Human ; Male ; Adult: 25-44 Yrs Old ; Madura Foot ; Mycetoma

Background: s/Aims: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) remains the most common therapeutic strategy used for cholecystocholedocholithiasis (CCL). Recently, single-stage ERCP + LC has gained popularity for treating CCL due to patient satisfaction and financial considerations. In this study, we aimed to compare the feasibility and efficacy of the two variants of single-stage ERCP + LC (starting with ERCP followed by LC versus starting with LC followed by ERCP) for treatment of CCL. Methods: A total of 115 patients who underwent single-stage ERCP + LC for CCL from January 2021 to December 2023 were enrolled in a retrospective comparative cohort study. These patients were divided into two groups: Group A (ERCP-first approach) and Group B (LC-first approach). Results: Patients in Group A had a common bile duct clearance rate of 88.2%, which was comparable to the 95.7% observed in Group B (p = 0.163). The mean duration of the ERCP procedure was comparable between the two groups (43.3 ± 11.8 vs 39.5 ± 13.5 minutes;p = 0.112). However, the mean duration of the LC procedure was significantly longer in Group A than in Group B (41.2 ± 8.98 vs 37.2 ± 12.2 minutes; p = 0.045). The mean total operative time for the combined ERCP + LC was significantly longer in Group A compared to Group B (81.9 ± 16.7 vs 75.1 ± 19.3 minutes; p = 0.046). Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 4 patients in Group A and in 2 patients in Group B (p = 0.701). Conclusions Both LC-1st approach and ERCP-1st approach are feasible and highly effective for treating CCL through single-stage ERCP + LC. However, the LC-1st approach has the advantage of a shorter operative time.

Background: s/Aims: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) remains the most common therapeutic strategy used for cholecystocholedocholithiasis (CCL). Recently, single-stage ERCP + LC has gained popularity for treating CCL due to patient satisfaction and financial considerations. In this study, we aimed to compare the feasibility and efficacy of the two variants of single-stage ERCP + LC (starting with ERCP followed by LC versus starting with LC followed by ERCP) for treatment of CCL. Methods: A total of 115 patients who underwent single-stage ERCP + LC for CCL from January 2021 to December 2023 were enrolled in a retrospective comparative cohort study. These patients were divided into two groups: Group A (ERCP-first approach) and Group B (LC-first approach). Results: Patients in Group A had a common bile duct clearance rate of 88.2%, which was comparable to the 95.7% observed in Group B (p = 0.163). The mean duration of the ERCP procedure was comparable between the two groups (43.3 ± 11.8 vs 39.5 ± 13.5 minutes;p = 0.112). However, the mean duration of the LC procedure was significantly longer in Group A than in Group B (41.2 ± 8.98 vs 37.2 ± 12.2 minutes; p = 0.045). The mean total operative time for the combined ERCP + LC was significantly longer in Group A compared to Group B (81.9 ± 16.7 vs 75.1 ± 19.3 minutes; p = 0.046). Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 4 patients in Group A and in 2 patients in Group B (p = 0.701). Conclusions Both LC-1st approach and ERCP-1st approach are feasible and highly effective for treating CCL through single-stage ERCP + LC. However, the LC-1st approach has the advantage of a shorter operative time.

Background: s/Aims: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) remains the most common therapeutic strategy used for cholecystocholedocholithiasis (CCL). Recently, single-stage ERCP + LC has gained popularity for treating CCL due to patient satisfaction and financial considerations. In this study, we aimed to compare the feasibility and efficacy of the two variants of single-stage ERCP + LC (starting with ERCP followed by LC versus starting with LC followed by ERCP) for treatment of CCL. Methods: A total of 115 patients who underwent single-stage ERCP + LC for CCL from January 2021 to December 2023 were enrolled in a retrospective comparative cohort study. These patients were divided into two groups: Group A (ERCP-first approach) and Group B (LC-first approach). Results: Patients in Group A had a common bile duct clearance rate of 88.2%, which was comparable to the 95.7% observed in Group B (p = 0.163). The mean duration of the ERCP procedure was comparable between the two groups (43.3 ± 11.8 vs 39.5 ± 13.5 minutes;p = 0.112). However, the mean duration of the LC procedure was significantly longer in Group A than in Group B (41.2 ± 8.98 vs 37.2 ± 12.2 minutes; p = 0.045). The mean total operative time for the combined ERCP + LC was significantly longer in Group A compared to Group B (81.9 ± 16.7 vs 75.1 ± 19.3 minutes; p = 0.046). Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 4 patients in Group A and in 2 patients in Group B (p = 0.701). Conclusions Both LC-1st approach and ERCP-1st approach are feasible and highly effective for treating CCL through single-stage ERCP + LC. However, the LC-1st approach has the advantage of a shorter operative time.

Kemunculan teknologi penyuntingan genom, terutamanya CRISPR/Cas9, telah mengubah dan merevolusikan landskap bidang genetik dan biologi molekul dengan begitu drastik. Sistem CRISPR/Cas9 diadaptasi daripada sistem adaptasi imuniti bakteria, menggunakan enzim Cas9 yang dipandu oleh sgRNA untuk penyingkiran gen atau penyuntingan genom secara jitu. Walau bagaimanapun, cabaran seperti kesan luar sasaran (off-target effects) telah mendorong pembangunan beberapa varian Cas9 seperti dCas9. dCas9 diubah suai untuk tidak memiliki sebarang aktiviti endonuklease dan kini dCas9 telah digunakan untuk pelbagai aplikasi yang melangkaui fungsi tradisional CRISPR/Cas9 sebagai kaedah pengeditan genom. Selain itu, teknologi terkini penyuntingan perdana (prime editing) telah menggabungkan enzim Cas9 yang diubahsuai bersama enzim transkriptase berbalik (reverse transcriptase) untuk meningkatkan lagi tahap keberkesanan penyuntingan genom secara jitu. Walaupun wujud kerisauan terhadap pertimbangan etika dan kebimbangan terkait keselamatan, namun teknologi ini menjanjikan dampak yang besar di dalam menangani penyakit genetik serta aplikasi dalam bidang perubatan jitu (precision medicine). Memahami dan mengoptimumkan potensi CRISPR/Cas9 dan teknologi penyuntingan perdana menandakan bermula era baharu dalam bidang penyelidikan berkaitan biologi dan perubatan, dan seterusnya menyediakan satu platform untuk penyuntingan genom yang tepat dan pengawalseliaan proses transkripsi gen.

Displaced olecranon fractures constitute a challenging problem for elbow surgeons. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the role of suture anchor fixation for treating patients with displaced olecranon fractures. Methods: A retrospective review was performed for all consecutive patients with displaced olecranon fractures treated with suture anchor fixation with at least 2 years of clinical follow-up. Surgical repair was performed acutely in all cases with nonmetallic suture anchors in a double-row configuration utilizing suture augmentation via the triceps tendon. Osseous union and perioperative complications were uniformly assessed. Results: Suture anchor fixation was performed on 17 patients with displaced olecranon fractures. Functional outcome scores were collected from 12 patients (70.6%). The mean age at the time of surgery was 65.6 years, and the mean follow-up was 5.6 years. Sixteen of 17 patients (94%) achieved osseous union in an acceptable position. No hardware-related complications or fixation failure occurred. Mean postoperative shortened disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (QuickDASH) score was 3.8±6.9, and mean Oxford Elbow Score was 47.5±1.0, with nine patients (75%) achieving a perfect score. Conclusions: Suture anchor fixation of displaced olecranon fractures resulted in excellent midterm functional outcomes. Additionally, this technique resulted in high rates of osseous union without any hardware-related complications or fixation failures. Level of evidence: IV.