Expression difference of FKBP51 in colorectal cancer and normal tissues and its relationship with clinicopathological features / 中国医师杂志

Objective To explore the difference of the expression level of FK506 Binding Protein 51 (FKBP51) in colorectal adenocarcinoma and normal colorectal tissues,and the correlation between FKBP51 expression level and clinicopathological characteristics,and to clarify whether FKBP51 is involved in the occurrence and development of colorectal cancer.Methods By immunohistochemical staining [streptavidin-peroxidase (SP) method] and Western blotting methods tested 31 cases of colorectal cancer tumor tissues and normal colorectal tissues far from tumor 5 cm,and explored the expression level difference of FKBP51.Combined with clinical data of patients,results were analyzed by statistical method x2 test of four case table data.Results The high expression rate of FKBP51 in tumor tissues was 74.19％ (23/31 cases),while the high expression rate of FKBP51 in normal tissue was 9.68％ (3/31 cases).The difference was significant.The expression level of FKBP51 in patients with colorectal carcinoma had no obvious correlation with gender (P =0.771),age (P =0.474),tumor location (P =0.213),degree of differentiation (P =0.318),lymph node metastasis (P =0.124),distant metastasis (P =0.318) and clinical stage (P =0.171);and the tumor size (P =0.049),depth of invasion related (P =0.031),the difference was statistically significant.Conclusions The expression of FKBP51 in colorectal cancer was strong,while weak expression in normal colorectal tissues.With the increase of tumor infiltration and deepening,the expression of FKBP51 became stronger,which indicated that FKBP51 participated in the genesis and development of colorectal cancer,and it might become a new target for individual therapy of colorectal cancer.

Endovascular repair vs conservative therapy for the treatment of acute type B aortic dissection / 中华普通外科杂志

Objectives To compare endovascular aortic repair (EVR) and medical therapy for acute type B aortic dissection (AD) in terms of treatment results.Methods From January 2004 to October 2010 116 cases were collected and were divided into two groups,with treatment of EVR (n =60)and medical therapy (n ＝ 56).Treatment outcomes were assessed.Results Clinical manifestations of AD are complex and variable,with the most common symptom being pain on chest and back (74.1％).CTA is the most valuable method in confirming the diagnosis of aortic dissection.In conservative group of 56 patients admitted to hospital,30-day mortality rate was 16.1％.In EVR group of 60 patients with grafts successfully released,the 30-day mortality was 1.7％.There is significant difference between the two groups on mortality rate during 30-day(P ＜0.05).Follow-up rate in conservative group and the EVR group was 71.4％ and 86.7％,with average follow-up time of (38 ± 16) months and (35 ± 14) months.The 5-year survival rates were 87.5％ and 88.5％ respectively in conservative group and EVR group (P ＞ 0.05).Conclusions EVR is considered to be the first choice for acute Stanford type B dissection.EVR can improve patients' 30-day survival,though long term result is comparable with that of conservative treatment.