1.Expert consensus on prognostic evaluation of cochlear implantation in hereditary hearing loss.
Xinyu SHI ; Xianbao CAO ; Renjie CHAI ; Suijun CHEN ; Juan FENG ; Ningyu FENG ; Xia GAO ; Lulu GUO ; Yuhe LIU ; Ling LU ; Lingyun MEI ; Xiaoyun QIAN ; Dongdong REN ; Haibo SHI ; Duoduo TAO ; Qin WANG ; Zhaoyan WANG ; Shuo WANG ; Wei WANG ; Ming XIA ; Hao XIONG ; Baicheng XU ; Kai XU ; Lei XU ; Hua YANG ; Jun YANG ; Pingli YANG ; Wei YUAN ; Dingjun ZHA ; Chunming ZHANG ; Hongzheng ZHANG ; Juan ZHANG ; Tianhong ZHANG ; Wenqi ZUO ; Wenyan LI ; Yongyi YUAN ; Jie ZHANG ; Yu ZHAO ; Fang ZHENG ; Yu SUN
Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery 2025;39(9):798-808
Hearing loss is the most prevalent disabling disease. Cochlear implantation(CI) serves as the primary intervention for severe to profound hearing loss. This consensus systematically explores the value of genetic diagnosis in the pre-operative assessment and efficacy prognosis for CI. Drawing upon domestic and international research and clinical experience, it proposes an evidence-based medicine three-tiered prognostic classification system(Favorable, Marginal, Poor). The consensus focuses on common hereditary non-syndromic hearing loss(such as that caused by mutations in genes like GJB2, SLC26A4, OTOF, LOXHD1) and syndromic hereditary hearing loss(such as Jervell & Lange-Nielsen syndrome and Waardenburg syndrome), which are closely associated with congenital hearing loss, analyzing the impact of their pathological mechanisms on CI outcomes. The consensus provides recommendations based on multiple round of expert discussion and voting. It emphasizes that genetic diagnosis can optimize patient selection, predict prognosis, guide post-operative rehabilitation, offer stratified management strategies for patients with different genotypes, and advance the application of precision medicine in the field of CI.
Humans
;
Cochlear Implantation
;
Prognosis
;
Hearing Loss/surgery*
;
Consensus
;
Connexin 26
;
Mutation
;
Sulfate Transporters
;
Connexins/genetics*
2.Deciphering the Role of VIM, STX8, and MIF in Pneumoconiosis Susceptibility: A Mendelian Randomization Analysis of the Lung-Gut Axis and Multi-Omics Insights from European and East Asian Populations.
Chen Wei ZHANG ; Bin Bin WAN ; Yu Kai ZHANG ; Tao XIONG ; Yi Shan LI ; Xue Sen SU ; Gang LIU ; Yang Yang WEI ; Yuan Yuan SUN ; Jing Fen ZHANG ; Xiao YU ; Yi Wei SHI
Biomedical and Environmental Sciences 2025;38(10):1270-1286
OBJECTIVE:
Pneumoconiosis, a lung disease caused by irreversible fibrosis, represents a significant public health burden. This study investigates the causal relationships between gut microbiota, gene methylation, gene expression, protein levels, and pneumoconiosis using a multi-omics approach and Mendelian randomization (MR).
METHODS:
We analyzed gut microbiota data from MiBioGen and Esteban et al. to assess their potential causal effects on pneumoconiosis subtypes (asbestosis, silicosis, and inorganic pneumoconiosis) using conventional and summary-data-based MR (SMR). Gene methylation and expression data from Genotype-Tissue Expression and eQTLGen, along with protein level data from deCODE and UK Biobank Pharma Proteomics Project, were examined in relation to pneumoconiosis data from FinnGen. To validate our findings, we assessed self-measured gut flora from a pneumoconiosis cohort and performed fine mapping, drug prediction, molecular docking, and Phenome-Wide Association Studies to explore relevant phenotypes of key genes.
RESULTS:
Three core gut microorganisms were identified: Romboutsia ( OR = 0.249) as a protective factor against silicosis, Pasteurellaceae ( OR = 3.207) and Haemophilus parainfluenzae ( OR = 2.343) as risk factors for inorganic pneumoconiosis. Additionally, mapping and quantitative trait loci analyses revealed that the genes VIM, STX8, and MIF were significantly associated with pneumoconiosis risk.
CONCLUSIONS
This multi-omics study highlights the associations between gut microbiota and key genes ( VIM, STX8, MIF) with pneumoconiosis, offering insights into potential therapeutic targets and personalized treatment strategies.
Humans
;
Male
;
East Asian People/genetics*
;
Europe
;
Gastrointestinal Microbiome
;
Lung
;
Macrophage Migration-Inhibitory Factors/metabolism*
;
Mendelian Randomization Analysis
;
Multiomics
;
Pneumoconiosis/microbiology*
;
Intramolecular Oxidoreductases
3.A study on the application of diffuse axonal multi-axis general evaluation for brain injury assessment in small overlap barrier crash test
Zhi FU ; Yi CHANG ; Tao XIONG ; Wen-Kai GAO ; Kui LI ; Yu LIU
Chinese Journal of Traumatology 2024;27(4):200-210
Purpose::Head injury criterion (HIC) companied by a rotation-based metric was widely believed to be helpful for head injury prediction in road traffic accidents. Recently, the Euro-New Car Assessment Program utilized a newly developed metric called diffuse axonal multi-axis general evaluation (DAMAGE) to explain test device for human occupant restraint (THOR) head injury, which demonstrated excellent ability in capturing concussions and diffuse axonal injuries. However, there is still a lack of comprehensive understanding regarding the effectiveness of using DAMAGE for Hybrid III 50th percentile male dummy (H50th) head injury assessment. The objective of this study is to determine whether the DAMAGE could capture the risk of H50th brain injury during small overlap barrier tests.Methods::To achieve this objective, a total of 24 vehicle crash loading curves were collected as input data for the multi-body simulation. Two commercially available mathematical dynamic models, namely H50th and THOR, were utilized to investigate the differences in head injury response. Subsequently, a decision method known as simple additive weighting was employed to establish a comprehensive brain injury metric by incorporating the weighted HIC and either DAMAGE or brain injury criterion. Furthermore, 35 sets of vehicle crash test data were used to analyze these brain injury metrics.Results::The rotational displacement of the THOR head is significantly greater than that of the H50th head. The maximum linear and rotational head accelerations experienced by H50th and THOR models were (544.6 ± 341.7) m/s 2, (2468.2 ± 1309.4) rad/s 2 and (715.2 ± 332.8) m/s 2, (3778.7 ± 1660.6) rad/s 2, respectively. Under the same loading condition during small overlap barrier (SOB) tests, THOR exhibits a higher risk of head injury compared to the H50th model. It was observed that the overall head injury response during the small overlap left test condition is greater than that during the small overlap right test. Additionally, an equation was formulated to establish the necessary relationship between the DAMAGE values of THOR and H50th. Conclusion::If H50th rather than THOR is employed as an evaluation tool in SOB crash tests, newly designed vehicles are more likely to achieve superior performance scores. According to the current injury curve for DAMAGE and brain injury criterion, it is highly recommended that HIC along with DAMAGE was prioritized for brain injury assessment in SOB tests.
4.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.
6.Bear bile powder attenuates senecionine-induced hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome in mice.
Kai-Yuan JIANG ; Yi ZHANG ; Xuan-Ling YE ; Fen XIONG ; Yan CHEN ; Xia-Li JIA ; Yi-Xin ZHANG ; Li YANG ; Ai-Zhen XIONG ; Zheng-Tao WANG
Chinese Journal of Natural Medicines (English Ed.) 2022;20(4):270-281
Hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (HSOS) via exposure to pyrrolizidine alkaloids (PAs) is with high mortality and there is no effective treatment in clinics. Bear bile powder (BBP) is a famous traditional animal drug for curing a variety of hepatobiliary diseases such as cholestasis, inflammation, and fibrosis. Here, we aim to evaluate the protective effect of BBP against HSOS induced by senecionine, a highly hepatotoxic PA compound. Our results showed that BBP treatment protected mice from senecionine-induced HSOS dose-dependently, which was evident by improved liver histology including reduced infiltration of inflammatory cells and collagen positive cells, alleviated intrahepatic hemorrhage and hepatic sinusoidal endothelial cells, as well as decreased conventional serum liver function indicators. In addition, BBP treatment lowered matrix metalloproteinase 9 and pyrrole-protein adducts, two well-known markers positively associated with the severity of PA-induced HSOS. Further investigation showed that BBP treatment prevents the development of liver fibrosis by decreasing transforming growth factor beta and downstream fibrotic molecules. BBP treatment also alleviated senecionine-induced liver inflammation and lowered the pro-inflammatory cytokines, in which tauroursodeoxycholic acid played an important role. What's more, BBP treatment also decreased the accumulation of hydrophobic bile acids, such as cholic acid, taurocholic acid, glycocholic acid, as well. We concluded that BBP attenuates senecionine-induced HSOS in mice by repairing the bile acids homeostasis, preventing liver fibrosis, and alleviating liver inflammation. Our present study helps to pave the way to therapeutic approaches of the treatment of PA-induced liver injury in clinics.
Animals
;
Bile
;
Bile Acids and Salts
;
Endothelial Cells/metabolism*
;
Hepatic Veno-Occlusive Disease/pathology*
;
Inflammation/pathology*
;
Liver Cirrhosis/drug therapy*
;
Mice
;
Powders
;
Pyrrolizidine Alkaloids/adverse effects*
;
Ursidae
7.Diagnosis and treatment status of perioperative anemia in patients with gastrointestinal neoplasms: a multi-center study in Hubei Province.
Peng ZHANG ; Cong Qing JIANG ; Zhi Guo XIONG ; Yong Bin ZHENG ; Ying Feng FU ; Xin Ming LI ; Dian Fu PANG ; Xiao Feng LIAO ; Xin TONG ; Huan Ming ZHU ; Zhen Hua YANG ; Guang Wei GONG ; Xiao Ping YIN ; Dong Liang LI ; Hong Jun LI ; Hong Liu CHEN ; Xue Feng JIANG ; Zhi Jun HE ; Yan Jun LU ; Xiao Ming SHUAI ; Jin Bo GAO ; Kai Lin CAI ; Kai Xiong TAO
Chinese Journal of Surgery 2022;60(1):32-38
Objective: To investigate the incidence and treatment of perioperative anemia in patients with gastrointestinal neoplasms in Hubei Province. Methods: The clinicopathological data of 7 474 patients with gastrointestinal neoplasms in 62 hospitals in 15 cities (state) of Hubei Province in 2019 were collected in the form of network database. There were 4 749 males and 2 725 females. The median age of the patients was 62 years (range: 17 to 96 years). The hemoglobin value of the first time in hospital and the first day after operation was used as the criterion of preoperative anemia and postoperative anemia. Anemia was defined as male hemoglobin <120 g/L and female hemoglobin <110.0 g/L, mild anemia as 90 to normal, moderate anemia as 60 to <90 g/L, severe anemia as <60 g/L. The t test and χ2 test were used for inter-group comparison. Results: The overall incidence of preoperative anemia was 38.60%(2 885/7 474), and the incidences of mild anemia, moderate anemia and severe anemia were 25.09%(1 875/7 474), 11.37%(850/7 474) and 2.14%(160/7 474), respectively. The overall incidence of postoperative anemia was 61.40%(4 589/7 474). The incidence of mild anemia, moderate anemia and severe anemia were 48.73%(3 642/7 474), 12.20%(912/7 474) and 0.47%(35/7 474), respectively. The proportion of preoperative anemia patients receiving treatment was 26.86% (775/2 885), and the proportion of postoperative anemia patients receiving treatment was 14.93% (685/4 589). The proportions of preoperative anemia patients in grade ⅢA, grade ⅢB, and grade ⅡA hospitals receiving treatment were 26.12% (649/2 485), 32.32% (85/263), and 29.93% (41/137), and the proportions of postoperative anemia patients receiving treatment were 14.61% (592/4 052), 22.05% (73/331), and 9.71% (20/206). The proportion of intraoperative blood transfusion (16.74% (483/2 885) vs. 3.05% (140/4 589), χ²=434.555, P<0.01) and the incidence of postoperative complications (17.78% (513/2 885) vs. 14.08% (646/4 589), χ²=18.553, P<0.01) in the preoperative anemia group were higher than those in the non-anemia group, and the postoperative hospital stay in the preoperative anemia group was longer than that in the non-anemia group ((14.1±7.3) days vs. (13.3±6.2) days, t=5.202, P<0.01). Conclusions: The incidence of perioperative anemia in patients with gastrointestinal neoplasms is high. Preoperative anemia can increase the demand for intraoperative blood transfusion and affect the short-term prognosis of patients. At present, the concept of standardized treatment of perioperative anemia among gastrointestinal surgeons in Hubei Province needs to be improved.
Adolescent
;
Adult
;
Aged
;
Aged, 80 and over
;
Anemia/epidemiology*
;
Blood Transfusion
;
Female
;
Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/surgery*
;
Humans
;
Length of Stay
;
Male
;
Middle Aged
;
Retrospective Studies
;
Treatment Outcome
;
Young Adult
8.Safety evaluation of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with local advanced gastric cancer after radical resection for prevention of peritoneal metastasis.
Yao LIN ; Chu SHEN ; Xi Kai GUO ; Yuan LI ; Dian Dan WANG ; Xin CHEN ; Zheng WANG ; Ke WU ; Kai Xiong TAO ; Chuan Qing WU
Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2022;25(1):48-55
Objective: Patients with advanced gastric cancer have a poor prognosis and a possibility of peritoneal metastasis even if receiving gastrectomy. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) can effectively kill free cancer cells or small lesions in the abdominal cavity. At present, preventive HIPEC still lacks safety evaluation in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. This study aims to explore the safety of radical resection combined with HIPEC in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. Methods: A descriptive case series study was carried out. Clinicopathological data of 130 patients with locally advanced gastric cancer who underwent radical resection + HIPEC at the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology from January 2020 to February 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria: (1) locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma confirmed by postoperative pathology; (2) no distant metastasis was found before surgery; (3) radical resection; (4) at least one HIPEC treatment was performed. Exclusion criteria: (1) incomplete clinicopathological data; (2) tumor metastasis was found during operation; (3) concomitant with other tumors. HIPEC method: all the patients received the first HIPEC immediately after D2 radical resection, and returned to the ward after waking up from anesthesia; the second and the third HIPEC were carried out according to the patient's postoperative recovery and tolerance; interval between two HIPEC treatments was 48 h. Observation indicators: (1) basic information, including gender, age, body mass index, etc.; (2) treatment status; (3) perioperative adverse events: based on the standard of common adverse events published by the US Department of Health and Public Health (CTCAE 5.0), the adverse events of grade 2 and above during the treatment period were recorded, including hypoalbuminemia, bone marrow cell reduction, wound complications, abdominal infection, lung infection, gastroparesis, anemia, postoperative bleeding, anastomotic leakage, intestinal obstruction, pleural effusion, abdominal distension, impaired liver function, and finally a senior professional title chief physician reviewed the above adverse events and made a safety evaluation of the patient; (4) association between times of HIPEC treatment and adverse events in perioperative period; (5) analysis of risk factors for adverse events in perioperative period. Results: Among the 130 patients, 79 were males and 51 were females with a median age of 59 (54, 66) years and an average body mass index of (23.9±7.4) kg/m(2). The tumor size was (5.4±3.0) cm and 100 patients (76.9%) had nerve invasion. All the 130 patients received radical resection + HIPEC and 125 (96.2%) patients underwent laparoscopic surgery. The mean operative time was (345.6±52.3) min and intraoperative blood loss was (82.0±36.5) ml. One HIPEC treatment was performed in 54 patients (41.5%), 2 HIPEC treatments were in 57 (43.8%), and 3 HIPEC treatments were in 19 (14.6%). The average postoperative hospital stay was (13.1±7.5) d. A total of 57 patients (43.8%) had 71 cases of postoperative complications of different degrees. Among them, the incidence of hypoalbuminemia was 22.3% (29/130), and the grade 2 and above anemia was 15.4% (20/130), lung infection was 3.8% (5/130), bone marrow cell suppression was 3.7% (4/130), abdominal cavity infection was 2.3% (3/130), and liver damage was 2.3% (3/130), wound complications was 1.5% (2/130), abdominal distension was 1.5% (2/130), anastomotic leakage was 0.8% (1/130), gastroparesis was 0.8% (1/130) and intestinal obstruction was 0.8% (1/130), etc. These adverse events were all improved by conservative treatments. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of adverse events during the perioperative period among patients undergoing 1, 2, and 3 times of HIPEC treatments (all P>0.05). Univariate and multivariate logistic analyses showed that age > 60 years (OR: 2.346, 95%CI: 1.069-5.150, P=0.034) and neurological invasion (OR: 2.992, 95%CI: 1.050-8.523, P=0.040) were independent risk factors for adverse events in locally advanced gastric cancer patients undergoing radical resection+HIPEC (both P<0.05). Conclusions: Radical surgery + HIPEC does not significantly increase the incidence of perioperative complications in patients with advanced gastric cancer. The age >60 years and nerve invasion are independent risk factors for adverse events in these patients.
Female
;
Gastrectomy
;
Humans
;
Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy
;
Male
;
Middle Aged
;
Peritoneal Neoplasms/therapy*
;
Retrospective Studies
;
Stomach Neoplasms/surgery*
9.Multicenter real-world study on safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy in combination with immunotherapy for colorectal cancer.
Xin Zhi LIU ; Zhen XIONG ; Bin Yi XIAO ; Guan Yu YU ; Ying Jie LI ; Yun Feng YAO ; Kai Xiong TAO ; Pei Rong DING ; Wei ZHANG ; Ai Wen WU
Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2022;25(3):219-227
Objective: To provide reference and evidence for clinical application of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer through multicenter large-scale analysis based on real-world data in China. Methods: This was a retrospective multicenter case series study. From January 2017 to October 2021, data of 94 patients with colorectal cancer who received neoadjuvant immunotherapy in Peking University Cancer Hospital (55 cases), Union Hospital of Tongji Medical College of Huazhong University of Science and Technology (19 cases), Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center (13 cases) and Changhai Hospital of Navy Medical University (7 cases) were retrospectively collected, including 48 males and 46 females. The median age was 58 years. Eighty-one cases were rectal cancer and 13 cases were colon cancer (2 cases of double primary colon cancer). Twelve cases were TNM staging II and 82 cases were stage III. Forty-six cases were well differentiated, 37 cases were moderately differentiated and 11 cases were poorly differentiated. Twenty-six patients (27.7%) with mismatch repair defects (dMMR) and microsatellite instability (MSI-H) were treated with immunotherapy alone, mainly programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1); sixty-eight cases (72.3%) with mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) and microsatellite stability (MSS) were treated with immune combined with neoadjuvant therapy, mainly CapeOx (capecitabine+oxaliplatin) combined with PD-1 antibody plus long- or short-course radiotherapy, or PD-1 antibody combined with cytotoxic T lymphocyte associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) antibody. Analysis and evaluation of adverse events during neoadjuvant immunotherapy were performed according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Standard version 3.0; the surgical complications were evaluated according to the Clavien-Dindo grading standard; the efficacy evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy included the following indicators: major pathological remission (MPR) was defined as tumor regression induced by neoadjuvant therapy in pathology residual tumor ≤10%; pathological complete response (pCR) was defined as tumor regression induced by neoadjuvant therapy without residual tumor in pathology; the tumor response rate was disease control rate (DCR), namely the proportion of complete response (CR), partial response (PR) and stable disease (SD) in the whole group; the objective response rate (ORR) was CR+PR. Results: The median cycle of neoadjuvant immunotherapy was 4 (1-10) in whole group, and the incidence of immune-related adverse reactions was 37.2% (35/94), including 35 cases (37.2%) of skin-related adverse reactions, 21 cases (22.3%) of thyroid dysfunction and 8 cases (8.5%) of immune enteritis, of which grade III or above accounted for 1.1%. The median interval between completion of neoadjuvant therapy and surgery was 30 (21-55) days. There were 81 cases of radical resection of rectal cancer, 11 cases of radical resection of colon cancer, and 2 cases of colon cancer combined with other organ resection. The primary tumor resection of all the patients reached R0. The incidence of surgical-related complications was 22.3% (21/94), mainly anastomotic leakage (4 cases), pelvic infection (4 cases), abdominal effusion (3 cases), anastomotic stenosis (3 cases ) and abdominal and pelvic hemorrhage (2 cases). Grade I-II complications developed in 13 cases (13.8%), grade III and above complications developed in 8 cases (8.5%), no grade IV or above complications were found. During a median follow-up of 32 (1-46 ) months, DCR was 98.9% (93/94), ORR was 88.3 % (83/94), pCR was 41.5% (39/94), MPR was 60.6% (57/94). The pCR rate of 26 patients with dMMR and MSI-H undergoing simple immunotherapy was 57.7% (15/26), and MPR rate was 65.4% (17/26). The pCR rate of 68 pMMR and MSS patients undergoing combined immunotherapy was 35.3%(24/68), and MPR rate was 58.8% (40/68). Conclusions: Neoadjuvant immunotherapy has favorable tumor control rate and pathological remission rate for patients with initial resectable colorectal cancer. The incidences of perioperative adverse reactions and surgical complications are acceptable.
Colorectal Neoplasms/surgery*
;
Female
;
Humans
;
Immunotherapy
;
Male
;
Middle Aged
;
Neoadjuvant Therapy
;
Rectal Neoplasms/surgery*
;
Retrospective Studies
10.Techniques in prophylactic ileostomy reversal.
Ming CAI ; Chao LI ; Zhen XIONG ; Zheng WANG ; Kai Lin CAI ; Guo Bin WANG ; Kai Xiong TAO
Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2022;25(11):976-980
In order to prevent and reduce the severity of anastomotic leakage after low rectal cancer surgery, prophylactic ileostomy is often performed by the clinician simultaneously. There are many controversies about prophylactic ileostomy in medicine, such as ileostomy indications, ileostomy complications, ileostomy reversal time, ileostomy reversal method and technique. Based on relevant literature and our own experience, we discussed the timing, method and complications of ileostomy reversal in this article to improve the diagnosis and treatment of ileostomy reversal as well as the life quality of the patients after ileostomy reversal.
Humans
;
Ileostomy/methods*
;
Anastomosis, Surgical/adverse effects*
;
Anastomotic Leak/etiology*
;
Rectal Neoplasms/complications*
;
Rectum/surgery*

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail