No abstract

Based on current, albeit limited evidence, it is unlikely that CTSS is inferior to OTSS regarding VAP prevention; however, further trials at low risk of bias are needed to confirm or refute this finding.

ObjectiveTo examine whether peppy comments from attending physicians increased the workload of residents working in the emergency department (ED).MethodsWe conducted two parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomized trials at the ED in a tertiary care hospital in western Japan. Twenty-five residents who examined either ambulatory (J(^o^)PAN-1 Trial) or transferred patients (J(^o^)PAN-2 Trial) in the ED on weekdays. Participants were randomly assigned to groups that either received a peppy message such as “Hope you have a quiet day!” (intervention group) or did not (control group) from the attending physicians. Both trials were conducted from June 2014 through March 2015. For each trial, residents rated the number of patients examined during and the busyness and difficulty of their shifts on a 5-point Likert scale.ResultsA total of 169 randomizations (intervention group, 81; control group, 88) were performed for the J(^o^)PAN-1 Trial, and 178 (intervention group, 85; control group, 93) for the J(^o^)PAN-2 Trial. In the J(^o^)PAN-1 trial, no differences were observed in the number of ambulatory patients examined during their shifts (5.5 and 5.7, respectively, p = 0.48), the busyness of their shifts (2.8 vs 2.8; p = 0.58), or the difficulty of their shifts (3.1 vs 3.1, p = 0.94). However, in the J(^o^)PAN-2 trial, although busyness (2.8 vs 2.7; p = 0.40) and difficulty (3.1 vs 3.2; p = 0.75) were similar between groups, the intervention group examined more transferred patients than the control group (4.4 vs 3.9; p = 0.01).ConclusionsPeppy comments from attending physicians had a minimal jinxing effect on the workload of residents working in the ED.Trial RegistrationUniversity Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR), UMIN000017193 and UMIN000017194.

Purpose This review aimed to summarize the treatment outcomes of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) for metastatic liver tumors based on the findings of published studies over the last decade. Materials and methods Literature describing the survival outcomes of ablation therapy for liver metastases was explored using the PubMed database on April 26, 2022, and articles published in 2012 or later were selected. The included studies met the following criteria: (i) English literature, (ii) original clinical studies, and (iii) literature describing overall survival (OS) of thermal ablation for metastatic liver tumors. All case reports and cohort studies with fewer than 20 patients and those that evaluated ablation for palliative purposes were excluded. Results RFA was the most commonly used method for ablation, while MWA was used in several recent studies. RFA and MWA for liver metastases from various primary tumors have been reported; however, majority of the studies focused on colorectal cancer. The local control rate by RFA and MWA varied widely among the studies, ranging approximately 50–90%. Five-year survival rates of 20–60% have been reported following ablation for colorectal liver metastases by a number of studies, and several reports of 10-year survival rates were also noted. Conclusion Comparative studies of local therapies for colorectal liver metastases demonstrated that RFA provides comparable survival outcomes to surgical metastasectomy and stereotactic body radiation therapy.

Aims: The demand for specimen collection for genomic profiling is rapidly increasing in the era of personalized medicine. Percutaneous needle biopsy is recognized as minimally invasive, but the feasibility of comprehensive genomic analysis using next-generation sequencing (NGS) is not yet clear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of genomic analysis using NGS with specimens obtained by image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy with 18-G needles. Patients and methods: Forty-eight patients who participated in a clinical study of genomic profiling with NGS with the specimen obtained by image-guided needle biopsy were included. All biopsies were performed under local anesthesia, with imaging guidance, using an 18-G cutting needle. A retrospective chart review was performed to determine the rate of successful genomic analysis, technical success rate of biopsy procedure, adverse events, rate of success in pathological diagnosis, and cause of failed genomic analysis. Results: The success rate of genomic analysis was 79.2% (38/48). The causes of failure were unprocessed for DNA extraction due to insufficient specimen volume (6/10), insufficient DNA volume (2/10), and deteriorated DNA quality (2/10). The rate of successful genomic analysis excluding NGS analysis that failed for reasons unrelated to the biopsy procedures was 95.2% (40/42). Technical success of biopsy was achieved in all patients without severe adverse events. The rate of success in the pathological diagnosis was 97.9% (47/48). Conclusions: Image-guided needle biopsy specimens using an 18-G cutting needle yielded a successful NGS genomic analysis rate with no severe adverse events and could be an adoptable method for tissue sampling for NGS.