母亲龋易感性与婴儿口腔微生物多样性关系的纵向探究

目的通过检查有龋及无龋母亲的口腔卫生状况,并通过随访收集其婴儿1个月(1月龄)及6个月(6月龄)的唾液样本测序分析,观察母亲患龋情况对其婴儿口腔微生物多样性的影响。方法通过筛查收集1月龄婴儿的唾液样本;于首次采样时记录母亲的口腔卫生状况,根据母亲患龋情况将婴儿分为母亲有龋组(简称有龋组)和母亲无龋组(简称无龋组),跟踪随访至婴儿6个月时再次收集唾液样本。通过高通量测序的方法,分析婴儿不同月龄微生物多样性的变化。结果本研究随访受试者10例(男6例,女4例),其中有龋组7例,无龋组3例,各组间的微生物群落多样性Shannon指数均无显著性差异(P>0.05)。无龋组婴儿1月龄至6月龄时微生物群落的物种组成有较大变化;有龋组婴儿在1月龄和6月龄时组内各样本间物种组成均差异较大;1月龄时两组微生物群落较相似,而至6月龄时两组婴儿唾液的物种组成已开始发生变化。结论有龋组婴儿口腔内菌群多样性总体高于无龋组,在1月龄至6月龄间婴儿口腔内微生物物种的多样性及丰度均有了不同程度的提高。     

吉林辽宁两省18年来的目标设置对突发公共卫生事件应急工作落实情况的关联研究

目的本研究立足于项目组前期研究的成果上，积极探索吉林辽宁两省目标设置水平的差异，并进一步探究受目标设置影响下的工作落实结果情况，探讨产生差异的原因。 方法以系统穷尽的方式收集吉林辽宁两省2000至2017年有关目标与工作落实情况的指标，利用Spearman相关和线性回归分析吉林辽宁两省目标设置对于突发应急工作落实情况的影响。 结果吉林辽宁两省突发应急领域的目标设置水平与工作落实情况总体均呈现上升趋势，截至2017年，吉林目标设置水平与工作落实情况分别为46%与60%，辽宁为60%与53.3%，且目标设置水平与工作落实呈正相关。 结论有公众需要为依据且定量可考的目标设置对于工作落实、推进、完善具有积极的正反馈作用，建立科学量化的突发应急目标设置评价体系是适宜可行的。     

层级质量控制在外科ICU护理管理中的应用

目的探讨在外科ICU护理管理中实施层级质量控制的效果。方法选择2016年1-12月为实施前,2018年1-12月为实施后,实施前后均选取50例外科ICU患者及护理人员为研究对象,对实施前后外科ICU护理管理质量进行观察。结果实施后外科护理人员在工作人员素质、环境管理、护理质量管理及质量总分上均显著高于实施前(P<0.05);实施后ICU患者对护理管理的总满意率为98.00%,明显高于实施前总满意率86.00%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论在外科ICU护理管理中,实施层级质量控制的护理管理模式,可显著提高ICU病房护理治疗,提高患者的满意率,值得推广。     

微滴式数字PCR和实时荧光定量PCR对新型冠状病毒肺炎患者不同时间血便尿中核酸检测结果初步探讨

目的 分析微滴式数字PCR(droplet digital PCR, ddPCR)和实时荧光定量PCR(quantitative real-time PCR,qPCR)的核酸检测结果,比较两种方法检测各类样本的差异性,为改进新型冠状病毒核酸检测方案提供数据支持。 方法 利用ddPCR和qPCR技术对已经确诊的3例新型冠状病毒肺炎患者发病不同时间的全血、尿液、粪便共22份标本进行新型冠状病毒核酸检测。 结果 两种方法对人保守区域基因扩增结果一致:全血标本信号最强,尿液次之,粪便最少;ddPCR在1份全血,1份尿液,5份粪便中检出ORF-1ab和N基因的阳性微滴,qPCR仅在3份粪便中检出上述基因,漏检的3个标本基因拷贝数平均浓度为128 copies/ml;ddPCR在发病<5、5~15、>15 d的各类标本中都有检出,qPCR检出以中晚期为主;重症病例用ddPCR均可测到阳性微滴,qPCR检测的各类标本均为阴性;轻症病例的各类标本中qPCR只有粪便核酸检测阳性,ddPCR检出率高于qPCR。 结论 ddPCR可以有效克服qPCR 灵敏度不足的难题,是对qPCR 的有益补充,尤其是针对病毒载量比较低的血液、尿液和可疑的粪便或肛拭子标本,适用于早期感染的判断及患者治愈后出院诊断。     

不同介入模式在肝癌治疗中的应用分析

目的探讨不同介入模式在肝癌治疗中的应用分析。方法选取我院肝癌患者130例,将其分为三组,其中,一组患者采用经肝动脉化疗栓塞术(TACE)治疗,二组患者采用肝门静脉化疗栓塞术(PVCE)治疗,三组患者在前两组患者治疗的基础上进行经皮肝穿刺乙醇消融(PEI)治疗,对比分析三组患者的治疗效果。结果一组治疗总有效率为27.5%,二组治疗总有效率为35%,三组治疗总有效率为92%,三组相对于一、二组来说治疗效果更佳,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论肝动脉化疗栓塞术、肝门静脉化疗栓塞术和经皮肝穿刺乙醇消融治疗相结合治疗肝癌患者,能够有效提高患者治疗效果,稳定患者病情。     

Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials: Efficacy and Safety of UDCA-Based Therapies in Primary Biliary Cirrhosis

Major ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA)-based therapies for primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) include UDCA only, or combined with either methotrexate (MTX), corticosteroids (COT), colchicine (COC), or bezafibrate (BEF). As the optimum treatment regimen is unclear and warrants exploration, we aimed to compare these therapies in terms of patient mortality or liver transplantation (MOLT) and adverse events (AE).PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for randomized controlled trials up to August 31, 2014. We estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) for MOLT and odds ratios (ORs) for AE. A sensitivity analysis based on the dose of UDCA was also executed.Thirty-one eligible articles were included. Compared with COT plus UDCA, UDCA (HR 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09–1.39), BEF plus UDCA (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.02–4.83), COC plus UDCA (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.07–2.25), MTX plus UDCA (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.05–1.63), or OBS (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.11–2.01) all provided an increased risk of MOLT. With respect to drug AE profile, although not differing appreciably, BEF plus UDCA was associated with more AEs compared with UDCA (OR 3.16, 95% CI 0.59–20.67), COT plus UDCA (OR 2.27, 95% CI 0.15–33.36), COC plus UDCA (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.09–12.16), MTX plus UDCA (OR 2.03, 95% CI 0.23–17.82), or OBS (OR 3.00, 95% CI 0.53–20.75). The results of sensitivity analyses were highly consistent with previous analyses.COT plus UDCA was the optimal UDCA-based regimen for both MOLT and AEs. BEF plus UDCA was most likely to cause AEs, whereas monotherapy with UDCA and coadministriation of COT plus UDCA appeared to be associated with the fewest AEs for PBC treatment.     

A Phase I Trial of Trametinib in Combination with Sorafenib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Cancer

Lessons Learned

• The combination of trametinib and sorafenib has an acceptable safety profile, albeit at doses lower than approved for monotherapy.
• Maximum tolerated dose is trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice daily.
• The limited anticancer activity observed in this unselected patient population does not support further exploration of trametinib plus sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BackgroundThe RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK signaling pathway is associated with proliferation and progression of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Preclinical data suggest that paradoxical activation of the MAPK pathway may be one of the resistance mechanisms of sorafenib; therefore, we evaluated trametinib plus sorafenib in HCC.MethodsThis was a phase I study with a 3+3 design in patients with treatment‐naïve advanced HCC. The primary objective was safety and tolerability. The secondary objective was clinical efficacy.ResultsA total of 17 patients were treated with three different doses of trametinib and sorafenib. Two patients experienced dose‐limiting toxicity, including grade 4 hypertension and grade 3 elevation of aspartate aminotransferase (AST)/alanine aminotransferase (ALT)/bilirubin over 7 days. Maximum tolerated dose was trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice a day. The most common grade 3/4 treatment‐related adverse events were elevated AST (37%) and hypertension (24%). Among 11 evaluable patients, 7 (63.6%) had stable disease with no objective response. The median progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.7 and 7.8 months, respectively. Phosphorylated‐ERK was evaluated as a pharmacodynamic marker, and sorafenib plus trametinib inhibited phosphorylated‐ERK up to 98.1% (median: 81.2%) in peripheral blood mononuclear cells.ConclusionTrametinib and sorafenib can be safely administered up to trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice a day with limited anticancer activity in advanced HCC.