Gastrectomy with radical lymph node dissection is the most promising treatment avenue for patients with gastric cancer. However, this procedure sometimes induces excessive intraoperative blood loss and requires periop...Gastrectomy with radical lymph node dissection is the most promising treatment avenue for patients with gastric cancer. However, this procedure sometimes induces excessive intraoperative blood loss and requires perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion. There are lasting discussions and controversies about whether intraoperative blood loss or perioperative blood transfusion has adverse effects on the prognosis in patients with gastric cancer. We reviewed laboratory and clinical evidence of these associations in patients with gastric cancer. A large amount of clinical evidence supports the correlation between excessive intraoperative blood loss and adverse effects on the prognosis. The laboratory evidence revealed three possible causes of such adverse effects: anti-tumor immunosuppression, unfavorable postoperative conditions, and peritoneal recurrence by spillage of cancer cells into the pelvis. Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses have suggested the adverse effects of perioperative blood transfusions on prognostic parameters such as all-cause mortality, recurrence, and postoperative complications. There are two possible causes of adverse effects of blood transfusions on the prognosis: Anti-tumor immunosuppression and patient-related confounding factors (e.g., preoperative anemia). These factors are associated with a worse prognosis and higher requirement for perioperative blood transfusions. Surgeons should make efforts to minimize intraoperative blood loss and transfusions during gastric cancer surgery to improve patients’ prognosis.展开更多
The recognition and management of risk in donation process and blood product is critical to ensure donor and patient safety. To achieve this goal, the failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a convenient method;mo...The recognition and management of risk in donation process and blood product is critical to ensure donor and patient safety. To achieve this goal, the failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a convenient method;moreover it was used to prevent the occurrence of adverse events and look at what could go strong at each step. This study aimed to utilize FMEA in central blood bank in Khartoum to evaluate the potential risk and adverse event that may occur during the donation process. According to the severity, occurrence and the detection of each failure mode, the risk priority number (RPN) was calculated to determine which of the failures should take priority to find a solution and applying corrective action to reduce the failure risk. The statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) version 11 was used as descriptive and analytical statistics tool. The FMEA technique provides a systematic method for finding vulnerabilities in a process before they result in an error, and in this study a satisfactory outcome was reached.展开更多
目的探究二甲双胍与门冬胰岛素联合治疗2型糖尿病(Diabetes Mellitus Type 2,T2DM)对血糖的控制效果。方法选取2021年6月—2023年6月吉林省人民医院收治的100例T2DM患者为研究对象,以投掷硬币法分为参照组(n=50,二甲双胍治疗)、观察组(n...目的探究二甲双胍与门冬胰岛素联合治疗2型糖尿病(Diabetes Mellitus Type 2,T2DM)对血糖的控制效果。方法选取2021年6月—2023年6月吉林省人民医院收治的100例T2DM患者为研究对象,以投掷硬币法分为参照组(n=50,二甲双胍治疗)、观察组(n=50,二甲双胍与门冬胰岛素联合治疗)。比较两组临床治疗效果、不良反应总发生率、血糖控制情况及血清炎性因子水平。结果观察组治疗总有效率(96.00%)高于参照组(84.00%),差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=4.000,P<0.05)。两组不良反应总发生率对比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。与治疗前相比,两组治疗半年后血糖水平、白细胞介素-6、白细胞介素-12水平均降低、白细胞介素-10水平升高,且观察组上述指标优于参照组,差异有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。结论二甲双胍与门冬胰岛素联合治疗T2DM患者时可提高疗效,患者血糖控制情况更佳,血清炎性因子水平也得到明显改善,安全性较高。展开更多
文摘Gastrectomy with radical lymph node dissection is the most promising treatment avenue for patients with gastric cancer. However, this procedure sometimes induces excessive intraoperative blood loss and requires perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion. There are lasting discussions and controversies about whether intraoperative blood loss or perioperative blood transfusion has adverse effects on the prognosis in patients with gastric cancer. We reviewed laboratory and clinical evidence of these associations in patients with gastric cancer. A large amount of clinical evidence supports the correlation between excessive intraoperative blood loss and adverse effects on the prognosis. The laboratory evidence revealed three possible causes of such adverse effects: anti-tumor immunosuppression, unfavorable postoperative conditions, and peritoneal recurrence by spillage of cancer cells into the pelvis. Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses have suggested the adverse effects of perioperative blood transfusions on prognostic parameters such as all-cause mortality, recurrence, and postoperative complications. There are two possible causes of adverse effects of blood transfusions on the prognosis: Anti-tumor immunosuppression and patient-related confounding factors (e.g., preoperative anemia). These factors are associated with a worse prognosis and higher requirement for perioperative blood transfusions. Surgeons should make efforts to minimize intraoperative blood loss and transfusions during gastric cancer surgery to improve patients’ prognosis.
文摘The recognition and management of risk in donation process and blood product is critical to ensure donor and patient safety. To achieve this goal, the failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a convenient method;moreover it was used to prevent the occurrence of adverse events and look at what could go strong at each step. This study aimed to utilize FMEA in central blood bank in Khartoum to evaluate the potential risk and adverse event that may occur during the donation process. According to the severity, occurrence and the detection of each failure mode, the risk priority number (RPN) was calculated to determine which of the failures should take priority to find a solution and applying corrective action to reduce the failure risk. The statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) version 11 was used as descriptive and analytical statistics tool. The FMEA technique provides a systematic method for finding vulnerabilities in a process before they result in an error, and in this study a satisfactory outcome was reached.
文摘目的探究二甲双胍与门冬胰岛素联合治疗2型糖尿病(Diabetes Mellitus Type 2,T2DM)对血糖的控制效果。方法选取2021年6月—2023年6月吉林省人民医院收治的100例T2DM患者为研究对象,以投掷硬币法分为参照组(n=50,二甲双胍治疗)、观察组(n=50,二甲双胍与门冬胰岛素联合治疗)。比较两组临床治疗效果、不良反应总发生率、血糖控制情况及血清炎性因子水平。结果观察组治疗总有效率(96.00%)高于参照组(84.00%),差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=4.000,P<0.05)。两组不良反应总发生率对比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。与治疗前相比,两组治疗半年后血糖水平、白细胞介素-6、白细胞介素-12水平均降低、白细胞介素-10水平升高,且观察组上述指标优于参照组,差异有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。结论二甲双胍与门冬胰岛素联合治疗T2DM患者时可提高疗效,患者血糖控制情况更佳,血清炎性因子水平也得到明显改善,安全性较高。
