Incidence and Characteristics of Cerebral Infarction After Microsurgical Clipping of Unruptured Anterior Circulation Cerebral Aneurysms: Diffusion-Weighted Imaging-Based Analysis of 600 Patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Postclipping cerebral infarction (PCI) remains a major concern after treatment for unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs). However, studies of microsurgical clipping based on diffusion-weighted imaging are limited. We aimed to present the incidence, risk factors, and types of PCI and its radiological and clinical characteristics. METHODS: This was a retrospective single-center study in which patients were scheduled to undergo microsurgical clipping for anterior circulation UIAs. The overall incidence and risk factors were calculated. Based on the operation and relevant artery, we categorized PCI on diffusion-weighted imaging into 4 types and presented their radiological and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: We reviewed the radiological and clinical data of 605 patients. The overall incidence of PCI was 16.7% (101/605), of which asymptomatic infarction was 14.9% (90/605) and symptomatic infarction was 1.8% (11/605). Hypertension (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.258; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.330-3.833), temporary clipping (aOR, 1.690; 95% CI: 1.034-2.760), multiple aneurysm locations (aOR, 1.832; 95% CI: 1.084-3.095), and aneurysm dome size (aOR, 1.094; 95% CI: 1.006-1.190) were independent risk factors for PCI. Type II (perianeurysmal perforator) infarction was the most common type of PCI (48.6%) and the most common cause of symptomatic infarction (72.7%). Types II and III (distal embolic) infarctions correlated with atherosclerotic changes in the aneurysm wall and temporary clipping (62.4% and 70.6%, respectively). The type IV (unrelated) infarction group had a higher incidence of systemic atherosclerosis (55%). CONCLUSION: Microsurgical clipping is a safe and viable option for the treatment of anterior circulation UIAs. However, modification of the surgical technique, preoperative radiological assessment, and patient selection are required to reduce the incidence of PCI.

Effectiveness and Safety of Carbon Ion Radiotherapy in Solid Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness of carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) compared to that of conventional radiotherapy in patients with various types of solid tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically searched eight electronic databases from inception until August 2022 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The comparative effectiveness of the different treatment options was assessed by a random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: This review included 34 comparative studies and three treatment groups. Overall, the meta-analysis indicated comparable local control rates between the CIRT and control groups [pooled risk ratio (RR)=1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90-1.15]. The local control rate in the CIRT group was higher than that in the photon therapy group, but slightly lower than that in the proton radiation therpy (PRT) group. Additionally, the CIRT group had significantly higher overall survival (OS) (RR=1.19, 95% CI=1.01-1.42) and progression-free survival (PFS) (RR=1.50, 95% CI=1.01-2.21) rates compared to the control group. In the subgroup analysis, survival rates were similar between the CIRT and PRT groups. CONCLUSION: CIRT was associated with improved toxicity, local tumor control, OS, and PFS compared to conventional treatments. Therefore, CIRT was found to be a safe and effective option for achieving local control in patients with solid tumors.

Efficacy and Safety of Metformin and Atorvastatin Combination Therapy vs. Monotherapy with Either Drug in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Dyslipidemia Patients (ATOMIC): Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGRUOUND: It is well known that a large number of patients with diabetes also have dyslipidemia, which significantly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination drugs consisting of metformin and atorvastatin, widely used as therapeutic agents for diabetes and dyslipidemia. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group and phase III multicenter study included adults with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels >7.0% and <10.0%, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) >100 and <250 mg/dL. One hundred eighty-five eligible subjects were randomized to the combination group (metformin+atorvastatin), metformin group (metformin+atorvastatin placebo), and atorvastatin group (atorvastatin+metformin placebo). The primary efficacy endpoints were the percent changes in HbA1c and LDL-C levels from baseline at the end of the treatment. RESULTS: After 16 weeks of treatment compared to baseline, HbA1c showed a significant difference of 0.94% compared to the atorvastatin group in the combination group (0.35% vs. -0.58%, respectively; P<0.0001), whereas the proportion of patients with increased HbA1c was also 62% and 15%, respectively, showing a significant difference (P<0.001). The combination group also showed a significant decrease in LDL-C levels compared to the metformin group (-55.20% vs. -7.69%, P<0.001) without previously unknown adverse drug events. CONCLUSION: The addition of atorvastatin to metformin improved HbA1c and LDL-C levels to a significant extent compared to metformin or atorvastatin alone in diabetes and dyslipidemia patients. This study also suggested metformin's preventive effect on the glucose-elevating potential of atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia, insufficiently controlled with exercise and diet. Metformin and atorvastatin combination might be an effective treatment in reducing the CVD risk in patients with both diabetes and dyslipidemia because of its lowering effect on LDL-C and glucose.