Spine fracture and dislocation are common traumatic spinal conditions that often require surgical intervention due to compromised spinal stability. Surgical approaches include anterior, posterior, and combined anterior-posterior spinal procedures. According to the specific surgical requirements, patients may be placed in the prone position or repositioned between prone and supine positions during surgery. Intraoperative repositioning has become an essential step in patient positioning. However, during repositioning, patients with spinal fracture and dislocation are at increased risk for complications such as hemodynamic instability, nerve injury, and pressure injuries to the skin and soft tissue. Notably, due to the instability of the spinal cord, even minor manipulations can further exacerbate the damage, potentially leading to severe outcomes like paraplegia. Although the current clinical guidelines provide instructive recommendations for standard position, there remains no specific protocols for intraoperative repositioning in patients with spine fracture and dislocation. With a concern for the lack of clinical studies on positioning techniques, risk prevention, and operational norms for special patients, no applicable guidelines or standards are available. A consensus was required to provide clinical reference, meet the requirements of surgical treatment, and minimize the safety risks of patients caused by improper placement of positions. Professional Committee of Operating Room Nursing of Shaanxi Nursing Association organized experts in nursing management and operating room nursing from major hospitals across China to formulate Expert consensus on intraoperative repositioning for patients with spinal fracture and dislocation ( version 2025). The consensus provides 11 recommendations covering pre-repositioning preparation, intraoperative maneuvers, and post-repositioning observation, aiming to provide references for clinical standardization of the intraoperative repositioning process and protection of patients′ safety.

Spine fracture and dislocation are common traumatic spinal conditions that often require surgical intervention due to compromised spinal stability. Surgical approaches include anterior, posterior, and combined anterior-posterior spinal procedures. According to the specific surgical requirements, patients may be placed in the prone position or repositioned between prone and supine positions during surgery. Intraoperative repositioning has become an essential step in patient positioning. However, during repositioning, patients with spinal fracture and dislocation are at increased risk for complications such as hemodynamic instability, nerve injury, and pressure injuries to the skin and soft tissue. Notably, due to the instability of the spinal cord, even minor manipulations can further exacerbate the damage, potentially leading to severe outcomes like paraplegia. Although the current clinical guidelines provide instructive recommendations for standard position, there remains no specific protocols for intraoperative repositioning in patients with spine fracture and dislocation. With a concern for the lack of clinical studies on positioning techniques, risk prevention, and operational norms for special patients, no applicable guidelines or standards are available. A consensus was required to provide clinical reference, meet the requirements of surgical treatment, and minimize the safety risks of patients caused by improper placement of positions. Professional Committee of Operating Room Nursing of Shaanxi Nursing Association organized experts in nursing management and operating room nursing from major hospitals across China to formulate Expert consensus on intraoperative repositioning for patients with spinal fracture and dislocation ( version 2025). The consensus provides 11 recommendations covering pre-repositioning preparation, intraoperative maneuvers, and post-repositioning observation, aiming to provide references for clinical standardization of the intraoperative repositioning process and protection of patients′ safety.

Purpose::Acute kidney injury (AKI) is one of the most common functional injuries observed in trauma patients. However, certain trauma medications may exacerbate renal injury. Therefore, the early detection of trauma-related AKI holds paramount importance in improving trauma prognosis.Methods::Qualified datasets were selected from public databases, and common differentially expressed genes related to trauma-induced AKI and hub genes were identified through enrichment analysis and the establishment of protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks. Additionally, the specificity of these hub genes was investigated using the sepsis dataset and conducted a comprehensive literature review to assess their plausibility. The raw data from both datasets were downloaded using R software (version 4.2.1) and processed with the "affy" package19 for correction and normalization.Results::Our analysis revealed 585 upregulated and 629 downregulated differentially expressed genes in the AKI dataset, along with 586 upregulated and 948 downregulated differentially expressed genes in the trauma dataset. Concurrently, the establishment of the PPI network and subsequent topological analysis highlighted key hub genes, including CD44, CD163, TIMP metallopeptidase inhibitor 1, cytochrome b-245 beta chain, versican, membrane spanning 4-domains A4A, mitogen-activated protein kinase 14, and early growth response 1. Notably, their receiver operating characteristic curves displayed areas exceeding 75%, indicating good diagnostic performance. Moreover, our findings postulated a unique molecular mechanism underlying trauma-related AKI. Conclusion::This study presents an alternative strategy for the early diagnosis and treatment of trauma-related AKI, based on the identification of potential biomarkers and therapeutic targets. Additionally, this study provides theoretical references for elucidating the mechanisms of trauma-related AKI.

Objective To investigate the treatment outcomes,prognosis,and risk factors of treatment failure of peritoneal dialysis associated peritonitis (PDAP) caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae,and thus provide clinical evidence for the prevention and treatment of this disease. Methods The clinical data of PDAP patients at four peritoneal dialysis centers from January 1,2014 to December 31,2019 were collected retrospectively.The treatment outcomes and prognosis were compared between the patients with PDAP caused by Klebsiella.pneumoniae and that caused by Escherichia coli.Kaplan-Meier method was employed to establish the survival curve of technical failure,and multivariate Logistic regression to analyze the risk factors of the treatment failure of PADP caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae. Results In the 4 peritoneal dialysis centers,1034 cases of PDAP occurred in 586 patients from 2014 to 2019,including 21 cases caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae and 98 cases caused by Escherichia coli.The incidence of Klebsiella pneumoniae caused PDAP was 0.0048 times per patient per year on average,ranging from 0.0024 to 0.0124 times per patient per year during 2014-2019.According to the Kaplan-Meier survival curve,the technical failure rate of Klebsiella pneumoniae caused PDAP was higher than that of Escherichia coli caused PDAP (P=0.022).The multivariate Logistic regression model showed that long-term dialysis was an independent risk factor for the treatment failure of Klebsiella pneumoniae caused PDAP (OR=1.082,95%CI=1.011-1.158,P=0.023).Klebsiella pneumoniae was highly sensitive to amikacin,meropenem,imipenem,piperacillin,and cefotetan,and it was highly resistant to ampicillin (81.82%),cefazolin (53.33%),tetracycline (50.00%),cefotaxime (43.75%),and chloramphenicol (42.86%). Conclusion The PDAP caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae had worse prognosis than that caused by Escherichia coli,and long-term dialysis was an independent risk factor for the treatment failure of Klebsiella pneumoniae caused PDAP.
Humans ; Klebsiella pneumoniae ; Retrospective Studies ; Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use* ; Peritoneal Dialysis/adverse effects* ; Peritonitis/drug therapy* ; Risk Factors ; Treatment Failure ; Escherichia coli

Clinical efficacy is the basis for the development of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM), and the evaluation of clinical efficacy of TCM has always been the focus of attention. The technical and methodological difficulties in the evaluation process often restrict the generation of high-level evidence. Therefore, methodological research should be deepened and innovative practice should be carried out to study the application of scientific research methods in the evaluation of the advantages of TCM. After more than ten years of development, the clinical efficacy evaluation of TCM, on the basis of the initially classic placebo randomized controlled trials, has successively carried out a series of meaningful attempts and explorations in N-of-1 trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies, real world studies, narrative medicine studies, systematic evaluation, and other aspects, laying the foundation for the transformation of TCM from "experience" to "evidence". This paper focused on the clinical efficacy evaluation of TCM, summarized the main connotation and development status of efficacy evaluation indicators, standards, and methods, and put forward corresponding countermeasures and suggestions for the problems of indicator selection, standard formulation, and methodology optimization in the research process. It is clear that scientific and objective evaluation of the efficacy of TCM is an urgent problem to be solved at present.
Medicine, Chinese Traditional ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Treatment Outcome ; Case-Control Studies ; Narrative Medicine

Amid the modernization and internationalization of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM), the safety of TCM has attracted much attention. At the moment, the government, scientific research teams, and pharmaceutical enterprises have made great efforts to explore methods and techniques for clinical safety evaluation of TCM. Although considerable achievements have been made, there are still many problems, such as the non-standard terms of adverse reactions of TCM, unclear evaluation indicators, unreasonable judgment methods, lack of evaluation models, out-of-date evaluation standards, and unsound reporting systems. Therefore, it is urgent to further deepen the research mode and method of clinical safety evaluation of TCM. Based on the current national requirements for the life-cycle management of drugs, this study focused on the problems in the five dimensions of clinical safety evaluation of TCM, including normative terms, evaluation modes, judgment methods, evaluation standards, and reporting systems, and proposed suggestions on the development of a life-cycle clinical safety evaluation method that conformed to the characteristics of TCM, hoping to provide a reference for future research.
Medicine, Chinese Traditional/adverse effects* ; Social Change

Child ; Humans ; COVID-19 ; SARS-CoV-2

OBJECTIVES: To study the efficacy and safety of domestic generic levetiracetam in replacement of brand-name levetiracetam in the treatment of children with epilepsy. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on the medical data of 154 children with epilepsy who received domestic generic levetiracetam in the inpatient or outpatient service of Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital from May 2019 to December 2020. Domestic generic levetiracetam and brand-name levetiracetam were compared in terms of efficacy and safety. RESULTS: For these 154 children, the epilepsy control rate was 77.3% (119/154) at baseline. At 6 months after switching to domestic generic levetiracetam, the epilepsy control rate reached 83.8% (129/154), which showed a significant increase (P<0.05). There was no significant change in the frequency of seizures from baseline to 6 months after switching (P>0.05). The incidence of refractory epilepsy in children with no response after switching treatment was significantly higher than that in children with response (P<0.05). Before switching, only 1 child (0.6%) experienced somnolence, while after switching, 3 children (1.9%) experienced mild adverse drug reactions, including dizziness, somnolence, irritability, and bad temper. CONCLUSIONS Switching from brand-name to generic levetiracetam is safe and effective and holds promise for clinical application, but more prospective randomized controlled trials are required in future.
Child ; Epilepsy/drug therapy* ; Humans ; Levetiracetam ; Prospective Studies ; Retrospective Studies ; Seizures

Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and side effects of PD-1 monoclonal antibody in the treatment of advanced metastatic renal cell carcinoma in China.Methods:The clinical data of 117 patients with advanced metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with PD-1 monoclonal antibody from October 2016 to February 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 87 males (74.4%) and 30 females (25.6%), with an average age of (57.9±10.9) years old, BMI of (23.6±3.4) kg/m 2and smoking history of 79 (67.5%). There were 44 cases (37.6%) with hypertension, 19 (16.2%) cases of diabetes. The ECOG score of 59.8% (70/117) patients was 0, 33.3% (39/117) was 1, 4.3% (5/117) was 2, and 2.5% (3/117) was 3. The pathological type of 104 cases were renal clear cell carcinoma (ccRCC), 8 cases of papillary renal cell carcinoma, 2 cases of chromophobe cell carcinoma, 2 cases of collecting duct carcinoma and 1 case of eosinophilic cell carcinoma. The general condition of the overall population and the overall survival (OS) of relevant subgroups were analyzed. Secondary goals included progression free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), adverse reactions, overall survival (OS), and progression free survival (PFS). Results:65.8% (77 / 117) of the patients chose targeted combined with PD-1 monoclonal antibody in the first-line treatment. The main targeted drugs were acitinib (81.8%, 63 / 77), tirelizumab (37.6%, 29 / 77) and cindilimab (25.9%, 20 / 77). After first-line treatment, 19.6.1% (23 / 117) patients needed to be converted to second-line treatment, and 15 patients changed the type of PD-1 antibody during treatment. In addition, the targeted drug of combined therapy was replaced by acitinib in 8 patients. The main causes of drug withdrawal were disease progression (70.7%, 29 / 41) and death (29.2%, 12 / 41). The median OS of the overall population was 35.6 (19-60) months and PFS was 12.1 (1-60) months. The ORR of the overall population was 47.8% (56 / 117). 4.2% (5/117) patients had complete remission, another 17.0% (20/117) patients were in stable condition, and 43.5% (51 / 117) patients were in partial remission. In the first-line treatment, the median PFS time of targeted combined with PD-1 monoclonal antibody was 12.6 (1-30) months, the median PFS time of PD-1 single drug immunotherapy was 10.5 (1-60) months. In the second-line treatment, the PFS of patients treated with PD-1 monoclonal antibody was 10.1 (4-19) months, and that of patients treated with PD-1 monoclonal antibody combined with targeted therapy was 11.7 (1-25) months. The most common adverse reactions were elevated blood pressure (18.5%, 23 / 124), followed by hypothyroidism (15.3%%, 19/124), rash (14.5%, 18 / 124), elevated transaminase (10.5%, 13 / 124) and bone marrow suppression (9.7%, 12/124). 9.4% (11 / 117) patients needed to reduce the related adverse reactions by interrupting the treatment control of PD-1 monoclonal antibody.Conclusions:The safety and efficacy of PD-1 monoclonal antibody in domestic patients are better, and the side effects are less. The efficacy and safety of PD-1 monoclonal antibody combined with targeted therapy in the real world population are consistent with many key clinical trials abroad. PD-1 monoclonal antibody combined with targeted drugs can be popularized in the domestic MRCC population.

Objective: To explore the effect of perioperative chemotherapy on the prognosis of gastric cancer patients under real-world condition. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was carried out. Real world data of gastric cancer patients receiving perioperative chemotherapy and surgery + adjuvant chemotherapy in 33 domestic hospitals from January 1, 2014 to January 31, 2016 were collected. Inclusion criteria: (1) gastric adenocarcinoma was confirmed by histopathology, and clinical stage was cT2-4aN0-3M0 (AJCC 8th edition); (2) D2 radical gastric cancer surgery was performed; (3) at least one cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) was completed; (4) at least 4 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) [SOX (S-1+oxaliplatin) or CapeOX (capecitabine + oxaliplatin)] were completed. Exclusion criteria: (1) complicated with other malignant tumors; (2) radiotherapy received; (3) patients with incomplete data. The enrolled patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy were included in the perioperative chemotherapy group, and those who received only postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy were included in the surgery + adjuvant chemotherapy group. Propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to control selection bias. The primary outcome were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after PSM. OS was defined as the time from the first neoadjuvant chemotherapy (operation + adjuvant chemotherapy group: from the date of operation) to the last effective follow-up or death. PFS was defined as the time from the first neoadjuvant chemotherapy (operation + adjuvant chemotherapy group: from the date of operation) to the first imaging diagnosis of tumor progression or death. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the survival rate, and the Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the independent effect of perioperative chemo therapy on OS and PFS. Results: 2 045 cases were included, including 1 293 cases in the surgery+adjuvant chemotherapy group and 752 cases in the perioperative chemotherapy group. After PSM, 492 pairs were included in the analysis. There were no statistically significant differences in gender, age, body mass index, tumor stage before treatment, and tumor location between the two groups (all P>0.05). Compared with the surgery + adjuvant chemotherapy group, patients in the perioperative chemotherapy group had higher proportion of total gastrectomy (χ(2)=40.526, P<0.001), smaller maximum tumor diameter (t=3.969, P<0.001), less number of metastatic lymph nodes (t=1.343, P<0.001), lower ratio of vessel invasion (χ(2)=11.897, P=0.001) and nerve invasion (χ(2)=12.338, P<0.001). In the perioperative chemotherapy group and surgery + adjuvant chemotherapy group, 24 cases (4.9%) and 17 cases (3.4%) developed postoperative complications, respectively, and no significant difference was found between two groups (χ(2)=0.815, P=0.367). The median OS of the perioperative chemotherapy group was longer than that of the surgery + adjuvant chemotherapy group (65 months vs. 45 months, HR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.62-0.89, P=0.001); the median PFS of the perioperative chemotherapy group was also longer than that of the surgery+adjuvant chemotherapy group (56 months vs. 36 months, HR=0.72, 95% CI:0.61-0.85, P<0.001). The forest plot results of subgroup analysis showed that both men and women could benefit from perioperative chemotherapy (all P<0.05); patients over 45 years of age (P<0.05) and with normal body mass (P<0.01) could benefit significantly; patients with cTNM stage II and III presented a trend of benefit or could benefit significantly (P<0.05); patients with signet ring cell carcinoma benefited little (P>0.05); tumors in the gastric body and gastric antrum benefited more significantly (P<0.05). Conclusion: Perioperative chemotherapy can improve the prognosis of gastric cancer patients.
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant ; Female ; Gastrectomy ; Humans ; Male ; Neoadjuvant Therapy ; Neoplasm Staging ; Prognosis ; Retrospective Studies ; Stomach Neoplasms/surgery*