ABSTRACT
Objective:To investigate the awareness of digestive system injury caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in gastroenterologists.Methods:From February 21 to 23 in 2020, the electronic questionnaire was used to learn about the condition of the basic knowledge of COVID-19 and awareness of digestive system injury caused by COVID-19 among the gastroenterologists across the country. Chi-square test was used for statistical analysis.Results:A total of 2 216 gastroenterologists from 31 provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities nationwide completed the survey. 99.7% (2 209/2 216) of gastroenterologists stated that they had read the COVID-19 diagnosis and treatment guidelines. The percentages of physicians who knew clearly about the diagnostic criteria of suspected and confirmed cases of COVID-19 was 34.9% (774/2 216) and 39.4% (874/2 216), respectively. The percentages of physician who gave the right answers of COVID-19 detectable methods and pulmonary imaging was 68.4% (1 516/2 216) and 71.6% (1 586/2 216), respectively. The percentages of correct answers of digestive system injury caused by COVID-19 were physicians and chief physicians was 30.9% (134/433) in residents, 33.9% (234/691) attending physicians, 32.4% (213/657) associated chief physicians and 34.9% (152/435) chief physicians, respectively, however there were no statistically significant differences among physicians with different professional titles ( χ2=6.60, P> 0.05). 95.6% (2 119/2 216) of gastroenterologists believed that probiotics could effectively improve bowel function, and 94.0% (2 082/2 216) of gastroenterologists considered that enteral nutrition support could improve patients’ prognosis. Conclusions:The knowledge and dynamic progress of the digestive system injury caused by COVID-19 are still insufficiently grasped by gastroenterologists in China. So it is necessary to carry out systematic and pertinent training programmes for them.
ABSTRACT
Objective@#To investigate awareness of digestive system injury caused by corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in gastroenterologists.@*Methods@#From February 21 to 23 in 2020, the electronic questionnaire was sent out to explore the condition of the basic knowledge of COVID-19 and knowledge of digestive system injury caused by COVID-19 grasped by gastroenterologists. Chi-square test was used for statistical analysis.@*Results@#A total of 2 216 gastroenterologists from 31 provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities nationwide completed the survey. 99.7% (2 209/2 216) of gastroenterologists stated that they had read the COVID-19 diagnosis and treatment guidelines. The percentage of physicians who well knew the diagnostic criteria of suspected and confirmed cases of COVID-19 was 34.9% (774/2 216) and 39.4% (874/2 216), respectively. The percentage of physician who gave the right answer of COVID-19 detectable methods and lung imaging was 68.4% (1 516/2 216) and 71.6% (1 586/2 216), respectively. The percentage of correct answer of digestive system injury caused by COVID-19 in residents, attending physicians, associate chief physicians and chief physicians was 30.9% (134/433), 33.9% (234/691), 32.4% (213/657) and 34.9% (152/435), respectively, however there were no statistically significant differences among physicians of different level (χ2=6.60, P> 0.05). 95.6% (2 119/2 216) of gastroenterologists believed that probiotics could effectively improve bowel function, and 94.0% (2 082/2 216) of gastroenterologists considered that enteral nutrition support could improve patients’ prognosis.@*Conclusions@#The knowledge and dynamic progress of the digestive system injury caused of COVID-19 are still insufficiently grasped by gastroenterologists in China. So it is necessary to carry out systematic and pertinent training for them.
ABSTRACT
Background:Non-variceal vascular originated gastrointestinal bleeding has been attracted more and more attention in clinical practice. Because of the poor efficacy of conventional drug therapy and the high rebleeding rate,endoscopic therapy or interventional therapy have become the first choice. Aims:To investigate the therapeutic value of endoscopic therapy and interventional therapy in non-variceal vascular originated gastrointestinal bleeding. Methods:Retrospective analysis was performed in 77 patients with non-variceal vascular originated gastrointestinal bleeding who underwent endoscopic therapy or interventional therapy from January 2010 to May 2016 at Daping Hospital of the Third Military Medical University. The therapeutic efficacy of the two therapies was compared. Results:In 77 patients,48 patients received endoscopic therapy and 29 patients received interventional therapy. Compared with interventional therapy group, hemoglobin was significantly higher (P = 0. 007)and Blatchford score was significantly lower in endoscopic therapy group (P = 0. 021). Stomach lesion was found in 22 patients,25 in duodenum,18 in small intestine,9 in colon and 3 in rectum. Angiodysplasia lesion was found in 35 patients,ulcer combined with angiodysplasia in 26 patients,arterial rupture in 13 patients,and angiotelectasis in 3 patients. Rebleeding occurred in 7 patients underwent endoscopic therapy within 72 hours. No rebleeding was found in patients underwent interventional therapy,however,1 patients died from pulmonary embolism. Conclusions:Most patients with upper gastrointestinal angiodysplasia can benefit from endoscopic therapy. Surgery may be a better choice for those with more severe mucosal damage and rebleeding within 72 hours after treatment. Interventional treatment may be a first choice for those who have bleeding from small intestinal angiodysplasia,lower hemoglobin and a higher Blatchford score.
ABSTRACT
Objective To investigate the data of gene expression microarray by protein interaction network analysis,establish an interaction network of differentially expressed genes between Kashin-Beck disease (KBD) and osteoarthritis (OA) and choose the central nodes of the network.Methods The articular cartilage samples of degrees Ⅱ ° and Ⅲ ° KBD and OA patients were selected according to the national diagnosis criteria for KBD and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) for OA.Chondrocytes of 8 patients with KBD and 7 with OA were selected.About 1 000 different genes detected by gene expression microarray were inputted into STRING 9.1 database online for analysis and establishment of the interaction network.The interaction data were imported into Cytoscape 3.2.1 software for screening the central nodes of the network.KEGG database was exploited for pathway analysis and functional study of the central node genes,Real-time PCR (RT-PCR) was used for verification.Results The protein products of 334 differentially expressed genes between KBD and OA had interrelation,forming a complicated interaction network.About 150 central nodes were selected by Cytoscape 3.2.1 that involved in more than ten signal pathways involved in mitochondria,bone metabolism and inflammatory cytokine.Conclusion The interaction network of the differentially expressed genes between KBD and OA,especially the central nodes of this network,can provide clues to the mechanism and early diagnosis and molecular targeted therapy of KBD and OA.
ABSTRACT
Objective To validate the discriminatory capacity of the new ankylosing spondylitis disease activity scores (ASDAS) in Chinese ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients, and assess its clinical value. Method One hundred and twenty-nine patients with AS was included in the study, in which 87 were par-ticipat clinical trials with Etanercept (n=87) and 42 were participants of clinical trails with. The disease activity and treatment effecticacy were assessed by ASDAS, BASDAI and patient global assessment. Discriminatory ability of all the measures was analyzed as standardized mean difference (SMD) and (-score. Pearson's correlation, two indepen -dent samples t test and simple linear regression model were used for statistical analysis. Result The four ASDAS scores correlated well with patient global assessment (r=0.56～0.74), ESR (r=0.50～0.80) and CRP (r=0.50～0.69) both at baseline and the changes form baseline to 6 weeks after treatment. The four ASDAS outperformed BASDAI, patient global assessment, ESR and CRP in differentiating patients with different levels of disease activity and patients with different levels of change. There was little difference in performance between the four ASDAS versions. Conclusion The four ASDAS are highly discriminatory in evaluating the disease activity and the efficacy of drugs in Chinese AS patients, showing a significant value in clinical practice.