Objective: To analyze the epidemiological characteristics and influencing factors of severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome (SFTS) in Zhejiang Province from 2019 to 2023, so as to provide the reference for strengthening SFTS prevention and control. Methods: Data on laboratory-confirmed SFTS cases in Zhejiang Province from 2019 to 2023 were collected through the Infectious Disease Reporting Information System of Chinese Disease Prevention and Control Information System. Meteorological data, geographic environment and socioeconomic factors during the same period were collected from the fifth-generation European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Geospatial Data Cloud, and Zhejiang Statistical Yearbook, respectively. Descriptive epidemiological methods were used to analyze the epidemiological characteristics of SFTS from 2019 to 2023, and a Bayesian spatio-temporal model was constructed to analyze the influencing factors of SFTS incidence. Results: A total of 578 SFTS cases were reported in Zhejiang Province from 2019 to 2023, with an annual average incidence of 0.23/105. The peak period was from May to July, accounting for 52.60%. There were 309 males and 269 females, with a male-to-female ratio of 1.15∶1. The cases were mainly aged 50-<80 years, farmers, and in rural areas, accounting for 82.53%, 77.34%, and 75.43%, respectively. Taizhou City and Shaoxing City reported more SFTS cases, while Shaoxing City and Zhoushan City had higher annual average incidences of SFTS. The Bayesian spatio-temporal interaction model showed good goodness of fit. The results showed that mean temperature (RR=1.626, 95%CI: 1.111-2.378) and mean wind speed (RR=1.814, 95%CI: 1.321-2.492) were positively correlated with SFTS risk, while altitude (RR=0.432, 95%CI: 0.230-0.829) and population density (RR=0.443, 95%CI: 0.207-0.964) were negatively correlated with SFTS risk. Conclusions SFTS in Zhejiang Province peaks from May to July. Middle-aged and elderly people and farmers are high-risk populations. Taizhou City, Shaoxing City, and Zhoushan City are high-incidence areas. Mean temperature, mean wind speed, altitude, and population density can all affect the risk of SFTS incidence.

Robot-assisted surgery with its advantages such as three-dimensional high-definition vision, dexterous robotic arms, and tremor filtration, is increasingly being applied to complex radical gastrectomy. However, the role of the surgical assistant remains crucial during the procedure. The assistant is responsible for tasks outside the console, including adjusting robotic arms, changing instruments, exposing the surgical field, and addressing unexpected situations. The technical proficiency of the assistant and their collaboration efficiency with the primary surgeon directly impact the smoothness of surgery and patients' outcomes. With the expansion of robot-assisted surgical indications, the establishment of a standardized training system and the optimization of team collaboration models have become urgent challenges to address. This article draws on the author's practical experience as an assistant in robot-assisted gastric cancer surgeries, conducting an in-depth analysis of the responsibilities and operational skills of surgical assistants in robot-assisted procedures. The aim is to develop a relatively comprehensive set of operational guidelines for surgical assistants in robot-assisted radical gastrectomy, providing valuable references for enhancing the overall efficiency of surgical teams and improving surgical outcomes.

Robot-assisted surgery with its advantages such as three-dimensional high-definition vision, dexterous robotic arms, and tremor filtration, is increasingly being applied to complex radical gastrectomy. However, the role of the surgical assistant remains crucial during the procedure. The assistant is responsible for tasks outside the console, including adjusting robotic arms, changing instruments, exposing the surgical field, and addressing unexpected situations. The technical proficiency of the assistant and their collaboration efficiency with the primary surgeon directly impact the smoothness of surgery and patients' outcomes. With the expansion of robot-assisted surgical indications, the establishment of a standardized training system and the optimization of team collaboration models have become urgent challenges to address. This article draws on the author's practical experience as an assistant in robot-assisted gastric cancer surgeries, conducting an in-depth analysis of the responsibilities and operational skills of surgical assistants in robot-assisted procedures. The aim is to develop a relatively comprehensive set of operational guidelines for surgical assistants in robot-assisted radical gastrectomy, providing valuable references for enhancing the overall efficiency of surgical teams and improving surgical outcomes.

Objective:To compare the effects of robotic and laparoscopic radical gastrectomy on short-term clinical outcomes and long-term prognosis in obese patients with gastric cancer.Methods:Clinical data from 231 obese gastric cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic radical gastrectomy at the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University between Jan 2015 and Dec 2022 was analyzed. After propensity score matching, the patients were divided into robotic surgery group ( n=79) and laparoscopic surgery group ( n=79). The short-term clinical outcomes and long-term prognosis were compared. Results:Compared with the laparoscopic group, the robotic group had a significantly greater number of dissected lymph nodes [(32±13) vs. (26±11), t=2.797, P=0.006], shorter operation time [(245±65) min vs. (272±62) min, t=-2.669, P=0.008], less intraoperative blood loss[(84±69) vs. (119±56) ml, t=-3.502, P=0.001], shorter postoperative hospital stay [(8.2±3.5) vs. (9.6±4.2) d, t=-2.363, P=0.019], and higher hospitalization cost [(102,139±18,303) vs. (77,857±18,325) yuan, t=8.333, P<0.001]. The 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were comparable between the robotic and laparoscopic groups (77.2% vs. 74.7%, P=0.684; and 73.4% vs. 68.4%, P=0.491, respectively). Conclusions:Robotic radical gastrectomy is a safe and feasible alternative for obese gastric cancer patients in experienced hands. It offers advantages in short-term clinical outcomes, however, it fails to provide a significant long-term survival benefit.

Objective:To compare the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Methods:Data from 321 patients with locally advanced gastric cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by robotic ( n=109) and laparoscopic ( n=212) radical gastrectomy at our center between May 2017 and Sep 2022 was collected. After 1∶1 propensity score matching, 106 patients from each group were included in the final analysis to compare short-term clinical outcomes and long-term prognostic indicators. Results:The robotic group had a significantly lower overall complication rate (13.2% vs. 28.3%, χ2=6.453, P=0.007) and surgery-related complication rate (8.5% vs. 17.9%, χ2=3.333, P=0.043) than the laparoscopic group. The robotic group also retrieved more total lymph nodes (35.3±4.9 vs. 31.4±6.3, t=4.863, P<0.001) and supra-pancreatic lymph nodes (13.1±3.4 vs. 10.1±2.1, t=5.258, P<0.001). Additionally, the robotic group had a shorter operative time [(218±47) min vs. (267±71) min, t=-6.001, P<0.001], less intraoperative blood loss [(47±12) ml vs. (71±17) ml, t=-5.424, P<0.001], and faster postoperative recovery. The 3-year recurrence-free survival rate was significantly higher in the robotic group compared to the laparoscopic group (75.5% vs. 62.3%, P=0.017). Conclusion:Compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy, robotic gastrectomy allows for a more lymph nodes harvest, significantly reduces intraoperative blood loss and complication rates and significantly improves recurrence-free survival.

Objective:To compare the effects of robotic and laparoscopic radical gastrectomy on short-term clinical outcomes and long-term prognosis in obese patients with gastric cancer.Methods:Clinical data from 231 obese gastric cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic radical gastrectomy at the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University between Jan 2015 and Dec 2022 was analyzed. After propensity score matching, the patients were divided into robotic surgery group ( n=79) and laparoscopic surgery group ( n=79). The short-term clinical outcomes and long-term prognosis were compared. Results:Compared with the laparoscopic group, the robotic group had a significantly greater number of dissected lymph nodes [(32±13) vs. (26±11), t=2.797, P=0.006], shorter operation time [(245±65) min vs. (272±62) min, t=-2.669, P=0.008], less intraoperative blood loss[(84±69) vs. (119±56) ml, t=-3.502, P=0.001], shorter postoperative hospital stay [(8.2±3.5) vs. (9.6±4.2) d, t=-2.363, P=0.019], and higher hospitalization cost [(102,139±18,303) vs. (77,857±18,325) yuan, t=8.333, P<0.001]. The 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were comparable between the robotic and laparoscopic groups (77.2% vs. 74.7%, P=0.684; and 73.4% vs. 68.4%, P=0.491, respectively). Conclusions:Robotic radical gastrectomy is a safe and feasible alternative for obese gastric cancer patients in experienced hands. It offers advantages in short-term clinical outcomes, however, it fails to provide a significant long-term survival benefit.

Objective:To compare the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Methods:Data from 321 patients with locally advanced gastric cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by robotic ( n=109) and laparoscopic ( n=212) radical gastrectomy at our center between May 2017 and Sep 2022 was collected. After 1∶1 propensity score matching, 106 patients from each group were included in the final analysis to compare short-term clinical outcomes and long-term prognostic indicators. Results:The robotic group had a significantly lower overall complication rate (13.2% vs. 28.3%, χ2=6.453, P=0.007) and surgery-related complication rate (8.5% vs. 17.9%, χ2=3.333, P=0.043) than the laparoscopic group. The robotic group also retrieved more total lymph nodes (35.3±4.9 vs. 31.4±6.3, t=4.863, P<0.001) and supra-pancreatic lymph nodes (13.1±3.4 vs. 10.1±2.1, t=5.258, P<0.001). Additionally, the robotic group had a shorter operative time [(218±47) min vs. (267±71) min, t=-6.001, P<0.001], less intraoperative blood loss [(47±12) ml vs. (71±17) ml, t=-5.424, P<0.001], and faster postoperative recovery. The 3-year recurrence-free survival rate was significantly higher in the robotic group compared to the laparoscopic group (75.5% vs. 62.3%, P=0.017). Conclusion:Compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy, robotic gastrectomy allows for a more lymph nodes harvest, significantly reduces intraoperative blood loss and complication rates and significantly improves recurrence-free survival.

Pharmacological perturbation studies based on protein-level signatures are fundamental for drug dis-covery.In the present study,we used a mass spectrometry(MS)-based proteomic platform to profile the whole proteome of the breast cancer MCF7 cell line under stress induced by 78 bioactive compounds.The integrated analysis of perturbed signal abundance revealed the connectivity between phenotypic behaviors and molecular features in cancer cells.Our data showed functional relevance in exploring the novel pharmacological activity of phenolic xanthohumol,as well as the noncanonical targets of clinically approved tamoxifen,lovastatin,and their derivatives.Furthermore,the rational design of synergistic inhibition using a combination of histone methyltransferase and topoisomerase was identified based on their complementary drug fingerprints.This study provides rich resources for the proteomic landscape of drug responses for precision therapeutic medicine.

Objective:To compare the patient-reported outcomes and short-term clinical outcomes between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer.Methods:This single-center prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University from October 2020 to August 2022. Patients with locally advanced gastric cancer who were to undergo radical gastrectomy were selected and randomly divided into two groups according to 1∶1, and received robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery, respectively. Patient-reported outcomes and short-term clinical outcomes (including postoperative complications, surgical quality and postoperative short-term recovery) were compared between the two groups by independent sample t test, Mann-Whitney U test, repeated ANOVA, generalized estimating equation, χ2 test and Fisher′s exact test. Results:A total of 237 patients were enrolled for modified intention-to-treat analysis (120 patients in the robotic group, 117 patients in the laparoscopic group). There were 180 males and 59 females, aged (63.0±10.2) years (range: 30 to 85 years). The incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the robotic group and laparoscopic group (16.7% (20/120) vs. 15.4% (18/117), χ2=0.072, P=0.788). The robotic group had higher patient-reported outcomes scores in general health status, emotional, and social domains compared to the laparoscopic group, differences in time effect, intervention effect, and interaction effect were statistically significant (general health status: χ2 value were 275.68, 3.91, 6.38, P value were <0.01, 0.048, 0.041; emotional: χ2 value were 77.79, 6.04, 6.15, P value were <0.01, 0.014, 0.046; social: χ2 value were 148.00, 7.57, 5.98, P value were <0.01, 0.006, 0.048). However, the financial burden of the robotic group was higher, the differences in time effect, intervention effect and interaction effect were statistically significant ( χ2 value were 156.24, 4.08, 36.56, P value were <0.01, 0.043,<0.01). Conclusion:Compared to the laparoscopic group, the robotic group could more effectively relieve postoperative negative emotions and improve recovery of social function in patients.

Objective:To compare the patient-reported outcomes and short-term clinical outcomes between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer.Methods:This single-center prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University from October 2020 to August 2022. Patients with locally advanced gastric cancer who were to undergo radical gastrectomy were selected and randomly divided into two groups according to 1∶1, and received robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery, respectively. Patient-reported outcomes and short-term clinical outcomes (including postoperative complications, surgical quality and postoperative short-term recovery) were compared between the two groups by independent sample t test, Mann-Whitney U test, repeated ANOVA, generalized estimating equation, χ2 test and Fisher′s exact test. Results:A total of 237 patients were enrolled for modified intention-to-treat analysis (120 patients in the robotic group, 117 patients in the laparoscopic group). There were 180 males and 59 females, aged (63.0±10.2) years (range: 30 to 85 years). The incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the robotic group and laparoscopic group (16.7% (20/120) vs. 15.4% (18/117), χ2=0.072, P=0.788). The robotic group had higher patient-reported outcomes scores in general health status, emotional, and social domains compared to the laparoscopic group, differences in time effect, intervention effect, and interaction effect were statistically significant (general health status: χ2 value were 275.68, 3.91, 6.38, P value were <0.01, 0.048, 0.041; emotional: χ2 value were 77.79, 6.04, 6.15, P value were <0.01, 0.014, 0.046; social: χ2 value were 148.00, 7.57, 5.98, P value were <0.01, 0.006, 0.048). However, the financial burden of the robotic group was higher, the differences in time effect, intervention effect and interaction effect were statistically significant ( χ2 value were 156.24, 4.08, 36.56, P value were <0.01, 0.043,<0.01). Conclusion:Compared to the laparoscopic group, the robotic group could more effectively relieve postoperative negative emotions and improve recovery of social function in patients.