Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the mechanism of self-efficacy between self-management ability and self-management behavior and its differences among patients with different disease courses through mediation tests. METHODS: In the study, 489 patients with type 2 diabetes who attended the endocrinology departments of four hospitals in Shanxi Province and Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region from July to September 2022 were enrolled as the study population. They were investigated by General Information Questionnaire, Diabetes Self-Management Scale, Chinese version of Diabetes Empowerment Simplified Scale, and Diabetes Self-Efficacy Scale. Mediation analyses were performed using the linear regression model, Sobel test, and Bootstrap test in the software Stata version 15.0 and divided the patients into different disease course groups for subgroup analysis according to whether the disease course was > 5 years. RESULTS: In this study, the score of self-management behavior in the patients with type 2 diabetes was 6.16±1.41, the score of self-management ability was 3.99±0.74, and the score of self-efficacy was 7.05±1.90. The results of the study showed that self-efficacy was positively correlated with self-management ability (r=0.33) as well as self-management behavior (r=0.47) in the patients with type 2 diabetes (P < 0.01). The mediating effect of self-efficacy accounted for 38.28% of the total effect of self-management ability on self-management behaviors and was higher in the behaviors of blood glucose monitoring (43.45%) and diet control (52.63%). The mediating effect of self-efficacy accounted for approximately 40.99% of the total effect for the patients with disease course ≤ 5 years, while for the patients with disease course > 5 years, the mediating effect accounted for 39.20% of the total effect. CONCLUSION Self-efficacy enhanced the effect of self-management ability on the behavior of the patients with type 2 diabetes, and this positive effect was more significant for the patients with shorter disease course. Targeted health education should be carried out to enhance patients' self-efficacy and self-management ability according to their disease characteristics, to stimulate their inner action, to promote the development of their self-management behaviors, and to form a more stable and long-term mechanism for disease management.
Humans ; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy* ; Self Efficacy ; Self-Management ; Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring ; Blood Glucose ; Self Care

Objective: Prior pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) on chest X-ray (CXR) was commonly found in infertile patients receiving examinations before Method: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 14,254 infertile patients who had received IVF-ET at Peking University Third Hospital in 2017. Prior PTB was defined as the presence of signs suggestive of old or inactive PTB on CXR, with or without a clinical TB history. Patients who had prior PTB on CXR but had not received a clinical diagnosis and anti-TB therapy were included for analysis. Live birth, clinical pregnancy, and miscarriage rates were compared between the untreated PTB and non-PTB groups. Results: The untreated PTB group had significantly lower clinical pregnancy (31.7% Conclusions Untreated PTB was associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes after IVF-ET, especially in patients with unexplained infertility, highlighting the clinical significance of PTB in this specific patient population.
Abortion, Spontaneous/epidemiology* ; Adult ; China/epidemiology* ; Embryo Transfer/statistics & numerical data* ; Female ; Fertilization in Vitro/statistics & numerical data* ; Humans ; Infertility, Female/etiology* ; Live Birth/epidemiology* ; Middle Aged ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology* ; Pregnancy Outcome/epidemiology* ; Radiography, Thoracic ; Retrospective Studies ; Tuberculosis, Pulmonary/epidemiology* ; Young Adult

Osteoporosis and its associated fragility fractures are becoming a severe burden in the healthcare system globally. In the Asian-Pacific (AP) region, the rapidly increasing in aging population is the main reason accounting for the burden. Moreover, the paucity of quality care for osteoporosis continues to be an ongoing challenge. The Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) is a program promoted by International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) with a goal to improve quality of postfracture care and prevention of secondary fractures. In this review article, we would like to introduce the Taiwan FLS network. The first 2 programs were initiated in 2014 at the National Taiwan University Hospital and its affiliated Bei-Hu branch. Since then, the Taiwan FLS program has continued to grow exponentially. Through FLS workshops promoted by the Taiwanese Osteoporosis Association (TOA), program mentors have been able to share their valuable knowledge and clinical experience in order to promote establishments of additional programs. With 22 FLS sites including 11 successfully accredited on the best practice map, Taiwan remains as one of the highest FLS coverage countries in the AP region, and was also granted the IOF Best Secondary Fracture Prevention Promotion award in 2017. Despite challenges faced by the TOA, we strive to promote more FLS sites in Taiwan with a main goal of ameliorating further health burden in managing osteoporotic patients.
Aging ; Awards and Prizes ; Delivery of Health Care ; Education ; Financing, Organized ; Humans ; Mentors ; Osteoporosis ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Taiwan

Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), and drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) are severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCAR) which are majorly caused by drugs. Though the incidence rate is low, SCAR sometimes can be life-threatening and leads to lifelong sequelae. Many pharmacogenomic associations in immune and nonimmune related genes with the development of SCAR have been discovered recently and the pharmacogenetic tests have been applied to prevent specific drug-induced SCAR. In this review, we discuss the recent advances of pharmacogenomics in SCAR.
Cicatrix ; Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome ; Incidence ; Pharmacogenetics ; Stevens-Johnson Syndrome

PURPOSE: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become an attractive therapeutic strategy for severe aortic stenosis (AS) in elderly patients due to its minimally-invasive nature. Therefore, early results of its clinical outcomes in elderly Korean patients were evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared early clinical outcomes of TAVI, surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), and optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients aged > or =80 years with symptomatic severe AS. Treatment groups were allocated as follows: TAVI (n=10), SAVR (n=14), and OMT (n=42). RESULTS: Baseline clinical characteristics including predicted operative mortality were similar among the three groups. However, patients with New York Heart Association functional class III or IV symptoms and smaller aortic valve area were treated with TAVI or SAVR rather than OMT. In-hospital combined safety endpoints (all-cause mortality, major stroke, peri-procedural myocardial infarction, life-threatening bleeding, major vascular complication, and acute kidney injury) after TAVI or SAVR were significantly lower in the TAVI group than in the SAVR group (10.0% vs. 71.4%, respectively, p=0.005), along with an acceptable rate of symptom improvement and device success. During the follow-up period, the TAVI group showed the lowest rate of 3-month major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, major stroke, and re-hospitalization (TAVI 0.0% vs. SAVR 50.0% vs. OMT 42.9%, p=0.017). CONCLUSION: Treatment with TAVI was associated with lower event rates compared to SAVR or OMT. Therefore, TAVI may be considered as the first therapeutic strategy in selected patients aged > or =80 years with symptomatic severe AS.
Age Factors ; Aged, 80 and over ; Aortic Valve/*surgery ; Aortic Valve Stenosis/diagnosis/*surgery ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Prognosis ; Risk Factors ; Treatment Outcome