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.

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a squatting posture grading system established to screen for limited ankle dorsiflexion. Methods: The squat posture grading system categorizes subjects’ squat posture into three grades. Grade 1 is defined as being able to maintain a squatting posture with heels on the ground in full ankle dorsiflexion without effort. Grade 2 is defined as being able to perform the same position, but unable to maintain the position for more than 5 seconds or requiring trunk and leg muscle efforts to maintain the position. Grade 3 is defined as being unable to maintain the same position and falling backwards immediately if attempted to touch the ground with heels. Next, subjects’ ankle dorsiflexion angles were directly measured in knee flexed and extended position by goniometer. Results: Out of the 92 total subjects, 35 were in grade 1, 18 were in grade 2, and 39 were in grade 3. The average ankle dorsiflexion angle with knee flexed position were 23.13° for grade 1, 16.03° for grade 2, and 9.31° for grade 3. The average ankle dorsiflexion angle with knee extended position were 15.16° for grade 1, 7.92° for grade 2, and 3.40° for grade 3. Ankle dorsiflexion angles showed a significant decrease from grade 1 to 3 (p<0.05). Conclusion The squatting posture grading system defined in this study effectively graded the subjects based on the difference in their average ankle dorsiflexion angle. This system could be used as a quick screening method for limited ankle dorsiflexion.

Purpose: Common bile duct (CBD) stone recurrence after laparoscopic CBD exploration (LCBDE) is relatively common. No studies have been conducted evaluating the safety and feasibility of re-do LCBDE in the treatment of recurrent CBD stones. Methods: This single-center retrospective study reviewed 340 consecutive patients who underwent LCBDE for CBD stones between January 2004 and December 2020. Patients with pancreatobiliary malignancies and those who underwent other surgical procedures were excluded. Results: Of the 340 included patients, 45 experienced a recurrence after a mean follow-up period of 24.2 months. Of them, 18 underwent re-do LCBDE, 20 underwent endoscopic intervention, 2 underwent radiologic intervention, and 5 underwent observation. Re-do LCBDE and initial LCBDE showed similar surgical outcomes in terms of operative time (113.1 minutes vs. 107.5 minutes, P = 0.515), estimated blood loss (42.5 mL vs. 49.1 mL, P = 0.661), open conversion rate (2.9% vs. 0%, P = 0.461), postoperative complication (15.3% vs. 22.2%, P = 0.430), and postoperative hospital stay (6.5 days vs. 6.4 days, P = 0.921). Comparing re-do LCBDE and nonsurgical treatment (endoscopic or radiologic), no statistically significant differences were noted in posttreatment complication (22.2% vs. 13.6%, P = 0.477), hospital stay (6.4 days vs.7.3 days, P = 0.607), and recurrence (50.0% vs. 36.4%, P = 0.385). The clearance rate was higher in the re-do LCBDE group than in the nonsurgical group (100% vs. 81.8%, P = 0.057). Conclusion Compared to initial LCBDE and endoscopic or radiological treatments, re-do LCBDE for recurrent CBD stones is a treatment option worth considering in selected patients.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to develop an approach to alleviate the discomfort caused by sandbag compression after a bone marrow examination. This research examined the effects of applying a pressure hemostasis band on bleeding, pain, and discomfort at the bone marrow examination site. Methods: This study was conducted with a nonequivalent control group non-synchronized design. For 74 patients under evaluation who underwent bone marrow examination, sandbag compression was applied to the examination site in the control group (n=37), and a pressure hemostasis band was applied to the intervention group (n=37). In both groups, absolute bed rest was performed for two hours, and bleeding, pain, and discomfort at the examination site were measured. Results: After two hours of the bone marrow examination, there was no difference in bleeding on the gauze between the two groups (F=0.59, p=.444). Bleeding occurred in three patients in the intervention group and six in the control group (χ 2 =1.14, p=.479), with no cases of hematoma detected in either group. One hour post-examination, the control group experienced significantly higher pain (F=5.45, p=.022) and discomfort (F=5.68, p=.020) than the intervention group. However, pain and discomfort levels were similar between groups after two hours. Conclusion Compared to the sandbag compression group, the band application group showed no difference in bleeding and experienced less pain and discomfort at the examination site. This confirms that the pressure hemostasis band is a suitable alternative to sandbag compression in post-examination care.