A comprehensive analysis of G-protein-signaling modulator 2 as a prognostic and diagnostic marker for pan-cancer.

Background: G-protein signaling modulator 2 (GPSM2) maintains cell polarization and regulates the cell cycle. Recent studies have shown that it is highly expressed in various tumors, but its pan-cancer analysis has not been reported. Methods: First, we analyzed the differential GPSM2 expression in normal and cancer tissues by the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) and Human Protein Atlas databases and investigated its expression effect on the survival of cancer patients by gene expression profiling interactive analysis 2 (GEPIA2). Second, we analyzed the GPSM2 phosphorylation level using the clinical proteomic tumor analysis consortium dataset. In addition, we investigated GPSM2 gene mutations in human tumor specimens and the impact of gene mutations on patient survival. Finally, we analyzed the relationship between GPSM2 expression and cellular immune infiltration through the TIMER 2.0 database. Meanwhile, the possible signaling pathway of the gene was analyzed by the Gene Ontology (GO)| Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway to explore its potential mechanism. Results: GPSM2 is overexpressed in most cancers, which leads to reduced overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival in patients. The results of phosphorylation analysis suggest that tumor development involves a complex GPSM2 phosphorylation process. We identified GPSM2 mutation loci with the highest frequency of mutations in uterine corpus endometrial carcinoma (UCEC), and this mutation increased progression-free survival and overall survival in uterine corpus endometrial carcinoma patients. Finally, we found that the role of GPSM2 in tumors may be associated with cellular immune infiltration. Gene Ontology|KEGG pathway analysis showed that the enrichment pathways were mainly "mitotic nuclear division," "chromosome segregation," and "spindle." Conclusions: Our pan-cancer analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the oncogenic roles and potential mechanisms of GPSM2 in multiple human cancers.

Bone Cement-Augmented Short-Segment Pedicle Screw Fixation for Kümmell Disease with Spinal Canal Stenosis.

BACKGROUND This study aimed to explore the feasibility and efficacy of bone cement-augmented short-segmental pedicle screw fixation in treating Kümmell disease. MATERIAL AND METHODS From June 2012 to June 2015, 18 patients with Kümmell disease with spinal canal stenosis were enrolled in this study. Each patient was treated with bone cement-augmented short-segment fixation and posterolateral bone grafting, and posterior decompression was performed when needed. All patients were followed up for 12-36 months. We retrospectively reviewed outcomes, including the Oswestry disability index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) score, anterior and posterior heights of fractured vertebrae, kyphotic Cobb angle, and neurological function by Frankel classification. RESULTS The VAS grades, ODI scores, anterior heights of affected vertebrae, and kyphotic Cobb angles showed statistically significant differences between pre- and postoperative and between preoperative and final follow-up values (P<0.05), whereas the differences between postoperative and final follow-up values were not statistically significant (P>0.05). The differences between posterior vertebral heights at each time point were not statistically significant (P>0.05). Improved neurological function was observed in 12 cases at final follow-up. Three cases had complications, including asymptomatic cement leakage in 2 patients and delayed wound infection in 1 patient. CONCLUSIONS Bone cement-augmented short-segment pedicle screw fixation is safe and effective for treating Kümmell disease, and can achieve satisfactory correction of kyphosis and vertebral height, with pain relief and improvement in neurological function, with few complications.

[Causes prevention and treatment for cerebrospinal leak after lumbar revision surgery].

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the causes and explore the measures of prevention and treatment of the cerebrospinal leak after lumbar revision surgery. METHODS: The clinical data of 24 patients(17.78%) with cerebrospinal leak among 135 cases after lumbar revision surgery from January 2011 to January 2016 was retrospectively studied. Of them, 12 cases due to severe adhesion caused by scar formation; 4 cases due to yellow ligament hyperplasia adhesion with dura mater occurred dural tears when separating adhesion; 2 cases with severe hyperplasia and ossification of lumbar posterior longitudinal ligament occurred dural tears when revealing intervertebral disk; 2 cases due to improper nailing happened dural tears during operation. And the other 4 cases without obvious dural tears in surgery, occurred cerebrospinal leak one to two days after surgery. And the 24 patients were treated with the measures of prevention and treatment preoperatively, intraoperatively, and postoperatively. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients with cerebrospinal leak were cured after treatment and were follow-up for 6 to 30 months. No recurrence of cerebrospinal leake or local and systemic complications were found. CONCLUSIONS: Scar formation is the main cause of cerebrospinal leak in lumbar revision surgery. As for lumbar revision surgery, as long as the standard control measures are taken, it can significantly reduce the incidence of cerebrospinal leak, achieve better clinical efficacy, and fundamentally solve the cerebrospinal leak problem that has plagued both doctors and patients for a long time.

[Therapeutic progress in lumbar spinal stenosis].

Along with the population aging in China, patients with lumbar spinal stenosis(LSS) caused by recessive change incessantly increase. At present, there is no adequate evidence to recommend any specific nonoperative treatment for LSS, and surgery is still an effective method. The cilincal symptoms of the patients without conservative treatment got improvement after surgery, which is the strongest evidence base. Spinal instability after simple decompression promotes the development of fusion technique, and the accelerated adjacent segment degeneration and no relief in symptoms after fusion lead to dynamic fixation technology emerge as the times require. Patients with spinal canal decompression whether need bone fusion or not is still controversial. For the past few years, the operation of simple decompression for LSS obviously decreased, whereas the decompression plus fusion surgery showed sustainable growth. Decompression complicated with fusion was more and more adopted in LSS, in order to reduce the hidden risk of spinal instability and deformity. Although decompressive operation has determinate effect, now it is still unclear if the therapeutic effect of decompression complicated with fusion is better than simple decompression. This article reviews the current studies to explore whether decompression plus bone fusion is applicable for LSS. To further explore the best choice of surgical treatment for LSS, we focused on evidence-based therapeutic options.