Methods: A total of 45 patients diagnosed with de novo thoracic or lumbar SEA who underwent posterior-only surgical decompression between 2005 and 2014, with a minimum postoperative follow-up of 2 years, were included. Patients were stratified based on the presence or absence of postoperative residual ND, and neurological function was assessed immediately after surgery and at the final followup using the Frankel grading system. SITE scores, along with clinical and radiological data associated with residual ND, were collected. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were performed to identify significant predictors. Results: Patients with residual ND had significantly lower SITE scores than those without residual ND (4.3±1.3 vs. 7±1.8, p<0.0001). Multivariate analysis identified the SITE score as an independent predictor (odds ratio, 2.70; p=0.012). ROC analysis showed that a SITE score ≤6 predicted residual ND with 73.3% sensitivity and 100% specificity, with an area under the curve of 0.877 (p<0.001). Other significant predictors included cauda equina syndrome and a shorter symptom-to-surgery interval, both of which were associated with a higher risk of residual ND. Conclusions The SITE score is a reliable and independent predictor of residual ND after surgery for SEA. SITE scores <6 indicate a significantly higher risk of postoperative ND.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Objective: A thoracolumbar burst fracture (TLBF) is defined as the failure of the anterior and middle columns of the vertebra due to high-energy trauma, such as motor vehicle collisions and falls from heights. Debate has continued for decades regarding the standard treatment, especially for TLBFs without neurological deficits (TLBF-WONDs). The aim of this study was to understand the role of expandable intravertebral titanium implants (EITIs) in treating TLBF-WONDs. Methods: We included patients aged 18–65 years who presented at our hospital Emergency Department with severe back pain (visual analogue scale [VAS] score ≥ 8), were neurologically intact, were diagnosed with TLBF-WOND by either computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging, underwent percutaneous bilateral transpedicular EITI implantation, and were followed-up for ≥12 months. Radiological and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Results: Thirty patients satisfied the study inclusion criteria, including 9 men and 21 women, with an average age of 48.2 years. Thirteen A3 and 17 A4 burst fractures were included. The mean duration of hospitalization was 3.3 days. The mean follow-up period was 4.4 years. All patients exhibited significant improvements in radiographical (anterior, middle, and posterior vertebral heights); vertebral kyphotic angle (p<0.001); and functional outcomes (VAS and Oswestry Disability Index scores, p<0.001). One case of cement leakage into the paraspinal muscle was observed; however, no major complications occurred. Conclusion Percutaneous bilateral transpedicular EITI placement with cement augmentation under local anesthesia may be an effective strategy for the treatment of high-energy traumatic TLBFs with neurological integrity.

Background/Aims: Real-world studies assessing the effectiveness and safety of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) plus ribavirin (RBV) for Child-Pugh B/C hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related cirrhosis are limited. Methods: We included 107 patients with Child-Pugh B/C HCV-related cirrhosis receiving SOF/VEL plus RBV for 12 weeks in Taiwan. The sustained virologic response rates at off-treatment week 12 (SVR12) for the evaluable population (EP), modified EP, and per-protocol population (PP) were assessed. Thesafety profiles were reported. Results: The SVR12 rates in the EP, modified EP and PP were 89.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 82.5–94.2%), 94.1% (95% CI, 87.8–97.3%), and 100% (95% CI, 96.2–100%). Number of patients who failed to achieve SVR12 were attributed to virologic failures. The SVR12 rates were comparable regardless of patient characteristics. One patient discontinued treatment because of adverse events (AEs). Twenty-four patients had serious AEs and six died, but none were related to SOF/VEL or RBV. Among the 96 patients achieving SVR12, 84.4% and 64.6% had improved Child-Pugh and model for endstage liver disease (MELD) scores. Multivariate analysis revealed that a baseline MELD score ≥15 was associated with an improved MELD score of ≥3 (odds ratio, 4.13; 95% CI, 1.16–14.71; P=0.02). Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 1 had more significant estimated glomerular filtration rate declines than patients with CKD stage 2 (-0.42 mL/min/1.73 m2/month; P=0.01) or stage 3 (-0.56 mL/min/1.73 m2/month; P<0.001). Conclusions SOF/VEL plus RBV for 12 weeks is efficacious and well-tolerated for Child-Pugh B/C HCV-related cirrhosis.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) are evidenced-based treatments for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who fail to respond to standard first-line therapies. However, although various TMS protocols have been proven to be clinically effective, the response rate varies across clinical applications due to the heterogeneity of real-world psychiatric comorbidities, such as generalized anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, panic disorder, or substance use disorder, which are often observed in patients with MDD. Therefore, individualized treatment approaches are important to increase treatment response by assigning a given patient to the most optimal TMS treatment protocol based on his or her individual profile. This literature review summarizes different rTMS or TBS protocols that have been applied in researches investigating MDD patients with certain psychiatric comorbidities and discusses biomarkers that may be used to predict rTMS treatment response. Furthermore, we highlight the need for the validation of neuroimaging and electrophysiological biomarkers associated with rTMS treatment responses. Finally, we discuss on which directions future efforts should focus for developing the personalization of the treatment of depression with rTMS or iTBS.