A comparative study on hemostasis effect of different application methods and time of tranexamic acid in total hip arthroplasty.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the hemostatic effect of different application methods and time of tranexamic acid (TXA) on primary unilateral total hip arthroplasty. METHODS: A total of 126 patients with primary unilateral total hip replacement admitted between January 2019 and January 2021 were recruited. The patients were divided into three groups (42 people in each group) by random number table method. In group I, 2.0 g TXA was perfused locally into the hip joint cavity through the drainage tube for 2 h. Group II was perfused locally with the same method for 4 h. Group III was given TXA 15 mg/kg intravenously 5-10 min before surgical incision. The hemoglobin concentration, red blood cell (RBC) count, international normalized ratio (INR), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), fibrinogen (FIB), D-Dimer (D-D), intraoperative blood loss, postoperative blood loss, implicit blood loss, total blood loss, postoperative blood transfusion and complications were compared. RESULTS: The postoperative drainage volume of group I (195.07 ± 34.65) mL and group II (199.62 ± 38.07) mL was significantly lower than that of group III (213.12 ± 25.05) mL (P = 0.037). There was no significant difference in postoperative drainage between group I and group II (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss, hidden blood loss and total blood loss between the three groups (P > 0.05). There was no difference in the incidence of deep vein thrombosis among the three groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: TXA is a safe and effective way of hemostasis in total hip arthroplasty. Local intraarticular application of TXA can reduce the postoperative drainage, but the difference is not clinically significant, probably due to the number of samples. There is no difference in the postoperative drainage after local application of 2 or 4 h, and there is no difference in the overall hemostasis effect between intravenous or local application of TXA.

Role of lncRNA LINC01194 in hepatocellular carcinoma via the miR-655-3p/SMAD family member 5 axis.

Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) are involved in developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The present study explored the role of lncRNA LINC01194, which is upregulated in HCC tissues and might be a vital regulator in HCC progression. Levels of LINC01194, microRNA (miR)-655-3p, and SMAD family member 5 (SMAD5) were assessed using reverse transcription quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). The bioactivity of Huh-7 cells was assessed using cell counting kit-8 and transwell assays and flow cytometry. Western blotting was conducted to measure the expression of invasion- and apoptosis-related proteins. The relationships between lncRNA LINC01194 and miR-655-3p, and miR-655-3p and SMAD5 were predicted using StarBase and TargetScan, and further verified using a dual-luciferase reporter assay. LINC01194 was overexpressed in HCC cells and in clinical samples. ILINC01194 silencing suppressed proliferation and migration; however, it promoted apoptosis in HCC cell lines. We also confirmed that miR-655-3p could bind to LINC01194, and miR-655-3p was downregulated in HCC. The upregulation of miR-655-3p suppressed HCC cell invasion and migration, and enhanced the number of apoptotic cells. SMAD5, which was overexpressed in HCC cell lines, was directly targeted by miR-655-3p. Therefore, LINC01194 promoted HCC development by decreasing miR-655-3p expression and may serve as a promising therapeutic target for HCC patients.

Hepatectomy for Liver Metastasis of Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Background. Management of gastric cancer (GC) with liver metastases is debated. It is still controversial whether surgical resection provides a survival benefit or not. This systematic review was designed to evaluate the efficacy of hepatectomy for GC liver metastasis. Methods. We searched several electronic databases to identify eligible studies updated on September 2018. Studies assessing the efficacy and safety of hepatectomy versus no hepatectomy were included. Odds ratio (OR) along with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were utilized for main outcome analysis. Results. In all, 10 studies were included. Patients who underwent hepatectomy had lower 1-year (OR = 0.15, 95% CI = 0.10-0.22, P < .00001), 3-year (OR = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.10-0.27, P < .00001), and 5-year mortality (OR = 0.13, 95% CI = 0.07-0.24, P < .00001) than those without hepatectomy. We also reported favorable survival outcome in patients with metachronous hepatic resection versus synchronous hepatic resection (OR = 2.09, 95% CI = 1.21-3.60, P = .008). However, there was no significant difference between solitary and multiple liver metastases (OR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.35-1.07, P = .08). Conclusion. The present study demonstrates that hepatic resection in the management of liver metastases of GC can prolong the survival of patients and should be considered a promising treatment for such patients. Furthermore, there are more favorable outcomes in patients with metachronous metastases versus those with synchronous disease. Therefore, metachronous hepatic metastases from GC are not necessarily a contraindication for hepatectomy of the metastatic site.