改良可视喉镜片在急诊气管插管患者中的应用

目的 制作改良型一次性可视喉镜片并探讨其在急诊患者气管插管中的应用效果。方法 在传统一次性可视喉镜片的基础上,沿镜片左缘增加1个吸引管道,前端顶部有吸孔,侧面有侧孔,尾端接口与吸引管配套,其正前方有负压控制孔,便于单手操作。将改良后的一次性可视喉镜片应用于临床,选取2017年10月—2018年5月行急诊气管插管的37例患者作为试验组,选取2017年2月-9月行急诊气管插管的39例患者作为对照组。试验组使用改良型一次性可视喉镜片行气管插管,对照组使用传统型一次性可视喉镜片行气管插管。结果 试验组声门暴露时间为（13.62±3.84） s,插管总时间为（19.76±4.16） s,对照组声门暴露时间为（20.21±3.29） s,插管总时间为（25.74±3.08） s,两组比较,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）;试验组一次插管成功率为78.37%,并发症发生率为10.81%,独立插管率为86.49%,对照组一次插管成功率为56.41%,并发症发生率为30.77%,独立插管率为10.26%,两组比较,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。结论 在紧急气管插管中应用改良型一次性可视喉镜片,可缩短声门暴露时间和气管插管总时间,提高一次插管成功率,减少插管相关并发症发生率,可单人操作,节约人力资源。     

难治性高血压的病因及治疗进展

难治性高血压属于高血压疾病中的一种特殊类型,严重危害患者的身体健康,所以,有必要针对此疾病展开深入的研究与分析。难治性高血压疾病的病因较多,其临床治疗关键要积极转变患者的既有生活方式,使患者接受科学的诊断与针对性的治疗措施,结合患者病情,积极开展介入治疗亦或是药物联合治疗,进而改善患者的临床症状,控制病情发展,提高预后效果。基于此,本文将难治性高血压作为主要研究内容,重点阐述其病因与治疗进展,致力于进一步提高其临床治疗效果,为广大临床工作者提供一定的参考依据。     

Timeliness of Treatment Initiation in Newly Diagnosed Patients With Breast Cancer

BackgroundEvidence-based timeliness benchmarks have been established to assess quality of breast cancer care, as delays in treatment are associated with poor clinical outcomes. However, few studies have evaluated how current breast cancer care meets these benchmarks and what factors may delay the timely initiation of treatment.Patients and MethodsDemographic and disease characteristics of 377 newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer who initiated treatment at Tufts Medical Center (2009-2015) were extracted from electronic medical records. Time from diagnosis to initial surgery and time from diagnosis to initiation of hormone therapy were estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves. Multivariable regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with treatment delays. Thematic analysis was performed to categorize reasons for delay.ResultsOf 319 patients who had surgery recommended as the first treatment, 248 (78%) met the 45-day benchmark (median, 28 days; 25th-75th %, 19-43). After adjusting for potential confounders, multivariable regression analysis revealed that negative hormone receptor status (odds ratio, 3.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.44-8.43) and mastectomy (odds ratio, 4.07; 95% confidence interval, 2.10-8.06) were significantly associated with delays in surgery. Delays were mostly owing to clinical complexity or logistical/financial reasons. Of 241 patients eligible for hormone therapy initiation, 232 (96%) met the 1-year benchmark (median, 147 days; 25th-75th %, 79-217).ConclusionMost patients met timeliness guidelines for surgery and initiation of hormone therapy, although risk factors for delay were identified. Knowledge of reasons for breast cancer treatment delay, including clinical complexity and logistical/financial issues, may allow targeting interventions for patients at greatest risk of care delays.     

The Effect of Treatment Sequence on Overall Survival for Men With Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

IntroductionWe aimed to evaluate the treatment sequence for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in real-world practice and compare overall survival in each sequential therapy.Patients and MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated 146 patients with mCRPC who were initially treated with androgen deprivation therapy as metastatic hormone-naive prostate cancer in 14 hospitals between January 2010 and March 2019. The agents for the sequential therapy included new androgen receptor-targeted agents (ART: abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide), docetaxel, and/or cabazitaxel. We evaluated the treatment sequence for mCRPC and the effect of sequence patterns on overall survival.ResultsThe median age was 71 years. A total of 35 patients received ART-ART, 33 received ART-docetaxel, 68 received docetaxel-ART, and 10 received docetaxel-cabazitaxel sequences. The most prescribed treatment sequence was docetaxel-ART (47%), followed by ART-ART (24%). Overall survival calculated from the initial diagnosis reached 83, 57, 79, and 37 months in the ART-ART, ART-docetaxel, docetaxel-ART, and docetaxel-cabazitaxel, respectively. Multivariate Cox regression analyses showed no significant difference in overall survival between the first-line ART (n = 68) and first-line docetaxel (n = 78) therapies (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; P = .530), between the ART-ART (n = 35) and docetaxel-mixed (n = 111) sequences (HR, 0.82; P = .650), and between the first-line abiraterone (n = 32) and first-line enzalutamide (n = 36) sequences (HR, 1.58; P = .384).ConclusionThe most prescribed treatment sequence was docetaxel followed by ART. No significant difference was observed in overall survival among the treatment sequences in real-world practice.     

Extending Screening in “Elderly” Patients: Should We Consider a Selective Approach?

BackgroundBreast cancer screening has been shown to reduce breast cancer-associated mortality. However, screening is limited to the targeted age group of 45 to 69 years in New Zealand despite the recognized increased risk with age. This study aims to compare the outcomes of women aged over 70 years with screen-detected and clinically detected cancers.Patients and MethodsA retrospective review was performed of prospectively collected data from June 2000 to May 2013 by the Auckland Breast Cancer Register. Demographic and tumor characteristics of women with invasive cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosis aged 70 years and over were compared between those screened and clinically detected. Five-year disease-free and overall survival outcomes were reviewed.ResultsA total of 2128 women aged 70 years and over were diagnosed with breast cancer (median, 77 years; interquartile range [IQR], 74-84 years). Of these, 416 (19.5%) were diagnosed through mammography screening, with a median age of 74 years (IQR, 71-77 years) compared with 79 years (IQR, 74-85 years) for those with clinical detected cancer diagnosis. Screen-detected cancers accounted for a significantly higher proportion of diagnoses in those aged 70 to 74 years compared with older patients (P < .001). Screen-detected cancers were of lower T and N stages. Disease-specific survival was significantly longer in screen-detected cancers versus other cancers (5-year survival, 93.7% vs. 81.9%; P < .001), as was overall survival (5-year survival, 84.7% vs. 57.4%; P < .001).ConclusionScreening in those aged 70 years and over continues to identify breast cancer at early stages and with improved survival. Although aware of the potential for lead-time bias and the healthy volunteer effect, there should still be consideration to extend breast cancer screening to patients aged to up 74 years after appropriate assessment of comorbidities and functional status.