Turning to critical illness is a common stage of various diseases and injuries before death. Patients usually have complex health conditions, while the treatment process involves a wide range of content, along with high requirements for doctor′s professionalism and multi-specialty teamwork, as well as a great demand for time-sensitive treatments. However, this is not matched with critical care professionals and the current state of medical care in China. Telemedicine, which shortens the distance of medical professionals and the gap of disease diagnosis and treatments in various regions through electronic information, can effectively solve the current problem. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop a standardized, high-quality visualization telemedicine round system .Therefore, experts have been organized to search domestic and foreign literature on telemedicine round for critically ill patients and to form this consensus based on clinical experiences so as to further improve the level of critical care treatments in regions.

Objective:To explore the diagnostic value of serum soluble semaphorin 4D (sSema4D) and soluble CD40 ligand (sCD40L) in left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in patients with primary hypertension (EH).Methods:Eighty-four patients with EH combined with LVH admitted to Qingdao Hospital of Shandong First Medical University from December 2022 to December 2023 were prospectively selected as the study group, and 84 patients with EH and without LVH admitted to Qingdao Hospital of Shandong First Medical University during the same period were regarded as the control group. Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay was applied to detect the levels of sSema4D and sCD40L. Employing Pearson correlation coefficient, the study assessed the association between concentrations of sSema4D and sCD40L in serum and various echocardiographic measurements. A multivariate Logistic regression model was engaged to probe into the contributing factors for the development of LVH. ROC curve was plotted to analyze the diagnostic value of serum sSema4D and sCD40L for EH combined with LVH.Results:Serum sSema4D and sCD40L levels were significantly higher in the study group than in the control group: (8.56 ± 2.19) μg/L vs. (5.12 ± 1.43) μg/L, (4.02 ± 1.03) μg/L vs. (3.22 ± 0.98) μg/L, and the differences were statistically significant ( P<0.05). The duration of hypertension, LVEDD, IVSTD, LVPWT, and LVMI were significantly higher in the study group than in the control group: (7.33 ± 1.53) years vs. (4.26 ± 1.35) years, (50.28 ± 3.33) mm vs. (44.45 ± 3.76) mm, (11.64 ± 3.21) mm vs. (9.53 ± 2.89) mm, (12.45 ± 1.52) mm vs. (9.13 ± 0.98) mm, (126.11 ± 15.28) g/m 2 vs. (81.15 ± 11.31) g/m 2, and the differences were statistically significant ( P<0.05). According to Pearson correlation analysis, it was known that both serum sSema4D and sCD40L were positively correlated with LVEDD, IVSTD, LVPWT and LVMI ( r = 0.425 and 0.533, 0.612 and 0.436, 0.513 and 0.628, 0.589 and 0.618; P<0.05). Multivariate Logistic regression analysis showed that hypertension duration, LVEDD, IVSTD, LVPWT, LVMI, sSema4D, sCD40L were risk factors for LVH in EH patients ( P<0.05). According to the ROC curve, the AUC for diagnosing EH combined with LVH with serum sSema4D was 0.848, the AUC for diagnosing EH combined with LVH with serum sCD40L was 0.725, and the AUC for diagnosing EH combined with LVH with serum sCD40L was 0.888, the combination of sCD40L and sCD40L was superior to their respective individual diagnoses ( Z = 2.651 and 2.526, P<0.05). Conclusions:The serum levels of sSema4D and sCD40L in patients with EH combined with LVH are obviously elevated, which are influencing factors for the occurrence of EH combined with LVH. Combined testing of the two has high diagnostic value for EH combined with LVH.

Objective:To explore the diagnostic value of serum soluble semaphorin 4D (sSema4D) and soluble CD40 ligand (sCD40L) in left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in patients with primary hypertension (EH).Methods:Eighty-four patients with EH combined with LVH admitted to Qingdao Hospital of Shandong First Medical University from December 2022 to December 2023 were prospectively selected as the study group, and 84 patients with EH and without LVH admitted to Qingdao Hospital of Shandong First Medical University during the same period were regarded as the control group. Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay was applied to detect the levels of sSema4D and sCD40L. Employing Pearson correlation coefficient, the study assessed the association between concentrations of sSema4D and sCD40L in serum and various echocardiographic measurements. A multivariate Logistic regression model was engaged to probe into the contributing factors for the development of LVH. ROC curve was plotted to analyze the diagnostic value of serum sSema4D and sCD40L for EH combined with LVH.Results:Serum sSema4D and sCD40L levels were significantly higher in the study group than in the control group: (8.56 ± 2.19) μg/L vs. (5.12 ± 1.43) μg/L, (4.02 ± 1.03) μg/L vs. (3.22 ± 0.98) μg/L, and the differences were statistically significant ( P<0.05). The duration of hypertension, LVEDD, IVSTD, LVPWT, and LVMI were significantly higher in the study group than in the control group: (7.33 ± 1.53) years vs. (4.26 ± 1.35) years, (50.28 ± 3.33) mm vs. (44.45 ± 3.76) mm, (11.64 ± 3.21) mm vs. (9.53 ± 2.89) mm, (12.45 ± 1.52) mm vs. (9.13 ± 0.98) mm, (126.11 ± 15.28) g/m 2 vs. (81.15 ± 11.31) g/m 2, and the differences were statistically significant ( P<0.05). According to Pearson correlation analysis, it was known that both serum sSema4D and sCD40L were positively correlated with LVEDD, IVSTD, LVPWT and LVMI ( r = 0.425 and 0.533, 0.612 and 0.436, 0.513 and 0.628, 0.589 and 0.618; P<0.05). Multivariate Logistic regression analysis showed that hypertension duration, LVEDD, IVSTD, LVPWT, LVMI, sSema4D, sCD40L were risk factors for LVH in EH patients ( P<0.05). According to the ROC curve, the AUC for diagnosing EH combined with LVH with serum sSema4D was 0.848, the AUC for diagnosing EH combined with LVH with serum sCD40L was 0.725, and the AUC for diagnosing EH combined with LVH with serum sCD40L was 0.888, the combination of sCD40L and sCD40L was superior to their respective individual diagnoses ( Z = 2.651 and 2.526, P<0.05). Conclusions:The serum levels of sSema4D and sCD40L in patients with EH combined with LVH are obviously elevated, which are influencing factors for the occurrence of EH combined with LVH. Combined testing of the two has high diagnostic value for EH combined with LVH.

Turning to critical illness is a common stage of various diseases and injuries before death. Patients usually have complex health conditions, while the treatment process involves a wide range of content, along with high requirements for doctor′s professionalism and multi-specialty teamwork, as well as a great demand for time-sensitive treatments. However, this is not matched with critical care professionals and the current state of medical care in China. Telemedicine, which shortens the distance of medical professionals and the gap of disease diagnosis and treatments in various regions through electronic information, can effectively solve the current problem. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop a standardized, high-quality visualization telemedicine round system .Therefore, experts have been organized to search domestic and foreign literature on telemedicine round for critically ill patients and to form this consensus based on clinical experiences so as to further improve the level of critical care treatments in regions.

Risk assessment models for periodontal disease provide dentists with a precise and consolidated evalua-tion of the prognosis of periodontitis,enabling the formulation of personalized treatment plans.Periodontal risk assess-ment systems have been widely applied in clinical practice and research.The application fields of periodontal risk assessment systems vary based on the distinctions between clinical periodontal parameters and risk factors.The assess-ment models listed below are commonly used in clinical practice,including the periodontal risk calculator(PRC),which is an individual-based periodontal risk assessment tool that collects both periodontal and systemic information for pre-diction;the periodontal assessment tool(PAT),which allows for quantitative differentiation of stages of periodontal dis-ease;the periodontal risk assessment(PRA)and modified periodontal risk assessment(mPRA),which are easy to use;and the classification and regression trees(CART),which assess the periodontal prognosis based on a single affected tooth.Additionally,there are orthodontic-periodontal combined risk assessment systems and implant periapical risk as-sessment systems tailored for patients needing multidisciplinary treatment.This review focuses on the current applica-tion status of periodontal risk assessment systems.

Risk assessment models for periodontal disease provide dentists with a precise and consolidated evalua-tion of the prognosis of periodontitis,enabling the formulation of personalized treatment plans.Periodontal risk assess-ment systems have been widely applied in clinical practice and research.The application fields of periodontal risk assessment systems vary based on the distinctions between clinical periodontal parameters and risk factors.The assess-ment models listed below are commonly used in clinical practice,including the periodontal risk calculator(PRC),which is an individual-based periodontal risk assessment tool that collects both periodontal and systemic information for pre-diction;the periodontal assessment tool(PAT),which allows for quantitative differentiation of stages of periodontal dis-ease;the periodontal risk assessment(PRA)and modified periodontal risk assessment(mPRA),which are easy to use;and the classification and regression trees(CART),which assess the periodontal prognosis based on a single affected tooth.Additionally,there are orthodontic-periodontal combined risk assessment systems and implant periapical risk as-sessment systems tailored for patients needing multidisciplinary treatment.This review focuses on the current applica-tion status of periodontal risk assessment systems.

Risk assessment models for periodontal disease provide dentists with a precise and consolidated evalua-tion of the prognosis of periodontitis,enabling the formulation of personalized treatment plans.Periodontal risk assess-ment systems have been widely applied in clinical practice and research.The application fields of periodontal risk assessment systems vary based on the distinctions between clinical periodontal parameters and risk factors.The assess-ment models listed below are commonly used in clinical practice,including the periodontal risk calculator(PRC),which is an individual-based periodontal risk assessment tool that collects both periodontal and systemic information for pre-diction;the periodontal assessment tool(PAT),which allows for quantitative differentiation of stages of periodontal dis-ease;the periodontal risk assessment(PRA)and modified periodontal risk assessment(mPRA),which are easy to use;and the classification and regression trees(CART),which assess the periodontal prognosis based on a single affected tooth.Additionally,there are orthodontic-periodontal combined risk assessment systems and implant periapical risk as-sessment systems tailored for patients needing multidisciplinary treatment.This review focuses on the current applica-tion status of periodontal risk assessment systems.

Risk assessment models for periodontal disease provide dentists with a precise and consolidated evalua-tion of the prognosis of periodontitis,enabling the formulation of personalized treatment plans.Periodontal risk assess-ment systems have been widely applied in clinical practice and research.The application fields of periodontal risk assessment systems vary based on the distinctions between clinical periodontal parameters and risk factors.The assess-ment models listed below are commonly used in clinical practice,including the periodontal risk calculator(PRC),which is an individual-based periodontal risk assessment tool that collects both periodontal and systemic information for pre-diction;the periodontal assessment tool(PAT),which allows for quantitative differentiation of stages of periodontal dis-ease;the periodontal risk assessment(PRA)and modified periodontal risk assessment(mPRA),which are easy to use;and the classification and regression trees(CART),which assess the periodontal prognosis based on a single affected tooth.Additionally,there are orthodontic-periodontal combined risk assessment systems and implant periapical risk as-sessment systems tailored for patients needing multidisciplinary treatment.This review focuses on the current applica-tion status of periodontal risk assessment systems.

Risk assessment models for periodontal disease provide dentists with a precise and consolidated evaluation of the prognosis of periodontitis, enabling the formulation of personalized treatment plans. Periodontal risk assessment systems have been widely applied in clinical practice and research. The application fields of periodontal risk assessment systems vary based on the distinctions between clinical periodontal parameters and risk factors. The assessment models listed below are commonly used in clinical practice, including the periodontal risk calculator (PRC), which is an individual-based periodontal risk assessment tool that collects both periodontal and systemic information for prediction; the periodontal assessment tool (PAT), which allows for quantitative differentiation of stages of periodontal disease; the periodontal risk assessment (PRA) and modified periodontal risk assessment (mPRA), which are easy to use; and the classification and regression trees (CART), which assess the periodontal prognosis based on a single affected tooth. Additionally, there are orthodontic-periodontal combined risk assessment systems and implant periapical risk assessment systems tailored for patients needing multidisciplinary treatment. This review focuses on the current application status of periodontal risk assessment systems.

Risk assessment models for periodontal disease provide dentists with a precise and consolidated evalua-tion of the prognosis of periodontitis,enabling the formulation of personalized treatment plans.Periodontal risk assess-ment systems have been widely applied in clinical practice and research.The application fields of periodontal risk assessment systems vary based on the distinctions between clinical periodontal parameters and risk factors.The assess-ment models listed below are commonly used in clinical practice,including the periodontal risk calculator(PRC),which is an individual-based periodontal risk assessment tool that collects both periodontal and systemic information for pre-diction;the periodontal assessment tool(PAT),which allows for quantitative differentiation of stages of periodontal dis-ease;the periodontal risk assessment(PRA)and modified periodontal risk assessment(mPRA),which are easy to use;and the classification and regression trees(CART),which assess the periodontal prognosis based on a single affected tooth.Additionally,there are orthodontic-periodontal combined risk assessment systems and implant periapical risk as-sessment systems tailored for patients needing multidisciplinary treatment.This review focuses on the current applica-tion status of periodontal risk assessment systems.