Objective To analysis the post-dialysis fatigue status of maintenance hemodialysis patients,explore the influencing factors in these patients and propose effective interventions.Methods One hundred and twenty maintenance hemodialysis patients in Department of Nephrology,Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University were enrolled.Clinical data were obtained by questionnaires.Biochemical changes before and post hemodialysis were recorded.The serum concentrations of hemoglobin,albumin,electrolyte,bicarbonate and lactic acid were collected for analysis.Results One hundred and nine(90.8％)effective questionnaires were collected,in which more than half of patients claimed to experience post-dialysis fatigue.Time to recover from hemodialysis(TIRD)was different:the median(interquartile range)time was 2.00(0.00,3.00)hours.In the study,30.3％patients reported no fatigue after hemodialysis.Recovery time in 35.8％patients was more than 30 minutes to 2 hours,22.0％was 3 to 4 hours,11.0％was 5 to 12 hours,0.9％patients took longer time to recover from a dialysis session.According to the recovery time,these patients were divided into three groups.Among the three groups,the ultrafiltration,the serum sodium and lactic acid after dialysis showed significant difference.It was showed by the unconditional logistic regression analysis that ultrafiltration(OR=2.35,95％CI 1.44-3.83),serum sodium(OR=0.75,95％CI 0.65-0.88),lactic acid(OR=3.16,95％CI 1.32-7.55)were associated of TIRD.Conclusions The incidence of post-dialysis fatigue is high.Most of the patients require more rest or sleep immediately after dialysis.The level of lactic acid is a significant influencing factor of the fatigue of patients.TIRD is correlated with the elevation of lactic acid during the dialysis process,and more attention should be paid to postdialysis fatigue.

OBJECTIVE To determine the optimal therapeutic plan for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer （mHSPC）， and to provide reference for clinical decision-making. METHODS Retrieved from Medline， Embase， BIOSIS preview， the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials. gov systematically， randomized controlled trials about mHSPC therapy， with overall survival （OS） and radiographic progression-free survival （rPFS） as efficacy outcomes and the incidence of serious adverse events （SAEs） as safety outcome， were collected during the inception-Mar. 2022. Two researchers independently screened the literature， extracted data， and evaluated the risk of bias for the included study before conducting a Bayesian network meta-analysis. RESULTS Eight studies with 9 437 patients were finally included. The effectiveness and safety of 7 therapy plans were compared [abiraterone acetate， apalutamide， darolutamide+docetaxel， docetaxel， enzalutamide， standard non-steroidal antiandrogen （SNA） in addition to ADT， and ADT alone]. In terms of efficacy index， the most beneficial regimen （except for ADT+SNA） for OS was ADT+darolutamide+docetaxel （HR＝0.54， 95%CI of 0.44-0.66）， followed by ADT+abiraterone acetate （HR＝0.64，95%CI of 0.57- 0.71）， apalutamide （HR＝0.65， 95%CI of 0.53-0.79）， enzalutamide （HR＝0.66， 95%CI of 0.53-0.82）； the least beneficial regimen for OS was ADT+docetaxel （HR＝0.79， 95%CI of 0.71-0.88）. The most beneficial regimen （except for ADT+SNA） for rPFS was ADT+enzalutamide （HR＝0.39， 95%CI of 0.30-0.50）， followed by ADT+apalutamide （HR＝0.48， 95%CI of 0.39- 0.60）， abiraterone acetate （HR＝0.57， 95%CI of 0.51-0.64）， docetaxel （HR＝0.62， 95%CI of 0.56-0.69）. The results of the tumor- loading subgroup analysis were the same. In terms of safety， ADT+darolutamide+docetaxel （OR＝25.86， 95%CI of 14.08-51.33）， and ADT+docetaxel （OR＝23.35， 95%CI of 13.26-44.81） were associated with markedly increased SAEs； the incidence of SAEs caused by ADT+abiraterone acetate （OR＝1.42，95%CI of 1.10-1.82） was slightly increased， and those of other therapy plans had no significant difference. CONCLUSIONS Compared with ADT alone， ADT+ darolutamide+docetaxel may provide the most significant OS benefit， but the incidence of SAEs is increased greatly； compared with ADT+docetaxel， ADT+abiraterone acetate， apalutamide or enzalutamide provide more OS benefits. ADT+enzalutamide provide optimal rPFS benefits with no increased SAEs.