RESUMO
T-SPOT.TB is a novel screening method for Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. However, it is controversial whether T-SPOT.TB should become an alternative method to the tuberculin skin test (TST) for screening M. tuberculosis infections. The present study aimed to evaluate this issue based on the retrospective analysis of clinical cases. TST and T-SPOT.TB tests were used on patients with suspected M. tuberculosis infection on admission. Demographic data and clinical information, including previous history of M. tuberculosis infection, were collected. A total of 118 patients were included in the analysis, among whom 30 (25.4%) were diagnosed with active M. tuberculosis infection, and seven patients (5.9%) were currently receiving immunosuppressive treatment. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the TST were 76.7 and 77.3%, respectively, while they were 88.3 and 68.1%, respectively, for the T-SPOT.TB test. Patients with large TST indurations had a higher number of gamma interferon-producing T cells among peripheral blood mononuclear cells compared with those of TST-negative patients. In conclusion, the T-SPOT.TB test had a higher sensitivity than the TST, but the difference was not statistically significant. Neither the T-SPOT.TB test nor the TST was sufficiently accurate to detect active M. tuberculosis infection.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To explore the feasibility, safety and the economical efficiency of double-pouch anastomosis in laparoscopic radical rectal cancer assisted by small incisions. METHODS: Clinical data of 224 patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery at Taizhou People's Hospital of Jiangsu Province from January 2011 to December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Indusion criteria: patients were diagnosed as primary rectal adenocarcinoma by preoperative enteroscopy pathology, the distance of the tumor to anal margin was from 4 to 15 cm, and patients were treated with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision(TME) through small incision. Patients were divided into two groups according to different anastomosis method, double-pouch group(108 cases) and single-pouch group (116 cases). The surgical indexes, tumor safety indexes, short-term efficacy and economic indexes were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between two groups in baseline data, operative time, blood loss, number of lymph nodes dissection, average length of proximal and distal bowel, or incidence of urination and sexual dysfunction (all P>0.05). Compared with the single-pouch group, the double-pouch group presented lower anastomotic secondary bleeding rate [0.9%(1/108) vs. 6.0% (7/116), χ²=4.238, P=0.040], lower incidence of anastomotic leakage[1.9%(2/108) vs. 7.8%(9/116), χ²=4.179, P=0.041], lower incidence of anastomotic stricture [1.9% (2/108) vs. 8.6% (10/116), χ²=5.054, P=0.025], shorter hospital stay [(13.4±3.9) days vs. (15.9±9.8) days, t=2.524, P=0.013] and less average hospitalization costs [(34 000±7 000) yuan vs. (46 000±23 000) yuan, t=5.047,P<0.001]. There was no significant difference in local recurrence, distant metastasis or overall survival between the two groups during mean follow-up of 33 months (all P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic TME assisted by small incision with double-pouch anastomosis is a safe, feasible and economical method.
