Objective:To explore the application effect of new whole-course closed sputum specimen collection technology in intensive care unit patients.Methods:From April 2020 to January 2022, the convenient sampling was used to select 442 ICU mechanical ventilation patients admitted to 6 hospitals in Jiaxing City as the research objects. According to the order of admission time, the patients were divided into the control group ( n=221) and the experimental group ( n=221) . The control group adopted the traditional open sputum specimen collection technology, while the experimental group adopted the new whole-course closed sputum specimen collection technology. The heart rate, the incidence of hypooxygen saturation and the incidence of sputum spatter were compared between the two groups after sputum sample sampling. Results:The incidences of hypooxygen saturation and sputum spatter in the experimental group were lower than those in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant ( P<0.01) . Conclusions:The new whole-course closed sputum specimen collection technology can effectively stabilize the oxygen saturation of ICU patients in the process of sputum specimen collection, reduce the incidence of sputum spatter and promote the safety of both patients and medical staff, which is worthy of clinical promotion and application.

Objective:To explore the clinical efficacy of morcellator assisted by transurethral bipolar plasmakinetic enucleation and resction of the prostate in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.Methods:A total of 90 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia treated in the Department of Urology, Shenyang Fifth People′s Hospital from Apirl 2020 to Apirl 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into the experimental group ( n=50) and the control group ( n=40) according to different sugical methods. Among them, patients underwent transurethral plasma anatomical prostatectomy with the aid of morcellator in the experimental group, patients of the control group underwent plasma prostatectomy. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, the decrease in hemoglobin, postoperative catheter retention, hospitalization time, international prostate symptom score (IPSS) of 3 months after surgery, quality of life score (QOL), maximum urine flow rate(Qmax), residual urine volume (PVR), surgical complications and other related indicators in the two groups were compared. Measurement data were expressed as mean±standard deviation ( Mean± SD), comparison between groups was by t-test; comparison of count data between groups was by Chi-square test. Results:Both groups were successfully treated by transurethral surgery. There were significant difference in the amount of blood loss [(62.11±5.32) mL vs (95.12±10.32) mL], the total operation time[(40.25±12.75) min vs (72.1±13.41) min], postoperative catheter retention[(3.02±0.41) d vs (4.73±1.32) d], hospitalization time[(4.03±0.41) d vs (6.52±0.85) d], the decrease in hemoglobin[(2.65±0.52) g/L vs (4.21±0.85) g/L]( P<0.05); there was no significant difference in the IPSS score(7.36±3.26 vs 8.12±3.56), QOL(2.12±0.32 vs 2.32±0.21), Qmax[(15.47±4.53) mL/s vs (16.23±3.21) mL/s], PVR [(15.25±5.14) mL vs (16.21±5.26) mL], the incidence of complications(6.00% vs 5.00%)( P>0.05). Conclusion:It is safe and feasible to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia by transurethral plasma anatomical prostatectomy assisted by tissue planer, which can significantly improve its clinical efficacy.

To establish the experts consensus on the management of delirium in critically ill patients.A special committee was set up by 15 experts from the Chinese Critical Hypothermia-Sedation Therapy Study Group.Each statement was assessed based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment,Development,and Evaluation) principle.Then the Delphi method was adopted by 36 experts to reassess all the statements.(1) Delirium is not only a mental change,but also a clinical syndrome with multiple pathophysiological changes.(2) Delirium is a form of disturbance of consciousness and a manifestation of abnormal brain function.(3) Pain is a common cause of delirium in critically ill patients.Analgesia can reduce the occurrence and development of delirium.(4) Anxiety or depression are important factors for delirium in critically ill patients.(5) The correlation between sedative and analgesic drugs and delirium is uncertain.(6) Pay attention to the relationship between delirium and withdrawal reactions.(7) Pay attention to the relationship between delirium and drug dependence/ withdrawal reactions.(8) Sleep disruption can induce delirium.(9) We should be vigilant against potential risk factors for persistent or recurrent delirium.(10) Critically illness related delirium can affect the diagnosis and treatment of primary diseases,and can also be alleviated with the improvement of primary diseases.(11) Acute change of consciousness and attention deficit are necessary for delirium diagnosis.(12) The combined assessment of confusion assessment method for the intensive care unit and intensive care delirium screening checklist can improve the sensitivity of delirium,especially subclinical delirium.(13) Early identification and intervention of subclinical delirium can reduce its risk of clinical delirium.(14) Daily assessment is helpful for early detection of delirium.(15) Hopoactive delirium and mixed delirium are common and should be emphasized.(16) Delirium may be accompanied by changes in electroencephalogram.Bedside electroencephalogram monitoring should be used in the ICU if conditions warrant.(17) Pay attention to differential diagnosis of delirium and dementia/depression.(18) Pay attention to the role of rapid delirium screening method in delirium management.(19) Assessment of the severity of delirium is an essential part of the diagnosis of delirium.(20) The key to the management of delirium is etiological treatment.(21) Improving environmental factors and making patient comfort can help reduce delirium.(22) Early exercise can reduce the incidence of delirium and shorten the duration of delirium.(23) Communication with patients should be emphasized and strengthened.Family members participation can help reduce the incidence of delirium and promote the recovery of delirium.(24) Pay attention to the role of sleep management in the prevention and treatment of delirium.(25) Dexmedetomidine can shorten the duration of hyperactive delirium or prevent delirium.(26) When using antipsychotics to treat delirium,we should be alert to its effect on the heart rhythm.(27) Delirium management should pay attention to brain functional exercise.(28) Compared with non-critically illness related delirium,the relief of critically illness related delirium will not accomplished at one stroke.(29) Multiple management strategies such as ABCDEF,eCASH and ESCAPE are helpful to prevent and treat delirium and improve the prognosis of critically ill patients.(30) Shortening the duration of delirium can reduce the occurrence of long-term cognitive impairment.(31) Multidisciplinary cooperation and continuous quality improvement can improve delirium management.Consensus can promote delirium management in critically ill patients,optimize analgesia and sedation therapy,and even affect prognosis.

Objective: Differences in the activated coagulation time (ACT) during ablation and adequate heparin dosing were observed among atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing AF catheter ablation receiving different anticoagulation therapies and the suitable heparin dosing during ablation among patients treated with different anticoagulation therapies was explored. Methods: Patients who received warfarin (n=100), low-molecular-weight heparin (n=100), dabigatran etexilate (n=98, 110 mg, Bid) and rivaroxaban (n=48, 20 mg, Qd) were included. All of them underwent the first AF ablation during January 2016 to December 2017 and patients with hepatic and renal dysfunction were excluded. Initial bolus heparin (100 U/kg, intravenous) was applied to all patients. Additional heparin dosage was added according to the ACT, which was measured in 15-minute interval to maintain the ACT within 250-350 seconds until the end of ablation. Patient characteristics, ACT and complications were compared among various groups. Results: The baseline general characteristics among patients were similar. The baseline ACTs in the dabigatran groups were significantly longer than those in the rivaroxaban group ((133±36) seconds vs. (113±22) seconds, P<0.05). The 15 min ACT in the warfarin group was longer than in the dabigatran group ((259±56) seconds vs. (243±43) seconds, P<0.05). The 15-minute ACTs were significantly longer in the warfarin ((259±56) seconds) and dabigatran ((243±43) seconds) groups compare with low-molecular-weight heparin group ((224±40) seconds) and rivaroxaban group ((226±32) seconds) (all P<0.05). The same trend was also observed in the rate of reaching ACT goal after initial-standard-dosage of heparin (warfarin (53%, 53/100), dabigatran (45%,44/98), low-molecular-weight heparin (28%,28/100), rivaroxaban (23%,11/48), P<0.05). The 1 hour ACT in the warfarin group ((254±49) seconds) was significantly longer than the other three groups (dabigatran (233±33) seconds, low-molecular-weight heparin (226±34) seconds, rivaroxaban (231±30) seconds, all P<0.01). The rate of reaching ACT goal at 1 hour were significantly higher in the warfarin group (66%,35/53) than in the dabigatran group (41%,18/44), and rivaroxaban group (27%,3/11) (all P<0.05). The total heparin required was significantly higher in rivaroxaban group than in the dabigatran and warfarin groups (all P<0.05). During the perioperative period, no patient exhibited any thromboembolic complications, and only a few minor bleeding complications was observed among patients, which was similar between the four groups (P>0.05). Conclusion Higher dosage of heparin is required during AF ablation to achieve the satisfactory anticoagulant intensity for AF patients under dabigatran etexilate (110 mg, Bid), low-molecular-weight heparin and rivaroxaban (20 mg, Qd) anticoagulation therapy before AF ablation.

Objective Differences in the activated coagulation time (ACT) during ablation and adequate heparin dosing were observed among atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing AF catheter ablation receiving different anticoagulation therapies and the suitable heparin dosing during ablation among patients treated with different anticoagulation therapies was explored. Methods Patients who received warfarin (n=100), low?molecular?weight heparin (n=100), dabigatran etexilate (n=98, 110 mg, Bid) and rivaroxaban (n=48, 20 mg, Qd) were included. All of them underwent the first AF ablation during January 2016 to December 2017 and patients with hepatic and renal dysfunction were excluded. Initial bolus heparin (100 U/kg, intravenous) was applied to all patients. Additional heparin dosage was added according to the ACT, which was measured in 15?minute interval to maintain the ACT within 250-350 seconds until the end of ablation. Patient characteristics, ACT and complications were compared among various groups. Results The baseline general characteristics among patients were similar. The baseline ACTs in the dabigatran groups were significantly longer than those in the rivaroxaban group ((133±36) seconds vs. (113±22) seconds, P<0.05). The 15 min ACT in the warfarin group was longer than in the dabigatran group ((259 ± 56) seconds vs. (243 ± 43) seconds, P<0.05). The 15?minute ACTs were significantly longer in the warfarin ((259 ± 56) seconds) and dabigatran ((243±43) seconds) groups compare with low?molecular?weight heparin group ((224± 40) seconds) and rivaroxaban group ((226±32) seconds) (all P<0.05). The same trend was also observed in the rate of reaching ACT goal after initial?standard?dosage of heparin (warfarin (53%, 53/100), dabigatran (45%,44/98),low?molecular?weight heparin (28%,28/100), rivaroxaban (23%,11/48), P<0.05). The 1 hour ACT in the warfarin group ((254 ± 49) seconds) was significantly longer than the other three groups (dabigatran (233 ± 33) seconds, low?molecular?weight heparin (226 ± 34) seconds, rivaroxaban (231 ± 30) seconds, all P<0.01). The rate of reaching ACT goal at 1 hour were significantly higher in the warfarin group (66%,35/53) than in the dabigatran group (41%,18/44), and rivaroxaban group (27%,3/11) (all P<0.05). The total heparin required was significantly higher in rivaroxaban group than in the dabigatran and warfarin groups (all P<0.05). During the perioperative period, no patient exhibited any thromboembolic complications, and only a few minor bleeding complications was observed among patients, which was similar between the four groups (P>0.05). Conclusion Higher dosage of heparin is required during AF ablation to achieve the satisfactory anticoagulant intensity for AF patients under dabigatran etexilate (110 mg, Bid), low?molecular?weight heparin and rivaroxaban (20 mg, Qd) anticoagulation therapy before AF ablation.

Critical ultrasonography(CUS) is different from the traditional diagnostic ultrasound,the examiner and interpreter of the image are critical care medicine physicians.The core content of CUS is to evaluate the pathophysiological changes of organs and systems and etiology changes.With the idea of critical care medicine as the soul,it can integrate the above information and clinical information,bedside real-time diagnosis and titration treatment,and evaluate the therapeutic effect so as to improve the outcome.CUS is a traditional technique which is applied as a new application method.The consensus of experts on critical ultrasonography in China released in 2016 put forward consensus suggestions on the concept,implementation and application of CUS.It should be further emphasized that the accurate and objective assessment and implementation of CUS requires the standardization of ultrasound image acquisition and the need to establish a CUS procedure.At the same time,the standardized training for CUS accepted by critical care medicine physicians requires the application of technical specifications,and the establishment of technical specifications is the basis for the quality control and continuous improvement of CUS.Chinese Critical Ultrasound Study Group and Critical Hemodynamic Therapy Collabration Group,based on the rich experience of clinical practice in critical care and research,combined with the essence of CUS,to learn the traditional ultrasonic essence,established the clinical application technical specifications of CUS,including in five parts:basic view and relevant indicators to obtain in CUS;basic norms for viscera organ assessment and special assessment;standardized processes and systematic inspection programs;examples of CUS applications;CUS training and the application of qualification certification.The establishment of applied technology standard is helpful for standardized training and clinical correct implementation.It is helpful for clinical evaluation and correct guidance treatment,and is also helpful for quality control and continuous improvement of CUS application.

Objective: To verify the safety and efficacy of IONTRIS particle therapy system (IONTRIS) in clinical implementation. Methods: Between 6.2014 and 8.2014, a total of 35 patients were enrolled into this trial: 31 males and 4 females with a median age of 69 yrs (range 39-80). Ten patients had locally recurrent head and neck tumors after surgery, 4 cases with thoracic malignancies, 1 case with hepatocellular carcinoma, 1 case with retroperitoneal sarcoma, and 19 cases with non-metastatic prostate carcinomas. Phantom dose verification was mandatory for each field before the start of radiation. Results: Twenty-two patients received carbon ion and 13 had proton irradiation. With a median follow-up time of 1 year, all patients were alive. Among the 16 patients with head and neck, thoracic, and abdominal/pelvic tumors, 2, 1, 12, and 1 cases developed complete response, partial response, stable disease, or disease progression, respectively. Progression-free survival rate was 93.8% (15/16). Among the 19 patients with prostate cancer, biological-recurrence free survival was 100%. Particle therapy was well tolerated in all 35 patients. Twenty-five patients (71.4%) experienced 33 grade 1 acute adverse effects, which subsided at 1 year follow-up. Six (17.1%) patients developed grade 1 late adverse effects. No significant change in ECOG or body weight was observed. Conclusions IONTRIS is safe and effective for clinical use. However, long term follow-up is needed to observe the late toxicity and long term result.

Objective To verify the safety and efficacy of IONTRIS particle therapy system ( IONTRIS) in clinical implementation. Methods Between 6.2014 and 8.2014, a total of 35 patients were enrolled into this trial:31 males and 4 females with a median age of 69 yrs ( range 39?80) . Ten patients had locally recurrent head and neck tumors after surgery, 4 cases with thoracic malignancies, 1 case with hepatocellular carcinoma, 1 case with retroperitoneal sarcoma, and 19 cases with non?metastatic prostate carcinomas. Phantom dose verification was mandatory for each field before the start of radiation. Results Twenty?two patients received carbon ion and 13 had proton irradiation. With a median follow?up time of 1 year, all patients were alive. Among the 16 patients with head and neck, thoracic, and abdominal/pelvic tumors, 2, 1, 12, and 1 cases developed complete response, partial response, stable disease, or disease progression, respectively. Progression?free survival rate was 93.8％ (15/16). Among the 19 patients with prostate cancer, biological?recurrence free survival was 100％. Particle therapy was well tolerated in all 35 patients. Twenty?five patients (71.4％) experienced 33 grade 1 acute adverse effects, which subsided at 1 year follow?up. Six ( 17.1％) patients developed grade 1 late adverse effects. No significant change in ECOG or body weight was observed. Conclusions IONTRIS is safe and effective for clinical use. However, long term follow?up is needed to observe the late toxicity and long term result.

Objective To verify the safety and efficacy of IONTRIS particle therapy system ( IONTRIS) in clinical implementation. Methods Between 6.2014 and 8.2014, a total of 35 patients were enrolled into this trial:31 males and 4 females with a median age of 69 yrs ( range 39?80) . Ten patients had locally recurrent head and neck tumors after surgery, 4 cases with thoracic malignancies, 1 case with hepatocellular carcinoma, 1 case with retroperitoneal sarcoma, and 19 cases with non?metastatic prostate carcinomas. Phantom dose verification was mandatory for each field before the start of radiation. Results Twenty?two patients received carbon ion and 13 had proton irradiation. With a median follow?up time of 1 year, all patients were alive. Among the 16 patients with head and neck, thoracic, and abdominal/pelvic tumors, 2, 1, 12, and 1 cases developed complete response, partial response, stable disease, or disease progression, respectively. Progression?free survival rate was 93.8％ (15/16). Among the 19 patients with prostate cancer, biological?recurrence free survival was 100％. Particle therapy was well tolerated in all 35 patients. Twenty?five patients (71.4％) experienced 33 grade 1 acute adverse effects, which subsided at 1 year follow?up. Six ( 17.1％) patients developed grade 1 late adverse effects. No significant change in ECOG or body weight was observed. Conclusions IONTRIS is safe and effective for clinical use. However, long term follow?up is needed to observe the late toxicity and long term result.