1.Carvedilol to prevent hepatic decompensation of cirrhosis in patients with clinically significant portal hypertension stratified by new non-invasive model (CHESS2306)
Chuan LIU ; Hong YOU ; Qing-Lei ZENG ; Yu Jun WONG ; Bingqiong WANG ; Ivica GRGUREVIC ; Chenghai LIU ; Hyung Joon YIM ; Wei GOU ; Bingtian DONG ; Shenghong JU ; Yanan GUO ; Qian YU ; Masashi HIROOKA ; Hirayuki ENOMOTO ; Amr Shaaban HANAFY ; Zhujun CAO ; Xiemin DONG ; Jing LV ; Tae Hyung KIM ; Yohei KOIZUMI ; Yoichi HIASA ; Takashi NISHIMURA ; Hiroko IIJIMA ; Chuanjun XU ; Erhei DAI ; Xiaoling LAN ; Changxiang LAI ; Shirong LIU ; Fang WANG ; Ying GUO ; Jiaojian LV ; Liting ZHANG ; Yuqing WANG ; Qing XIE ; Chuxiao SHAO ; Zhensheng LIU ; Federico RAVAIOLI ; Antonio COLECCHIA ; Jie LI ; Gao-Jun TENG ; Xiaolong QI
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology 2025;31(1):105-118
Background:
s/Aims: Non-invasive models stratifying clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) are limited. Herein, we developed a new non-invasive model for predicting CSPH in patients with compensated cirrhosis and investigated whether carvedilol can prevent hepatic decompensation in patients with high-risk CSPH stratified using the new model.
Methods:
Non-invasive risk factors of CSPH were identified via systematic review and meta-analysis of studies involving patients with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). A new non-invasive model was validated for various performance aspects in three cohorts, i.e., a multicenter HVPG cohort, a follow-up cohort, and a carvediloltreating cohort.
Results:
In the meta-analysis with six studies (n=819), liver stiffness measurement and platelet count were identified as independent risk factors for CSPH and were used to develop the new “CSPH risk” model. In the HVPG cohort (n=151), the new model accurately predicted CSPH with cutoff values of 0 and –0.68 for ruling in and out CSPH, respectively. In the follow-up cohort (n=1,102), the cumulative incidences of decompensation events significantly differed using the cutoff values of <–0.68 (low-risk), –0.68 to 0 (medium-risk), and >0 (high-risk). In the carvediloltreated cohort, patients with high-risk CSPH treated with carvedilol (n=81) had lower rates of decompensation events than non-selective beta-blockers untreated patients with high-risk CSPH (n=613 before propensity score matching [PSM], n=162 after PSM).
Conclusions
Treatment with carvedilol significantly reduces the risk of hepatic decompensation in patients with high-risk CSPH stratified by the new model.
2.Carvedilol to prevent hepatic decompensation of cirrhosis in patients with clinically significant portal hypertension stratified by new non-invasive model (CHESS2306)
Chuan LIU ; Hong YOU ; Qing-Lei ZENG ; Yu Jun WONG ; Bingqiong WANG ; Ivica GRGUREVIC ; Chenghai LIU ; Hyung Joon YIM ; Wei GOU ; Bingtian DONG ; Shenghong JU ; Yanan GUO ; Qian YU ; Masashi HIROOKA ; Hirayuki ENOMOTO ; Amr Shaaban HANAFY ; Zhujun CAO ; Xiemin DONG ; Jing LV ; Tae Hyung KIM ; Yohei KOIZUMI ; Yoichi HIASA ; Takashi NISHIMURA ; Hiroko IIJIMA ; Chuanjun XU ; Erhei DAI ; Xiaoling LAN ; Changxiang LAI ; Shirong LIU ; Fang WANG ; Ying GUO ; Jiaojian LV ; Liting ZHANG ; Yuqing WANG ; Qing XIE ; Chuxiao SHAO ; Zhensheng LIU ; Federico RAVAIOLI ; Antonio COLECCHIA ; Jie LI ; Gao-Jun TENG ; Xiaolong QI
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology 2025;31(1):105-118
Background:
s/Aims: Non-invasive models stratifying clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) are limited. Herein, we developed a new non-invasive model for predicting CSPH in patients with compensated cirrhosis and investigated whether carvedilol can prevent hepatic decompensation in patients with high-risk CSPH stratified using the new model.
Methods:
Non-invasive risk factors of CSPH were identified via systematic review and meta-analysis of studies involving patients with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). A new non-invasive model was validated for various performance aspects in three cohorts, i.e., a multicenter HVPG cohort, a follow-up cohort, and a carvediloltreating cohort.
Results:
In the meta-analysis with six studies (n=819), liver stiffness measurement and platelet count were identified as independent risk factors for CSPH and were used to develop the new “CSPH risk” model. In the HVPG cohort (n=151), the new model accurately predicted CSPH with cutoff values of 0 and –0.68 for ruling in and out CSPH, respectively. In the follow-up cohort (n=1,102), the cumulative incidences of decompensation events significantly differed using the cutoff values of <–0.68 (low-risk), –0.68 to 0 (medium-risk), and >0 (high-risk). In the carvediloltreated cohort, patients with high-risk CSPH treated with carvedilol (n=81) had lower rates of decompensation events than non-selective beta-blockers untreated patients with high-risk CSPH (n=613 before propensity score matching [PSM], n=162 after PSM).
Conclusions
Treatment with carvedilol significantly reduces the risk of hepatic decompensation in patients with high-risk CSPH stratified by the new model.
3.Carvedilol to prevent hepatic decompensation of cirrhosis in patients with clinically significant portal hypertension stratified by new non-invasive model (CHESS2306)
Chuan LIU ; Hong YOU ; Qing-Lei ZENG ; Yu Jun WONG ; Bingqiong WANG ; Ivica GRGUREVIC ; Chenghai LIU ; Hyung Joon YIM ; Wei GOU ; Bingtian DONG ; Shenghong JU ; Yanan GUO ; Qian YU ; Masashi HIROOKA ; Hirayuki ENOMOTO ; Amr Shaaban HANAFY ; Zhujun CAO ; Xiemin DONG ; Jing LV ; Tae Hyung KIM ; Yohei KOIZUMI ; Yoichi HIASA ; Takashi NISHIMURA ; Hiroko IIJIMA ; Chuanjun XU ; Erhei DAI ; Xiaoling LAN ; Changxiang LAI ; Shirong LIU ; Fang WANG ; Ying GUO ; Jiaojian LV ; Liting ZHANG ; Yuqing WANG ; Qing XIE ; Chuxiao SHAO ; Zhensheng LIU ; Federico RAVAIOLI ; Antonio COLECCHIA ; Jie LI ; Gao-Jun TENG ; Xiaolong QI
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology 2025;31(1):105-118
Background:
s/Aims: Non-invasive models stratifying clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) are limited. Herein, we developed a new non-invasive model for predicting CSPH in patients with compensated cirrhosis and investigated whether carvedilol can prevent hepatic decompensation in patients with high-risk CSPH stratified using the new model.
Methods:
Non-invasive risk factors of CSPH were identified via systematic review and meta-analysis of studies involving patients with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). A new non-invasive model was validated for various performance aspects in three cohorts, i.e., a multicenter HVPG cohort, a follow-up cohort, and a carvediloltreating cohort.
Results:
In the meta-analysis with six studies (n=819), liver stiffness measurement and platelet count were identified as independent risk factors for CSPH and were used to develop the new “CSPH risk” model. In the HVPG cohort (n=151), the new model accurately predicted CSPH with cutoff values of 0 and –0.68 for ruling in and out CSPH, respectively. In the follow-up cohort (n=1,102), the cumulative incidences of decompensation events significantly differed using the cutoff values of <–0.68 (low-risk), –0.68 to 0 (medium-risk), and >0 (high-risk). In the carvediloltreated cohort, patients with high-risk CSPH treated with carvedilol (n=81) had lower rates of decompensation events than non-selective beta-blockers untreated patients with high-risk CSPH (n=613 before propensity score matching [PSM], n=162 after PSM).
Conclusions
Treatment with carvedilol significantly reduces the risk of hepatic decompensation in patients with high-risk CSPH stratified by the new model.
4.A propensity score-matched analysis on biopsy methods: enhanced detection rates of prostate cancer with combined cognitive fusion-targeted biopsy.
Bi-Ran YE ; Hui WANG ; Yong-Qing ZHANG ; Guo-Wen LIN ; Hua XU ; Zhe HONG ; Bo DAI ; Fang-Ning WAN
Asian Journal of Andrology 2025;27(4):488-494
The choice of biopsy method is critical in diagnosing prostate cancer (PCa). This retrospective cohort study compared systematic biopsy (SB) or cognitive fusion-targeted biopsy combined with SB (CB) in detecting PCa and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Data from 2572 men who underwent either SB or CB in Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (Shanghai, China) between January 2019 and December 2023 were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline characteristics, and detection rates were compared before and after PSM. Subgroup analyses based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores were performed. Primary and secondary outcomes were the detection rates of PCa and csPCa, respectively. Of 2572 men, 1778 were included in the PSM analysis. Before PSM, CB had higher detection rates for both PCa (62.9% vs 52.4%, odds ratio [OR]: 1.54, P < 0.001) and csPCa (54.9% vs 43.3%, OR: 1.60, P < 0.001) compared to SB. After PSM, CB remained superior in detecting PCa (63.1% vs 47.9%, OR: 1.86, P < 0.001) and csPCa (55.0% vs 38.2%, OR: 1.98, P < 0.001). In patients with PSA 4-12 ng ml -1 (>4 ng ml -1 and ≤12 ng ml -1 , which is also applicable to the following text), CB detected more PCa (59.8% vs 40.7%, OR: 2.17, P < 0.001) and csPCa (48.1% vs 27.7%, OR: 2.42, P < 0.001). CB also showed superior csPCa detection in those with PI-RADS 3 lesions (32.1% vs 18.0%, OR: 2.15, P = 0.038). Overall, CB significantly improves PCa and csPCa detection, especially in patients with PSA 4-12 ng ml -1 or PI-RADS 3 lesions.
Humans
;
Male
;
Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis*
;
Propensity Score
;
Retrospective Studies
;
Middle Aged
;
Aged
;
Image-Guided Biopsy/methods*
;
Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood*
;
Prostate/diagnostic imaging*
5.Effects of Hot Night Exposure on Human Semen Quality: A Multicenter Population-Based Study.
Ting Ting DAI ; Ting XU ; Qi Ling WANG ; Hao Bo NI ; Chun Ying SONG ; Yu Shan LI ; Fu Ping LI ; Tian Qing MENG ; Hui Qiang SHENG ; Ling Xi WANG ; Xiao Yan CAI ; Li Na XIAO ; Xiao Lin YU ; Qing Hui ZENG ; Pi GUO ; Xin Zong ZHANG
Biomedical and Environmental Sciences 2025;38(2):178-193
OBJECTIVE:
To explore and quantify the association of hot night exposure during the sperm development period (0-90 lag days) with semen quality.
METHODS:
A total of 6,640 male sperm donors from 6 human sperm banks in China during 2014-2020 were recruited in this multicenter study. Two indices (i.e., hot night excess [HNE] and hot night duration [HND]) were used to estimate the heat intensity and duration during nighttime. Linear mixed models were used to examine the association between hot nights and semen quality parameters.
RESULTS:
The exposure-response relationship revealed that HNE and HND during 0-90 days before semen collection had a significantly inverse association with sperm motility. Specifically, a 1 °C increase in HNE was associated with decreased sperm progressive motility of 0.0090 (95% confidence interval [ CI]: -0.0147, -0.0033) and decreased total motility of 0.0094 (95% CI: -0.0160, -0.0029). HND was significantly associated with reduced sperm progressive motility and total motility of 0.0021 (95% CI: -0.0040, -0.0003) and 0.0023 (95% CI: -0.0043, -0.0002), respectively. Consistent results were observed at different temperature thresholds on hot nights.
CONCLUSION
Our findings highlight the need to mitigate nocturnal heat exposure during spermatogenesis to maintain optimal semen quality.
Humans
;
Male
;
Semen Analysis
;
Adult
;
Sperm Motility
;
Hot Temperature/adverse effects*
;
China
;
Middle Aged
;
Spermatozoa/physiology*
;
Young Adult
6.National bloodstream infection bacterial resistance surveillance report (2022) : Gram-negative bacteria
Zhiying LIU ; Yunbo CHEN ; Jinru JI ; Chaoqun YING ; Qing YANG ; Haishen KONG ; Haifeng MAO ; Hui DING ; Pengpeng TIAN ; Jiangqin SONG ; Yongyun LIU ; Jiliang WANG ; Yan JIN ; Yuanyuan DAI ; Yizheng ZHOU ; Yan GENG ; Fenghong CHEN ; Lu WANG ; Yanyan LI ; Dan LIU ; Peng ZHANG ; Junmin CAO ; Xiaoyan LI ; Dijing SONG ; Xinhua QIANG ; Yanhong LI ; Qiuying ZHANG ; Guolin LIAO ; Ying HUANG ; Baohua ZHANG ; Liang GUO ; Aiyun LI ; Haiquan KANG ; Donghong HUANG ; Sijin MAN ; Zhuo LI ; Youdong YIN ; Kunpeng LIANG ; Haixin DONG ; Donghua LIU ; Hongyun XU ; Yinqiao DONG ; Rong XU ; Lin ZHENG ; Shuyan HU ; Jian LI ; Qiang LIU ; Liang LUAN ; Jilu SHEN ; Lixia ZHANG ; Bo QUAN ; Xiaoping YAN ; Xiaoyan QI ; Dengyan QIAO ; Weiping LIU ; Xiusan XIA ; Ling MENG ; Jinhua LIANG ; Ping SHEN ; Yonghong XIAO
Chinese Journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases 2024;17(1):42-57
Objective:To report the results of national surveillance on the distribution and antimicrobial resistance profile of clinical Gram-negative bacteria isolates from bloodstream infections in China in 2022.Methods:The clinical isolates of Gram-negative bacteria from blood cultures in member hospitals of national bloodstream infection Bacterial Resistant Investigation Collaborative System(BRICS)were collected during January 2022 to December 2022. Antibiotic susceptibility tests were conducted by agar dilution or broth dilution methods recommended by Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute(CLSI). WHONET 5.6 and SPSS 25.0 software were used to analyze the data.Results:During the study period,9 035 strains of Gram-negative bacteria were collected from 51 hospitals,of which 7 895(87.4%)were Enterobacteriaceae and 1 140(12.6%)were non-fermenting bacteria. The top 5 bacterial species were Escherichia coli( n=4 510,49.9%), Klebsiella pneumoniae( n=2 340,25.9%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa( n=534,5.9%), Acinetobacter baumannii complex( n=405,4.5%)and Enterobacter cloacae( n=327,3.6%). The ESBLs-producing rates in Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Proteus spp. were 47.1%(2 095/4 452),21.0%(427/2 033)and 41.1%(58/141),respectively. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli(CREC)and carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae(CRKP)were 1.3%(58/4 510)and 13.1%(307/2 340);62.1%(36/58)and 9.8%(30/307)of CREC and CRKP were resistant to ceftazidime/avibactam combination,respectively. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii(CRAB)complex was 59.5%(241/405),while less than 5% of Acinetobacter baumannii complex was resistant to tigecycline and polymyxin B. The prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa(CRPA)was 18.4%(98/534). There were differences in the composition ratio of Gram-negative bacteria in bloodstream infections and the prevalence of main Gram-negative bacteria resistance among different regions,with statistically significant differences in the prevalence of CRKP and CRPA( χ2=20.489 and 20.252, P<0.001). The prevalence of CREC,CRKP,CRPA,CRAB,ESBLs-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae were higher in provinicial hospitals than those in municipal hospitals( χ2=11.953,81.183,10.404,5.915,12.415 and 6.459, P<0.01 or <0.05),while the prevalence of CRPA was higher in economically developed regions(per capita GDP ≥ 92 059 Yuan)than that in economically less-developed regions(per capita GDP <92 059 Yuan)( χ2=6.240, P=0.012). Conclusions:The proportion of Gram-negative bacteria in bloodstream infections shows an increasing trend,and Escherichia coli is ranked in the top,while the trend of CRKP decreases continuously with time. Decreasing trends are noted in ESBLs-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Low prevalence of carbapenem resistance in Escherichia coli and high prevalence in CRAB complex have been observed. The composition ratio and antibacterial spectrum of bloodstream infections in different regions of China are slightly different,and the proportion of main drug resistant bacteria in provincial hospitals is higher than those in municipal hospitals.
7.Chinese expert consensus on blood support mode and blood transfusion strategies for emergency treatment of severe trauma patients (version 2024)
Yao LU ; Yang LI ; Leiying ZHANG ; Hao TANG ; Huidan JING ; Yaoli WANG ; Xiangzhi JIA ; Li BA ; Maohong BIAN ; Dan CAI ; Hui CAI ; Xiaohong CAI ; Zhanshan ZHA ; Bingyu CHEN ; Daqing CHEN ; Feng CHEN ; Guoan CHEN ; Haiming CHEN ; Jing CHEN ; Min CHEN ; Qing CHEN ; Shu CHEN ; Xi CHEN ; Jinfeng CHENG ; Xiaoling CHU ; Hongwang CUI ; Xin CUI ; Zhen DA ; Ying DAI ; Surong DENG ; Weiqun DONG ; Weimin FAN ; Ke FENG ; Danhui FU ; Yongshui FU ; Qi FU ; Xuemei FU ; Jia GAN ; Xinyu GAN ; Wei GAO ; Huaizheng GONG ; Rong GUI ; Geng GUO ; Ning HAN ; Yiwen HAO ; Wubing HE ; Qiang HONG ; Ruiqin HOU ; Wei HOU ; Jie HU ; Peiyang HU ; Xi HU ; Xiaoyu HU ; Guangbin HUANG ; Jie HUANG ; Xiangyan HUANG ; Yuanshuai HUANG ; Shouyong HUN ; Xuebing JIANG ; Ping JIN ; Dong LAI ; Aiping LE ; Hongmei LI ; Bijuan LI ; Cuiying LI ; Daihong LI ; Haihong LI ; He LI ; Hui LI ; Jianping LI ; Ning LI ; Xiying LI ; Xiangmin LI ; Xiaofei LI ; Xiaojuan LI ; Zhiqiang LI ; Zhongjun LI ; Zunyan LI ; Huaqin LIANG ; Xiaohua LIANG ; Dongfa LIAO ; Qun LIAO ; Yan LIAO ; Jiajin LIN ; Chunxia LIU ; Fenghua LIU ; Peixian LIU ; Tiemei LIU ; Xiaoxin LIU ; Zhiwei LIU ; Zhongdi LIU ; Hua LU ; Jianfeng LUAN ; Jianjun LUO ; Qun LUO ; Dingfeng LYU ; Qi LYU ; Xianping LYU ; Aijun MA ; Liqiang MA ; Shuxuan MA ; Xainjun MA ; Xiaogang MA ; Xiaoli MA ; Guoqing MAO ; Shijie MU ; Shaolin NIE ; Shujuan OUYANG ; Xilin OUYANG ; Chunqiu PAN ; Jian PAN ; Xiaohua PAN ; Lei PENG ; Tao PENG ; Baohua QIAN ; Shu QIAO ; Li QIN ; Ying REN ; Zhaoqi REN ; Ruiming RONG ; Changshan SU ; Mingwei SUN ; Wenwu SUN ; Zhenwei SUN ; Haiping TANG ; Xiaofeng TANG ; Changjiu TANG ; Cuihua TAO ; Zhibin TIAN ; Juan WANG ; Baoyan WANG ; Chunyan WANG ; Gefei WANG ; Haiyan WANG ; Hongjie WANG ; Peng WANG ; Pengli WANG ; Qiushi WANG ; Xiaoning WANG ; Xinhua WANG ; Xuefeng WANG ; Yong WANG ; Yongjun WANG ; Yuanjie WANG ; Zhihua WANG ; Shaojun WEI ; Yaming WEI ; Jianbo WEN ; Jun WEN ; Jiang WU ; Jufeng WU ; Aijun XIA ; Fei XIA ; Rong XIA ; Jue XIE ; Yanchao XING ; Yan XIONG ; Feng XU ; Yongzhu XU ; Yongan XU ; Yonghe YAN ; Beizhan YAN ; Jiang YANG ; Jiangcun YANG ; Jun YANG ; Xinwen YANG ; Yongyi YANG ; Chunyan YAO ; Mingliang YE ; Changlin YIN ; Ming YIN ; Wen YIN ; Lianling YU ; Shuhong YU ; Zebo YU ; Yigang YU ; Anyong YU ; Hong YUAN ; Yi YUAN ; Chan ZHANG ; Jinjun ZHANG ; Jun ZHANG ; Kai ZHANG ; Leibing ZHANG ; Quan ZHANG ; Rongjiang ZHANG ; Sanming ZHANG ; Shengji ZHANG ; Shuo ZHANG ; Wei ZHANG ; Weidong ZHANG ; Xi ZHANG ; Xingwen ZHANG ; Guixi ZHANG ; Xiaojun ZHANG ; Guoqing ZHAO ; Jianpeng ZHAO ; Shuming ZHAO ; Beibei ZHENG ; Shangen ZHENG ; Huayou ZHOU ; Jicheng ZHOU ; Lihong ZHOU ; Mou ZHOU ; Xiaoyu ZHOU ; Xuelian ZHOU ; Yuan ZHOU ; Zheng ZHOU ; Zuhuang ZHOU ; Haiyan ZHU ; Peiyuan ZHU ; Changju ZHU ; Lili ZHU ; Zhengguo WANG ; Jianxin JIANG ; Deqing WANG ; Jiongcai LAN ; Quanli WANG ; Yang YU ; Lianyang ZHANG ; Aiqing WEN
Chinese Journal of Trauma 2024;40(10):865-881
Patients with severe trauma require an extremely timely treatment and transfusion plays an irreplaceable role in the emergency treatment of such patients. An increasing number of evidence-based medicinal evidences and clinical practices suggest that patients with severe traumatic bleeding benefit from early transfusion of low-titer group O whole blood or hemostatic resuscitation with red blood cells, plasma and platelet of a balanced ratio. However, the current domestic mode of blood supply cannot fully meet the requirements of timely and effective blood transfusion for emergency treatment of patients with severe trauma in clinical practice. In order to solve the key problems in blood supply and blood transfusion strategies for emergency treatment of severe trauma, Branch of Clinical Transfusion Medicine of Chinese Medical Association, Group for Trauma Emergency Care and Multiple Injuries of Trauma Branch of Chinese Medical Association, Young Scholar Group of Disaster Medicine Branch of Chinese Medical Association organized domestic experts of blood transfusion medicine and trauma treatment to jointly formulate Chinese expert consensus on blood support mode and blood transfusion strategies for emergency treatment of severe trauma patients ( version 2024). Based on the evidence-based medical evidence and Delphi method of expert consultation and voting, 10 recommendations were put forward from two aspects of blood support mode and transfusion strategies, aiming to provide a reference for transfusion resuscitation in the emergency treatment of severe trauma and further improve the success rate of treatment of patients with severe trauma.
8.National bloodstream infection bacterial resistance surveillance report(2022): Gram-positive bacteria
Chaoqun YING ; Yunbo CHEN ; Jinru JI ; Zhiying LIU ; Qing YANG ; Haishen KONG ; Haifeng MAO ; Hui DING ; Pengpeng TIAN ; Jiangqin SONG ; Yongyun LIU ; Jiliang WANG ; Yan JIN ; Yuanyuan DAI ; Yizheng ZHOU ; Yan GENG ; Fenghong CHEN ; Lu WANG ; Yanyan LI ; Dan LIU ; Peng ZHANG ; Junmin CAO ; Xiaoyan LI ; Dijing SONG ; Xinhua QIANG ; Yanhong LI ; Qiuying ZHANG ; Guolin LIAO ; Ying HUANG ; Baohua ZHANG ; Liang GUO ; Aiyun LI ; Haiquan KANG ; Donghong HUANG ; Sijin MAN ; Zhuo LI ; Youdong YIN ; Kunpeng LIANG ; Haixin DONG ; Donghua LIU ; Hongyun XU ; Yinqiao DONG ; Rong XU ; Lin ZHENG ; Shuyan HU ; Jian LI ; Qiang LIU ; Liang LUAN ; Jilu SHEN ; Lixia ZHANG ; Bo QUAN ; Xiaoping YAN ; Xiaoyan QI ; Dengyan QIAO ; Weiping LIU ; Xiusan XIA ; Ling MENG ; Jinhua LIANG ; Ping SHEN ; Yonghong XIAO
Chinese Journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases 2024;17(2):99-112
Objective:To report the results of national surveillance on the distribution and antimicrobial resistance profile of clinical Gram-positive bacteria isolates from bloodstream infections in China in 2022.Methods:The clinical isolates of Gram-positive bacteria from blood cultures in member hospitals of National Bloodstream Infection Bacterial Resistant Investigation Collaborative System(BRICS)were collected during January 2022 to December 2022. Antibiotic susceptibility tests were conducted by agar dilution or broth dilution methods recommended by Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute(CLSI). WHONET 5.6 and SPSS 25.0 software were used to analyze the data.Results:A total of 3 163 strains of Gram-positive pathogens were collected from 51 member units,and the top five bacteria were Staphylococcus aureus( n=1 147,36.3%),coagulase-negative Staphylococci( n=928,29.3%), Enterococcus faecalis( n=369,11.7%), Enterococcus faecium( n=296,9.4%)and alpha-hemolyticus Streptococci( n=192,6.1%). The detection rates of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus(MRSA)and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococci(MRCNS)were 26.4%(303/1 147)and 66.7%(619/928),respectively. No glycopeptide and daptomycin-resistant Staphylococci were detected. The sensitivity rates of Staphylococcus aureus to cefpirome,rifampin,compound sulfamethoxazole,linezolid,minocycline and tigecycline were all >95.0%. Enterococcus faecium was more prevalent than Enterococcus faecalis. The resistance rates of Enterococcus faecium to vancomycin and teicoplanin were both 0.5%(2/369),and no vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium was detected. The detection rate of MRSA in southern China was significantly lower than that in other regions( χ2=14.578, P=0.002),while the detection rate of MRCNS in northern China was significantly higher than that in other regions( χ2=15.195, P=0.002). The detection rates of MRSA and MRCNS in provincial hospitals were higher than those in municipal hospitals( χ2=13.519 and 12.136, P<0.001). The detection rates of MRSA and MRCNS in economically more advanced regions(per capita GDP≥92 059 Yuan in 2022)were higher than those in economically less advanced regions(per capita GDP<92 059 Yuan)( χ2=9.969 and 7.606, P=0.002和0.006). Conclusions:Among the Gram-positive pathogens causing bloodstream infections in China, Staphylococci is the most common while the MRSA incidence decreases continuously with time;the detection rate of Enterococcus faecium exceeds that of Enterococcus faecalis. The overall prevalence of vancomycin-resistant Enterococci is still at a low level. The composition ratio of Gram-positive pathogens and resistant profiles varies slightly across regions of China,with the prevalence of MRSA and MRCNS being more pronounced in provincial hospitals and areas with a per capita GDP≥92 059 yuan.
9.BRICS report of 2021: The distribution and antimicrobial resistance profile of clinical bacterial isolates from blood stream infections in China
Yunbo CHEN ; Jinru JI ; Zhiying LIU ; Chaoqun YING ; Qing YANG ; Haishen KONG ; Jiliang WANG ; Hui DING ; Haifeng MAO ; Yizheng ZHOU ; Yan JIN ; Yongyun LIU ; Yan GENG ; Yuanyuan DAI ; Hong LU ; Peng ZHANG ; Ying HUANG ; Donghong HUANG ; Xinhua QIANG ; Jilu SHEN ; Hongyun XU ; Fenghong CHEN ; Guolin LIAO ; Dan LIU ; Haixin DONG ; Jiangqin SONG ; Lu WANG ; Junmin CAO ; Lixia ZHANG ; Yanhong LI ; Dijing SONG ; Zhuo LI ; Youdong YIN ; Donghua LIU ; Liang GUO ; Qiang LIU ; Baohua ZHANG ; Rong XU ; Yinqiao DONG ; Shuyan HU ; Kunpeng LIANG ; Bo QUAN ; Lin ZHENG ; Ling MENG ; Liang LUAN ; Jinhua LIANG ; Weiping LIU ; Xuefei HU ; Pengpeng TIAN ; Xiaoping YAN ; Aiyun LI ; Jian LI ; Xiusan XIA ; Xiaoyan QI ; Dengyan QIAO ; Yonghong XIAO
Chinese Journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases 2023;16(1):33-47
Objective:To report the results of national surveillance on the distribution and antimicrobial resistance profile of clinical bacterial isolates from bloodstream infections in China in 2021.Methods:The clinical bacterial strains isolated from blood culture from member hospitals of Blood Bacterial Resistant Investigation Collaborative System (BRICS) were collected during January 2021 to December 2021. Antibiotic susceptibility tests were conducted by agar dilution or broth dilution methods recommended by Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). WHONET 5.6 was used to analyze data.Results:During the study period, 11 013 bacterial strains were collected from 51 hospitals, of which 2 782 (25.3%) were Gram-positive bacteria and 8 231 (74.7%) were Gram-negative bacteria. The top 10 bacterial species were Escherichia coli (37.6%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (18.9%), Staphylococcus aureus (9.8%), coagulase-negative Staphylococci (6.3%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (3.6%), Enterococcus faecium (3.6%), Acinetobacter baumannii (2.8%), Enterococcus faecalis (2.7%), Enterobacter cloacae (2.5%) and Klebsiella spp (2.1%). The prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococcus aureus were 25.3% and 76.8%, respectively. No glycopeptide- and daptomycin-resistant Staphylococci was detected; more than 95.0% of Staphylococcus aureus were sensitive to ceftobiprole. No vancomycin-resistant Enterococci strains were detected. The rates of extended spectrum B-lactamase (ESBL)-producing isolated in Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Proteus mirabilis were 49.6%, 25.5% and 39.0%, respectively. The prevalence rates of carbapenem-resistance in Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae were 2.2% and 15.8%, respectively; 7.9% of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae was resistant to ceftazidime/avibactam combination. Ceftobiprole demonstrated excellent activity against non-ESBL-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Aztreonam/avibactam was highly active against carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae. The prevalence rate of carbapenem-resistance in Acinetobacter baumannii was 60.0%, while polymyxin and tigecycline showed good activity against Acinetobacter baumannii (5.5% and 4.5%). The prevalence of carbapenem-resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa was 18.9%. Conclusions:The BRICS surveillance results in 2021 shows that the main pathogens of blood stream infection in China are gram-negative bacteria, in which Escherichia coli is the most common. The MRSA incidence shows a further decreasing trend in China and the overall prevalence of vancomycin-resistant Enterococci is low. The prevalence of Carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae is still on a high level, but the trend is downwards.
10.Guideline for clinical comprehensive evaluation of Chinese patent medicine (2022 version).
Wei-An YUAN ; Jun-Hua ZHANG ; Jian-Ping LIU ; Zhong-Qi YANG ; Jun-Ling CAO ; Xing LIAO ; Xiao-Yu XI ; Mei HAN ; Wen-Yuan LI ; Zhen-Wen QIU ; Shi-Yin FENG ; Yuan-Yuan GUO ; Lu-Jia CAO ; Xiao-Hong LIAO ; Yan-Ling AI ; Ju HUANG ; Lu-Lu JIA ; Xiang-Fei SU ; Xue WU ; Ze-Qi DAI ; Ji-Hua GUO ; Bing-Qing LU ; Xiao-Xiao ZHANG ; Jian-Yuan TANG
China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica 2023;48(1):256-264
Currently,the research or publications related to the clinical comprehensive evaluation of Chinese patent medicine are increasing,which attracts the broad attention of all circles. According to the completed clinical evaluation report on Chinese patent medicine,there are still practical problems and technical difficulties such as unclear responsibility of the evaluation organization,unclear evaluation subject,miscellaneous evaluation objects,and incomplete and nonstandard evaluation process. In terms of evaluation standards and specifications,there are different types of specifications or guidelines with different emphases issued by different academic groups or relevant institutions. The professional guideline is required to guide the standardized and efficient clinical comprehensive evaluation of Chinese patent medicine and further improve the authority and quality of evaluation. In combination with the characteristics of Chinese patent medicine and the latest research achievement at home and abroad,the detailed specifications were formulated from six aspects including design,theme selection,content and index,outcome,application and appraisal,and quality control. The guideline was developed based on the guideline development requirements of China Assoication of Chinese medicine. After several rounds of expert consensus and public consultation,the current version of the guideline has been developed.
Medicine, Chinese Traditional
;
Nonprescription Drugs
;
Consensus
;
China
;
Reference Standards
;
Drugs, Chinese Herbal

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail