This paper summarizes Professor WANG Xixing's clinical experience in treating immune checkpoint inhibitor-related pneumonitis （CIP） based on the theory of "cough attributed to the five zang （脏） organs". Cough is a common predominant symptom of CIP. According to the theory of "cough attributed to the five zang organs"， drug toxicity triggers cancer toxin， leading to disharmony among the five zang organs， and then lung failing to diffuse and govern descent as the core pathogenesis. Therefore， treatment should focus on harmonizing the five zang organs to restore the normal function of lung qi to diffuse and govern descent. In clinical practice， CIP can be classified into four syndrome patterns， including lung yin depletion， deficiency of both the lung and the spleen with phlegm-dampness， liver fire harassing the lung， and lung-kidney yin deficiency. Correspondingly， Chaimai Jinluo Runfei Decoction （柴麦金络润肺汤） is used to nourish yin and moisten the lung； Qigui Peitu Huayin Decoction （芪桂培土化饮汤） is used to fortify the spleen and tonify the lung， resolve dampness and dispel phlegm； Chaidan Shuyu Runjin Decoction （柴丹疏郁润金汤） is used to drain liver and clear the lung； and Dimai Jinshui Xiangsheng Decoction （地脉金水相生汤） is used to nourish the kidney and moisten the lung.

Objective:To understand the potential characteristics of decision-making preparation in outpatient hypertensive patients based on latent profile analysis, to identify the influencing factors of different categories of decision-making preparation levels, and to explore the performance of different decision-making preparation types in facilitation of patients involvement in treatment decision-making.Methods:Through a cross-sectional study, 350 hypertensive patients attending outpatient clinics in five different types of healthcare institutions (general hospitals, specialised hospitals and community hospitals) in Tianjin during January to May 2024 who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected by the convenience sampling method as study subjects. General Information Questionnaires, Preparation for Decision Making Scale, and Facilitation of Patient Involvement Scale were used for investigation.Results:Totally 350 valid questionnaires [178 males and 172 females aged 25-89(57.24 ± 13.39)years old] were collected. The decision-making preparation score of outpatient hypertensive patients was (64.19 ± 18.69). The latent profile analysis results showed that the decision-making preparation of outpatient hypertensive patients could be divided into three potential categories: decision-making information scarcity type accounted for 20.0%(70/350), decision-making balance negotiation type accounted for 39.7%(139/350), and decision-making preparation adequacy type accounted for 40.3%(141/350). The results of multiple Logistic regression analysis showed that age, medical insurance type, occupation, and children′s condition were the influencing factors for the potential categories of decision-making preparation in outpatient hypertensive patients (all P<0.05). Age [less than 35 years old: OR(95% CI)=0.127(0.020-0.796)], occupation [on the job: OR(95% CI)=2.010 (1.034-3.906)], were the influencing factors of decision-making balance negotiation group (all P<0.05). Medical insurance type [basic medical insurance for urban employees: OR(95% CI)=0.372(0.193-0.720)], occupation [on the job: OR(95% CI)=2.500(1.270-4.920)], children′s condition[junior and senior high school: OR(95% CI)=0.391(0.190-0.802)] were the influencing factors of decision-making preparation adequacy group (all P<0.05). Conclusions:The level of promoting patient participation among outpatients with hypertension is relatively high, and there are differences in the perceived degree of promoting patient participation among patients with different types of decision preparation.It is recommended that medical staff provide decision-making related information based on the characteristics of different decision-making preparation categories of patients, encourage patients to actively participate in decision-making, and construct targeted decision support plans.

Objective:To understand the potential characteristics of decision-making preparation in outpatient hypertensive patients based on latent profile analysis, to identify the influencing factors of different categories of decision-making preparation levels, and to explore the performance of different decision-making preparation types in facilitation of patients involvement in treatment decision-making.Methods:Through a cross-sectional study, 350 hypertensive patients attending outpatient clinics in five different types of healthcare institutions (general hospitals, specialised hospitals and community hospitals) in Tianjin during January to May 2024 who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected by the convenience sampling method as study subjects. General Information Questionnaires, Preparation for Decision Making Scale, and Facilitation of Patient Involvement Scale were used for investigation.Results:Totally 350 valid questionnaires [178 males and 172 females aged 25-89(57.24 ± 13.39)years old] were collected. The decision-making preparation score of outpatient hypertensive patients was (64.19 ± 18.69). The latent profile analysis results showed that the decision-making preparation of outpatient hypertensive patients could be divided into three potential categories: decision-making information scarcity type accounted for 20.0%(70/350), decision-making balance negotiation type accounted for 39.7%(139/350), and decision-making preparation adequacy type accounted for 40.3%(141/350). The results of multiple Logistic regression analysis showed that age, medical insurance type, occupation, and children′s condition were the influencing factors for the potential categories of decision-making preparation in outpatient hypertensive patients (all P<0.05). Age [less than 35 years old: OR(95% CI)=0.127(0.020-0.796)], occupation [on the job: OR(95% CI)=2.010 (1.034-3.906)], were the influencing factors of decision-making balance negotiation group (all P<0.05). Medical insurance type [basic medical insurance for urban employees: OR(95% CI)=0.372(0.193-0.720)], occupation [on the job: OR(95% CI)=2.500(1.270-4.920)], children′s condition[junior and senior high school: OR(95% CI)=0.391(0.190-0.802)] were the influencing factors of decision-making preparation adequacy group (all P<0.05). Conclusions:The level of promoting patient participation among outpatients with hypertension is relatively high, and there are differences in the perceived degree of promoting patient participation among patients with different types of decision preparation.It is recommended that medical staff provide decision-making related information based on the characteristics of different decision-making preparation categories of patients, encourage patients to actively participate in decision-making, and construct targeted decision support plans.

To summarise Professor WANG Xixing's experience in treating brain tumour from emotions and minds. Professor WANG regarded abnormal emotions and minds as the key to the treatment of brain tumor. Emotions and minds internal damage lead to malfunction of the five zang organs， resulting in phlegm， stasis， dampness， toxicity and other pathogenic qi gathering in the brain and developing into brain tumour. The treatment advocated regulating qi of the five zang organs and dispelling phlegm， blood stasis， dampness and toxins at the same time. The brain tumour is classified into four syndromes： heart-spleen deficiency， liver depression and spleen deficiency， failure of the heart and kidney to interact， and liver-kidney yin deficiency， with Guipi Yangshen Decoction （归脾养神汤） to fortify the spleen and nourish the heart， Guishao Shunzhi Decoction （归芍顺志汤） to soothe the liver and fortify the spleen， Liangui Tongshen Decoction （连桂通神汤） to restore interaction between the heart and the kidney， and Zishui Qingmu Huashen Decoction （滋水清木化神汤） to nourish the kidney and clear liver. At the same time， it was emphasised that the patient's emotional changes should be paid attention to， and psychological guidance should be given at the right time， so as to overcome the disease with emotions and mind.

Objective:To evaluate the endometrial implantation window in patients with recurrent implantation failure using endometrial receptive array(ERA)sequencing or endometrial histological detection methods,and to explore the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analysis of two technologies for improving clinical outcomes in such patients.Methods:A retrospective cohort study was conducted on clinical data of 125 patients diagnosed with repeated implantation failure in Gansu Maternal and Child Health Hospital from January 2018 to December 2022.According to whether endometrial receptivity testing was accepted and different detection techniques were used,they were divided into a control group(n=36),a genomic group(n=35),and a histological group(n=54).The clinical data and pregnancy outcomes of the three groups were compared.Results:①The results of one-way ANOVA showed that the embryo implantation rate in the genomic group and histological group was significantly higher than that in the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).There was no sta-tistically significant difference in embryo implantation rate between genomic and histological groups(P=0.48).②There was no statistically significant difference in clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate among the three groups(P＞0.05).③Log rank test showed:The time for 50％of patients to reach live labor was significantly shorter than that of the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05);There was no sta-tistically significant difference in the time to live birth in 50％of patients between the genomic and histological groups of 50％of patients(P＞0.05).④The average number of embryos transferred in the control group was significantly higher than that in the genomic and histological groups,with statistical significance(P＜0.05).The cost of genomic patients was significantly higher than that of histology group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusions:①Endometrial implantation window detection is feasible for patients with re-peated implantation failure,which can effectively shorten the time to live birth and reduce the number of transplan-ted embryos;②Both ERA sequencing and endometrial histology detection have limitations as methods to evaluate endometrial implantation window,and it is not clear which detection method has more advantages in accuracy and practicability.

Objective:To evaluate the endometrial implantation window in patients with recurrent implantation failure using endometrial receptive array(ERA)sequencing or endometrial histological detection methods,and to explore the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analysis of two technologies for improving clinical outcomes in such patients.Methods:A retrospective cohort study was conducted on clinical data of 125 patients diagnosed with repeated implantation failure in Gansu Maternal and Child Health Hospital from January 2018 to December 2022.According to whether endometrial receptivity testing was accepted and different detection techniques were used,they were divided into a control group(n=36),a genomic group(n=35),and a histological group(n=54).The clinical data and pregnancy outcomes of the three groups were compared.Results:①The results of one-way ANOVA showed that the embryo implantation rate in the genomic group and histological group was significantly higher than that in the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).There was no sta-tistically significant difference in embryo implantation rate between genomic and histological groups(P=0.48).②There was no statistically significant difference in clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate among the three groups(P＞0.05).③Log rank test showed:The time for 50％of patients to reach live labor was significantly shorter than that of the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05);There was no sta-tistically significant difference in the time to live birth in 50％of patients between the genomic and histological groups of 50％of patients(P＞0.05).④The average number of embryos transferred in the control group was significantly higher than that in the genomic and histological groups,with statistical significance(P＜0.05).The cost of genomic patients was significantly higher than that of histology group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusions:①Endometrial implantation window detection is feasible for patients with re-peated implantation failure,which can effectively shorten the time to live birth and reduce the number of transplan-ted embryos;②Both ERA sequencing and endometrial histology detection have limitations as methods to evaluate endometrial implantation window,and it is not clear which detection method has more advantages in accuracy and practicability.

Objective:To evaluate the endometrial implantation window in patients with recurrent implantation failure using endometrial receptive array(ERA)sequencing or endometrial histological detection methods,and to explore the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analysis of two technologies for improving clinical outcomes in such patients.Methods:A retrospective cohort study was conducted on clinical data of 125 patients diagnosed with repeated implantation failure in Gansu Maternal and Child Health Hospital from January 2018 to December 2022.According to whether endometrial receptivity testing was accepted and different detection techniques were used,they were divided into a control group(n=36),a genomic group(n=35),and a histological group(n=54).The clinical data and pregnancy outcomes of the three groups were compared.Results:①The results of one-way ANOVA showed that the embryo implantation rate in the genomic group and histological group was significantly higher than that in the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).There was no sta-tistically significant difference in embryo implantation rate between genomic and histological groups(P=0.48).②There was no statistically significant difference in clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate among the three groups(P＞0.05).③Log rank test showed:The time for 50％of patients to reach live labor was significantly shorter than that of the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05);There was no sta-tistically significant difference in the time to live birth in 50％of patients between the genomic and histological groups of 50％of patients(P＞0.05).④The average number of embryos transferred in the control group was significantly higher than that in the genomic and histological groups,with statistical significance(P＜0.05).The cost of genomic patients was significantly higher than that of histology group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusions:①Endometrial implantation window detection is feasible for patients with re-peated implantation failure,which can effectively shorten the time to live birth and reduce the number of transplan-ted embryos;②Both ERA sequencing and endometrial histology detection have limitations as methods to evaluate endometrial implantation window,and it is not clear which detection method has more advantages in accuracy and practicability.

Objective:To evaluate the endometrial implantation window in patients with recurrent implantation failure using endometrial receptive array(ERA)sequencing or endometrial histological detection methods,and to explore the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analysis of two technologies for improving clinical outcomes in such patients.Methods:A retrospective cohort study was conducted on clinical data of 125 patients diagnosed with repeated implantation failure in Gansu Maternal and Child Health Hospital from January 2018 to December 2022.According to whether endometrial receptivity testing was accepted and different detection techniques were used,they were divided into a control group(n=36),a genomic group(n=35),and a histological group(n=54).The clinical data and pregnancy outcomes of the three groups were compared.Results:①The results of one-way ANOVA showed that the embryo implantation rate in the genomic group and histological group was significantly higher than that in the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).There was no sta-tistically significant difference in embryo implantation rate between genomic and histological groups(P=0.48).②There was no statistically significant difference in clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate among the three groups(P＞0.05).③Log rank test showed:The time for 50％of patients to reach live labor was significantly shorter than that of the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05);There was no sta-tistically significant difference in the time to live birth in 50％of patients between the genomic and histological groups of 50％of patients(P＞0.05).④The average number of embryos transferred in the control group was significantly higher than that in the genomic and histological groups,with statistical significance(P＜0.05).The cost of genomic patients was significantly higher than that of histology group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusions:①Endometrial implantation window detection is feasible for patients with re-peated implantation failure,which can effectively shorten the time to live birth and reduce the number of transplan-ted embryos;②Both ERA sequencing and endometrial histology detection have limitations as methods to evaluate endometrial implantation window,and it is not clear which detection method has more advantages in accuracy and practicability.

Objective:To evaluate the endometrial implantation window in patients with recurrent implantation failure using endometrial receptive array(ERA)sequencing or endometrial histological detection methods,and to explore the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analysis of two technologies for improving clinical outcomes in such patients.Methods:A retrospective cohort study was conducted on clinical data of 125 patients diagnosed with repeated implantation failure in Gansu Maternal and Child Health Hospital from January 2018 to December 2022.According to whether endometrial receptivity testing was accepted and different detection techniques were used,they were divided into a control group(n=36),a genomic group(n=35),and a histological group(n=54).The clinical data and pregnancy outcomes of the three groups were compared.Results:①The results of one-way ANOVA showed that the embryo implantation rate in the genomic group and histological group was significantly higher than that in the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).There was no sta-tistically significant difference in embryo implantation rate between genomic and histological groups(P=0.48).②There was no statistically significant difference in clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate among the three groups(P＞0.05).③Log rank test showed:The time for 50％of patients to reach live labor was significantly shorter than that of the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05);There was no sta-tistically significant difference in the time to live birth in 50％of patients between the genomic and histological groups of 50％of patients(P＞0.05).④The average number of embryos transferred in the control group was significantly higher than that in the genomic and histological groups,with statistical significance(P＜0.05).The cost of genomic patients was significantly higher than that of histology group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusions:①Endometrial implantation window detection is feasible for patients with re-peated implantation failure,which can effectively shorten the time to live birth and reduce the number of transplan-ted embryos;②Both ERA sequencing and endometrial histology detection have limitations as methods to evaluate endometrial implantation window,and it is not clear which detection method has more advantages in accuracy and practicability.

Objective:To evaluate the endometrial implantation window in patients with recurrent implantation failure using endometrial receptive array(ERA)sequencing or endometrial histological detection methods,and to explore the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analysis of two technologies for improving clinical outcomes in such patients.Methods:A retrospective cohort study was conducted on clinical data of 125 patients diagnosed with repeated implantation failure in Gansu Maternal and Child Health Hospital from January 2018 to December 2022.According to whether endometrial receptivity testing was accepted and different detection techniques were used,they were divided into a control group(n=36),a genomic group(n=35),and a histological group(n=54).The clinical data and pregnancy outcomes of the three groups were compared.Results:①The results of one-way ANOVA showed that the embryo implantation rate in the genomic group and histological group was significantly higher than that in the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).There was no sta-tistically significant difference in embryo implantation rate between genomic and histological groups(P=0.48).②There was no statistically significant difference in clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate among the three groups(P＞0.05).③Log rank test showed:The time for 50％of patients to reach live labor was significantly shorter than that of the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05);There was no sta-tistically significant difference in the time to live birth in 50％of patients between the genomic and histological groups of 50％of patients(P＞0.05).④The average number of embryos transferred in the control group was significantly higher than that in the genomic and histological groups,with statistical significance(P＜0.05).The cost of genomic patients was significantly higher than that of histology group,and the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusions:①Endometrial implantation window detection is feasible for patients with re-peated implantation failure,which can effectively shorten the time to live birth and reduce the number of transplan-ted embryos;②Both ERA sequencing and endometrial histology detection have limitations as methods to evaluate endometrial implantation window,and it is not clear which detection method has more advantages in accuracy and practicability.