A unified model-based framework for doublet or multiplet detection in single-cell multiomics data.

Droplet-based single-cell sequencing techniques rely on the fundamental assumption that each droplet encapsulates a single cell, enabling individual cell omics profiling. However, the inevitable issue of multiplets, where two or more cells are encapsulated within a single droplet, can lead to spurious cell type annotations and obscure true biological findings. The issue of multiplets is exacerbated in single-cell multiomics settings, where integrating cross-modality information for clustering can inadvertently promote the aggregation of multiplet clusters and increase the risk of erroneous cell type annotations. Here, we propose a compound Poisson model-based framework for multiplet detection in single-cell multiomics data. Leveraging experimental cell hashing results as the ground truth for multiplet status, we conducted trimodal DOGMA-seq experiments and generated 17 benchmarking datasets from two tissues, involving a total of 280,123 droplets. We demonstrated that the proposed method is an essential tool for integrating cross-modality multiplet signals, effectively eliminating multiplet clusters in single-cell multiomics data-a task at which the benchmarked single-omics methods proved inadequate.

[Review and prospects of international clinical research in critical care medicine in 2023].

The main clinical research advances of critical care in 2023 includes: new trials of Chinese herbal medicine, hydroxocobalamin (vitamin B12), methylene blue as well glucocorticoids have shown the potential to improve outcomes of patients with sepsis and septic shock; international committees launched new global definition and managing recommendations for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Besides, a cluster of new evidences has emerged in many aspects as following: fluid control strategy in sepsis (restrictive/liberative), antibiotic infusion strategy (continuous/intermittent), oxygen-saturation targets for mechanical ventilation (conservative/liberative), blood pressure targets after resuscitation from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (hypotension/hypertension), blood pressure targets after successful stroke thrombectomy (intensive/conventional), and nutritional support strategies (low protein-calories/conventional protein-calories, fasting/persistent feeding before extubation). Thus, given above progress, carrying out high -quality domestic multi-center clinical registration researches, constructing shareable standardized databases, as well raising public awareness of sepsis, should be the essential steps to improve our level of intensive care medicine.

[International clinical research of critical care medicine in 2021].

The progress of critical care medicine in 2021 is still encouraging. The new international guideline for management of sepsis and septic shock came out after 4 years. Besides, a couple of preferable clinical evidences were released including restrictive blood transfusion strategy for patients with acute myocardial infarction, prevention of peripheral venous catheter infection, heparin inhalation and driving pressure setting in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), lower oxygenation target for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, low level positive end-expiratory pressure in non-ARDS patients with respiratory failure, light sedation or non-sedation strategy, biological phenotypes, as well machine learning in sepsis and ARDS. However, we also encounter negative results such as balanced solution during fluid resuscitation, hypothermia therapy after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest or traumatic brain injury, adrenomedullin-specific antibody adrecizumab therapy and coupled plasma filtration-adsorption (CPFA) therapy for patients with septic shock, extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) implementation in acute hypoxic respiratory failure, continuous infusion of hypertonic saline in patients with traumatic brain injury. Collectively, in the future, individualized diagnosis and management based on the principle of "wise choice" will become the daily practice scene for all intensivists.

[Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021, interpretation and expectation].

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021 (2021 guidelines) was recently released. The guidelines summarized the evidences from literatures up to July 2019, and composed by 6 parts as "screening and early treatment", "infection", "hemodynamic management", "ventilation", "additional therapies" and "long-term outcomes and goals of care" with a total of 93 items and 99 recommendations. Compared with the 2016 guidelines (96 recommendations), although the total number of recommendations in the 2021 guidelines is similar, the number of "strong recommendations (recommend)" in 2021 guidelines has dropped significantly, as the number of "weak recommendations (suggest)" has increased significantly, and the level of the quality of evidence on which the recommendations are based has been significantly lowered. Furthermore, 2021 guidelines have also markedly deleted or simplified the recommendations regarding infection prevention, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) treatment, nutritional support and so on. While, the most obvious improvement appears in the segment of "long-term outcomes and goals of care", in which the patients and their families could get help in term of determining their physical rehabilitation and discharge follow-up plans and formulating exact goals of care. 2021 guidelines did not adopt new and emerging therapies or treatments, such as metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS), diaphragm protective ventilation, timing of initiating renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury, early mobility, endotoxin adsorption, tranexamic acid, E-medicine and telemedicine, big data and artificial intelligence and other new therapies. Collectively, it may suggest the 2021 guidelines tend to be conservative and simplified rather than fairly optimized and logicalized, which may arouse controversy in the future and affect clinician compliance.