ObjectivePrimary liver cancer, predominantly hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), is a significant global health issue, ranking as the sixth most diagnosed cancer and the third leading cause of cancer-related mortality. Accurate and early diagnosis of HCC is crucial for effective treatment, as HCC and non-HCC malignancies like intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) exhibit different prognoses and treatment responses. Traditional diagnostic methods, including liver biopsy and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), face limitations in applicability and objectivity. The primary objective of this study was to develop an advanced, light-weighted classification network capable of distinguishing HCC from other non-HCC malignancies by leveraging the automatic analysis of brightness changes in CEUS images. The ultimate goal was to create a user-friendly and cost-efficient computer-aided diagnostic tool that could assist radiologists in making more accurate and efficient clinical decisions. MethodsThis retrospective study encompassed a total of 161 patients, comprising 131 diagnosed with HCC and 30 with non-HCC malignancies. To achieve accurate tumor detection, the YOLOX network was employed to identify the region of interest (ROI) on both B-mode ultrasound and CEUS images. A custom-developed algorithm was then utilized to extract brightness change curves from the tumor and adjacent liver parenchyma regions within the CEUS images. These curves provided critical data for the subsequent analysis and classification process. To analyze the extracted brightness change curves and classify the malignancies, we developed and compared several models. These included one-dimensional convolutional neural networks (1D-ResNet, 1D-ConvNeXt, and 1D-CNN), as well as traditional machine-learning methods such as support vector machine (SVM), ensemble learning (EL), k-nearest neighbor (KNN), and decision tree (DT). The diagnostic performance of each method in distinguishing HCC from non-HCC malignancies was rigorously evaluated using four key metrics: area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC), accuracy (ACC), sensitivity (SE), and specificity (SP). ResultsThe evaluation of the machine-learning methods revealed AUC values of 0.70 for SVM, 0.56 for ensemble learning, 0.63 for KNN, and 0.72 for the decision tree. These results indicated moderate to fair performance in classifying the malignancies based on the brightness change curves. In contrast, the deep learning models demonstrated significantly higher AUCs, with 1D-ResNet achieving an AUC of 0.72, 1D-ConvNeXt reaching 0.82, and 1D-CNN obtaining the highest AUC of 0.84. Moreover, under the five-fold cross-validation scheme, the 1D-CNN model outperformed other models in both accuracy and specificity. Specifically, it achieved accuracy improvements of 3.8% to 10.0% and specificity enhancements of 6.6% to 43.3% over competing approaches. The superior performance of the 1D-CNN model highlighted its potential as a powerful tool for accurate classification. ConclusionThe 1D-CNN model proved to be the most effective in differentiating HCC from non-HCC malignancies, surpassing both traditional machine-learning methods and other deep learning models. This study successfully developed a user-friendly and cost-efficient computer-aided diagnostic solution that would significantly enhances radiologists’ diagnostic capabilities. By improving the accuracy and efficiency of clinical decision-making, this tool has the potential to positively impact patient care and outcomes. Future work may focus on further refining the model and exploring its integration with multimodal ultrasound data to maximize its accuracy and applicability.

Bone grafting is a primary method for treating bone defects. Among various graft materials, xenogeneic bone substitutes are widely used in clinical practice due to their abundant sources, convenient processing and storage, and avoidance of secondary surgeries. With the advancement of domestic production and the limitations of imported products, an increasing number of bone filling or grafting substitute materials isentering clinical trials. Relevant experts have drafted this consensus to enhance the management of medical device clinical trials, protect the rights of participants, and ensure the scientific and effective execution of trials. It summarizes clinical experience in aspects, such as design principles, participant inclusion/exclusion criteria, observation periods, efficacy evaluation metrics, safety assessment indicators, and quality control, to provide guidance for professionals in the field.
Humans ; Bone Substitutes/therapeutic use* ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/methods* ; Consensus ; Bone Transplantation ; Research Design

Objective:To investigate the prognosis of patients with initially resectable gastric cancer liver metastasis (GCLM) who were treated by different modalities, and analyze the influencing factors for prognosis of patients.Methods:The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 327 patients with initially resectable GCLM who were included in the database of a nationwide multicenter retrospective cohort study on GCLM based on real-world data from January 2010 to December 2019 were collected. There were 267 males and 60 females, aged 61(54,68)years. According to the specific situations of patients, treatment modalities included radical surgery combined with systemic treatment, palliative surgery combined with systemic treatment, and systemic treatment alone. Observation indicators: (1) clinical characteristics of patients who were treated by different modalities; (2) prognostic outcomes of patients who were treated by different modalities; (3) analysis of influencing factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM; (4) screening of potential beneficiaries in patients who were treated by radical surgery plus systemic treatment and patients who were treated by palliative surgery plus systemic treatment. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean± SD, and comparison between groups was conducted using the independent sample t test. Measurement data with skewed distribution were represented as M( Q1, Q3), and comparison between groups was conducted using the rank sum test. Count data were described as absolute numbers or percentages, and comparison between groups was conducted using the chi-square test. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate survival rate and draw survival curve, and Log-Rank test was used for survival analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using the COX proportional hazard regression model. The propensity score matching was employed by the 1:1 nearest neighbor matching method with a caliper value of 0.1. The forest plots were utilized to evaluate potential benefits of diverse surgical combined with systemic treatments within the population. Results:(1) Clinical characteristics of patients who were treated by different modalities. Of 327 patients, there were 118 cases undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment, 164 cases undergoing palliative surgery plus systemic treatment, and 45 cases undergoing systemic treatment alone. There were significant differences in smoking, drinking, site of primary gastric tumor, diameter of primary gastric tumor, site of liver metastasis, and metastatic interval among the three groups of patients ( P<0.05). (2) Prognostic outcomes of patients who were treated by different modalities. The median overall survival time of the 327 pati-ents was 19.9 months (95% confidence interval as 14.9-24.9 months), with 1-, 3-year overall survival rate of 61.3%, 32.7%, respectively. The 1-year overall survival rates of patients undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment, palliative surgery plus systemic treatment and systemic treatment alone were 68.3%, 63.1%, 30.6%, and the 3-year overall survival rates were 41.1%, 29.9%, 11.9%, showing a significant difference in overall survival rate among the three groups of patients ( χ2=19.46, P<0.05). Results of further analysis showed that there was a significant difference in overall survival rate between patients undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment and patients undergoing systemic treatment alone ( hazard ratio=0.40, 95% confidence interval as 0.26-0.61, P<0.05), between patients undergoing palliative surgery plus systemic treatment and patients under-going systemic treatment alone ( hazard ratio=0.47, 95% confidence interval as 0.32-0.71, P<0.05). (3) Analysis of influencing factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM. Results of multivariate analysis showed that the larger primary gastric tumor, poorly differentiated tumor, larger liver metastasis, multiple hepatic metastases were independent risk factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM ( hazard ratio=1.20, 1.70, 1.20, 2.06, 95% confidence interval as 1.14-1.27, 1.25-2.31, 1.04-1.42, 1.45-2.92, P<0.05) and immunotherapy or targeted therapy, the treatment modality of radical or palliative surgery plus systemic therapy were independent protective factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM ( hazard ratio=0.60, 0.39, 0.46, 95% confidence interval as 0.42-0.87, 0.25-0.60, 0.30-0.70, P<0.05). (4) Screening of potentinal beneficiaries in patients who were treated by radical surgery plus systemic treatment and patients who were treated by palliative surgery plus systemic treatment. Results of forest plots analysis showed that for patients with high-moderate differentiated GCLM and patients with liver metastasis located in the left liver, the overall survival rate of patients undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment was better than patients undergoing palliative surgery plus systemic treatment ( hazard ratio=0.21, 0.42, 95% confidence interval as 0.09-0.48, 0.23-0.78, P<0.05). Conclusions:Compared to systemic therapy alone, both radical and palliative surgery plus systemic therapy can improve the pro-gnosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM. The larger primary gastric tumor, poorly differen-tiated tumor, larger liver metastasis, multiple hepatic metastases are independent risk factors for prognosis of patients with initial resectable GCLM and immunotherapy or targeted therapy, the treatment modality of radical or palliative surgery plus systemic therapy are independent protective factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM.

Objective:To examine the impact of varied surgical treatment strategies on the prognosis of patients with initial resectable gastric cancer liver metastases (IR-GCLM).Methods:This is a retrospective cohort study. Employing a retrospective cohort design, the study selected clinicopathological data from the national multi-center retrospective cohort study database, focusing on 282 patients with IR-GCLM who underwent surgical intervention between January 2010 and December 2019. There were 231 males and 51 males, aging ( M(IQR)) 61 (14) years (range: 27 to 80 years). These patients were stratified into radical and palliative treatment groups based on treatment decisions. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method and distinctions in survival rates were assessed using the Log-rank test. The Cox risk regression model evaluated HR for various factors, controlling for confounders through multivariate analysis to comprehensively evaluate the influence of surgery on the prognosis of IR-GCLM patients. A restricted cubic spline Cox proportional hazard model assessed and delineated intricate associations between measured variables and prognosis. At the same time, the X-tile served as an auxiliary tool to identify critical thresholds in the survival analysis for IR-GCLM patients. Subgroup analysis was then conducted to identify potential beneficiary populations in different surgical treatments. Results:(1) The radical group comprised 118 patients, all undergoing R0 resection or local physical therapy of primary and metastatic lesions. The palliative group comprised 164 patients, with 52 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors and liver metastases, 56 cases undergoing radical resections for gastric primary tumors only, 45 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors, and 11 cases receiving palliative treatments for liver metastases. A statistically significant distinction was observed between the groups regarding the site and the number of liver metastases (both P<0.05). (2) The median overall survival (OS) of the 282 patients was 22.7 months (95% CI: 17.8 to 27.6 months), with 1-year and 3-year OS rates were 65.4% and 35.6%, respectively. The 1-year OS rates for patients in the radical surgical group and palliative surgical group were 68.3% and 63.1%, while the corresponding 3-year OS rates were 42.2% and 29.9%, respectively. A comparison of OS between the two groups showed no statistically significant difference ( P=0.254). Further analysis indicated that patients undergoing palliative gastric cancer resection alone had a significantly worse prognosis compared to other surgical options ( HR=1.98, 95% CI: 1.21 to 3.24, P=0.006). (3) The size of the primary gastric tumor significantly influenced the patients′ prognosis ( HR=2.01, 95% CI: 1.45 to 2.79, P<0.01), with HR showing a progressively increasing trend as tumor size increased. (4) Subgroup analysis indicates that radical treatment may be more effective compared to palliative treatment in the following specific cases: well/moderately differentiated tumors ( HR=2.84, 95% CI 1.49 to 5.41, P=0.001), and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver ( HR=2.06, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.57, P=0.010). Conclusions:In patients with IR-GCLM, radical surgery did not produce a significant improvement in the overall prognosis compared to palliative surgery. However, within specific patient subgroups (well/moderately differentiated tumors, and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver), radical treatment can significantly improve prognosis compared to palliative approaches.

Objective:To examine the impact of varied surgical treatment strategies on the prognosis of patients with initial resectable gastric cancer liver metastases (IR-GCLM).Methods:This is a retrospective cohort study. Employing a retrospective cohort design, the study selected clinicopathological data from the national multi-center retrospective cohort study database, focusing on 282 patients with IR-GCLM who underwent surgical intervention between January 2010 and December 2019. There were 231 males and 51 males, aging ( M(IQR)) 61 (14) years (range: 27 to 80 years). These patients were stratified into radical and palliative treatment groups based on treatment decisions. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method and distinctions in survival rates were assessed using the Log-rank test. The Cox risk regression model evaluated HR for various factors, controlling for confounders through multivariate analysis to comprehensively evaluate the influence of surgery on the prognosis of IR-GCLM patients. A restricted cubic spline Cox proportional hazard model assessed and delineated intricate associations between measured variables and prognosis. At the same time, the X-tile served as an auxiliary tool to identify critical thresholds in the survival analysis for IR-GCLM patients. Subgroup analysis was then conducted to identify potential beneficiary populations in different surgical treatments. Results:(1) The radical group comprised 118 patients, all undergoing R0 resection or local physical therapy of primary and metastatic lesions. The palliative group comprised 164 patients, with 52 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors and liver metastases, 56 cases undergoing radical resections for gastric primary tumors only, 45 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors, and 11 cases receiving palliative treatments for liver metastases. A statistically significant distinction was observed between the groups regarding the site and the number of liver metastases (both P<0.05). (2) The median overall survival (OS) of the 282 patients was 22.7 months (95% CI: 17.8 to 27.6 months), with 1-year and 3-year OS rates were 65.4% and 35.6%, respectively. The 1-year OS rates for patients in the radical surgical group and palliative surgical group were 68.3% and 63.1%, while the corresponding 3-year OS rates were 42.2% and 29.9%, respectively. A comparison of OS between the two groups showed no statistically significant difference ( P=0.254). Further analysis indicated that patients undergoing palliative gastric cancer resection alone had a significantly worse prognosis compared to other surgical options ( HR=1.98, 95% CI: 1.21 to 3.24, P=0.006). (3) The size of the primary gastric tumor significantly influenced the patients′ prognosis ( HR=2.01, 95% CI: 1.45 to 2.79, P<0.01), with HR showing a progressively increasing trend as tumor size increased. (4) Subgroup analysis indicates that radical treatment may be more effective compared to palliative treatment in the following specific cases: well/moderately differentiated tumors ( HR=2.84, 95% CI 1.49 to 5.41, P=0.001), and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver ( HR=2.06, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.57, P=0.010). Conclusions:In patients with IR-GCLM, radical surgery did not produce a significant improvement in the overall prognosis compared to palliative surgery. However, within specific patient subgroups (well/moderately differentiated tumors, and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver), radical treatment can significantly improve prognosis compared to palliative approaches.

Objective:To analyze the supervision mode and problems of intensive countywide medical communities and explore the methods and strategies to improve their supervision system.Methods:From March 2022 to May 2022, a stratified random sampling method was used and the intensive countywide medical communities in the province were selected for field study. In-depth interviews were made with the staff of the healthcare administration departments and health insurance agencies affiliated with intensive countywide medical communities, directors of general hospitals, directors of township hospitals, and heads of functional departments. These interviews mainly covered the principal entities of countywide medical community supervision, supervision measures and contents, supervision effects, supervision weaknesses, and how to improve internal and external supervision mechanisms. The interviews results were analyzed using thematic framework analysis and the data were subject to a descriptive analysis.Results:23 persons of five intensive countywide medical communities were selected for key person interview. The finalized framework of regulatory elements of intensive countywide medical communities consists of such five general themes as regulatory subjects, regulatory content, regulatory measures, regulatory effectiveness and existing problems, comprising 14 level-1 indicators and 52 level-2 indicators. The main regulatory bodies were mainly government departments (15 times), the regulatory content was focused on medical resources (10 times), the regulatory measures cover specific regulations (4 times), specific activities (4 times) and assessment and evaluation (4 times). And the regulatory effectiveness demonstrated a currently strong regulation strength of medical communities (5 times), and the existing problems were insufficient government supervision (12 times), difficulties encountered by social forces in their supervision (11 times) and internal governance (5 times).Conclusions:The supervision system of intensive countywide medical communities should be optimized by improving the governmental supervision mechanism, inviting supervision of social forces and building an effective internal governance.

Pulmonary blast injury has become the main type of trauma in modern warfare, characterized by externally mild injuries but internally severe injuries, rapid disease progression, and a high rate of early death. The injury is complicated in clinical practice, often with multiple and compound injuries. Currently, there is a lack of effective protective materials, accurate injury detection instrument and portable monitoring and transportation equipment, standardized clinical treatment guidelines in various medical centers, and evidence-based guidelines at home and abroad, resulting in a high mortality in clinlcal practice. Therefore, the Trauma Branch of Chinese Medical Association and the Editorial Committee of Chinese Journal of Trauma organized military and civilian experts in related fields such as thoracic surgery and traumatic surgery to jointly develop the Clinical treatment guideline for pulmonary blast injury ( version 2023) by combining evidence for effectiveness and clinical first-line treatment experience. This guideline provided 16 recommended opinions surrounding definition, characteristics, pre-hospital diagnosis and treatment, and in-hospital treatment of pulmonary blast injury, hoping to provide a basis for the clinical treatment in hospitals at different levels.

China has classified the Corona Virus Disease 2019(COVID-19) as a statutory category B infectious disease and managed it according to Category B since January 8, 2023.In view that Omicron variant is currently the main epidemic strain in China, in order to guide the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2(SARS-CoV-2) infection in children with the times, refer to the Diagnosis and Treatment Protocol for Novel Coronavirus Infection (Trial 10 th Edition), Expert Consensus on Diagnosis, Treatment and Prevention of Novel Coronavirus Infection in Children (Fourth Edition) and the Diagnosis and Treatment Strategy for Pediatric Related Viral Infections.The Expert Consensus on the Diagnosis, Treatment and Prevention of Novel Coronavirus Infection in Children (Fifth Edition) has been formulated and updated accordingly on related etiology, epidemiology, pathogenic mechanism, clinical manifestations, auxiliary examination, diagnosis and treatment, and added key points for the treatment of COVID-19 related encephalopathy, fulminating myocarditis and other serious complications for clinical reference.

Monkeypox is a zoonotic disease.Previous studies have shown that children are vulnerable to monkeypox and are also at high risk for severe disease or complications.In order to improve pediatricians′ understanding of monkeypox and achieve early detection, early diagnosis, early treatment and early disposal, the committee composed of more than 40 experts in the related fields of infectious diseases, pediatrics, infection control and public health formulate this expert consensus, on the basis of the latest clinical management and infection prevention and control for monkeypox released by the World Health Organization (WHO), the guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of monkeypox (version 2022) issued by National Health Commission of the People′s Republic of China and other relevant documents.During the development of this consensus, multidisciplinary experts have repeatedly demonstrated the etiology, epidemiology, transmission, clinical manifestations, laboratory examinations, diagnosis and differential diagnosis, treatment, discharge criteria, prevention, case management process and key points of prevention and control about monkeypox.

Since December 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2(SARS-CoV-2) infections have raged globally for more than 2 years.China has always adopted scientific and effective prevention and control measures to achieved some success.However, with the continuous variation of SARS-CoV-2 cases and imported cases from abroad, the prevention and control work has become more difficult and complex.With the variation of the mutant strain, the number of cases in children changed, and some new special symptoms and complications were found, which proposed a new topic for the prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection in children in China.Based on the third edition, the present consensus according to the characteristics of the new strain, expounded the etiology, pathology, pathogenesis, and according to the clinical characteristics and experience of children′s cases, and puts forward recommendations on the diagnostic criteria, laboratory examination, treatment, prevention and control of children′s cases for providing reference for further guidance of effective prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection in children in China.