微创治疗方法在输尿管上段结石中应用进展

输尿管上段结石为临床中常见泌尿系结石类型之一,如不能及时诊治,可引起重度积水、泌尿系感染,甚至脓毒血症,对患者肾功能、健康造成严重影响。随着微创治疗技术在泌尿系结石中应用,微创治疗方法能降低对患者造成治疗性创伤,降低相关并发症发生率,促进患者康复,了解临床中微创治疗输尿管上段结石方法,对临床中合理治疗输尿管上段结石有重要价值。     

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。     

Minimally Invasive Treatments for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

PurposeTo review and to compare indirectly the outcomes of minimally invasive therapies for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia.Materials and MethodsA literature search via Medline and Cochrane Central databases was completed for randomized control studies published between January 2000 to April 2020 for the following therapies: Rezum, Urolift, Aquablation, and prostatic artery embolization (PAE). Data on the following variables were included: International prostate symptom score (IPSS), maximum urinary flow rate, quality of life, and postvoid residual (PVR). Standard mean differences between treatments were compared through a meta-analysis using transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to assess differences in treatment effect.ResultsThere was no significant difference in outcomes between therapies for IPSS at the 3, 6, and 12-month follow ups. Although outcomes for Rezum were only available out to 3 months, there were no consistently significant differences in outcomes when comparing Aquablation versus PAE versus Rezum. TURP PVR was significantly better than Urolift at 3, 6, and 12 months. No significant differences in minor or major adverse events were noted.ConclusionAlthough significant differences in outcomes were limited, Aquablation and PAE were the most durable at 12 months. PAE has been well studied on multiple randomized control trials with minimal adverse events while Aquablation has limited high quality data and has been associated with bleeding-related complications.     

Endoscopic diagnosis of sessile serrated polyp: A systematic review

The aim of the present review was to clarify how we should detect and diagnose sessile serrated polyps (SSP) endoscopically. A systematic search was conducted of MEDLINE from January 2004 through March 2018. Nine findings: (i) proximal location; (ii) size >10 mm; (iii) irregular shape; (iv) indistinctive border; (v) cloud‐like surface; (vi) mucus cap; (vii) rim of debris in white‐light endoscopy; (viii) dilated vessels; and (ix) dilated crypts (pits) in image‐enhanced endoscopy were considered to be candidate discriminators of SSP from hyperplastic polyps. Prospective studies in a general setting are warranted to validate the above‐mentioned endoscopic features of SSP during real‐time colonoscopy and to determine whether these features are useful for the differential diagnosis of SSP.     

胃癌微创外科临床研究进展及展望（2000-2020）

目前临床研究已证实腹腔镜胃癌根治术治疗早期胃癌的安全性、可行性和有效性。基于此，第4版日本《胃癌治疗指南》推荐腹腔镜手术治疗临床Ⅰ期远端胃癌。然而，腹腔镜胃癌手术治疗进展期胃癌的有效性和安全性仍存争议。中国腹腔镜胃肠外科研究组（CLASS研究组）发起的CLASS-01研究顺利完成，提供了全球首个局部进展期胃癌腹腔镜手术安全性和疗效的前瞻性多中心证据。胃癌外科的主流方向在从“大切口和扩大化手术切除”逐渐向“微创、精准化手术”转变，以使手术安全性和病人术后生活质量最优化。     

Non-robotic minimally invasive gastrectomy as an independent risk factor for postoperative intra-abdominal infectious complications: A single-center,retrospective and propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer(GC) has gained widespread use as a safe curative procedure especially for early GC.AIM To determine risk factors for postoperative complications after minimally invasive gastrectomy for GC.METHODS Between January 2009 and June 2019, 1716 consecutive patients were referred to our division for primary GC. Among them, 1401 patients who were diagnosed with both clinical and pathological Stage Ⅲ or lower GC and underwent robotic gastrectomy(RG) or laparoscopic gastrectomy(LG) were enrolled. Retrospective chart review and multivariate analysis were performed for identifying risk factors for postoperative morbidity.RESULTS Morbidity following minimally invasive gastrectomy was observed in 7.5% of the patients. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that non-robotic minimally invasive surgery, male gender, and an operative time of ≥ 360 min were significant independent risk factors for morbidity. Therefore, morbidity was compared between RG and LG. Accordingly, propensity-matched cohort analysis revealed that the RG group had significantly fewer intra-abdominal infectious complications than the LG group(2.5% vs 5.9%, respectively; P = 0.038), while no significant differences were noted for other local or systemic complications.Multivariate analyses of the propensity-matched cohort revealed that non-robotic minimally invasive surgery [odds ratio = 2.463(1.070–5.682); P = 0.034] was a significant independent risk factor for intra-abdominal infectious complications.CONCLUSION The findings showed that robotic surgery might improve short-term outcomes following minimally invasive radical gastrectomy by reducing intra-abdominal infectious complications.     

Endoscopic gastroplasty to treat medically uncontrolled obesity needs more quality data: A systematic review

Endoscopic gastroplasty (EG) has been used in clinical practice to treat obesity. This systematic review has the objective of assessing if there is an acceptable level of scientific evidence on the safety and effectiveness of EG. A thorough search strategy was used up to October 2018, including the 2 most common techniques: endoscopic suturing and the primary obesity surgery endolumenal procedure. The quality of the studies was evaluated through the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools for use in Systematic Reviews—“Checklist for Case Series”—and summarized using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Only 1 randomized controlled trial (moderate GRADE evidence) was found, and the remaining were case reports or small case series (very low GRADE evidence). The literature has low scientific quality. All studies, with 1 exception, are small case series with short follow-up. One of the randomized controlled trials did not meet the primary endpoint for weight loss in both groups (EG × sham) after 1-year follow-up. The case series reported from 16% to 19% total weight loss, but few had more than 6 months of follow-up. Serious adverse events ranged from 2% to 10%. Based on current literature, there is not enough quality scientific evidence regarding long-term weight loss and the procedure’s safety to recommend the use of EG in current clinical practice.