference in the abnormal rates of other laboratory indicators among the three types of injection Cephalosporins （P＞ 0.05）. CONCLUSIONS The efficacy of 3 kinds of Cephalosporin for injection from centralized procurement is not inferior to non- centralized procurement varieties， and the safety is equivalent to that of non-centralized procurement varieties.