Nucleos(t)ide Analogs Do Not Independently Influence Hepatic Fibrosis and Portal Hypertension beyond Viral Suppression in CBDL-Induced Cirrhotic Rat.

Chronic hepatitis is the major cause of liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Several factors affect portal pressure, including liver fibrosis, splanchnic vasodilatation, and pathologic angiogenesis. Nucleos(t)ide analogs (NUCs), the oral antiviral agents, effectively attenuate chronic hepatitis B-related liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension via viral suppression and alleviation of hepatitis. On the other hand, NUCs affect tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and nitric oxide, which participate in fibrogenesis, vasodilatation, and angiogenesis. However, whether NUCs independently influence liver fibrosis and portal hypertension beyond viral suppression is unknown. This study thus aimed to evaluate the influences of three frequently used NUCs in rats with nonviral cirrhosis. Male Sprague-Dawley rats received common bile duct ligation (CBDL) to induce cholestatic cirrhosis and portal hypertension. The rats were randomly allocated into four groups, treated by mouth with lamivudine (30 mg/kg per day), entecavir (0.09 mg/kg per day), tenofovir (50 mg/kg per day), or distilled water (vehicle control) from the 15th day after CBDL. On the 29th day, liver cirrhosis- and portal hypertension-related parameters were evaluated. The results showed that chronic NUCs treatment did not affect hemodynamic parameters, plasma TNF-α concentration, and hepatic fibrogenesis protein expressions in rats with nonviral cirrhosis. Though the mesenteric VEGF receptor 2 phosphorylation was downregulated in NUCs-treated groups, the splanchnic angiogenesis was not influenced. In conclusion, lamivudine, entecavir, and tenofovir had no additional effects on liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension in rats with nonviral cirrhosis.

A pilot study of integrating standardized patients in problem-based learning tutorial in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND: Problem-based learning (PBL) has been widely adopted in medical education; however, its application has been questioned due to the lack of interaction with a real patient. Standardized patients (SPs) might solve this problem. Herein, we tested the impact of integrating SPs in a PBL tutorial. METHODS: In 2017, a total of 313 students, 66 facilitators, and 36 SPs were enrolled at National Yang-Ming University, Taiwan. The SPs presented the symptoms/signs of the cases then the students interviewed them to obtain the detail history. All students, facilitators, and SPs were invited to complete the questionnaires before and after this program. RESULTS: Most SPs considered that both the second-year dental medical student and third-year medical students participated actively and were competent enough but students and facilitators considered that the fourth-year medical students might be more prepared. Overall, the students thought highly of the interactions with the SPs. Only about one-fifth felt that this design caused unnecessary pressure among the students and facilitators. They agreed that this program significantly inspired the student's learning motivation (pre- vs post-course: 4.1 ± 0.7 vs 4.3 ± 0.7, p < 0.001), increased their confidence level in interviewing patients (4.0 ± 0.8 vs 4.2 ± 0.7, p < 0.001), and encouraging critical thinking (4.0 ± 0.7 vs 4.2 ± 0.7, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The SPs, facilitators, and students had different viewpoints with regards to integrating SPs in the PBL tutorial. However, a majority agreed that this design enhanced the motivation of students and supported such an application in PBL tutorials.