Analysis of anomalous origin of coronary arteries by coronary angiography in Chinese patients with coronary artery disease

With the development of coronary angiography for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease, its clinical significance in detecting coronary artery anomalies and evaluating the seriousness is attracting more attention. In the study we aimed to assess the prevalence of anomalous origin of coronary arteries in a Chinese population who underwent coronary angiography for coronary artery disease, and explore any patterns in the common variants and typical anomalies, especially the potentially serious ones. Patients who underwent coronary angiography from January 2013 to December 2016 in Fuwai Hospital were included. Baseline characteristics and angiographic data were collected, the incidence of anomalous origin of coronary arteries was calculated, and the typical patterns were analyzed. Comparisons between the present results and those of existing reports were also conducted. A total of 110,158 patients were included in the study, among which 0.76% (835 cases) had anomalous origin of coronary arteries. Among the anomalies, the incidences of anomalous origin of the right coronary artery (RCA), the left coronary artery (LCA), both the RCA and LCA, single coronary artery (SCA) and dextrocardia were 76.76% (641 cases), 14.61% (122 cases), 1.80% (15 cases), 4.67% (39 cases) and 2.16% (18 cases), respectively. Moreover, 47.54% (397 cases) of the anomalies were shown to be potentially serious, and an RCA arising from the left sinus of Valsalva (LSV) was the most common subtype (39.28%, 328 cases). Although anomalous origin of coronary arteries is not quite common, more clinical attention should be paid to this condition due to the potential risk of serious sequelae.     

本科临床医学专业教育中不同教学方法的特点及合理应用

我国的本科临床医学教育可分为三个阶段：临床前阶段、临床见习阶段、临床实习阶段,每个阶段都有不同的特点和教学任务。临床医学教学过程中应用的教学方法主要有以授课为基础的教学（lecture-based learning,LBL）、以团队为基础的学习（team-based learning,TBL）、案例教学（case-based learning,CBL）和以问题为基础的学习（problem-based learning,PBL）。LBL是“以教师为中心”,注重知识的准确性、系统性、连贯性;TBL、CBL和PBL是“以学生为中心”,注重学生的主观能动性和学习积极性的培养。每种教学方法都有各自的优缺点,本研究根据本科医学教育三个阶段的不同特点,浅析不同医学教学方法在三阶段中的合理应用。临床前阶段,联合应用LBL和TBL;临床见习阶段,联合应用LBL、TBL和CBL教学方法;临床实习阶段,联合应用CBL和PBL。     

贵州地区汉族居民糖尿病患病情况及相关危险因素研究

目的 了解贵州地区汉族居民空腹血糖水平,分析糖尿病相关危险因素。方法 采用多阶段整群抽样方法,选取20～80岁汉族居民进行调查。调查内容包括问卷调查、体格检查和实验室检测。比较城乡不同年龄、性别人群空腹血糖水平和糖尿病相关危险因素。结果 共纳入研究对象2 967人,城镇居民空腹血糖平均值高于农村(5.21 mmol/L vs. 5.03 mmol/L,P< 0.001),男性高于女性(5.23 mmol/L vs. 5.09 mmol/L,P=0.003),血糖水平有随年龄增长的趋势(P< 0.001)。城镇居民糖尿病标化患病率为6.01%(粗率7.45%),其中男性显著高于女性(P< 0.001),随年龄增长患病率升高。农村居民标化患病率为3.47%(粗率3.77%),性别差异无统计学意义,随年龄增长患病率升高。相同年龄性别下,≥40岁城镇居民患病率高于农村居民。糖尿病患者中知晓率为56.59%,治疗率为84.47%,控制率为41.38%。多因素分析显示,男性发病风险高于女性、年龄≥40岁发病风险升高、有糖尿病家族史、经常进行身体锻炼、高血压、高甘油三酯者糖尿病的发病风险增加。结论 贵州汉族居民糖尿病患病率较高,城乡患病率差异大,半数以上糖尿病患者治疗后血糖未达到控制水平,糖尿病知晓率、治疗率及控制率仍需进一步提高。     

中国10省(市)流感成年人住院病例的临床特征及重症危险因素分析

目的 了解中国10省(市)严重急性呼吸道感染(SARI)住院病例哨点监测纳入的流感成年人住院病例的临床特征及重症危险因素。方法 对2009年12月至2014年6月中国10省(市)SARI哨点监测医院纳入的符合SARI定义的≥15岁病例进行流行病学和临床信息调查,采集呼吸道标本进行流感病毒核酸检测。按检测结果将病例分为流感住院组和非流感住院组,分析两组人口统计学信息、临床和流行病学特征,并分析重症危险因素。结果 10家哨点医院共纳入3 071例SARI成年人病例,其中实验室确诊240例(7.8%),以A(H1N1)pdm2009和A(H3N2)亚型流感病毒为主。病例年龄M为63岁,≥65岁老年人占47.1%。144例(60.0%)患有至少1种慢性基础性疾病,流感病例肺气肿比例(7.9%)高于非流感病例(3.8%),差异有统计学意义(χ²=3.963,P=0.047)。19.4%的流感育龄妇女为孕妇,240例流感病例中仅有1.1%在过去一年接种过流感疫苗。流感住院病例中咽痛、呼吸困难所占比例高于非流感住院病例。17.5%的流感病例收入重症监护室治疗,与非流感住院病例间的差异无统计学意义(P=0.160)。23.1%的流感病例在发病后使用了抗病毒药物治疗,高于非流感住院组(4.8%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。流感住院病例中41.5%出现并发症,病毒性肺炎比例明显高于非流感组(P<0.001)。危险因素分析显示,发病入院时间>7 d(RR=1.673,95%CI:1.071～2.614)、患有哮喘(RR=15.200,95%CI:1.157～199.633)、免疫抑制疾病(RR=5.250,95%CI:1.255～21.960)、怀孕(RR=21.000,95%CI:1.734～254.275)是流感重症的危险因素。结论 成年人流感住院病例主要集中在≥65岁组,流感疫苗接种率极低、抗病毒药物使用不足,应推荐孕妇、老年人、慢性病病例等高危人群每年进行流感疫苗预防接种,流感住院病例应及早应用抗病毒药物。     

Carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy in the treatment of symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose: To evaluate the short-term and intermediate- to long-term efficacy and safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) compared with carotid endarterectomy (CEA).Materials and Methods: The published literature was electronically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) between CAS and CEA for the treatment of carotid stenosis performed from January 2000 to January 2017. The short-term and intermediate- to long-term outcomes were evaluated.Results: We identified 10 RCTs including 7,183 participants with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Our meta-analysis found different results between the patients with and those without symptoms. In patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis, the total stroke incidence in the CAS group was significantly higher than that in the CEA group within the 30-day periprocedural period (p<0.001); however, the myocardial infarction incidence in the CAS group was significantly lower than that in the CEA group (p<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the mortality within 30 days post-procedure, but the intermediate- to long-term incidence of stroke or death in the CAS group was higher than that of the CEA group (p<0.05). In contrast, for asymptomatic patients, there were no significant differences between the CAS and CEA groups in the short- and intermediate- to long-term outcomes.Conclusion: For patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis, CEA is associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, whereas CAS is correlated with an increased risk of procedurally related strokes. However, for patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis, no significant difference was found in the efficacy or safety between CAS and CEA.     

TGFβR2作为非小细胞肺癌伴随诊断分子的探讨

目的 定量分析转化生长因子受体2(Transforming growth factor receptor 2, TGFβR2)在非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer, NSCLC)及其癌旁组织中的表达,探讨TGFβR2的表达在NSCLC伴随诊断(companion diagnostic,CD)中的意义。方法 取患者手术中立即取材置于液氮中的新鲜组织标本(90例NSCLC组织,40例癌旁肺组织),抽提RNA,采用实时荧光定量PCR(RT-qPCR)技术检测标本。TGFβR2基因表达量通过2-ΔΔCT方法计算。TGFβR2的表达用(x±s)呈现。独立样本t检验比较两组差异,应用Kaplan-Meier生存分析来评估总生存期(Overall survival, OS)和无进展生存期(Progression-free survival, PFS)。结果 实验结果表明NSCLC组织中TGFβR2的表达(3.19±4.28)显著高于癌旁肺组织(1.01±0.41),二者差异具有统计学意义。生存分析显示TGFβR2高表达的NSCLC患者预后不良,总生存期和无进展生存期明显降低。结论 TGFβR2可以作为NSCLC潜在的伴随诊断分子标志物。     

肺癌患者胸腔镜下右肺上叶切除并支气管成形术1例报告及文献复习

目的: 探讨1例应用胸腔镜行右肺上叶切除并支气管成形术治疗右肺中心型肺癌病例临床效果,同时进行胸腔镜下肺叶切除、支气管成形术的文献复习。方法: 胸腔镜下游离、处理上叶动静脉后,楔形切除部分右主支气管,纵行缝针挂线,间距3.0 mm,由两侧向中心依次系紧缝线完成吻合重建通畅气道。结果: 患者术后恢复顺利,术后5 d拔管。病理回报为右肺上叶中分化鳞状细胞癌。术后复查胸部CT右肺中下叶膨胀良好。结论: 病例选择适当,胸腔镜行右肺上叶切除、支气管成形术治疗右肺上叶开口处的右肺中心型肺癌是可行的,且效果良好。     

Terlipressin versus norepinephrine as infusion in patients with septic shock: a multicentre,randomised, double-blinded trial

Purpose

Recent clinical data suggest that terlipressin, a vasopressin analogue, may be more beneficial in septic shock patients than catecholamines. However, terlipressin’s effect on mortality is unknown. We set out to ascertain the efficacy and safety of continuous terlipressin infusion compared with norepinephrine (NE) in patients with septic shock.

Methods

In this multicentre, randomised, double-blinded trial, patients with septic shock recruited from 21 intensive care units in 11 provinces of China were randomised (1:1) to receive either terlipressin (20–160 µg/h with maximum infusion rate of 4 mg/day) or NE (4–30 µg/min) before open-label vasopressors. The primary endpoint was mortality 28 days after the start of infusion. Primary efficacy endpoint analysis and safety analysis were performed on the data from a modified intention-to-treat population.

Results

Between 1 January 2013 and 28 February 2016, 617 patients were randomised (312 to the terlipressin group, 305 to the NE group). The modified intention-to-treat population comprised 526 (85.3%) patients (260 in the terlipressin group and 266 in the NE group). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality rate between the terlipressin group (40%) and the NE group (38%) (odds ratio 0.93 [95% CI 0.55–1.56]; p?=?0.80). Change in SOFA score on day 7 was similar between the two groups: ??7 (IQR ??11 to 3) in the terlipressin group and ??6 (IQR ??10 to 5) in the NE group. There was no difference between the groups in the number of days alive and free of vasopressors. Overall, serious adverse events were more common in the terlipressin group than in the NE group (30% vs 12%; p?<?0.001).

Conclusions

In this multicentre, randomised, double-blinded trial, we observed no difference in mortality between terlipressin and NE infusion in patients with septic shock. Patients in the terlipressin group had a higher number of serious adverse events.

Trial registration

This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: ID NCT01697410.