Nonunion of osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVF), predominantly affecting the elderly, can lead to intractable pain, vertebral collapse, progressive kyphotic deformity, and neurological impairment, significantly compromising patients′ quality of life. There exists considerable debate on diagnosis and management of OVF, encompassing key issues such as clinical diagnosis and staging criteria for nonunion, surgical indications and procedure selection, and postoperative rehabilitation planning. Currently, there lacks standardized clinical guideline and expert consensus on the diagnosis and management of OVF nonunion in China. To address this gap, Minimally Invasive Surgery Group of Chinese Orthopedic Association, Osteoporosis Committee of Chinese Association of Orthopedic Surgeons, Prevention and Rehabilitation Committee for Osteoporosis of Chinese Association of Rehabilitation Medicine and Minimally Invasive Orthopedic Surgery Branch of China Association for Geriatric Care jointly organized domestic experts in spinal surgery, endocrinology, and rehabilitation to formulate the Clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment for nonunion of osteoporotic vertebral fractures ( version 2025), based on existing literature and clinical experience and adhering to principles of scientific rigor and practicality. The guideline provided 13 evidence-based recommendations encompassing diagnosis and treatment of OVF nonunion, aiming to standardize its clinical management.

Acute symptomatic osteoporotic thoracolumbar compression fracture (ASOTLF) can lead to chronic low back pain, kyphosis deformity, pulmonary dysfunction, loss of mobility, and even life-threatening complications. Vertebral augmentation is currently the mainstream treatment method for this condition. In 2019, the Editorial Board of Chinese Journal of Trauma and the Spinal Trauma Group of Orthopedic Surgeons Branch of Chinese Medical Doctor Association collaboratively led the development of Clinical guideline for vertebral augmentation for acute symptomatic osteoporotic thoracolumbar compression fractures. Six years later, with advances in clinical diagnosis and treatment techniques as well as accumulating evidence in related fields, the 2019 guideline requires updating. To this end, the Spinal Trauma Group of Orthopedic Surgeons Branch of Chinese Medical Doctor Association, the Spinal Health Professional Committee of China Human Health Science and Technology Promotion Association, and the Minimally Invasive Orthopedics Professional Committee of Shaanxi Medical Doctor Association have organized experts in the field to develop the Clinical guideline for vertebral augmentation of acute symptomatic osteoporotic thoracolumbar compression fractures ( version 2025) , based on the latest evidence-based medical researches. This guideline incorporates 3 recommendations retained from the 2019 version with updated strength of evidence, along with 12 new recommendations. It provides recommendations from six aspects of diagnosis, pain management, treatment option selection, prevention of postoperative complications, anti-osteoporosis therapy, and postoperative rehabilitation, aiming to provide a reference for standard treatment of vertebral augmentation for ASOTLF in hospitals at all levels.

Objective:To analyze Hepatitis B virus(HBV)drug resistance mutations in patients with chronic hepatitis B(CHB)infection who have undergone long-term monotherapy with Entecavir(ETV)and those receiving combination therapy with ETV and Lamivudine(LAM), and to explore the related factors affecting HBV drug resistance mutations.Methods:The study retrospectively analyzed patients with CHB, compensated cirrhosis, decompensated cirrhosis, and liver cancer who received long-term nucleotide analogue antiviral therapy at the Fifth Medical Center of PLA General Hospital from August 2012 to August 2019.The patients were divided into an ETV monotherapy group and a combined LAM+ETV therapy group.Chi-square tests, independent sample t-tests, and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to compare the clinical baseline characteristics and HBV drug resistance mutation features between the two therapy groups.A multivariate logistic regression model was used to analyze the factors related to HBV drug resistance mutations. Results:A total of 533 patients were enrolled in this study, 357 in the ETV monotherapy group and 176 in the LAM+ETV group. The ETV monotherapy group had 122 (34.17%) patients with resistance mutations, while the LAM+ETV group had 126 (71.59%).In general, the difference in gene mutation rate between the two therapy groups was statistically significant( χ2=66.337, P<0.001). The median age and alanine aminotransferase levels of patients with drug resistance mutations in the two therapy groups were higher than those in the non-mutation group[( t=-4.743, P<0.001)/( Z=-4.809, P<0.001), ( Z=-2.667, P=0.007)/( Z=-2.001, P=0.045)].Age( OR=1.044, 95% CI:1.023-1.066), compensated cirrhosis( OR=2.163, 95% CI:1.193-3.922), liver cancer( OR=4.017, 95% CI:2.170-7.436) and the treatment regimen( OR=6.075, 95% CI:3.889-9.489) were associated with drug resistance gene mutations( P<0.001).The mutation rates in different stages of chronic liver disease(CHB, cirrhosis, and liver cancer)showed statistically significant( χ2=41.038, P<0.001; χ2=15.894, P<0.001).The overall mutation rates of ETV-related genes in the two therapy groups were 25.49% and 32.39%, respectively.Additionally, 10 mutation sites and 38 variant combinations were identified, containing five common combinations being rtL180M, rtM204V, rtS202G;rtL180M, rtM204V, rtT184A; rtL180M, rtM204V, rtT184L;rtM204I and rtL180M, rtM204V. Conclusion:In CHB patients undergoing long-term therapy, the rate of HBV resistance mutations is higher in those receiving ETV and LAM combination therapy than in those receiving ETV monotherapy.Monitoring older patients and those with cirrhosis or liver cancer is especially important for preventing resistance mutations.

Objective:To investigate the prognostic factors for esophageal cancer after radical resection and the application value of machine learning prediction model.Methods:The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopatholigical data of 406 esophageal cancer patients who were admitted to Qilu Hospital of Shandong University from January 2018 to March 2022 were collected. There were 357 males and 49 females, aged (64±8)years. All patients underwent radical resection of esophageal cancer. The 406 patients were randomly divided into a training set of 285 cases and a validation set of 121 cases at a 7∶3 ratio based on a random number table. The training set was used to construct prediction model, and the validation set was used to validate prediction model. Patients were divided into high-risk group and low-risk group based on risk scores. Observation indicators: (1) follow-up of patients and analysis of influencing factors for prognosis; (2) construction and validation of machine learning prediction models. Comparison of measurement data with normal distribution between groups was conducted using the independent sample t test. Comparison of measurement data with skewed distribution between groups was conducted using the Mann-Whitney U test. Comparison of count data between groups was conducted using the chi-square test. Comparison of ordinal data between groups was conducted using the rank sum test. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate survival rate and plot survival curve, and the Log-rank test was used for survival analysis. The Cox proportional hazard regression model was used for univariate and multivariate analyses. Independent influencing factors were included, and data processing, machine learning model construction, and visualization were performed using R packages including random survival forest (RSF), gradient boosting machine (GBM), least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox regression (LASSO-Cox), Cox proportional hazards model boosting (CoxBoost), survival support vector machine (survivalsvm), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), supervised principal component analysis (SuperPC), and Cox partial least squares regression (plsRcox). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were drawn, and sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated. The Delong test was used to assess the differences in AUC among different models in the training set, and the time-dependent ROC was used to compare the predictive performance of different models. Calibration curves were used to evaluate model accuracy, and decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to evaluate overall net benefit. Results:(1) Follow-up of patients and analysis of influencing factors for prognosis. All 406 patients were followed up postoperatively for 28(range, 6-36)months, with 1- and 3-year overall survival rate of 86.5% and 40.9%, respectively. The 285 patients in the training set were followed up postoperatively for 30(range, 6-36)months, with 1- and 3-year overall survival rate of 85.1% and 35.5%, respectively. The 121 patients in the validation set were followed up postoperatively for 25(range, 6-36)months, with 1- and 3-year overall survival rate of 87.0% and 43.2%, respectively. There was no significant difference in postoperative overall survival rate between the training set and the validation set ( χ2=3.20, P>0.05). Results of multivariate analysis showed that left thoracic surgical approach, preopera-tive neutrophil count, vascular invasion, perineural invasion, pathological T2-4 stage, pathological N2-3 stage, and postoperative pneumonia were independent risk factors affecting postoperative survival of 285 patients in the training set ( hazard ratio=1.466, 1.037, 1.482, 1.549, 5.268, 7.727, 22.202, 2.539, 2.686, 1.425, 95% confidence interval as 1.026-2.096, 1.003-1.073, 1.008-2.179, 1.105-2.170, 1.201-23.099, 1.833-32.576, 4.734-104.128, 1.577-4.087, 1.631-4.422, 1.018-1.994, P<0.05). (2) Construction and validation of machine learning prediction models. Independent risk factors affecting postoperative survival were included to construct RSF, GBM, LASSO-Cox, CoxBoost, survivalsvm, XGBoost, SuperPC, and plsRcox machine learning prediction models. Results of Delong test showed that there were significant differences in the AUC of RSF and GBM from the other six models ( P<0.05). Results of time-dependent ROC curve showed that all 8 machine learning predic-tion models had good discriminative ability in the training cohort, among which the RSF machine learning prediction model had the best predictive performance. Results of calibration curve showed that the RSF machine learning prediction model fitted well for predicting postoperative 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival in the training cohort, with high consistency with actual results. Results of decision curve analysis showed that within a threshold range of 0-0.80, the RSF machine learning prediction model provided a better overall net benefit. Further analysis showed that in the validation set, the AUC of RSF machine learning prediction model for postoperative 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival prediction were 0.786 (95% confidence interval as 0.609-0.962), 0.774 (95% confidence interval as 0.676-0.873), and 0.750 (95% confidence interval as 0.652-0.848), respectively. Results of calibration curve showed that the RSF machine learning prediction model fitted well for predicting postopera-tive 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival in the validation set, with high consistency with actual results. In the training set, the optimal cutoff value of the RSF machine learning prediction model risk score was 11.7. Patients with risk score ≥11.7 were classified as the high-risk group, and those with risk score <11.7 as the low-risk group. The median survival times of the two groups were 18.0 months and >36.0 months, respectively, showing a significant difference between them ( χ2=73.30, P<0.05). In the validation set, the optimal cutoff value of the RSF machine learning prediction model risk score was 11.7. Patients with risk score ≥11.7 were classified as the high-risk group, and those with risk score<11.7 as the low-risk group. The median survival times of the two groups were 17.0 months and>36.0 months for the high-risk and low-risk groups, respectively, showing a significant difference between them ( χ2=35.20, P<0.05). Conclusions:Left thoracic surgical approach, preoperative neutrophil count, vascular invasion, perineural invasion, pathological T2-4 stage, pathological N2-3 stage, and postoperative pneumonia are independent risk factors affecting survival of esophageal cancer patients after radical resection. The RSF machine learning prediction model constructed based on these factors can effectively distinguish the survival prognosis of high-risk and low-risk patients.

Objective:To explore the differences between the Phoenix sepsis scoring system including Phoenix sepsis score (PSS) and Phoenix-8 organ dysfunction score (hereinafter referred to as Phoenix-8) and the commonly used pediatric sepsis scores in evaluating clinical characteristics and prognostic analysis of pediatric patients with severe sepsis diagnosed under traditional standards, namely the diagnostic criteria from the 2005 International Pediatric Sepsis Consensus Conference.Methods:This study was a retrospective observational study. From December 2020 to March 2023, 202 pediatric patients with severe sepsis meeting the inclusion criteria were admitted to the Children's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University. Based on the sepsis diagnostic criteria outlined in the International Consensus Criteria for Pediatric Sepsis and Septic Shock (2024), the pediatric patients were categorized into a sepsis group and a non-sepsis group. Sepsis group was further subdivided into a death subgroup and a survival subgroup based on the outcomes. The age, hospitalization costs, disease outcome indicators (e.g., mortality rate and incidence of septic shock), major organ (e.g., heart, liver, lungs, and kidneys) damage and their correlations, as well as PSS, Phoenix-8 and commonly used pediatric sepsis scores (e.g., pediatric sequential organ failure assessment (pSOFA), pediatric risk of mortality score Ⅲ (PRISM Ⅲ), pediatric logistic organ dysfunction-2 score (PELOD-2), pediatric multiple organ dysfunction score (P-MODS), pediatric critical illness score (PCIS), and pediatric early warning score (PEWS)) were collected and compared. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and precision-recall curve were plotted to evaluate the predictive ability of PSS, Phoenix-8, and commonly used pediatric sepsis scores for mortality risk in pediatric patients with severe sepsis under traditional standards. Predictive performance was quantified using the area under the ROC curve (AUROC). Univariate logistic regression analysis was employed to quantify the odds ratios of PSS and Phoenix-8 for predicting mortality risk. Patients with severe sepsis under traditional standards were further stratified into subgroups based on complications and comorbidities, including central nervous system (CNS) diseases, multiple infections, cardiovascular system diseases, shock, and malignancies. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was used to assess calibration of PSS and Phoenix-8, and the DeLong test was used to compare whether there were statistically significant differences in the AUROC of PSS and Phoenix-8 for predicting mortality risk among different subgroups of pediatric patients. Results:Compared with those in non-sepsis group, pediatric patients in sepsis group were significantly older ( Z=-2.92, P<0.05) with higher incidences of septic shock and mortality, hospitalization costs, PRISM Ⅲ, PEWS, pSOFA, PELOD-2, PSS, and Phoenix-8 (with χ2 values of 21.28 and 13.64, respectively, Z values of -1.99, -5.33, -5.10, -8.55, -6.91, -10.98, and -9.93, respectively, P<0.05), and lower PCIS ( Z=-3.34, P<0.05). Compared with those in survival subgroup, hospitalization costs, PSS, Phoenix-8, PRISM Ⅲ, PEWS, pSOFA, PELOD-2, and P-MODS of pediatric patients in death subgroup was significantly higher (with Z values of -2.50, -3.50, -2.47, -5.11, -3.84, -2.94, -3.61, and -3.04, respectively, P<0.05). Compared with those in survival subgroup, the incidences of lung damage and liver damage of pediatric patients in death subgroup were also significantly higher (with χ2 values of 6.20 and 10.94, respectively, P<0.05), and 64.7% (97/150) of patients exhibited two or more concurrent organ damage. For predicting mortality risk in pediatric patients with severe sepsis under traditional standards, the AUROC values for PRISM Ⅲ, PCIS, PEWS, pSOFA, PELOD-2, P-MODS, PSS, and Phoenix-8 were approximately 0.70, with optimal cutoff values of 17.5, 91.0, 5.5, 4.5, 2.5, 4.5, 3.5, and 4.5, respectively; PELOD-2 demonstrated the highest sensitivity (0.83); while PRISM Ⅲ, PSS, and Phoenix-8 showed high specificity (>0.80). Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that for every 1-point increase in the PSS within 24 hours of pediatric intensive care unit admission, the relative risk of mortality increased by 63.7% (with odds ratio of 1.64, 95% confidence interval of 1.34-1.99, P<0.05). Similarly, for every 1-point increase in the Phoenix-8, the relative risk of mortality increased by 37.5% (with odds ratio of 1.38, 95% confidence interval of 1.18-1.60, P<0.05). The AUROC values (around 0.80) of PSS and Phoenix-8 for predicting mortality risk in pediatric patients with severe sepsis combined with CNS diseases, multiple infections, and cardiovascular system diseases were relatively high. In contrast, the AUROC values (0.60-0.80) for predicting mortality risk in pediatric patients with severe sepsis combined with shock or malignant tumors were moderate. All models passed the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test ( P>0.05). The DeLong test indicated no statistically significant differences in predictive ability between PSS and Phoenix-8 across subgroups of pediatric patients ( P>0.05). Conclusions:PSS and Phoenix-8 exhibited higher specificity than most of the commonly used pediatric sepsis scores in predicting mortality risk under traditional standards. Both scores performed much better in predicting the mortality risk in pediatric patients with severe sepsis combined with CNS diseases, multiple infections, and cardiovascular system diseases.

Objective To assess the clinical value of a novel surgical technique—Tubeless subxiphoid uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery with percutaneous suspension technique via balance-shaped sternal elevation device in the resection of anterior mediastinal masses. Methods Patients who underwent tubeless subxiphoid uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery via balance-shaped sternal elevation device in anterior mediastinal masses process at the Department of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University from March to April 2025 were included, and their clinical data were analyzed. Results A total of 4 patients were included, with 2 males and 2 females, aged 58-75 years. The diameter of the tumor was 2.5-3.0 cm. The operation time was 60.0-150.0 min, intraoperative blood loss was 5-10 mL, pain score on the 3rd day after surgery was 0 points, and postoperative hospital stay was 2-3 days. All patients achieved complete resection of the masses and thymus without perioperative complications. Conclusion The tubeless subxiphoid uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery with percutaneous suspension technique via balance-shaped sternal elevation device technique optimizes surgical visualization and instrument maneuverability while avoiding complications related to conventional anesthesia and tubing, thereby markedly enhancing the minimally invasive profile of anterior mediastinal masses resections. In addition to maintaining procedural safety, this approach effectively reduces postoperative pain and accelerates patient recovery, highlighting its potential for widespread clinical adoption.

Objective:To analyze Hepatitis B virus(HBV)drug resistance mutations in patients with chronic hepatitis B(CHB)infection who have undergone long-term monotherapy with Entecavir(ETV)and those receiving combination therapy with ETV and Lamivudine(LAM), and to explore the related factors affecting HBV drug resistance mutations.Methods:The study retrospectively analyzed patients with CHB, compensated cirrhosis, decompensated cirrhosis, and liver cancer who received long-term nucleotide analogue antiviral therapy at the Fifth Medical Center of PLA General Hospital from August 2012 to August 2019.The patients were divided into an ETV monotherapy group and a combined LAM+ETV therapy group.Chi-square tests, independent sample t-tests, and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to compare the clinical baseline characteristics and HBV drug resistance mutation features between the two therapy groups.A multivariate logistic regression model was used to analyze the factors related to HBV drug resistance mutations. Results:A total of 533 patients were enrolled in this study, 357 in the ETV monotherapy group and 176 in the LAM+ETV group. The ETV monotherapy group had 122 (34.17%) patients with resistance mutations, while the LAM+ETV group had 126 (71.59%).In general, the difference in gene mutation rate between the two therapy groups was statistically significant( χ2=66.337, P<0.001). The median age and alanine aminotransferase levels of patients with drug resistance mutations in the two therapy groups were higher than those in the non-mutation group[( t=-4.743, P<0.001)/( Z=-4.809, P<0.001), ( Z=-2.667, P=0.007)/( Z=-2.001, P=0.045)].Age( OR=1.044, 95% CI:1.023-1.066), compensated cirrhosis( OR=2.163, 95% CI:1.193-3.922), liver cancer( OR=4.017, 95% CI:2.170-7.436) and the treatment regimen( OR=6.075, 95% CI:3.889-9.489) were associated with drug resistance gene mutations( P<0.001).The mutation rates in different stages of chronic liver disease(CHB, cirrhosis, and liver cancer)showed statistically significant( χ2=41.038, P<0.001; χ2=15.894, P<0.001).The overall mutation rates of ETV-related genes in the two therapy groups were 25.49% and 32.39%, respectively.Additionally, 10 mutation sites and 38 variant combinations were identified, containing five common combinations being rtL180M, rtM204V, rtS202G;rtL180M, rtM204V, rtT184A; rtL180M, rtM204V, rtT184L;rtM204I and rtL180M, rtM204V. Conclusion:In CHB patients undergoing long-term therapy, the rate of HBV resistance mutations is higher in those receiving ETV and LAM combination therapy than in those receiving ETV monotherapy.Monitoring older patients and those with cirrhosis or liver cancer is especially important for preventing resistance mutations.

Objective:To investigate the prognostic factors for esophageal cancer after radical resection and the application value of machine learning prediction model.Methods:The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopatholigical data of 406 esophageal cancer patients who were admitted to Qilu Hospital of Shandong University from January 2018 to March 2022 were collected. There were 357 males and 49 females, aged (64±8)years. All patients underwent radical resection of esophageal cancer. The 406 patients were randomly divided into a training set of 285 cases and a validation set of 121 cases at a 7∶3 ratio based on a random number table. The training set was used to construct prediction model, and the validation set was used to validate prediction model. Patients were divided into high-risk group and low-risk group based on risk scores. Observation indicators: (1) follow-up of patients and analysis of influencing factors for prognosis; (2) construction and validation of machine learning prediction models. Comparison of measurement data with normal distribution between groups was conducted using the independent sample t test. Comparison of measurement data with skewed distribution between groups was conducted using the Mann-Whitney U test. Comparison of count data between groups was conducted using the chi-square test. Comparison of ordinal data between groups was conducted using the rank sum test. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate survival rate and plot survival curve, and the Log-rank test was used for survival analysis. The Cox proportional hazard regression model was used for univariate and multivariate analyses. Independent influencing factors were included, and data processing, machine learning model construction, and visualization were performed using R packages including random survival forest (RSF), gradient boosting machine (GBM), least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox regression (LASSO-Cox), Cox proportional hazards model boosting (CoxBoost), survival support vector machine (survivalsvm), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), supervised principal component analysis (SuperPC), and Cox partial least squares regression (plsRcox). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were drawn, and sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated. The Delong test was used to assess the differences in AUC among different models in the training set, and the time-dependent ROC was used to compare the predictive performance of different models. Calibration curves were used to evaluate model accuracy, and decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to evaluate overall net benefit. Results:(1) Follow-up of patients and analysis of influencing factors for prognosis. All 406 patients were followed up postoperatively for 28(range, 6-36)months, with 1- and 3-year overall survival rate of 86.5% and 40.9%, respectively. The 285 patients in the training set were followed up postoperatively for 30(range, 6-36)months, with 1- and 3-year overall survival rate of 85.1% and 35.5%, respectively. The 121 patients in the validation set were followed up postoperatively for 25(range, 6-36)months, with 1- and 3-year overall survival rate of 87.0% and 43.2%, respectively. There was no significant difference in postoperative overall survival rate between the training set and the validation set ( χ2=3.20, P>0.05). Results of multivariate analysis showed that left thoracic surgical approach, preopera-tive neutrophil count, vascular invasion, perineural invasion, pathological T2-4 stage, pathological N2-3 stage, and postoperative pneumonia were independent risk factors affecting postoperative survival of 285 patients in the training set ( hazard ratio=1.466, 1.037, 1.482, 1.549, 5.268, 7.727, 22.202, 2.539, 2.686, 1.425, 95% confidence interval as 1.026-2.096, 1.003-1.073, 1.008-2.179, 1.105-2.170, 1.201-23.099, 1.833-32.576, 4.734-104.128, 1.577-4.087, 1.631-4.422, 1.018-1.994, P<0.05). (2) Construction and validation of machine learning prediction models. Independent risk factors affecting postoperative survival were included to construct RSF, GBM, LASSO-Cox, CoxBoost, survivalsvm, XGBoost, SuperPC, and plsRcox machine learning prediction models. Results of Delong test showed that there were significant differences in the AUC of RSF and GBM from the other six models ( P<0.05). Results of time-dependent ROC curve showed that all 8 machine learning predic-tion models had good discriminative ability in the training cohort, among which the RSF machine learning prediction model had the best predictive performance. Results of calibration curve showed that the RSF machine learning prediction model fitted well for predicting postoperative 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival in the training cohort, with high consistency with actual results. Results of decision curve analysis showed that within a threshold range of 0-0.80, the RSF machine learning prediction model provided a better overall net benefit. Further analysis showed that in the validation set, the AUC of RSF machine learning prediction model for postoperative 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival prediction were 0.786 (95% confidence interval as 0.609-0.962), 0.774 (95% confidence interval as 0.676-0.873), and 0.750 (95% confidence interval as 0.652-0.848), respectively. Results of calibration curve showed that the RSF machine learning prediction model fitted well for predicting postopera-tive 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival in the validation set, with high consistency with actual results. In the training set, the optimal cutoff value of the RSF machine learning prediction model risk score was 11.7. Patients with risk score ≥11.7 were classified as the high-risk group, and those with risk score <11.7 as the low-risk group. The median survival times of the two groups were 18.0 months and >36.0 months, respectively, showing a significant difference between them ( χ2=73.30, P<0.05). In the validation set, the optimal cutoff value of the RSF machine learning prediction model risk score was 11.7. Patients with risk score ≥11.7 were classified as the high-risk group, and those with risk score<11.7 as the low-risk group. The median survival times of the two groups were 17.0 months and>36.0 months for the high-risk and low-risk groups, respectively, showing a significant difference between them ( χ2=35.20, P<0.05). Conclusions:Left thoracic surgical approach, preoperative neutrophil count, vascular invasion, perineural invasion, pathological T2-4 stage, pathological N2-3 stage, and postoperative pneumonia are independent risk factors affecting survival of esophageal cancer patients after radical resection. The RSF machine learning prediction model constructed based on these factors can effectively distinguish the survival prognosis of high-risk and low-risk patients.

Nonunion of osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVF), predominantly affecting the elderly, can lead to intractable pain, vertebral collapse, progressive kyphotic deformity, and neurological impairment, significantly compromising patients′ quality of life. There exists considerable debate on diagnosis and management of OVF, encompassing key issues such as clinical diagnosis and staging criteria for nonunion, surgical indications and procedure selection, and postoperative rehabilitation planning. Currently, there lacks standardized clinical guideline and expert consensus on the diagnosis and management of OVF nonunion in China. To address this gap, Minimally Invasive Surgery Group of Chinese Orthopedic Association, Osteoporosis Committee of Chinese Association of Orthopedic Surgeons, Prevention and Rehabilitation Committee for Osteoporosis of Chinese Association of Rehabilitation Medicine and Minimally Invasive Orthopedic Surgery Branch of China Association for Geriatric Care jointly organized domestic experts in spinal surgery, endocrinology, and rehabilitation to formulate the Clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment for nonunion of osteoporotic vertebral fractures ( version 2025), based on existing literature and clinical experience and adhering to principles of scientific rigor and practicality. The guideline provided 13 evidence-based recommendations encompassing diagnosis and treatment of OVF nonunion, aiming to standardize its clinical management.

Acute symptomatic osteoporotic thoracolumbar compression fracture (ASOTLF) can lead to chronic low back pain, kyphosis deformity, pulmonary dysfunction, loss of mobility, and even life-threatening complications. Vertebral augmentation is currently the mainstream treatment method for this condition. In 2019, the Editorial Board of Chinese Journal of Trauma and the Spinal Trauma Group of Orthopedic Surgeons Branch of Chinese Medical Doctor Association collaboratively led the development of Clinical guideline for vertebral augmentation for acute symptomatic osteoporotic thoracolumbar compression fractures. Six years later, with advances in clinical diagnosis and treatment techniques as well as accumulating evidence in related fields, the 2019 guideline requires updating. To this end, the Spinal Trauma Group of Orthopedic Surgeons Branch of Chinese Medical Doctor Association, the Spinal Health Professional Committee of China Human Health Science and Technology Promotion Association, and the Minimally Invasive Orthopedics Professional Committee of Shaanxi Medical Doctor Association have organized experts in the field to develop the Clinical guideline for vertebral augmentation of acute symptomatic osteoporotic thoracolumbar compression fractures ( version 2025) , based on the latest evidence-based medical researches. This guideline incorporates 3 recommendations retained from the 2019 version with updated strength of evidence, along with 12 new recommendations. It provides recommendations from six aspects of diagnosis, pain management, treatment option selection, prevention of postoperative complications, anti-osteoporosis therapy, and postoperative rehabilitation, aiming to provide a reference for standard treatment of vertebral augmentation for ASOTLF in hospitals at all levels.