Objective:To learn about physicians’ concepts and commonly employed method in hyaluronic acid injection and provide reference data for the standardization of pain management.Methods:This study was a cross-sectional study. Convenient sampling method was used to distribute questionnaires to cosmetic injectors and patients experienced with hyaluronic acid injections to collect data on their views of pain associated with hyaluronic acid injections. The physician portion was collected offline from June 15 to July 20, 2022, and the patient portion was collected from November 14, 2022, to December 6, 2022, via the Questionnaire Star platform. The physician questionnaire consisted of 17 questions, question types included single choice, multiple choice and essay questions. The patient questionnaire consisted of 6 questions, question types included single choice and multiple choice. Relevant data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software for descriptive statistics, and data were presented in the form of cases and percentages (%).Results:Sixty-two physician questionnaires and 123 patient questionnaires were collected. 42 (67.74%) physicians observed from their daily practice that more than 50% of their patients were very concerned about pain during injection; 101 (82.11%) patients scored ≥5 out of 10 for concern about impending pain prior to hyaluronic acid filler injection. At the time of treatment, 48 (77.42%) physicians advised patients to choose a lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid filler for reasons including a significant reduction in injection pain (53 cases, 85.48%) and patient comfort with the treatment experience (59 cases, 95.16%). 60 (48.78%) patients were willing to choose an anesthesia-containing product at the time of injection, but the price of the anesthesia-containing product influenced the patient’ s choice (55 cases 44.72%) .Conclusions:Pain from cosmetic injectable treatments is an important issue to both physicians and patients. Lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid is recognized by physicians and patients for its analgesic effect and high safety profile. There is no perfect solution for pain in cosmetic injection treatment, and multidisciplinary collaboration may be needed to solve the problem.

Objective:To learn about physicians’ concepts and commonly employed method in hyaluronic acid injection and provide reference data for the standardization of pain management.Methods:This study was a cross-sectional study. Convenient sampling method was used to distribute questionnaires to cosmetic injectors from plastic surgery department of public hospitals or medical beauty institutions and patients experienced with hyaluronic acid injections to collect data on their views of pain associated with hyaluronic acid injections. The physician portion was collected offline from June 15 to July 20, 2022, and the patient portion was collected from November 14 to December 6, 2022, via the Questionnaire Star platform. The physician questionnaire consisted of 17 questions, question types included single choice, multiple choice and essay questions. The patient questionnaire consisted of 6 questions, question types included single choice and multiple choice. Relevant data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software for descriptive statistics, and data were presented in the form of cases(%).Results:Sixty-two physician questionnaires and 123 patient questionnaires were collected. 42 (67.74%) physicians observed from their daily practice that more than 50% of their patients were very concerned about pain during injection; 101 (82.11%) patients scored ≥5 out of 10 for concern about impending pain prior to hyaluronic acid filler injection. At the time of treatment, 48 (77.42%) physicians advised patients to choose a lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid filler for reasons including a significant reduction in injection pain (53 cases, 85.48%) and patient comfort with the treatment experience (59 cases, 95.16%). 60 (48.78%) patients were willing to choose an anesthesia-containing product at the time of injection, but the price of the anesthesia-containing product influenced the patient’s choice (55 cases, 44.72%).Conclusion:Pain from cosmetic injectable treatments is an important issue to both physicians and patients. Lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid is recognized by physicians and patients for its analgesic effect and high safety profile. There is no perfect solution for pain in cosmetic injection treatment, and multidisciplinary collaboration may be needed to solve the problem.

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most malignant tumors with a 5-year survival rate of 13%. Difficulty in early diagnosis,high tumor heterogeneity,high rate of drug resistance,and lack of effective new drugs are the main reasons for the poor therapeutic effect. Traditional cell line models cannot simulate the tumor environment in vitro and cannot reflect the heterogeneity of pancreatic cancer,while animal models have a long culture process and cannot be used for high-throughput screening. Pancreatic cancer organoids can be continuously expanded and cultured in vitro,which can realistically reflect the heterogeneity of pancreatic cancer and allow high-throughput drug screening,making it an ideal tool for individualized precision diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer. According to recent studies on the evaluation of clinical drug efficacy using pancreatic cancer organoids,the drug sensitivity of pancreatic cancer organoids is highly consistent with the clinical efficacy,demonstrating the feasibility of drug sensitivity of pancreatic cancer organoids in guiding clinical therapy,comfirming the ability to discover potential therapeutic drugs through high-throughput drug screening of pancreatic cancer organoids. At the same time,this review reveals the importance of pancreatic cancer organoids as a model of the pancreatic cancer microenvironment for the development of new drugs and tumor microenvironment research. and the role of pancreatic cancer organoids as a model that can reflect the specific microenvironment of pancreatic cancer for new drug discovery and microenvironmental evaluation. Pancreatic cancer organoids and organ-on-chips are powerful tools for precision companion therapy and new drug discovery.

Objective:To learn about physicians’ concepts and commonly employed method in hyaluronic acid injection and provide reference data for the standardization of pain management.Methods:This study was a cross-sectional study. Convenient sampling method was used to distribute questionnaires to cosmetic injectors and patients experienced with hyaluronic acid injections to collect data on their views of pain associated with hyaluronic acid injections. The physician portion was collected offline from June 15 to July 20, 2022, and the patient portion was collected from November 14, 2022, to December 6, 2022, via the Questionnaire Star platform. The physician questionnaire consisted of 17 questions, question types included single choice, multiple choice and essay questions. The patient questionnaire consisted of 6 questions, question types included single choice and multiple choice. Relevant data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software for descriptive statistics, and data were presented in the form of cases and percentages (%).Results:Sixty-two physician questionnaires and 123 patient questionnaires were collected. 42 (67.74%) physicians observed from their daily practice that more than 50% of their patients were very concerned about pain during injection; 101 (82.11%) patients scored ≥5 out of 10 for concern about impending pain prior to hyaluronic acid filler injection. At the time of treatment, 48 (77.42%) physicians advised patients to choose a lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid filler for reasons including a significant reduction in injection pain (53 cases, 85.48%) and patient comfort with the treatment experience (59 cases, 95.16%). 60 (48.78%) patients were willing to choose an anesthesia-containing product at the time of injection, but the price of the anesthesia-containing product influenced the patient’ s choice (55 cases 44.72%) .Conclusions:Pain from cosmetic injectable treatments is an important issue to both physicians and patients. Lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid is recognized by physicians and patients for its analgesic effect and high safety profile. There is no perfect solution for pain in cosmetic injection treatment, and multidisciplinary collaboration may be needed to solve the problem.

Objective:To learn about physicians’ concepts and commonly employed method in hyaluronic acid injection and provide reference data for the standardization of pain management.Methods:This study was a cross-sectional study. Convenient sampling method was used to distribute questionnaires to cosmetic injectors from plastic surgery department of public hospitals or medical beauty institutions and patients experienced with hyaluronic acid injections to collect data on their views of pain associated with hyaluronic acid injections. The physician portion was collected offline from June 15 to July 20, 2022, and the patient portion was collected from November 14 to December 6, 2022, via the Questionnaire Star platform. The physician questionnaire consisted of 17 questions, question types included single choice, multiple choice and essay questions. The patient questionnaire consisted of 6 questions, question types included single choice and multiple choice. Relevant data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software for descriptive statistics, and data were presented in the form of cases(%).Results:Sixty-two physician questionnaires and 123 patient questionnaires were collected. 42 (67.74%) physicians observed from their daily practice that more than 50% of their patients were very concerned about pain during injection; 101 (82.11%) patients scored ≥5 out of 10 for concern about impending pain prior to hyaluronic acid filler injection. At the time of treatment, 48 (77.42%) physicians advised patients to choose a lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid filler for reasons including a significant reduction in injection pain (53 cases, 85.48%) and patient comfort with the treatment experience (59 cases, 95.16%). 60 (48.78%) patients were willing to choose an anesthesia-containing product at the time of injection, but the price of the anesthesia-containing product influenced the patient’s choice (55 cases, 44.72%).Conclusion:Pain from cosmetic injectable treatments is an important issue to both physicians and patients. Lidocaine-containing hyaluronic acid is recognized by physicians and patients for its analgesic effect and high safety profile. There is no perfect solution for pain in cosmetic injection treatment, and multidisciplinary collaboration may be needed to solve the problem.

Objective:To understand the epidemiological characteristics of human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) among acute respiratory infection (ARI) cases in 16 provinces of China from 2009 to 2023.Methods:The data of this study were collected from the ARI surveillance data from 16 provinces in China from 2009 to 2023, with a total of 28 278 ARI cases included in the study. The clinical specimens from ARI cases were screened for HRSV nucleic acid from 2009 to 2023, and differences in virus detection rates among cases of different age groups, regions, and months were analyzed.Results:A total of 28 278 ARI cases were enrolled from January 2009 to September 2023. The age of the cases ranged from<1 month to 112 years, and the age M ( Q1, Q3) was 3 years (1 year, 9 years). Among them, 3 062 cases were positive for HRSV nucleic acid, with a total detection rate of 10.83%. From 2009 to 2019, the detection rate of HRSV was 9.33%, and the virus was mainly prevalent in winter and spring. During the Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the detection rate of HRSV fluctuated between 6.32% and 18.67%. There was no traditional winter epidemic peak of HRSV from the end of 2022 to the beginning of 2023, and an anti-seasonal epidemic of HRSV occurred from April to May 2023. About 87.95% (2 693/3 062) of positive cases were children under 5 years old, and the difference in the detection rate of HRSV among different age groups was statistically significant ( P<0.001), showing a decreasing trend of HRSV detection rate with the increase of age ( P<0.001). Among them, the HRSV detection rate (25.69%) was highest in children under 6 months. Compared with 2009-2019, the ranking of HRSV detection rates in different age groups changed from high to low between 2020 and 2023, with the age M (Q1, Q3) of HRSV positive cases increasing from 1 year (6 months, 3 years) to 2 years (11 months, 3 years). Conclusion:Through 15 years of continuous HRSV surveillance analysis, children under 5 years old, especially infants under 6 months old, are the main high-risk population for HRSV infection. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the prevalence and patterns of HRSV in China have changed.

Objective To explore the factors influencing the pregnancy rate after fallopian tube recanalization(FTR),and to construct and validate a nomogram prediction model.Methods The clinical data of a total of 322 female patients with tubal obstructive infertility,who received FTR at the Wuhan Municipal Third Hospital of China between January 2018 and December 2022,were retrospectively analyzed.According to whether the female patient had natural pregnancy or not within 12 months after FTR treatment,the female patients were divided into the pregnant group and the non-pregnant group.Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the independent factors influencing pregnancy.The female patients were randomly divided into training group and validation group at 1∶1 ratio.A nomogram model was constructed in the training group,and the predictive efficacy of the model was verified in the validation group by using receiver operating characteristic(ROC)curves,calibration curves and decision curve analysis(DCA).Results The natural pregnancy rate at one year after FTR was 45.34％(146/322).Age＞35 years,primary infertility,duration of infertility＞3 years,distal fallopian tube obstruction,and moderate to severe tubal lesion were the independent risk factors affecting the pregnancy rate after FTR(all P＜0.05).The constructed nomogram model had a good differentiation and calibration ability and it carried a high degree of clinical utility.Conclusion The nomogram model constructed in this study can effectively predict the risk of infertility within one year after FTR treatment,which is helpful for formulating the individualized therapeutic scheme for infertility female patients.

Objective:To explore the drugs and clinical characteristics causing drug-induced liver injury (DILI) in recent years, as well as identify drug-induced liver failure, and chronic DILI risk factors, in order to better manage them timely.Methods:A retrospective investigation and analysis was conducted on 224 cases diagnosed with DILI and followed up for at least six months between January 2018 and December 2020. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify risk factors for drug-induced liver failure and chronic DILI.Results:Traditional Chinese medicine (accounting for 62.5%), herbal medicine (accounting for 84.3% of traditional Chinese medicine), and some Chinese patent medicines were the main causes of DILI found in this study. Severe and chronic DILI was associated with cholestatic type. Preexisting gallbladder disease, initial total bilirubin, initial prothrombin time, and initial antinuclear antibody titer were independent risk factors for DILI. Prolonged time interval between alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) falling from the peak to half of the peak (T 0.5ALP and T 0.5ALT) was an independent risk factor for chronic DILI [area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC)?=?0.787, 95%CI: 0.697~0.878, P ?

Objective:In chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients with previous 96-week treatment with tenofovir amibufenamide (TMF) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), we investigated the efficacy of sequential TMF treatment from 96 to 144 weeks.Methods:Enrolled subjects who were previously assigned (2:1) to receive either 25 mg TMF or 300 mg TDF with matching placebo for 96 weeks received extended or switched TMF treatment for 48 weeks. Efficacy was evaluated based on virological, serological, biological parameters, and fibrosis staging. Statistical analysis was performed using the McNemar test, t-test, or Log-Rank test according to the data. Results:593 subjects from the initial TMF group and 287 subjects from the TDF group were included at week 144, with the proportions of HBV DNA<20 IU/ml at week 144 being 86.2% and 83.3%, respectively, and 78.1% and 73.8% in patients with baseline HBV DNA levels ≥8 log10 IU/ml. Resistance to tenofovir was not detected in both groups. For HBeAg loss and seroconversion rates, both groups showed a further increase from week 96 to 144 and the 3-year cumulative rates of HBeAg loss were about 35% in each group. However, HBsAg levels were less affected during 96 to 144 weeks. For patients switched from TDF to TMF, a substantial further increase in the alanine aminotransferase (ALT) normalization rate was observed (11.4%), along with improved FIB-4 scores.Conclusion:After 144 weeks of TMF treatment, CHB patients achieved high rates of virological, serological, and biochemical responses, as well as improved liver fibrosis outcomes. Also, switching to TMF resulted in significant benefits in ALT normalization rates (NCT03903796).

Objective:In chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients with previous 96-week treatment with tenofovir amibufenamide (TMF) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), we investigated the safety profile of sequential TMF treatment from 96 to 144 weeks.Methods:Enrolled subjects that previously assigned (2:1) to receive either 25 mg TMF or 300 mg TDF with matching placebo for 96 weeks received extending or switching TMF treatment for 48 weeks. Safety profiles of kidney, bone, metabolism, body weight, and others were evaluated.Results:666 subjects from the initial TMF group and 336 subjects from TDF group with at least one dose of assigned treatment were included at week 144. The overall safety profile was favorable in each group and generally similar between extended or switched TMF treatments from week 96 to 144. In subjects switching from TDF to TMF, the non-indexed estimated glomerular filtration rate (by non-indexed CKD-EPI formula) and creatinine clearance (by Cockcroft-Gault formula) were both increased, which were (2.31±8.33) ml/min and (4.24±13.94) ml/min, respectively. These changes were also higher than those in subjects with extending TMF treatment [(0.91±8.06) ml/min and (1.30±13.94) ml/min]. Meanwhile, switching to TMF also led to an increase of the bone mineral density (BMD) by 0.75% in hip and 1.41% in spine. On the other side, a slight change in TC/HDL ratio by 0.16 (IQR: 0.00, 0.43) and an increase in body mass index (BMI) by (0.54±0.98) kg/m 2 were oberved with patients switched to TMF, which were significantly higher than that in TMF group. Conclusion:CHB patients receiving 144 weeks of TMF treatment showed favorable safety profile. After switching to TMF, the bone and renal safety was significantly improved in TDF group, though experienceing change in metabolic parameters and weight gain (NCT03903796).