Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Objective: The relationship between adverse childhood experiences and methamphetamine use disorder (MUD) has been shown in previous studies; nevertheless, the underlying neural mechanisms remain elusive. Childhood trauma is associated with aberrant functional connectivity (FC) within the default-mode network (DMN). Furthermore, within the DMN, FC may contribute to impaired self-awareness in addiction, while cross-network FC is critical for relapse.We aimed to investigate whether childhood trauma was associated with DMN-related resting-state FC among healthy controls and patients with MUD and to examine whether DMN-related FC affected the effect of childhood trauma on the symptom load of MUD diagnosis. Methods: Twenty-seven male patients with MUD and 27 male healthy controls were enrolled and completed the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire. DMN-related resting-state FC was examined using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Results: There were 47.1% healthy controls and 66.7% MUD patients in this study with adverse childhood experiences.Negative correlations between adverse childhood experiences and within-DMN FC were observed in both healthy controls and MUD patients, while within-DMN FC was significantly altered in MUD patients. The detrimental effects of adverse childhood experiences on MUD patients may be attenuated through DMN-executive control networks (ECN) FC. Conclusion Adverse childhood experiences were negatively associated with within-DMN FC in MUD patients and healthy controls. However, DMN-ECN FC may attenuate the effects of childhood trauma on symptoms load of MUD.

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract and is characterized by alternating periods of inflammation and remission. Although UC incidence is lower in Taiwan than in Western countries, its impact remains considerable, demanding updated guidelines for addressing local healthcare challenges and patient needs. The revised guidelines employ international standards and recent research, emphasizing practical implementation within the Taiwanese healthcare system. Since the inception of the guidelines in 2017, the Taiwan Society of Inflammatory Bowel Disease has acknowledged the need for ongoing revisions to incorporate emerging therapeutic options and evolving disease management practices. This updated guideline aims to align UC management with local contexts, ensuring comprehensive and context-specific recommendations, thereby raising the standard of care for UC patients in Taiwan. By adapting and optimizing international protocols for local relevance, these efforts seek to enhance health outcomes for patients with UC.

Crohn’s disease (CD) is a chronic, fluctuating inflammatory condition that primarily affects the gastrointestinal tract. Although the incidence of CD in Taiwan is lower than that in Western countries, the severity of CD presentation appears to be similar between Asia and the West. This observation indicates the urgency for devising revised guidelines tailored to the unique reimbursement system, and patient requirements in Taiwan. The core objectives of these updated guidelines include the updated treatment choices and the integration of the treat-to-target strategy into CD management, promoting the achievement of deep remission to mitigate complications and enhance the overall quality of life. Given the diversity in disease prevalence, severity, insurance policies, and access to medical treatments in Taiwan, a customized approach is imperative for formulating these guidelines. Such tailored strategies ensure that international standards are not only adapted but also optimized to local contexts. Since the inception of its initial guidelines in 2017, the Taiwan Society of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (TSIBD) has acknowledged the importance of continuous revisions for incorporating new therapeutic options and evolving disease management practices. The latest update leverages international standards and recent research findings focused on practical implementation within the Taiwanese healthcare system.

Objective::To determine whether an association exists between group B Streptococcus (GBS) colonization and preeclampsia among pregnant Black women.Methods::This retrospective cross-sectional study involved Black women who gave birth at State University of New York Downstate Hospital between January 2010 and December 2017. Data were collected from the Obstetric Department, including delivery date, time, mode of delivery, age of the mother, weeks of gestation at delivery, and antepartum complications. The GBS test results were originally determined using the eSwab transport system. Preeclampsia was defined based on the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists criteria for the periods 2010-2012 and 2013-2017. The primary outcome was whether GBS was associated with the outcome of preeclampsia in the population of Black women. Covariates, including smoking status, gestational age, parity, body mass index, maternal age, and presence of herpes simplex virus (HSV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) were examined as potential confounders. Chi-squared test and logistic regression model were used, presenting odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals ( P < 0.050), analyzed with SAS on Demand for Academics (SAS Institute, Inc., NY). Results::Among the 8,019 Black women included in this study, GBS-positive women ( n = 977) had a 53% reduction in the likelihood of being diagnosed with preeclampsia compared to GBS-negative women (adjusted odds ratio, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.70). We did not find evidence of differences in the distribution of smoking habits ( P = 0.783) or maternal age ( P = 0.107) between GBS-positive and GBS-negative women. However, the GBS-positive women tended to be less likely to have a preterm delivery (9.62% (94/977) vs. 24.24% (1707/7042), P < 0.001), less likely to be nulliparous (33.37% (326/977) vs. 37.87% (2667/7042), P = 0.006), and less likely to be obese (51.38% (502/977) vs. 55.30% (3894/7042), P < 0.001) compared with GBS-negative women. In contrast, GBS-positive women were more likely to have a comorbid infection than their counterparts: HSV (5.94% (58/977) vs. 2.63% (185/7042), P < 0.001) and HIV (1.54% (15/977) vs. 0.82% (58/7042), P = 0.028). Conclusion::We found a reduced likelihood of preeclampsia among women who were positive for GBS at delivery. Given the cross-sectional nature of our study, more research is needed to further explore this association.

Objective::To determine whether an association exists between group B Streptococcus (GBS) colonization and preeclampsia among pregnant Black women.Methods::This retrospective cross-sectional study involved Black women who gave birth at State University of New York Downstate Hospital between January 2010 and December 2017. Data were collected from the Obstetric Department, including delivery date, time, mode of delivery, age of the mother, weeks of gestation at delivery, and antepartum complications. The GBS test results were originally determined using the eSwab transport system. Preeclampsia was defined based on the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists criteria for the periods 2010-2012 and 2013-2017. The primary outcome was whether GBS was associated with the outcome of preeclampsia in the population of Black women. Covariates, including smoking status, gestational age, parity, body mass index, maternal age, and presence of herpes simplex virus (HSV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) were examined as potential confounders. Chi-squared test and logistic regression model were used, presenting odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals ( P < 0.050), analyzed with SAS on Demand for Academics (SAS Institute, Inc., NY). Results::Among the 8,019 Black women included in this study, GBS-positive women ( n = 977) had a 53% reduction in the likelihood of being diagnosed with preeclampsia compared to GBS-negative women (adjusted odds ratio, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.70). We did not find evidence of differences in the distribution of smoking habits ( P = 0.783) or maternal age ( P = 0.107) between GBS-positive and GBS-negative women. However, the GBS-positive women tended to be less likely to have a preterm delivery (9.62% (94/977) vs. 24.24% (1707/7042), P < 0.001), less likely to be nulliparous (33.37% (326/977) vs. 37.87% (2667/7042), P = 0.006), and less likely to be obese (51.38% (502/977) vs. 55.30% (3894/7042), P < 0.001) compared with GBS-negative women. In contrast, GBS-positive women were more likely to have a comorbid infection than their counterparts: HSV (5.94% (58/977) vs. 2.63% (185/7042), P < 0.001) and HIV (1.54% (15/977) vs. 0.82% (58/7042), P = 0.028). Conclusion::We found a reduced likelihood of preeclampsia among women who were positive for GBS at delivery. Given the cross-sectional nature of our study, more research is needed to further explore this association.