电视辅助胸腔镜下解剖性肺切除治疗I期肺癌的临床效果

目的 探讨电视辅助胸腔镜下解剖性肺切除治疗Ⅰ期肺癌的临床效果。方法 采用回顾性研究方法,选取2015年5月至2017年1月广西医科大学附属肿瘤医院收治的I期肺癌患者84例,按照手术方法不同将患者分为两组:观察组和对照组,每组各42例。观察组患者实施电视辅助胸腔镜下解剖性肺切除术治疗,对照组患者给予传统开胸肺叶切除术治疗。比较两组患者的住院时间、切口长度、术中出血量、手术时间、1年和3年生存情况及生活质量评分(SF-36生活量表)变化。结果 观察组患者的住院时间短于对照组(6. 13±1. 46 vs. 10. 39±2. 41 d),切口长度小于对照组(4. 38±1. 09 vs. 11. 84±3. 25 cm),术中出血量少于对照组(284. 62±54. 21 vs. 397. 57±61. 49 ml),差异均具有统计学意义(P <0. 05);而两组手术时间比较(165. 28±33. 24 vs. 156. 39±30. 92 min),差异无统计学意义(P> 0. 05)。观察组患者的1、3年生存率[97. 62%(41/42)、90. 48%(38/42)]均高于对照组[88. 10%(37/42)、76. 19%(32/42)],但差异无统计学意义(P> 0. 05)。观察组患者的各项生活质量评分[精神健康(75. 42±6. 87 vs 61. 30±4. 15分)、情感职能(81. 38±7. 15 vs. 73. 49±5. 76分)、社会功能(82. 67±5. 78 vs. 75. 42±4. 35分)、一般健康状况(79. 49±6. 17 vs.70. 31±5. 04分)、精力(84. 37±5. 45 vs. 74. 13±6. 07分)、生理职能(86. 52±6. 88 vs. 76. 93±6. 42分)、躯体疼痛(83. 46±7. 49 vs. 74. 33±5. 79分)、生理功能(70. 39±4. 31 vs. 61. 38±3. 56分)]均高于对照组,且差异具有统计学意义(P <0. 05)。结论 与传统开胸肺叶切除术相比,电视辅助胸腔镜下解剖性肺切除治疗I期肺癌手术损伤更小、短期生存率更高,且有助于提高患者术后生活质量水平,这对改善患者预后有重要意义,值得临床推广应用。     

Differentiating autoimmune pancreatitis from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with CT radiomics features

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to determine whether computed tomography (CT)-based machine learning of radiomics features could help distinguish autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).Materials and MethodsEighty-nine patients with AIP (65 men, 24 women; mean age, 59.7 ± 13.9 [SD] years; range: 21–83 years) and 93 patients with PDAC (68 men, 25 women; mean age, 60.1 ± 12.3 [SD] years; range: 36–86 years) were retrospectively included. All patients had dedicated dual-phase pancreatic protocol CT between 2004 and 2018. Thin-slice images (0.75/0.5 mm thickness/increment) were compared with thick-slices images (3 or 5 mm thickness/increment). Pancreatic regions involved by PDAC or AIP (areas of enlargement, altered enhancement, effacement of pancreatic duct) as well as uninvolved parenchyma were segmented as three-dimensional volumes. Four hundred and thirty-one radiomics features were extracted and a random forest was used to distinguish AIP from PDAC. CT data of 60 AIP and 60 PDAC patients were used for training and those of 29 AIP and 33 PDAC independent patients were used for testing.ResultsThe pancreas was diffusely involved in 37 (37/89; 41.6%) patients with AIP and not diffusely in 52 (52/89; 58.4%) patients. Using machine learning, 95.2% (59/62; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 89.8–100%), 83.9% (52:67; 95% CI: 74.7–93.0%) and 77.4% (48/62; 95% CI: 67.0–87.8%) of the 62 test patients were correctly classified as either having PDAC or AIP with thin-slice venous phase, thin-slice arterial phase, and thick-slice venous phase CT, respectively. Three of the 29 patients with AIP (3/29; 10.3%) were incorrectly classified as having PDAC but all 33 patients with PDAC (33/33; 100%) were correctly classified with thin-slice venous phase with 89.7% sensitivity (26/29; 95% CI: 78.6–100%) and 100% specificity (33/33; 95% CI: 93–100%) for the diagnosis of AIP, 95.2% accuracy (59/62; 95% CI: 89.8–100%) and area under the curve of 0.975 (95% CI: 0.936–1.0).ConclusionsRadiomic features help differentiate AIP from PDAC with an overall accuracy of 95.2%.     

腹腔镜下子宫双侧动脉阻断术联合清宫术治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠疗效分析

目的 探讨腹腔镜下子宫双侧动脉阻断术联合清宫术治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠疗效及对内分泌的影响.方法 选择2011年1月至2015年12月剖宫产瘢痕妊娠患者57例,其中A组32例患者给予超声引导下清宫术治疗,B组25例患者给予腹腔镜下子宫双侧动脉阻断术联合清宫术治疗,比较两组患者出血量、住院时间、月经复潮时间、术后人绒毛膜促性腺激素(hCG)降至正常时间,并发症情况及术前(T0)、术后第1d(T1)、第3d(T2)神经内分泌激素水平.结果 ①B组患者出血量低于A组,住院时间、月经复潮时间短于A组,比较差异有统计学意义(t出血量=31.85,k院时间=9.36,t月经复t潮时间=16.37,均P＜0.05);②B组患者并发症发生率为8.00％,低于A组的15.63％,比较差异有统计学意义(x2=9.35,P＜0.05);③B组T1、T2血清COR、β-EP、GLU水平低于A组(CORF交互=17.67,β-EPF交互=132.36,6LUF交互=155.38,均P＜0.05).结论 腹腔镜下子宫双侧动脉阻断术联合清宫术治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠微创优势明显,安全性高,对内分泌影响较轻.     

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and neck of femur fractures: Standardising the perioperative management and time to surgery

Demographic projections for hip fragility fractures indicate a rising annual incidence by virtue of a multimorbid, ageing population with more noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). NCDs are characterised by slow progression and long duration ranging from ischaemic cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to various cancers. Management of this disease burden often involves commencing patients on oral anticoagulants to reduce the risk of thromboembolic events. The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in clinical practice has increased due to their rapid onset of action, short half-life and predictable anticoagulant effects, without the need for routine monitoring. Safe and timely surgical intervention relies on reversal of anticoagulants. However, the lack of specific evidence-based guidelines for the perioperative management of patients on DOACs with hip fractures has proved challenging; in particular, the accessibility of DOAC-specific assays, justification of the cost-benefit ratio of targeted reversal agents and indications for neuraxial anaesthesia. This has led to potentially avoidable delays in surgical intervention. Following a literature review of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics of commonly used DOACs in our region including the role of surrogate markers, we propose a systematic, evidence-based guideline to the perioperative management of hip fractures DOACs. We believe this standardised protocol can be easily replicated between hospitals. We recommend that if patients are deemed suitable for a general anaesthesia, with satisfactory renal function, optimal surgical time should be 24 h following the last ingested dose of DOAC.