AIM: To summarize 10 surgical pearls for managing proliferative diabetic retinopathy(PDR)adapted from the ancient Chinese allusions and analyze the application of these pearls in a real-world fashion.METHODS: Retrospective, noncomparative, interventional study. Ten surgical pearls were summarized and adapted from the ancient Chinese philosophy. Totally 346 cases(443 eyes)that underwent pars plana vitrectomy(PPV)at our hospial from January 2016 to February 2024 were selected. Flexible combinations of these pearls were applied according to the specific condition of each patient during surgeries. The efficacy and safety were analyzed, as well as the application frequencies according to the existence of tractional retinal detachment or not.RESULTS: A total of 473 times of surgeries were performed on all the patients. According to ancient Chinese allusions, ten surgical pearls were summarized from these surgeries. All PPVs went smoothly with the application of different combinations. Finally, almost all proliferative membranes were successfully peeled except for 10 patients(11 eyes), who went through strategy No.10(minimal membranectomy)that, only necessary relaxation incisions were made with most of the proliferative membranes left on purpose. The final visual acuities were mostly improved or stable(1.92±0.83 LogMAR preoperatively vs 1.16±0.85 LogMAR postoperatively, P<0.01). Postoperative complications mainly included early inflammatory responses in the anterior chamber and nuclear sclerosis. Recurrent vitreous hemorrhage, retinal detachment, and hyphema or neovascular glaucoma occurred in 1.9%(9/473), 3.2%(15/473), 0.4%(2/473)and 0.4%(2/473)times of PPVs, respectively. After 12/473(2.5%)times of PPVs, retinal detachment at the macular area still existed, and multiple times of subsequent PPVs were conducted. Final retinal attachment at the macular area was realized in 98.9% eyes. Those 5 unattached eyes were with heavily reproliferated membranes and subsequent tractional retinal detachment recurrence under the oil, and three of them were scleral buckled additionally.CONCLUSION:These 10 surgical strategies and technique pearls were mostly effective and safe in the management of severe PDR patients. They were relatively easy to be memorized and applicated once the meaning of each Chinese idiom was understood. One can use different combinations flexibly according to a patient's specific condition.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is widely used as an auxiliary device to diagnosis and treat mental illness, and the scope of its use is gradually expanding. It is widely used as a tool to assist diagnosis in various fields such as radiology and ophthalmology. Meanwhile, in psychiatry, the use of AI has been limited so far due to the lack of a specific objective test for diagnosis and the reliability of medical records for sensitive records such as suicide attempts. However, AI can detect people’s behavior and facial expressions changes more sensitively and more accurately find the correlation between quantitative neurophysiological test results and behavior and emotions. Nowadays, AI is useful as an auxiliary tool in diagnosing not only pediatric and adolescent mental disorders such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD), but also affective disorders and psychotic disorders. AI is also actively used to treat insomnia, ASD, ADHD, cognitive dysfunction, depression, anxiety disorders, substance use disorders, and schizophrenia. Many psychiatrists are still cautious about the use of AI. There are concerns that AI cannot replace the doctorpatient relationship, which is the most important element of traditional psychotherapy. Nevertheless, AI can diagnose psychiatric disorders more accurately and can also be useful in improving patients’ symptoms and quality of life through AI or digital treatments. I hope that psychiatrists to contribute to the treatment of human mental illness by becoming users, supervisors, and monitors of AI.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.