糖尿病合并结核潜伏感染的研究热点与趋势分析

目的 探讨糖尿病合并结核潜伏感染的研究现状、热点与前沿。方法 收集Web of Science核心合集于2000年1月1日至2021年11月20日发表的糖尿病合并结核潜伏感染的相关文章，运用CiteSpace 5.8.R3软件进行可视化分析。结果 共纳入英文文献148篇，近20年来该领域发文量呈上升趋势。美国发文量最多（46篇, 31.08%），机构间合作情况的可视化分析共得到个340节点、929条连线，网络密度为0.0161，作者间合作关系的知识图谱共得到790个节点、2425条连线，网络密度为0.0078，关键词共现分析结果显示，糖尿病合并结核潜伏感染的危险因素、患病率、诊断和治疗是该领域的研究热点和趋势。结论 糖尿病合并结核潜伏感染的发文量不断增加，机构间、区域内和国际范围内的合作有待进一步开展。立足国情，探索慢病共病的管理模式将有助于优化共病管理，进一步推动慢病管理的进程。     

伏立康唑一级预防急性白血病患者化疗期间并发真菌感染的临床疗效北大核心

目的:探讨初诊急性白血病患者化疗期间应用伏立康唑进行预防侵袭性真菌病(IFD)的临床疗效及安全性。方法:回顾性分析2016年02月至2018年03月期间我院血液科收治的初诊急性白血病行化疗的患者166例,按照是否使用抗真菌药进行预防性治疗分为观察组(应用伏立康唑进行预防治疗,n=103)和对照组(未应用抗真菌药物,n=63),比较两组患者IFD发生率差异,并分析抗真菌药物应用的不良反应。结果:观察组IFD发生率为10.7%,对照组为33.3%,两组患者的IFD发生率有明显差异(P<0.05);所有应用伏立康唑进行预防治疗的患者均未出现严重的不良反应。结论:伏立康唑可以有效减低急性白血病患者化疗期间IFD发生率,并且有着较好的安全性,值得在临床推广应用。     

Effectiveness and Safety of Inhaled Antibiotics in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. A Multicentre Observational Study

BackgroundWe aimed to describe the effectiveness and safety of inhaled antibiotics in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, as well as the patient profile in which they are usually prescribed and the patient groups that can most benefit from this treatment.MethodsMulticentre retrospective observational cohort study in COPD patients who had received ≥1 dose of inhaled antibiotics in the last 5 years. Clinical data from the two years prior to and subsequent to the start of the treatment were compared. Primary outcome: COPD exacerbations. Secondary outcomes: side effects, symptomatology (sputum purulence, dyspnoea), microbiological profile and pathogen eradication.ResultsOf 693 COPD patients analyzed (aged 74.1; 86.3% men; mean FEV₁ = 43.7%), 71.7% had bronchiectasis and 46.6% presented chronic bronchial infection (CBI) by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA). After 1 year of treatment with inhaled antibiotics, there was a significant decrease in the number of exacerbations (?33.3%; P < .001), hospital admissions (?33.3%; P < .001) and hospitalization days (?26.2%; P = .003). We found no difference in effectiveness between patients with or without associated bronchiectasis. Positive patient outcomes were more pronounced in PA-eradicated patients. We found a significant reduction in daily expectoration (?33.1%; P = .024), mucopurulent/purulent sputum (?53.9%; P < .001), isolation of any potentially pathogenic microorganisms (PPM) (?16.7%; P < .001), CBI by any PPM (?37.4%; P < .001) and CBI by PA (?49.8%; P < .001). CBI by any PPM and ≥three previous exacerbations were associated with a better treatment response. 25.4% of patients presented non-severe side-effects, the most frequent of these being bronchospasm (10.5%), dyspnoea (8.8%) and cough (1.7%).ConclusionsIn COPD patients with multiple exacerbations and/or CBI by any PPM (especially PA), inhaled antibiotics appear to be an effective and safe treatment, regardless of the presence of bronchiectasis.     

Más difícil todavía: tratar una glomerulonefritis rápidamente progresiva grave en el seno de una neumonía por COVID-19

We present the case of a male patient with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, with simultaneous onset of p-ANCA positive rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis. We discuss the different therapeutic possibilities, emphasising the appropriateness of their administration according to the time in the course of the infection.     

短时程脊髓电刺激治疗爆发痛合并触诱发痛的急性期带状疱疹的临床研究

目的探讨短时程脊髓电刺激(temporary spinal cord stimulation, tSCS)治疗爆发痛合并触诱发痛的急性期带状疱疹的临床疗效。方法回顾性地分析同济大学附属第十人民医院疼痛科2020年1月—2020年12月收治的52例接受tSCS治疗的爆发痛合并触诱发痛的急性期带状疱疹患者的临床资料，评估在治疗前、治疗后3d、7d、14d、3个月、6个月的总体疼痛情况(numerical rating scale, NRS)评分、(simple McGill scores, McGill)评分、爆发痛情况(发生率、NRS评分、次数以及持续时间)、触诱发痛情况(发生率、分级)、术后不良反应等；评估在治疗前、治疗后7d、3个月、6个月的睡眠时长、睡眠中醒来次数、疼痛障碍指数(pain disorder index, PDI)、功能状态评分(Karnofsky score, KPS)、抑郁症筛查量表(patient health questionnaire depression module scale, PHQ-9)和焦虑症筛查量表(generalized anxiety disorder-7 scale, GAD-7)等。结果与治疗前相比，治疗后3d、7d、14d、3个月、6个月的总体疼痛NRS评分、总体疼痛MCGILL评分、静息痛NRS评分明显降低(均P<0.001)；与治疗前相比，治疗后3d、7d、14d、3个月、6个月的的爆发痛NRS评分明显降低(均P<0.05)，治疗后14d、3个月、6个月时的爆发痛次数以及持续时间都明显降低(均P<0.05)；与治疗前比较，患者治疗后7d、14d、3个月、6个月时的触诱发痛的分级都明显降低，差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)；与治疗前相比，治疗后14d、3个月、6个月的PDI评分明显降低(P<0.05)；与治疗前相比，治疗后14d、3个月、6个月的PHQ-9评分和GAD-7评分都明显减少(P<0.05)，与术前的药物使用情况相比，治疗后各镇痛药使用人数普遍呈下降趋势；术中及整个随访期间未观察到严重不良事件。结论短时程脊髓电刺激对爆发痛合并触诱发痛的急性期带状疱疹具有较好的临床疗效。     

Inhibition of autophagy enhances apoptosis induced by bortezomib in AML cells

Bortezomib is a novel proteasome inhibitor, which has been successfully used to treat mantle cell lymphoma and multiple myeloma. However, the direct effects of bortezomib on acute promyelocytic leukaemia (APL) have not been fully investigated. In the present study, the WST-8 assay, western blotting, flow cytometry, monodansylcadaverine staining and transmission electron microscopy were performed. It was demonstrated that bortezomib treatment induced a time- and dose-dependent decrease in the viability of NB4 cells. Bortezomib treatment induced cell apoptosis in NB4 cells, as assessed by Annexin V/propidium iodide analysis, and the detection of cleaved caspase-3, cleaved poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase, Bax and Bcl-2 expression. Furthermore, bortezomib treatment induced autophagy in NB4 cells, as indicated by autophagosome formation, p62 degradation, LC3-I to LC3-II conversion and formation of acidic autophagic vacuoles. Notably, autophagy induced by bortezomib was initiated prior to apoptosis. Inhibition of autophagy by knocking down Beclin-1 expression increased bortezomib-induced apoptosis in NB4 cells. Therefore, the present study revealed that the combination of bortezomib and autophagy inhibition may be a potential treatment strategy for APL.     

Differential Diagnosis of Acute Diarrhea

Acute diarrhea is a condition of increased water stool content, stool volume, and number of bowel movements that lasts less than 14 days. Mild diarrhea is usually self-limiting; however, undertreated moderate to severe diarrhea may cause severe dehydration and lead to hypovolemic shock. In order to prevent severe dehydration and treat patients appropriately, it is crucial for health care providers to determine the right diagnosis of patients with acute diarrhea. This article focuses on pathophysiology, general patient presentation, diagnostic tests and differential diagnosis lists of acute diarrhea to discuss which diagnosis should be made based on patient presentation and objective data.     

Glycaemic control for patients with severe acute brain injury: Protocol for a systematic review

Background

Hyperglycaemia is common in patients with acute brain injury admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Many studies have found associations between development of hyperglycaemia and increased mortality in hospitalised patients. However, the optimal target for blood glucose control is unknown. We want to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis to explore the beneficial and harmful effects of restrictive versus liberal glucose control on patient outcomes in adults with severe acute brain injury.

Methods

We will systematically search medical databases including CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE and trial registries. We will search the following websites for ongoing or unpublished trials: http://www.controlled-trials.com/ , http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ , www.eudraCT.com , http://centerwatch.com/ , The Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and CINAHL. Two authors will independently review and select trials and extract data. We will include randomised trials comparing levels of glucose control in our analyses and observational studies will be included to address potential harms. The primary outcomes are defined as all-cause mortality, functional outcome and health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse events including hypoglycaemia, length of ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation, and explorative outcomes including intracranial pressure and infection. Trial Sequential Analysis will be used to investigate the risk of type I error due to repetitive testing and to further explore imprecision. Quality of trials will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

Discussion

The results of the systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication. With the review, we hope to inform future randomised clinical trials and improve clinical practice.