1.Predictive Factors Associated With Dysphagia in Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury
Shu-Mei YANG ; Ting-Ju LAI ; Ya-Chu HSU ; Yu-Lin LU ; Hsing-Yu CHEN ; Hsiao-Ting TSAI ; Sheng-Hao CHENG ; Ming-Yen HSIAO ; Meng-Ting LIN
Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine 2026;50(2):117-128
Objective:
To identify early clinical predictors associated with dysphagia and delayed swallowing recovery in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI).
Methods:
In this retrospective study, we enrolled adult TBI patients admitted to the rehabilitation unit of a tertiary medical center between June 2019 and June 2023. Data on baseline characteristics, neurological status, imaging findings, and rehabilitation-related variables were collected. Swallowing function was assessed using two indicators: (1) nasogastric (NG) tube retention and (2) the Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) scores at 1, 4, and 12 weeks post-injury. Regression analyses were conducted to identify predictors associated with dysphagia and swallowing recovery.
Results:
A total of 160 patients were included. At 1 week post-injury, longer intensive care unit (ICU) stay, poor initial sitting balance and use of sedative medication in ICU were associated with NG tube retention. At 4 weeks, lower initial Rancho Los Amigos Scale (RLAS) scores, immobility-related complications, longer hospitalization, and temporal lobe hematomas were associated with persistent NG tube dependence. By 12 weeks, older age, delayed ability to follow commands, and poor initial sitting balance remained associated with NG tube retention. FOIS outcomes were also associated with older age, delayed time to follow commands, impaired initial sitting balance, prolonged ICU stay, temporal lobe hematomas, lower initial RLAS scores, immobility-related complications, prolonged endotracheal tube placement and extended hospital stays.
Conclusion
Impaired cognitive status, poor physical function, immobility-related complications, and temporal lobe hematomas were key factors associated with dysphagia and delayed oral intake in individuals with TBI.
2.Effect of Anti-reflux Mucosal Ablation on Esophageal Motility in Patients With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Study Based on High-resolution Impedance Manometry
Chien-Chuan CHEN ; Chu-Kuang CHOU ; Ming-Ching YUAN ; Kun-Feng TSAI ; Jia-Feng WU ; Wei-Chi LIAO ; Han-Mo CHIU ; Hsiu-Po WANG ; Ming-Shiang WU ; Ping-Huei TSENG
Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2025;31(1):75-85
Background/Aims:
Anti-reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) is a promising endoscopic intervention for proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-dependent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the effect of ARMA on esophageal motility remains unclear.
Methods:
Twenty patients with PPI-dependent GERD receiving ARMA were prospectively enrolled. Comprehensive self-report symptom questionnaires, endoscopy, 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring, and high-resolution impedance manometry were performed and analyzed before and 3 months after ARMA.
Results:
All ARMA procedures were performed successfully. Symptom scores, including GerdQ (11.16 ± 2.67 to 9.11 ± 2.64, P = 0.026) and reflux symptom index (11.63 ± 5.62 to 6.11 ± 3.86, P = 0.001), improved significantly, while 13 patients (65%) reported discontinuation of PPI. Total acid exposure time (5.84 ± 4.63% to 2.83 ± 3.41%, P = 0.024) and number of reflux episodes (73.05 ± 19.34 to 37.55 ± 22.71, P < 0.001) decreased significantly after ARMA. Improved esophagogastric junction (EGJ) barrier function, including increased lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure (13.89 ± 10.78 mmHg to 21.68 ± 11.5 mmHg, P = 0.034), 4-second integrated relaxation pressure (5.75 ± 6.42 mmHg to 9.99 ± 5.89 mmHg, P = 0.020), and EGJ-contractile integral(16.42 ± 16.93 mmHg · cm to 31.95 ± 21.25 mmHg · cm, P = 0.016), were observed. Esophageal body contractility also increased significantly (distal contractile integral, 966.85 ± 845.84 mmHg · s · cm to 1198.8 ± 811.74 mmHg · s · cm, P = 0.023). Patients with symptom improvement had better pre-AMRA esophageal body contractility.
Conclusions
ARMA effectively improves symptoms and reflux burden, EGJ barrier function, and esophageal body contractility in patients with PPIdependent GERD during short-term evaluation. Longer follow-up to clarify the sustainability of ARMA is needed.
3.Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Urine Metabolomics via Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry
Chung-Hsin CHEN ; Hsiang-Po HUANG ; Kai-Hsiung CHANG ; Ming-Shyue LEE ; Cheng-Fan LEE ; Chih-Yu LIN ; Yuan Chi LIN ; William J. HUANG ; Chun-Hou LIAO ; Chih-Chin YU ; Shiu-Dong CHUNG ; Yao-Chou TSAI ; Chia-Chang WU ; Chen-Hsun HO ; Pei-Wen HSIAO ; Yeong-Shiau PU ;
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(2):376-386
Purpose:
Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles.
Materials and Methods:
Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion.
Results:
The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column.
Conclusions
Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.
4.Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Urine Metabolomics via Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry
Chung-Hsin CHEN ; Hsiang-Po HUANG ; Kai-Hsiung CHANG ; Ming-Shyue LEE ; Cheng-Fan LEE ; Chih-Yu LIN ; Yuan Chi LIN ; William J. HUANG ; Chun-Hou LIAO ; Chih-Chin YU ; Shiu-Dong CHUNG ; Yao-Chou TSAI ; Chia-Chang WU ; Chen-Hsun HO ; Pei-Wen HSIAO ; Yeong-Shiau PU ;
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(2):376-386
Purpose:
Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles.
Materials and Methods:
Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion.
Results:
The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column.
Conclusions
Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.
5.Effect of Anti-reflux Mucosal Ablation on Esophageal Motility in Patients With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Study Based on High-resolution Impedance Manometry
Chien-Chuan CHEN ; Chu-Kuang CHOU ; Ming-Ching YUAN ; Kun-Feng TSAI ; Jia-Feng WU ; Wei-Chi LIAO ; Han-Mo CHIU ; Hsiu-Po WANG ; Ming-Shiang WU ; Ping-Huei TSENG
Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2025;31(1):75-85
Background/Aims:
Anti-reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) is a promising endoscopic intervention for proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-dependent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the effect of ARMA on esophageal motility remains unclear.
Methods:
Twenty patients with PPI-dependent GERD receiving ARMA were prospectively enrolled. Comprehensive self-report symptom questionnaires, endoscopy, 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring, and high-resolution impedance manometry were performed and analyzed before and 3 months after ARMA.
Results:
All ARMA procedures were performed successfully. Symptom scores, including GerdQ (11.16 ± 2.67 to 9.11 ± 2.64, P = 0.026) and reflux symptom index (11.63 ± 5.62 to 6.11 ± 3.86, P = 0.001), improved significantly, while 13 patients (65%) reported discontinuation of PPI. Total acid exposure time (5.84 ± 4.63% to 2.83 ± 3.41%, P = 0.024) and number of reflux episodes (73.05 ± 19.34 to 37.55 ± 22.71, P < 0.001) decreased significantly after ARMA. Improved esophagogastric junction (EGJ) barrier function, including increased lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure (13.89 ± 10.78 mmHg to 21.68 ± 11.5 mmHg, P = 0.034), 4-second integrated relaxation pressure (5.75 ± 6.42 mmHg to 9.99 ± 5.89 mmHg, P = 0.020), and EGJ-contractile integral(16.42 ± 16.93 mmHg · cm to 31.95 ± 21.25 mmHg · cm, P = 0.016), were observed. Esophageal body contractility also increased significantly (distal contractile integral, 966.85 ± 845.84 mmHg · s · cm to 1198.8 ± 811.74 mmHg · s · cm, P = 0.023). Patients with symptom improvement had better pre-AMRA esophageal body contractility.
Conclusions
ARMA effectively improves symptoms and reflux burden, EGJ barrier function, and esophageal body contractility in patients with PPIdependent GERD during short-term evaluation. Longer follow-up to clarify the sustainability of ARMA is needed.
6.Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Urine Metabolomics via Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry
Chung-Hsin CHEN ; Hsiang-Po HUANG ; Kai-Hsiung CHANG ; Ming-Shyue LEE ; Cheng-Fan LEE ; Chih-Yu LIN ; Yuan Chi LIN ; William J. HUANG ; Chun-Hou LIAO ; Chih-Chin YU ; Shiu-Dong CHUNG ; Yao-Chou TSAI ; Chia-Chang WU ; Chen-Hsun HO ; Pei-Wen HSIAO ; Yeong-Shiau PU ;
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(2):376-386
Purpose:
Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles.
Materials and Methods:
Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion.
Results:
The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column.
Conclusions
Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.
7.Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Urine Metabolomics via Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry
Chung-Hsin CHEN ; Hsiang-Po HUANG ; Kai-Hsiung CHANG ; Ming-Shyue LEE ; Cheng-Fan LEE ; Chih-Yu LIN ; Yuan Chi LIN ; William J. HUANG ; Chun-Hou LIAO ; Chih-Chin YU ; Shiu-Dong CHUNG ; Yao-Chou TSAI ; Chia-Chang WU ; Chen-Hsun HO ; Pei-Wen HSIAO ; Yeong-Shiau PU ;
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(2):376-386
Purpose:
Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles.
Materials and Methods:
Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion.
Results:
The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column.
Conclusions
Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.
8.Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Urine Metabolomics via Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry
Chung-Hsin CHEN ; Hsiang-Po HUANG ; Kai-Hsiung CHANG ; Ming-Shyue LEE ; Cheng-Fan LEE ; Chih-Yu LIN ; Yuan Chi LIN ; William J. HUANG ; Chun-Hou LIAO ; Chih-Chin YU ; Shiu-Dong CHUNG ; Yao-Chou TSAI ; Chia-Chang WU ; Chen-Hsun HO ; Pei-Wen HSIAO ; Yeong-Shiau PU ;
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(2):376-386
Purpose:
Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles.
Materials and Methods:
Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion.
Results:
The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column.
Conclusions
Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.
9.Effect of Anti-reflux Mucosal Ablation on Esophageal Motility in Patients With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Study Based on High-resolution Impedance Manometry
Chien-Chuan CHEN ; Chu-Kuang CHOU ; Ming-Ching YUAN ; Kun-Feng TSAI ; Jia-Feng WU ; Wei-Chi LIAO ; Han-Mo CHIU ; Hsiu-Po WANG ; Ming-Shiang WU ; Ping-Huei TSENG
Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2025;31(1):75-85
Background/Aims:
Anti-reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) is a promising endoscopic intervention for proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-dependent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the effect of ARMA on esophageal motility remains unclear.
Methods:
Twenty patients with PPI-dependent GERD receiving ARMA were prospectively enrolled. Comprehensive self-report symptom questionnaires, endoscopy, 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring, and high-resolution impedance manometry were performed and analyzed before and 3 months after ARMA.
Results:
All ARMA procedures were performed successfully. Symptom scores, including GerdQ (11.16 ± 2.67 to 9.11 ± 2.64, P = 0.026) and reflux symptom index (11.63 ± 5.62 to 6.11 ± 3.86, P = 0.001), improved significantly, while 13 patients (65%) reported discontinuation of PPI. Total acid exposure time (5.84 ± 4.63% to 2.83 ± 3.41%, P = 0.024) and number of reflux episodes (73.05 ± 19.34 to 37.55 ± 22.71, P < 0.001) decreased significantly after ARMA. Improved esophagogastric junction (EGJ) barrier function, including increased lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure (13.89 ± 10.78 mmHg to 21.68 ± 11.5 mmHg, P = 0.034), 4-second integrated relaxation pressure (5.75 ± 6.42 mmHg to 9.99 ± 5.89 mmHg, P = 0.020), and EGJ-contractile integral(16.42 ± 16.93 mmHg · cm to 31.95 ± 21.25 mmHg · cm, P = 0.016), were observed. Esophageal body contractility also increased significantly (distal contractile integral, 966.85 ± 845.84 mmHg · s · cm to 1198.8 ± 811.74 mmHg · s · cm, P = 0.023). Patients with symptom improvement had better pre-AMRA esophageal body contractility.
Conclusions
ARMA effectively improves symptoms and reflux burden, EGJ barrier function, and esophageal body contractility in patients with PPIdependent GERD during short-term evaluation. Longer follow-up to clarify the sustainability of ARMA is needed.
10.Effects of Codeine on Esophageal Peristalsis in Patients With Ineffective Esophageal Motility:Studies Using High-resolution Manometry
Wei-Yi LEI ; Tso-Tsai LIU ; Wei-Chuan CHANG ; Chih-Hsun YI ; Jui-Sheng HUNG ; Ming-Wun WONG ; Shu-Wei LIANG ; Lin LIN ; Chien-Lin CHEN
Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2024;30(1):38-45
Background/Aims:
This study aims to evaluate the effects of acute codeine administration on primary and secondary esophageal peristalsis in patients with ineffective esophageal motility (IEM).
Methods:
Eighteen IEM patients (8 women; mean age 37.8 years, range 23-64 years) were enrolled in the study. The patients underwent highresolution manometry exams, consisting of 10 single wet swallows, multiple rapid swallows, and ten 20 mL rapid air injections to trigger secondary peristalsis. All participants completed 2 separate sessions, including acute administration of codeine (60 mg) and placebo, in a randomized order.
Results:
Codeine significantly increased the distal contractile integral (566 ± 81 mmHg · s · cm vs 247 ± 36 mmHg · s · cm, P = 0.001) andshortened distal latency (5.7 ± 0.2 seconds vs 6.5 ± 0.1 seconds, P < 0.001) for primary peristalsis compared with these parameters after placebo treatment. The mean total break length decreased significantly after codeine treatment compared with the length after placebo (P= 0.003). Codeine significantly increased esophagogastric junction-contractile integral (P= 0.028) but did not change the 4-second integrated relaxation pressure (P= 0.794). Codeine significantly decreased the frequency of weak (P= 0.039) and failed contractions (P= 0.009), resulting in increased frequency of normal primary peristalsis (P < 0.136). No significant differences in the ratio of impaired multiple rapid swallows inhibition and parameters of secondary peristalsis were detected.
Conclusions
In IEM patients, acute administration of codeine increases contraction vigor and reduces distal latency of primary esophageal peristalsis, but has no effect on secondary peristalsis. Future studies are required to further elucidate clinical relevance of these findings, especially in the setting of gastroesophageal reflux disease with IEM.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail