RESUMEN
Background: This study aims to explore whether serum miR-185-5p levels are related to the injury severity and prognosis of traumatic brain injury patients. Methods: Serum miR-185-5p level was quantified in 120 TBI patients. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) was used to grade the damage, and the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) was used to evaluate the prognosis 3 months after TBI. Pearson correlation analysis was performed to determine the relationship between serum miR-185-5p level and injury severity and prognosis, and the value of serum miR-185-5p level to assess injury severity and prognosis was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Results: Serum miR-185-5p level in moderate and severe TBI patients was higher than in mild TBI patients, and serum miR-185-5p was closely related to GCS score and GOS score. Serum miR-185-5p level higher than 0.36 could distinguish patients with mild to moderate TBI injury, with 72.97% sensitivity and 97.62% specificity, while that higher than 0.43 had 46.34% sensitivity and 91.89% specificity to distinguish moderate to severe TBI patients. Moreover, serum miR-185-5p levels higher than 0.36, with a sensitivity of 96.30% and a specificity of 60.24%, distinguished the poor prognosis of TBI patients. Serum miR185-5p level was an independent predictor of poor prognosis in TBI patients after 3 months and was effective in discriminating adverse outcomes at 3 months. Conclusions: Serum miR-185-5p level was significantly correlated with 3-month injury and adverse prognosis in TBI patients, suggesting that serum miR-185-5p level may be a biomarker that provides supplementary prognostic information and can be used to identify the risk of adverse prognosis in TBI patients.
RESUMEN
Objective:To investigate the risk factors for death in patients with corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Methods:The clinical data of 141 cases of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University from February 1 to February 26, 2020 were included in this retrospective analysis. The gender, age, time of hospitalization after the onset, clinical manifestations, underlying diseases, laboratory examination indicators (inculding white blood cell counts, neutrophil counts, lymphocyte counts, lymphocyte subsets, immunoglobulin, complement 3, complement 4, D-dimer, fibrinogen), and short term prognosis were compared between the death group and the survival group. Logistic regression was used to analyze the factors influencing the death of COVID-19 patients. The t test, Mann Whitney U test or chi-square test were used for comparison between groups. Results:Of the 141 COVID-19 patients, 52 died and 89 survived. The age, hypertension, chronic respiratory diseases, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases, fever and wheeze of patients in the death group were all higher than those in the survival group, which were (70.7±13.3) years old vs (50.4±15.3) years old, 51.9%(27/52) vs 14.6%(13/89), 15.4%(8/52) vs 4.5%(4/89), 30.8%(16/52) vs 7.9%(7/89), 80.8%(42/52) vs 61.8%(55/89) and 50.0%(26/52) vs 25.8%(23/89), respectively. The differences were all statistically significant ( t=7.972, χ2=22.104, 3.615, 12.392, 5.503 and 8.447, respectively, all P<0.05). The white blood cell count, neutrophil count, CD4 + /CD8 + T lymphocyte, immunoglobulin E, D-dimer, fibrinogen, CD19 + T lymphocyte proportion and CD19 + T lymphocyte count of patients in the death group were all higher than those in the survival group, which were 8.20(5.26, 13.01)×10 9/L vs 5.29(3.96, 7.04)×10 9/L, 7.40(4.54, 11.46)×10 9/L vs 3.16(2.20, 5.01)×10 9/L, 2.32(1.77, 3.11) vs 1.63(1.25, 2.08), 125.0(42.6, 275.0) IU/mL vs 66.8(38.3, 143.0) IU/mL, 7.27(2.11, 16.21) mg/L vs 0.95(0.38, 2.54) mg/L, 4.37(2.72, 6.78) g/L vs 4.10(2.78, 4.97) g/L, (23.19±13.43)% vs (15.38±6.38)%, and (181.5±115.4)/μL vs (98.89±77.64)/μL, respectively. The differences were all statistically significant ( Z=3.944, 4.210, 2.834, 1.190, 5.497, 1.180, t=3.987, 3.411, respectively, all P<0.05). The lymphocyte count, CD3 + T lymphocyte proportion, CD3 + T lymphocyte count, CD8 + T lymphocyte proportion, CD8 + T lymphocyte count, CD16 + CD56 + T lymphocyte count and CD4 + T lymphocyte count were all lower than those in survival group, which were 0.47(0.37, 0.96)×10 9/L vs 1.33(0.90, 1.55)×10 9/L, 48.72%(42.31%, 76.92%) vs 69.91%(65.05%, 75.36%), 223.0(100.0, 403.0)/μL vs 761.0(499.0, 1 092.0)/μL, 13.82%(10.32%, 19.82%) vs 24.90%(20.87%, 29.57%), 55.5(30.5, 106.0)/μL vs 318.0(162.5, 443.5)/μL, 63.0(29.0, 99.5)/μL vs 140.0(69.5, 195.5)/μL and (209.74±140.13)/μL vs (487.61±232.02)/μL, respectively. The differences were all statistically significant ( Z=6.937, 3.944, 5.883, 3.924, 5.703, 3.517 and t=7.558, respectively, all P<0.01). Age, history of hypertension, white blood cell count, D-dimer, and fibrinogen were the risk factors for death of COVID-19 (odds ratio ( OR)=1.170, 10.405, 3.055, 1.128 and 1.343, respectively, all P<0.05). Conclusion:Age, underlying hypertension, white blood cell count, D-dimer and fibrinogen are independent prognostic factors for COVID-19.
RESUMEN
Objective To investigate the clinical effect of laparoscopic surgery on gynecologic malignancies,providing information for the clinical therapy.Methods 35 patients with gynecologic malignancies treated with laparoscopic surgery were selected as the observation group.While 35 cases of abdominal surgery patients were selected as control group at the same period.The incidence of postoperative complications,survival rate and other conditions of the two groups were observed and compared.Results The operation time of laparoscopic surgery group was longer than open surgery group,no significant difference between the two groups(P ＞ 0.05 ).Blood loss,hospital slay and recovery time of body temperature of the laparoscopic surgery group was significantly lower than open surgery group ( P ＜0,05).2 cases had urinary retention,1 urinary tract infection and 1 deep vein thrombosis occured in observation group; while 3 urinary retention cases,1 intestinal obstruction case,1 deep vein thrombosis case,1 abdominal wound infection case occured in control group,and the difference was significant ( P ＜ 0.05 ).2 patients lost in each group.3-year survival rate of laparoscopic surgery group was similar with open surgery,the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant( P ＜ 0.01 ).Conclusion Excision and pelvic lymph node dissection under laparoscopy is an effective method in treatment of gynecologic cancer,and with less trauma and faster recovery.
