Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms(pNENs)are rare and highly heterogeneous pancreatic tumors with insidious clinical manifestations.They have a high propensity for distant metastasis,with liver metastases being the most common,significantly impacting patient prognosis.Despite extensive research on treating pNEN with liver metastases in recent years,many controversies and gaps remain.With the advancement of multidisciplinary treatment approaches,therapeutic strategies for pNEN liver metastases have been continuously refined,encompassing surgical resection,local therapies(such as radiofrequency ablation and transarterial interventions),and systemic treatments(including chemotherapy,targeted therapy,immunotherapy,radionuclide therapy,and endocrine therapy).Combination therapy has become an emerging trend.Radical surgery remains the preferred option for resectable cases,while for inoperable or treatment-intolerant patients,a rational combination of local and systemic therapies can improve survival outcomes.Additionally,endocrine therapy is crucial in symptom relief and quality-of-life improvement for patients with functional pNEN.Multidisciplinary collaboration in formulating individualized treatment plans can significantly enhance patient prognosis.This review summarizes recent advancements in treating pNEN liver metastases,providing a reference for clinical decision-making.

Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms(pNENs)are rare and highly heterogeneous pancreatic tumors with insidious clinical manifestations.They have a high propensity for distant metastasis,with liver metastases being the most common,significantly impacting patient prognosis.Despite extensive research on treating pNEN with liver metastases in recent years,many controversies and gaps remain.With the advancement of multidisciplinary treatment approaches,therapeutic strategies for pNEN liver metastases have been continuously refined,encompassing surgical resection,local therapies(such as radiofrequency ablation and transarterial interventions),and systemic treatments(including chemotherapy,targeted therapy,immunotherapy,radionuclide therapy,and endocrine therapy).Combination therapy has become an emerging trend.Radical surgery remains the preferred option for resectable cases,while for inoperable or treatment-intolerant patients,a rational combination of local and systemic therapies can improve survival outcomes.Additionally,endocrine therapy is crucial in symptom relief and quality-of-life improvement for patients with functional pNEN.Multidisciplinary collaboration in formulating individualized treatment plans can significantly enhance patient prognosis.This review summarizes recent advancements in treating pNEN liver metastases,providing a reference for clinical decision-making.

Objective: To discuss the effect of high-density fat-binding SVF-GEL in female facial lipofilling. Methods: This is a retrospective study including 32 female patients, received facial fat transplantation during June 2017 to June 2018 in Yichun College. Each patient underwent high-density fat-binding SVF-GEL transplantation for facial surgery. Patients′satisfaction with the surgery and the rate of secondary surgery was evaluated. Fat was harvested from the inner thigh, centrifuged at 1200 g for 3 min, and the liquid was removed. The upper 2/3 part is prepared for SVF-GEL, for further used in delicate lipofilling in eyelid, tear groove and nasolabial groove. The lower 1/3 high density fat was used for volume restoration, such as forehead, temporal area and cheek. Results: All patients had significant improvements in facial contours with mild swelling and short recovery time. The satisfaction rate was 68.8%(22/32), and the second operation rate was 15.6%(5/32). Conclusions High-density fat-binding SVF-GEL transplantation can achieve good results in correcting facial volume loss.

Objective To observe the clinical effects and safety of sodium valproate combined with decitabine for treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Methods Forty-two patients with MDS were enrolled in department of hematology in Shanxi Dayi Hospital from February 2012 to February 2017. According to random number table, the patients were divided into the control group (21 cases) and the experimental group (21 cases). The patients in the control group received decitabine at the dose of 20 mg·m-2·d-1, and intravenous infusion was completed in 2 hours, continuous therapy up to 5 days, 4 weeks as a course; the patients in the experimental group received combined medication, orally given sodium valproate 0.2 g once, 3 times per day. One week later, the dosage was added to 0.4 g once, 3 times per day. Both groups received at least 4 courses of treatment. The treatment was stopped when serious adverse reactions or obvious disease progression occurred. The bone marrow smear was rechecked every 4 weeks after treatment to evaluate the efficacy. The expressions of ASXL1, DNMT3A and TET2 in bone marrow cells were detected by fluorescence quantitative PCR before and after treatment. Results The total treatment response rate of the experimental group and the control group were 76.2 % (16/21) and 57.1 % (12/21) respectively, and there was statistically significant difference (P< 0.05); the total remission rate of the two groups was 47.6 % (10/21) and 38.1 %(8/21) respectively, and there was no significant difference (P> 0.05). All patients had slight adverse reactions, and the adverse reaction rate was 42.9 % (9/21) and 38.1 % (8/21), and there was no significant difference (P>0.05). The content of TET2 mRNA and DNMT3A mRNA after treatment in both groups were decreased compared with the expressions before treatment, and there were significant differences (P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups after treatment (P> 0.05); the content of ASXL1 mRNA had no obvious change in the control group and a dramatic decrease in the experimental group compared with that before treatment (P<0.05). Conclusion Sodium valproate combined with decitabine has favorable effects and mild adverse reactions for treatment of MDS, besides, it can influence the expressions of TET2, DNMT3A and ASXL1.