Objective:To analyze the etiological characteristics of Clostridium ramosum DZS3717106 isolated from the blood of a patient with septic shock secondary to perianal abscess and the immunological characteristics of the patient. Methods:The isolate was subjected to morphological observation, mass spectrometry, antibiotic susceptibility testing, and 16S rRNA sequencing. Biochemical and cytological test results of the patient were collected. Flow cytometry was used to detect T cell subsets. Impacts of the virulence factors of the isolate on the host immune system were evaluated.Results:DZS3717106 was an anaerobic Clostridium with pleomorphic rod-shaped cells and spores. It was sensitive to penicillin G, piperacillin/tazobactam, and metronidazole, but resistant to clindamycin. It carried various virulence and resistance genes. The patient was immunocompromised with abnormal IL-6, IL-8, and IL-10 levels. Conclusions:Septic shock caused by Clostridium ramosum is rare, and more research is needed on the causes and epidemiology. DZS3717106 infection triggers over-activated inflammatory response in the patient, which may be closely related to the occurrence and development of septic shock.

Objective:To analyze the etiological characteristics of Clostridium ramosum DZS3717106 isolated from the blood of a patient with septic shock secondary to perianal abscess and the immunological characteristics of the patient. Methods:The isolate was subjected to morphological observation, mass spectrometry, antibiotic susceptibility testing, and 16S rRNA sequencing. Biochemical and cytological test results of the patient were collected. Flow cytometry was used to detect T cell subsets. Impacts of the virulence factors of the isolate on the host immune system were evaluated.Results:DZS3717106 was an anaerobic Clostridium with pleomorphic rod-shaped cells and spores. It was sensitive to penicillin G, piperacillin/tazobactam, and metronidazole, but resistant to clindamycin. It carried various virulence and resistance genes. The patient was immunocompromised with abnormal IL-6, IL-8, and IL-10 levels. Conclusions:Septic shock caused by Clostridium ramosum is rare, and more research is needed on the causes and epidemiology. DZS3717106 infection triggers over-activated inflammatory response in the patient, which may be closely related to the occurrence and development of septic shock.

Objective:To compare the clinical efficacy of camrelizumab and sintilimab in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) , and to explore its impact on tumor marker levels and immune function index, as well as to perform safety analysis.Methods:A total of 87 patients with advanced NSCLC who were treated in Hai'an People's Hospital of Jiangsu Province from May 2019 to May 2021 were selected as the research objects. According to the treatment scheme, the patients were divided into camrelizumab group ( n=41) and sintilimab group ( n=46) . The clinical efficacy, prognosis, tumor marker levels, immune function index and immune related adverse reactions of the two groups were compared. Results:There were no statistically significant differences in objective response rate [48.78% (20/41) vs. 39.13% (18/46) , χ2=0.82, P=0.365] or disease control rate [78.05% (32/41) vs. 71.74% (33/46) , χ2=0.46, P=0.499] in both camrelizumab and sintilimab group. The median progression-free survival (PFS) in the camrelizumab group was 9.1 months, and the median overall survival (OS) was 15.4 months. The median PFS in the sintilimab group was 9.7 months, and the median OS was 15.7 months. There were no statistically significant differences in median PFS and median OS between the two groups ( χ2=0.18, P=0.633; χ2=0.15, P=0.697) . Before treatment, there were no statistically significant differences in carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) [ (47.68±8.12) ng/ml vs. (49.03±8.70) ng/ml, t=0.75, P=0.458], cytokeratin 19 fragment antigen 21-1 (CYFRA21-1) [ (18.06±3.41) ng/ml vs. (17.25±3.78) ng/ml, t=1.05, P=0.299], and carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125) [ (72.26±21.06) U/ml vs. (74.03±22.10) U/ml, t=0.38, P=0.704] levels between the camrelizumab group and sintilimab group. After treatment, there were no statistically significant differences in CEA [ (28.11±7.68) ng/ml vs. (27.63±5.71) ng/ml, t=0.33, P=0.740], CYFRA21-1 [ (9.29±1.88) ng/ml vs. (9.06±1.80) ng/ml, t=0.15, P=0.814], and CA125 [ (61.39±21.22) U/ml vs. (60.51±11.03) U/ml, t=0.25, P=0.806] levels between the two groups, but CEA, CYFRA21-1, and CA125 levels decreased after treatment compared with those before treatment in both groups (all P<0.05) . Before treatment, there were no statistically significant differences in T cells CD4 + [ (41.15±3.24) % vs. (41.17±2.90) %, t=0.03, P=0.976], CD8 + [ (68.82±3.94) % vs. (70.06±4.08) %, t=1.44, P=0.154], and CD4 +/CD8 + (1.88±0.33 vs. 1.76±0.25, t=1.92, P=0.058) between the two groups. After treatment, there were no statistically significant differences in T cells CD4 + [ (47.08±3.22) % vs. (48.53±5.07) %, t=1.57, P=0.120], CD8 + [ (61.22±1.67) % vs. (61.45±1.66) %, t=0.64, P=0.522], and CD4 +/CD8 + (2.31±0.17 vs. 2.36±0.12, t=1.60, P=0.114) between the two groups, while T cells CD8 + was lower than that before treatment, and CD4 + as well as CD4 +/CD8 + were higher than those before treatment in both groups (all P<0.05) . The overall incidence of adverse reactions in the sintilimab group [10.87% (5/46) ] was lower than that in the camrelizumab group [31.71% (13/41) ], and with a statistically significance ( χ2=5.74, P=0.016) . Conclusion:The clinical efficacy of camrelizumab and sintilimab in NSCLC patients is basically the same, the impacts of which on tumor markers and immune function are comparable, but the safety of sintilimab is better than that of camrelizumab.

Objective:To investigate the clinical effect of 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) photodynamic therapy (PDT) combined with CO 2 fractional laser on hypertrophic scars. Methods:From 2017 to 2019, 20 patients [17 males, 3 females, aged (24.4±4.24) years] with mandibular acne keloid in the Department of Dermatology of Air Force Medical Center, were treated with ALA-PDT combined with CO 2 fractional laser treatment, once a month, 3 times in total, and were followed up for 6 months. The efficacy, safety, and recurrence were evaluated by the Vancouver scar scale (VSS) score. Results:The effective rate was 100% after three treatments. The VSS score decreased significantly after the first treatment, and as the number of treatments increased, the VSS score further decreased. The first improvement after treatment was thickness and hardness. There was no recurrence during the 6-month follow-up. The main adverse reactions were pain, erythema and pigmentation.Conclusions:ALA-PDT combined with CO 2 fractional laser can be used as a new treatment for hypertrophic scars.