Protective effect of rhodioloside and bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells infected with HIF-1-expressing adenovirus on acute spinal cord injury.

Rhodioloside has been shown to protect cells from hypoxia injury, and bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells have a good effect on tissue repair. To study the effects of rhodioloside and bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells on spinal cord injury, a rat model of spinal cord injury was established using the Infinite Horizons method. After establishing the model, the rats were randomly divided into five groups. Rats in the control group were intragastrically injected with phosphate buffered saline (PBS) (5 µL). PBS was injected at 6 equidistant points around 5 mm from the injury site and at a depth of 5 mm. Rats in the rhodioloside group were intragastrically injected with rhodioloside (5 g/kg) and intramuscularly injected with PBS. Rats in the mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) group were intramuscularly injected with PBS and intramuscularly with MSCs (8 × 106/mL in a 50-µL cell suspension). Rats in the Ad-HIF-MSC group were intragastrically injected with PBS and intramuscularly injected with HIF-1 adenovirus-infected MSCs. Rats in the rhodioloside + Ad-HIF-MSC group were intramuscularly injected with MSCs infected with the HIF-1 adenovirus and intragastrically injected with rhodioloside. One week after treatment, exercise recovery was evaluated with a modified combined behavioral score scale. Hematoxylin-eosin staining and Pischingert's methylene blue staining were used to detect any histological or pathological changes in spinal cord tissue. Levels of adenovirus IX and Sry mRNA were detected by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction and used to determine the number of adenovirus and mesenchymal stem cells that were transfected into the spinal cord. Immunohistochemical staining was applied to detect HIF-1 protein levels in the spinal cord. The results showed that: (1) compared with the other groups, the rhodioloside + Ad-HIF-MSC group exhibited the highest combined behavioral score (P < 0.05), the most recovered tissue, and the greatest number of neurons, as indicated by Pischingert's methylene blue staining. (2) Compared with the PBS group, HIF-1 protein expression was greater in the rhodioloside group (P < 0.05). (3) Compared with the Ad-HIF-MSC group, Sry mRNA levels were higher in the rhodioloside + Ad-HIF-MSC group (P < 0.05). These results confirm that rhodioloside combined with bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells can promote the recovery of spinal cord injury and activate the HIF-1 pathway to promote the survival of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells and repair damaged neurons within spinal cord tissue. This experiment was approved by the Animal Ethics Committee of Gansu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, China (approval No. 2015KYLL029) in June 2015.

[Transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer].

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effects of transperitoneal (Tp) versus extraperitoneal (Ep) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, Wanfang, CNKI, and CBM for the articles comparing the clinical effect Tp-RARP with that of Ep-RARP in the treatment of localized prostate cancer published from January 2000 to November 2016. All the articles must meet the inclusion criteria, that is, dealing with at least one of the following aspects: operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative catheterization time, length of bed confinement, perioperative complications, positive surgical margins, bowel-related complications, postoperative anastomotic leakage, and postoperative urinary continence. We subjected the data obtained to statistical analysis using the RevMan5.3 software. RESULTS: Two randomized controlled trials and six case-control studies were included in this meta-analysis, involving 451 cases of Tp-RARP and 676 cases of Ep-RARP. Compared with Tp-RARP, Ep-RARP showed significantly shorter operation time (WMD = 21.39, 95% CI: 7.54－35.24, P = 0.002), shorter length of bed confinement (WMD = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.61－1.09, P <0.001), and lower rate of bowel-related complications (RR = 9.74, 95% CI: 3.26－29.07, P <0.001). However, no statistically significant differences were found between the two strategies in intraoperative blood loss (WMD = －8.12, 95% CI: －27.86－11.63, P = 0.42), postoperative catheterization time (WMD = 0.17, 95% CI: －0.55－0.21, P = 0.38), or the rates of perioperative complications (RR = 1.34, 95% CI: －0.97－1.87, P = 0.08), positive surgical margins (RR = 1.24, 95% CI: 0.95－1.61, P = 0.12), anastomotic leakage (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.46－2.10, P = 0.95), urinary continence at 3 months (RR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.91－1.00, P = 0.05) and urinary continence at 6 months (RR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.97－1.02, P = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: Ep-RARP has the advantages of shorter operation time, shorter length of bed confinement and lower rate of bowel-related complications over Tp-RARP, and therefore may be a better option for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. However, more multi-centered randomized controlled clinical trials are needed for further evaluation of these two approaches.