Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Background/Aims: Anti-reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) is a promising endoscopic intervention for proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-dependent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the effect of ARMA on esophageal motility remains unclear. Methods: Twenty patients with PPI-dependent GERD receiving ARMA were prospectively enrolled. Comprehensive self-report symptom questionnaires, endoscopy, 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring, and high-resolution impedance manometry were performed and analyzed before and 3 months after ARMA. Results: All ARMA procedures were performed successfully. Symptom scores, including GerdQ (11.16 ± 2.67 to 9.11 ± 2.64, P = 0.026) and reflux symptom index (11.63 ± 5.62 to 6.11 ± 3.86, P = 0.001), improved significantly, while 13 patients (65%) reported discontinuation of PPI. Total acid exposure time (5.84 ± 4.63% to 2.83 ± 3.41%, P = 0.024) and number of reflux episodes (73.05 ± 19.34 to 37.55 ± 22.71, P < 0.001) decreased significantly after ARMA. Improved esophagogastric junction (EGJ) barrier function, including increased lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure (13.89 ± 10.78 mmHg to 21.68 ± 11.5 mmHg, P = 0.034), 4-second integrated relaxation pressure (5.75 ± 6.42 mmHg to 9.99 ± 5.89 mmHg, P = 0.020), and EGJ-contractile integral(16.42 ± 16.93 mmHg · cm to 31.95 ± 21.25 mmHg · cm, P = 0.016), were observed. Esophageal body contractility also increased significantly (distal contractile integral, 966.85 ± 845.84 mmHg · s · cm to 1198.8 ± 811.74 mmHg · s · cm, P = 0.023). Patients with symptom improvement had better pre-AMRA esophageal body contractility. Conclusions ARMA effectively improves symptoms and reflux burden, EGJ barrier function, and esophageal body contractility in patients with PPIdependent GERD during short-term evaluation. Longer follow-up to clarify the sustainability of ARMA is needed.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Background/Aims: Anti-reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) is a promising endoscopic intervention for proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-dependent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the effect of ARMA on esophageal motility remains unclear. Methods: Twenty patients with PPI-dependent GERD receiving ARMA were prospectively enrolled. Comprehensive self-report symptom questionnaires, endoscopy, 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring, and high-resolution impedance manometry were performed and analyzed before and 3 months after ARMA. Results: All ARMA procedures were performed successfully. Symptom scores, including GerdQ (11.16 ± 2.67 to 9.11 ± 2.64, P = 0.026) and reflux symptom index (11.63 ± 5.62 to 6.11 ± 3.86, P = 0.001), improved significantly, while 13 patients (65%) reported discontinuation of PPI. Total acid exposure time (5.84 ± 4.63% to 2.83 ± 3.41%, P = 0.024) and number of reflux episodes (73.05 ± 19.34 to 37.55 ± 22.71, P < 0.001) decreased significantly after ARMA. Improved esophagogastric junction (EGJ) barrier function, including increased lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure (13.89 ± 10.78 mmHg to 21.68 ± 11.5 mmHg, P = 0.034), 4-second integrated relaxation pressure (5.75 ± 6.42 mmHg to 9.99 ± 5.89 mmHg, P = 0.020), and EGJ-contractile integral(16.42 ± 16.93 mmHg · cm to 31.95 ± 21.25 mmHg · cm, P = 0.016), were observed. Esophageal body contractility also increased significantly (distal contractile integral, 966.85 ± 845.84 mmHg · s · cm to 1198.8 ± 811.74 mmHg · s · cm, P = 0.023). Patients with symptom improvement had better pre-AMRA esophageal body contractility. Conclusions ARMA effectively improves symptoms and reflux burden, EGJ barrier function, and esophageal body contractility in patients with PPIdependent GERD during short-term evaluation. Longer follow-up to clarify the sustainability of ARMA is needed.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Background/Aims: Anti-reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) is a promising endoscopic intervention for proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-dependent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the effect of ARMA on esophageal motility remains unclear. Methods: Twenty patients with PPI-dependent GERD receiving ARMA were prospectively enrolled. Comprehensive self-report symptom questionnaires, endoscopy, 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring, and high-resolution impedance manometry were performed and analyzed before and 3 months after ARMA. Results: All ARMA procedures were performed successfully. Symptom scores, including GerdQ (11.16 ± 2.67 to 9.11 ± 2.64, P = 0.026) and reflux symptom index (11.63 ± 5.62 to 6.11 ± 3.86, P = 0.001), improved significantly, while 13 patients (65%) reported discontinuation of PPI. Total acid exposure time (5.84 ± 4.63% to 2.83 ± 3.41%, P = 0.024) and number of reflux episodes (73.05 ± 19.34 to 37.55 ± 22.71, P < 0.001) decreased significantly after ARMA. Improved esophagogastric junction (EGJ) barrier function, including increased lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure (13.89 ± 10.78 mmHg to 21.68 ± 11.5 mmHg, P = 0.034), 4-second integrated relaxation pressure (5.75 ± 6.42 mmHg to 9.99 ± 5.89 mmHg, P = 0.020), and EGJ-contractile integral(16.42 ± 16.93 mmHg · cm to 31.95 ± 21.25 mmHg · cm, P = 0.016), were observed. Esophageal body contractility also increased significantly (distal contractile integral, 966.85 ± 845.84 mmHg · s · cm to 1198.8 ± 811.74 mmHg · s · cm, P = 0.023). Patients with symptom improvement had better pre-AMRA esophageal body contractility. Conclusions ARMA effectively improves symptoms and reflux burden, EGJ barrier function, and esophageal body contractility in patients with PPIdependent GERD during short-term evaluation. Longer follow-up to clarify the sustainability of ARMA is needed.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Background/Aims: Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is common in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and can be associated with poor esophageal contraction reserve on multiple rapid swallows. Alterations in the esophageal microbiome have been reported in GERD, but the relationship to presence or absence of contraction reserve in IEM patients has not been evaluated. We aim to investigate whether contraction reserve influences esophageal microbiome alterations in patients with GERD and IEM. Methods: We prospectively enrolled GERD patients with normal endoscopy and evaluated esophageal motility and contraction reserve with multiple rapid swallows during high-resolution manometry. The esophageal mucosa was biopsied for DNA extraction and 16S ribosomal RNA gene V3-V4 (Illumina)/full-length (Pacbio) amplicon sequencing analysis. Results: Among the 56 recruited patients, 20 had normal motility (NM), 19 had IEM with contraction reserve (IEM-R), and 17 had IEM without contraction reserve (IEM-NR). Esophageal microbiome analysis showed a significant decrease in microbial richness in patients with IEM-NR when compared to NM. The beta diversity revealed different microbiome profiles between patients with NM or IEM-R and IEM-NR (P = 0.037). Several esophageal bacterial taxa were characteristic in patients with IEM-NR, including reduced Prevotella spp.and Veillonella dispar, and enriched Fusobacterium nucleatum. In a microbiome-based random forest model for predicting IEM-NR, an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.81 was yielded. Conclusions In symptomatic GERD patients with normal endoscopic findings, the esophageal microbiome differs based on contraction reserve among IEM. Absent contraction reserve appears to alter the physiology and microbiota of the esophagus.

Background: The bispectral index (BIS) may be unreliable to gauge anesthetic depth when dexmedetomidine is administered. By comparison, the electroencephalogram (EEG) spectrogram enables the visualization of the brain response during anesthesia and may prevent unnecessary anesthetic consumption. Methods: This retrospective study included 140 adult patients undergoing elective craniotomy who received total intravenous anesthesia using a combination of propofol and dexmedetomidine infusions. Patients were equally matched to the spectrogram group (maintaining the robust EEG alpha power during surgery) or the index group (maintaining the BIS score between 40 and 60 during surgery) based on the propensity score of age and surgical type. The primary outcome was the propofol dose. Secondary outcome was the postoperative neurological profile. Results: Patients in the spectrogram group received significantly less propofol (1585 ± 581 vs. 2314 ± 810 mg, P < 0.001). Fewer patients in the spectrogram group exhibited delayed emergence (1.4% vs. 11.4%, P = 0.033). The postoperative delirium profile was similar between the groups (profile P = 0.227). Patients in the spectrogram group exhibited better in-hospital Barthel’s index scores changes (admission state: 83.6 ± 27.6 vs. 91.6 ± 17.1; discharge state: 86.4 ± 24.3 vs. 85.1 ± 21.5; group–time interaction P = 0.008). However, the incidence of postoperative neurological complications was similar between the groups. Conclusions EEG spectrogram–guided anesthesia prevents unnecessary anesthetic consumption during elective craniotomy. This may also prevent delayed emergence and improve postoperative Barthel index scores.