首页 > 最新文献

JAMA surgery最新文献

英文 中文
Tranexamic Acid During Radical Cystectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial. 根治性膀胱切除术中的氨甲环酸:随机临床试验
IF 15.7 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4183
Rodney H Breau, Luke T Lavallée, Ilias Cagiannos, Franco Momoli, Gregory L Bryson, Salmaan Kanji, Christopher Morash, Alexis F Turgeon, Ryan Zarychanski, Brett L Houston, Daniel I McIsaac, Ranjeeta Mallick, Greg A Knoll, Girish Kulkarni, Jonathan Izawa, Fred Saad, Wassim Kassouf, Vincent Fradet, Ricardo Rendon, Bobby Shayegan, Adrian Fairey, Darrel E Drachenberg, Dean Fergusson

Importance: Among cancer surgeries, patients requiring open radical cystectomy have the highest risk of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion. Prophylactic tranexamic acid (TXA) reduces blood loss during cardiac and orthopedic surgery, and it is possible that similar effects of TXA would be observed during radical cystectomy.

Objective: To determine whether TXA, administered before incision and for the duration of radical cystectomy, reduced the number of RBC transfusions received by patients up to 30 days after surgery.

Design, setting, and participants: The Tranexamic Acid During Cystectomy Trial (TACT) was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial with enrollment between June 2013 and January 2021. This multicenter trial was conducted in 10 academic centers. A consecutive sample of patients was eligible if the patients had a planned open radical cystectomy for the treatment of bladder cancer.

Intervention: Before incision, patients in the intervention arm received a loading dose of intravenous TXA, 10 mg/kg, followed by a maintenance infusion of 5 mg/kg per hour for the duration of the surgery. In the control arm, patients received indistinguishable matching placebo.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was receipt of RBC transfusion up to 30 days after surgery.

Results: A total of 386 patients were assessed for eligibility, and 33 did not meet eligibility. Of 353 randomized patients (median [IQR] age, 69 [62-75] years; 263 male [74.5%]), 344 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. RBC transfusion up to 30 days occurred in 64 of 173 patients (37.0%) in the TXA group and 64 of 171 patients (37.4%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.83-1.18). There were no differences in secondary outcomes among the TXA group vs placebo group including mean (SD) number of RBC units transfused (0.9 [1.5] U vs 1.1 [1.8] U; P = .43), estimated blood loss (927 [733] mL vs 963 [624] mL; P = .52), intraoperative transfusion (28.3% [49 of 173] vs 24.0% [41 of 171]; P = .08), or venous thromboembolic events (3.5% [6 of 173] vs 2.9% [5 of 171]; P = .57). Non-transfusion-related adverse events were similar between groups.

Conclusions and relevance: Results of this randomized clinical trial reveal that TXA did not reduce blood transfusion in patients undergoing open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. Based on this trial, routine use of TXA during open radical cystectomy is not recommended.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01869413.

重要性:在癌症手术中,需要进行开放性根治性膀胱切除术的患者输注红细胞(RBC)的风险最高。预防性氨甲环酸(TXA)可减少心脏和骨科手术中的失血量,在根治性膀胱切除术中也可能观察到类似的效果:目的:确定在根治性膀胱切除术切口前和手术期间使用氨甲环酸(TXA)是否能减少患者术后 30 天内输注红细胞的次数:膀胱切除术期间氨甲环酸试验(TACT)是一项双盲、安慰剂对照、随机临床试验,入组时间为2013年6月至2021年1月。这项多中心试验在 10 个学术中心进行。如果患者为治疗膀胱癌而计划进行开放性根治性膀胱切除术,则符合条件的患者均为连续样本:切口前,干预组患者接受 10 mg/kg 负荷剂量的静脉 TXA,随后在手术期间每小时输注 5 mg/kg。对照组患者接受无差别的匹配安慰剂:主要结果和测量指标:主要结果是术后 30 天内接受红细胞输注的情况:共有 386 名患者接受了资格评估,33 人不符合资格。在353名随机患者(中位数[IQR]年龄为69[62-75]岁;263名男性[74.5%])中,344名患者被纳入意向治疗分析。TXA组173例患者中有64例(37.0%)在30天内输注了红细胞,安慰剂组171例患者中有64例(37.4%)在30天内输注了红细胞(相对风险为0.99;95% CI为0.83-1.18)。TXA组与安慰剂组的次要结果无差异,包括平均(标清)输注的红细胞单位数(0.9 [1.5] U vs 1.1 [1.8] U;P = .43)、估计失血量(927 [733] mL vs 963 [624] mL;P = .52)、术中输血(28.3% [173例中的49例] vs 24.0% [171例中的41例];P = .08)或静脉血栓栓塞事件(3.5% [173例中的6例] vs 2.9% [171例中的5例];P = .57)。各组间非输血相关不良事件相似:这项随机临床试验的结果表明,TXA 并未减少膀胱癌开放根治性膀胱切除术患者的输血量。根据这项试验,不建议在开放性根治性膀胱切除术中常规使用TXA:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT01869413。
{"title":"Tranexamic Acid During Radical Cystectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"Rodney H Breau, Luke T Lavallée, Ilias Cagiannos, Franco Momoli, Gregory L Bryson, Salmaan Kanji, Christopher Morash, Alexis F Turgeon, Ryan Zarychanski, Brett L Houston, Daniel I McIsaac, Ranjeeta Mallick, Greg A Knoll, Girish Kulkarni, Jonathan Izawa, Fred Saad, Wassim Kassouf, Vincent Fradet, Ricardo Rendon, Bobby Shayegan, Adrian Fairey, Darrel E Drachenberg, Dean Fergusson","doi":"10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4183","DOIUrl":"10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4183","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Among cancer surgeries, patients requiring open radical cystectomy have the highest risk of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion. Prophylactic tranexamic acid (TXA) reduces blood loss during cardiac and orthopedic surgery, and it is possible that similar effects of TXA would be observed during radical cystectomy.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine whether TXA, administered before incision and for the duration of radical cystectomy, reduced the number of RBC transfusions received by patients up to 30 days after surgery.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>The Tranexamic Acid During Cystectomy Trial (TACT) was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial with enrollment between June 2013 and January 2021. This multicenter trial was conducted in 10 academic centers. A consecutive sample of patients was eligible if the patients had a planned open radical cystectomy for the treatment of bladder cancer.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Before incision, patients in the intervention arm received a loading dose of intravenous TXA, 10 mg/kg, followed by a maintenance infusion of 5 mg/kg per hour for the duration of the surgery. In the control arm, patients received indistinguishable matching placebo.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The primary outcome was receipt of RBC transfusion up to 30 days after surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 386 patients were assessed for eligibility, and 33 did not meet eligibility. Of 353 randomized patients (median [IQR] age, 69 [62-75] years; 263 male [74.5%]), 344 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. RBC transfusion up to 30 days occurred in 64 of 173 patients (37.0%) in the TXA group and 64 of 171 patients (37.4%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.83-1.18). There were no differences in secondary outcomes among the TXA group vs placebo group including mean (SD) number of RBC units transfused (0.9 [1.5] U vs 1.1 [1.8] U; P = .43), estimated blood loss (927 [733] mL vs 963 [624] mL; P = .52), intraoperative transfusion (28.3% [49 of 173] vs 24.0% [41 of 171]; P = .08), or venous thromboembolic events (3.5% [6 of 173] vs 2.9% [5 of 171]; P = .57). Non-transfusion-related adverse events were similar between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>Results of this randomized clinical trial reveal that TXA did not reduce blood transfusion in patients undergoing open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. Based on this trial, routine use of TXA during open radical cystectomy is not recommended.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01869413.</p>","PeriodicalId":14690,"journal":{"name":"JAMA surgery","volume":" ","pages":"1355-1363"},"PeriodicalIF":15.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11447623/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142361524","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
JAMA Surgery. JAMA手术。
IF 15.7 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2023.5181
{"title":"JAMA Surgery.","authors":"","doi":"10.1001/jamasurg.2023.5181","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2023.5181","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14690,"journal":{"name":"JAMA surgery","volume":"159 12","pages":"1334"},"PeriodicalIF":15.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142807070","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Choosing the Right Neighborhood Deprivation Index. 选择正确的邻里贫困指数。
IF 15.7 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4204
Michael A Jacobs, Susanne Schmidt, Daniel E Hall
{"title":"Choosing the Right Neighborhood Deprivation Index.","authors":"Michael A Jacobs, Susanne Schmidt, Daniel E Hall","doi":"10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4204","DOIUrl":"10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4204","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14690,"journal":{"name":"JAMA surgery","volume":" ","pages":"1414"},"PeriodicalIF":15.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142361520","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Comparing Deprivation vs Vulnerability Index Performance Using Medicare Beneficiary Surgical Outcomes. 利用医疗保险受益人的手术结果,比较贫困指数与弱势指数的表现。
IF 15.7 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4195
Kimberly A Rollings, Grace A Noppert, Jennifer J Griggs, Andrew M Ibrahim, Philippa J Clarke

Importance: Health care researchers, professionals, payers, and policymakers are increasingly relying on publicly available composite indices of area-level socioeconomic deprivation to address health equity. Implications of index selection, however, are not well understood.

Objective: To compare the performance of 2 frequently used deprivation indices using policy-relevant outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing 3 common surgical procedures.

Design, setting, and participants: This cross-sectional study examined outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries (65 to 99 years old) undergoing 1 of 3 common surgical procedures (hip replacement, knee replacement, or coronary artery bypass grafting) between 2016 and 2019. Index discriminative performance was compared for beneficiaries residing in tracts with high- and low-deprivation levels (deciles) according to each index. Analyses were conducted between December 2022 and August 2023.

Main outcomes and measures: Tract-level deprivation was operationalized using 2020 releases of the area deprivation index (ADI) and the social vulnerability index (SVI). Binary outcomes were unplanned surgery, 30-day readmissions, and 30-day mortality. Multivariable logistic regression models, stratified by each index, accounted for beneficiary and hospital characteristics.

Results: A total of 2 433 603 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 73.8 [6.1] years; 1 412 968 female beneficiaries [58.1%]; 24 165 Asian [1.0%], 158 582 Black [6.5%], and 2 182 052 White [89.7%]) were included in analyses. According to both indices, beneficiaries residing in high-deprivation tracts had significantly greater adjusted odds of all outcomes for all procedures when compared with beneficiaries living in low-deprivation tracts. However, compared to ADI, SVI resulted in higher adjusted odds ratios (adjusted odds ratios, 1.17-1.31 for SVI vs 1.09-1.23 for ADI), significantly larger outcome rate differences (outcome rate difference, 0.07%-5.17% for SVI vs outcome rate difference, 0.05%-2.44% for ADI; 95% CIs excluded 0), and greater effect sizes (Cohen d, 0.076-0.546 for SVI vs 0.044-0.304 for ADI) for beneficiaries residing in high- vs low-deprivation tracts.

Conclusions and relevance: In this cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries, SVI had significantly better discriminative performance-stratifying surgical outcomes over a wider range-than ADI for identifying and distinguishing between high- and low-deprivation tracts, as indexed by outcomes for common surgical procedures. Index selection requires careful consideration of index differences, index performance, and contextual factors surrounding use, especially when informing resource allocation and health care payment adjustment models to address health equity.

重要性:医疗保健研究人员、专业人士、付款人和政策制定者越来越依赖于公开的地区级社会经济贫困综合指数来解决健康公平问题。然而,人们对指数选择的影响还不甚了解:目的:在接受 3 种常见外科手术的医疗保险受益人中,使用与政策相关的结果,比较 2 种常用贫困指数的表现:这项横断面研究调查了 2016 年至 2019 年期间接受 3 种常见外科手术(髋关节置换术、膝关节置换术或冠状动脉旁路移植术)中一种手术的医疗保险受益人(65 岁至 99 岁)的治疗效果。根据每个指数,比较了居住在高贫困水平和低贫困水平(十分位数)地区的受益人的指数判别性能。分析在 2022 年 12 月至 2023 年 8 月期间进行:采用 2020 年发布的地区贫困指数 (ADI) 和社会脆弱性指数 (SVI) 来计算地区贫困程度。二元结果为非计划手术、30 天再入院和 30 天死亡率。多变量逻辑回归模型根据每个指数进行分层,并考虑受益人和医院的特征:共有 2 433 603 名医疗保险受益人(平均 [SD] 年龄 73.8 [6.1] 岁;1 412 968 名女性受益人 [58.1%];24 165 名亚裔 [1.0%]、158 582 名黑人 [6.5%] 和 2 182 052 名白人 [89.7%])被纳入分析。根据这两项指数,与居住在低贫困地区的受益人相比,居住在高贫困地区的受益人在所有程序中出现所有结果的调整后几率明显更高。然而,与 ADI 相比,SVI 的调整后几率更高(SVI 的调整后几率为 1.17-1.31 vs ADI 的调整后几率为 1.09-1.23),结果率差异更大(SVI 的结果率差异为 0.07%-5.17%;95% CIs 不包括 0),居住在高贫困区与低贫困区的受益人的效应大小更大(Cohen d,SVI 为 0.076-0.546 vs ADI 为 0.044-0.304):在这项针对医疗保险受益人的横断面研究中,在识别和区分高贫困区和低贫困区方面,SVI 的判别性能--在更大范围内对手术结果进行分级--明显优于 ADI(以常见手术的结果为指标)。指数的选择需要仔细考虑指数的差异、指数的性能以及使用的环境因素,尤其是在为资源分配和医疗支付调整模型提供信息以解决健康公平问题时。
{"title":"Comparing Deprivation vs Vulnerability Index Performance Using Medicare Beneficiary Surgical Outcomes.","authors":"Kimberly A Rollings, Grace A Noppert, Jennifer J Griggs, Andrew M Ibrahim, Philippa J Clarke","doi":"10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4195","DOIUrl":"10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4195","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Health care researchers, professionals, payers, and policymakers are increasingly relying on publicly available composite indices of area-level socioeconomic deprivation to address health equity. Implications of index selection, however, are not well understood.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the performance of 2 frequently used deprivation indices using policy-relevant outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing 3 common surgical procedures.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This cross-sectional study examined outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries (65 to 99 years old) undergoing 1 of 3 common surgical procedures (hip replacement, knee replacement, or coronary artery bypass grafting) between 2016 and 2019. Index discriminative performance was compared for beneficiaries residing in tracts with high- and low-deprivation levels (deciles) according to each index. Analyses were conducted between December 2022 and August 2023.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Tract-level deprivation was operationalized using 2020 releases of the area deprivation index (ADI) and the social vulnerability index (SVI). Binary outcomes were unplanned surgery, 30-day readmissions, and 30-day mortality. Multivariable logistic regression models, stratified by each index, accounted for beneficiary and hospital characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2 433 603 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 73.8 [6.1] years; 1 412 968 female beneficiaries [58.1%]; 24 165 Asian [1.0%], 158 582 Black [6.5%], and 2 182 052 White [89.7%]) were included in analyses. According to both indices, beneficiaries residing in high-deprivation tracts had significantly greater adjusted odds of all outcomes for all procedures when compared with beneficiaries living in low-deprivation tracts. However, compared to ADI, SVI resulted in higher adjusted odds ratios (adjusted odds ratios, 1.17-1.31 for SVI vs 1.09-1.23 for ADI), significantly larger outcome rate differences (outcome rate difference, 0.07%-5.17% for SVI vs outcome rate difference, 0.05%-2.44% for ADI; 95% CIs excluded 0), and greater effect sizes (Cohen d, 0.076-0.546 for SVI vs 0.044-0.304 for ADI) for beneficiaries residing in high- vs low-deprivation tracts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries, SVI had significantly better discriminative performance-stratifying surgical outcomes over a wider range-than ADI for identifying and distinguishing between high- and low-deprivation tracts, as indexed by outcomes for common surgical procedures. Index selection requires careful consideration of index differences, index performance, and contextual factors surrounding use, especially when informing resource allocation and health care payment adjustment models to address health equity.</p>","PeriodicalId":14690,"journal":{"name":"JAMA surgery","volume":" ","pages":"1404-1413"},"PeriodicalIF":15.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11447624/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142361521","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Facility Medicaid Burden and Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infection-Related Mortality. 医疗机构医疗补助负担与坏死性软组织感染相关死亡率。
IF 15.7 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-11-27 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4744
Jodi-Ann S Edwards, Sherene E Sharath, Panos Kougias
{"title":"Facility Medicaid Burden and Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infection-Related Mortality.","authors":"Jodi-Ann S Edwards, Sherene E Sharath, Panos Kougias","doi":"10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4744","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4744","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14690,"journal":{"name":"JAMA surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":15.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142728786","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Refrain From the Drain? The ADIGE Trial Brings Gastrectomy to the Debate. 避免引流?ADIGE 试验将胃切除术带入辩论。
IF 15.7 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-11-27 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.5228
Max R Coffey, Kyle E Lambert, Vivian E Strong
{"title":"Refrain From the Drain? The ADIGE Trial Brings Gastrectomy to the Debate.","authors":"Max R Coffey, Kyle E Lambert, Vivian E Strong","doi":"10.1001/jamasurg.2024.5228","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2024.5228","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14690,"journal":{"name":"JAMA surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":15.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142728808","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Risk Factors for Metabolic Disease in Veterans: Beyond BMI. 退伍军人代谢性疾病的风险因素:超越体重指数。
IF 15.7 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-11-27 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4518
Yang Lu, Katherine Arnow, Dan Eisenberg
{"title":"Risk Factors for Metabolic Disease in Veterans: Beyond BMI.","authors":"Yang Lu, Katherine Arnow, Dan Eisenberg","doi":"10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4518","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4518","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14690,"journal":{"name":"JAMA surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":15.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142728813","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Prophylactic Drain Placement and Postoperative Invasive Procedures After Gastrectomy: The Abdominal Drain After Gastrectomy (ADIGE) Randomized Clinical Trial. 胃切除术后预防性引流管放置和术后侵入性手术:胃切除术后腹腔引流管(ADIGE)随机临床试验。
IF 15.7 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-11-27 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.5227
Jacopo Weindelmayer, Valentina Mengardo, Filippo Ascari, Gian Luca Baiocchi, Riccardo Casadei, Giovanni Domenico De Palma, Stefano De Pascale, Ugo Elmore, Giovanni Carlo Ferrari, Massimo Framarini, Roberta Gelmini, Monica Gualtierotti, Federico Marchesi, Marco Milone, Lucia Puca, Rossella Reddavid, Riccardo Rosati, Leonardo Solaini, Lorena Torroni, Luigi Totaro, Alessandro Veltri, Giuseppe Verlato, Giovanni de Manzoni
<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Evidence suggests that prophylactic abdominal drainage after gastrectomy for cancer may reduce postoperative morbidity and hospital stay but this evidence comes from small studies with a high risk of bias. Further research is needed to determine whether drains safely meet their primary purpose of identifying and managing postoperative intraperitoneal collections without the need for reoperation or additional percutaneous drainage.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine whether avoiding routine abdominal drainage increased postoperative invasive procedures.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>The Abdominal Drain in Gastrectomy (ADIGE) Trial was a multicenter prospective randomized noninferiority trial. Enrollment spanned from December 2019 to January 2023. Follow-up evaluations were completed at 30 and 90 days. Eleven centers within the Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer, encompassing both academic medical centers and community hospitals, were included. Patients with gastric cancer undergoing subtotal or total gastrectomy with curative intent were eligible, excluding those younger than 18 years, with serious comorbidities, or undergoing procedure types outside the scope of the study. Of 803 patients assessed for eligibility, 404 were randomized and 390 were included in final analyses.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Patients were randomized 1:1 into prophylactic drain or no drain arms.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The primary end point was a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) analysis measuring reoperation or percutaneous drainage within 30 postoperative days. The null hypothesis was rejected when the 90% CI upper limit of the proportion difference did not exceed 3.56%. The calculated sample size to achieve 80% power with a 10% dropout rate was 404 patients (202 in each group). Surgeons and patients were blinded until gastrointestinal reconstruction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 404 patients randomized 226 (57.8%) were male; the median (IQR) age was 71 (62-78) years. Intraoperative identification of nonresectable disease occurred in 14 patients, leading to their exclusion from the study, leaving 390 patients. In the mITT analysis, 15 patients (7.7%) in the drain group needed reoperation or percutaneous drainage by postoperative day 30 vs 29 (15%) in the no drain group, favoring the drain group (difference, 7.2%; 90% CI, 2.1-12.4; P = .02). Of note, the difference in the primary composite end point was entirely due to a similar difference in reoperation (5.1% in the drain group vs 12.4% in the no drain group; P = .01). Drain-related complications occurred in 4 patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>The findings of this study indicate that refraining from prophylactic drain use after gastrectomy heightened the risk of postoperative invasive procedures, discouraging its avoidance. Future studies identifying high-risk groups
重要性:有证据表明,癌症胃切除术后预防性腹腔引流可降低术后发病率和住院时间,但这些证据来自于偏倚风险较高的小型研究。需要进一步研究以确定引流管是否能安全地达到其主要目的,即识别和处理术后腹腔积液,而无需再次手术或额外的经皮引流:目的:确定避免常规腹腔引流是否会增加术后侵入性手术:腹腔引流在胃切除术中的应用(ADIGE)试验是一项多中心前瞻性随机非劣效性试验。注册时间为 2019 年 12 月至 2023 年 1 月。随访评估在 30 天和 90 天后完成。意大利胃癌研究小组(Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer)的11个中心(包括学术医疗中心和社区医院)参与了该试验。接受根治性次全胃切除术或全胃切除术的胃癌患者均符合条件,但不包括年龄小于18岁、患有严重合并症或接受研究范围以外手术类型的患者。在803名通过资格评估的患者中,404人被随机分配,390人被纳入最终分析:患者按 1:1 随机分为预防性引流管组和无引流管组:主要终点是对术后30天内再次手术或经皮引流术的改良意向治疗(mITT)分析。当90% CI的比例差异上限不超过3.56%时,拒绝零假设。计算得出的样本量为 404 例患者(每组 202 例),在 10%的辍学率下达到 80% 的功率。在胃肠道重建之前,外科医生和患者都是盲人:在随机抽取的 404 名患者中,226 名(57.8%)为男性;中位数(IQR)年龄为 71(62-78)岁。有 14 名患者在术中发现了不可切除的疾病,因此被排除在研究之外,剩下 390 名患者。在 mITT 分析中,引流管组有 15 名患者(7.7%)在术后第 30 天需要再次手术或经皮引流,无引流管组有 29 名患者(15%)需要再次手术或经皮引流,引流管组更胜一筹(差异为 7.2%;90% CI,2.1-12.4;P = .02)。值得注意的是,主要复合终点的差异完全归因于再次手术的类似差异(引流管组为5.1%,无引流管组为12.4%;P = .01)。4名患者出现了引流管相关并发症:本研究结果表明,胃切除术后不预防性使用引流管会增加术后侵入性手术的风险,因此不提倡避免使用引流管。未来对高风险人群的研究可优化预防性引流决定:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT04227951。
{"title":"Prophylactic Drain Placement and Postoperative Invasive Procedures After Gastrectomy: The Abdominal Drain After Gastrectomy (ADIGE) Randomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"Jacopo Weindelmayer, Valentina Mengardo, Filippo Ascari, Gian Luca Baiocchi, Riccardo Casadei, Giovanni Domenico De Palma, Stefano De Pascale, Ugo Elmore, Giovanni Carlo Ferrari, Massimo Framarini, Roberta Gelmini, Monica Gualtierotti, Federico Marchesi, Marco Milone, Lucia Puca, Rossella Reddavid, Riccardo Rosati, Leonardo Solaini, Lorena Torroni, Luigi Totaro, Alessandro Veltri, Giuseppe Verlato, Giovanni de Manzoni","doi":"10.1001/jamasurg.2024.5227","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2024.5227","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Importance: &lt;/strong&gt;Evidence suggests that prophylactic abdominal drainage after gastrectomy for cancer may reduce postoperative morbidity and hospital stay but this evidence comes from small studies with a high risk of bias. Further research is needed to determine whether drains safely meet their primary purpose of identifying and managing postoperative intraperitoneal collections without the need for reoperation or additional percutaneous drainage.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt;To determine whether avoiding routine abdominal drainage increased postoperative invasive procedures.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Design, setting, and participants: &lt;/strong&gt;The Abdominal Drain in Gastrectomy (ADIGE) Trial was a multicenter prospective randomized noninferiority trial. Enrollment spanned from December 2019 to January 2023. Follow-up evaluations were completed at 30 and 90 days. Eleven centers within the Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer, encompassing both academic medical centers and community hospitals, were included. Patients with gastric cancer undergoing subtotal or total gastrectomy with curative intent were eligible, excluding those younger than 18 years, with serious comorbidities, or undergoing procedure types outside the scope of the study. Of 803 patients assessed for eligibility, 404 were randomized and 390 were included in final analyses.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Interventions: &lt;/strong&gt;Patients were randomized 1:1 into prophylactic drain or no drain arms.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Main outcomes and measures: &lt;/strong&gt;The primary end point was a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) analysis measuring reoperation or percutaneous drainage within 30 postoperative days. The null hypothesis was rejected when the 90% CI upper limit of the proportion difference did not exceed 3.56%. The calculated sample size to achieve 80% power with a 10% dropout rate was 404 patients (202 in each group). Surgeons and patients were blinded until gastrointestinal reconstruction.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;Of the 404 patients randomized 226 (57.8%) were male; the median (IQR) age was 71 (62-78) years. Intraoperative identification of nonresectable disease occurred in 14 patients, leading to their exclusion from the study, leaving 390 patients. In the mITT analysis, 15 patients (7.7%) in the drain group needed reoperation or percutaneous drainage by postoperative day 30 vs 29 (15%) in the no drain group, favoring the drain group (difference, 7.2%; 90% CI, 2.1-12.4; P = .02). Of note, the difference in the primary composite end point was entirely due to a similar difference in reoperation (5.1% in the drain group vs 12.4% in the no drain group; P = .01). Drain-related complications occurred in 4 patients.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions and relevance: &lt;/strong&gt;The findings of this study indicate that refraining from prophylactic drain use after gastrectomy heightened the risk of postoperative invasive procedures, discouraging its avoidance. Future studies identifying high-risk groups ","PeriodicalId":14690,"journal":{"name":"JAMA surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":15.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142728793","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Issues With the New Liver Allocation System. 新肝脏分配系统的问题。
IF 15.7 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-11-27 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4949
Maria Bernadette Majella Doyle, Ola Ahmed, Susan L Orloff
{"title":"Issues With the New Liver Allocation System.","authors":"Maria Bernadette Majella Doyle, Ola Ahmed, Susan L Orloff","doi":"10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4949","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4949","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14690,"journal":{"name":"JAMA surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":15.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142728789","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Bioengineered Human Arteries for the Repair of Vascular Injuries. 用于修复血管损伤的生物工程人体动脉。
IF 15.7 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-11-20 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4893
Ernest E Moore, Michael Curi, Nicholas Namias, Rishi Kundi, Ying Wei Lum, Charles J Fox, Ravi R Rajani, Todd E Rasmussen, Oleksandr Sokolov, Laura E Niklason, Zakaria Khondker, Shamik J Parikh
<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Vascular injuries require urgent repair to minimize loss of limb and life. Standard revascularization relies on autologous vein or synthetic grafts, but alternative options are needed when adequate vein is not feasible and when clinical conditions preclude safe use of synthetic materials.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the performance of the acellular tissue engineered vessel (ATEV) in the repair of arterial injuries.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>Two open-label, single-arm, nonrandomized clinical trials, including 1 prospective civilian study (CLN-PRO-V005 [V005]) and 1 retrospective observational study in a war zone (CLN-PRO-V017 [V017]), were conducted from September 2018 to January 2024 (follow-up ongoing) at 19 level 1 trauma centers in the US and Israel and 5 frontline hospitals in Ukraine. Patients had vascular injury, no autologous vein available for emergent revascularization, and risk factors for wound infection. Data were analyzed from September 2023 to January 2024.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>The ATEV is a bioengineered vascular conduit grown from human vascular cells, available off the shelf, and implantable without immunosuppression.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Primary patency at day 30 was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included limb salvage, graft infection, and patient survival. A systematic literature review identified synthetic graft benchmarks in the treatment of arterial trauma for the same end points.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The V005 and V017 studies evaluated 69 and 17 patients, respectively, and included 51 in V005 and 16 in V017 with noniatrogenic arterial injuries of the extremities. The majority were male (V005, 38 [74.5%]; V017, 16 [100%]), the mean (SD) ages were similar (V005, 33.5 [13.6] years; V017, 34.2 [9.0] years), and the mean (SD) Injury Severity Scores were similar (V005, 20.8 [10.5]; V017, 20.1 [18.9]). Penetrating injuries dominated (V005, 29 patients [56.9%]; V017, 14 patients [87.5%]). At day 30 for the V005 and V017 trials, respectively, ATEV primary patency was 84.3% (95% CI, 72.0%-91.8%) and 93.8% (95% CI, 71.7%-98.9%); secondary patency was 90.2% (95% CI, 79.0%-95.7%) and 93.8% (95% CI, 71.7%-98.9%); amputation rate was 9.8% (95% CI, 4.3%-21.0%) and 0% (95% CI, 0.0%-19.4%); ATEV infection rate was 2.0% (95% CI, 0.4%-10.3%) and 0% (95% CI, 0.0%-19.4%); and death rate was 5.9% (95% CI, 2.0%-15.9%) and 0% (95% CI, 0.0%-19.4%) (no deaths attributed to the ATEV). Day 30 synthetic graft benchmarks were as follows: secondary patency, 78.9%; amputation, 24.3%; infection, 8.4%; and death, 3.4%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>Results of 2 single-arm trials in civilian and real-world military settings suggest that the ATEV provides benefits in terms of patency, limb salvage, and infection resistance. Comparing ATEV outcomes with synthetic graft benchmarks demonstrates im
重要性:血管损伤需要紧急修复,以尽量减少肢体和生命损失。标准的血管再造术依赖于自体静脉或合成移植物,但当无法获得足够的静脉以及临床条件不允许安全使用合成材料时,就需要替代方案:评估无细胞组织工程血管(ATEV)在修复动脉损伤方面的性能:两项开放标签、单臂、非随机临床试验,包括 1 项前瞻性民用研究(CLN-PRO-V005 [V005])和 1 项战区回顾性观察研究(CLN-PRO-V017 [V017]),于 2018 年 9 月至 2024 年 1 月在美国和以色列的 19 家一级创伤中心以及乌克兰的 5 家前线医院进行(随访仍在进行中)。患者存在血管损伤、无自体静脉可供紧急血管再通,以及伤口感染的风险因素。数据分析时间为 2023 年 9 月至 2024 年 1 月:ATEV是一种由人类血管细胞培育而成的生物工程血管导管,现货供应,无需免疫抑制即可植入:主要结果和测量指标:第30天的主要通畅率是主要结果。次要结果包括肢体挽救率、移植物感染率和患者存活率。系统性文献综述确定了动脉创伤治疗中相同终点的合成移植物基准:V005 和 V017 两项研究分别对 69 名和 17 名患者进行了评估,其中 V005 和 V017 分别对 51 名和 16 名四肢非iatrogenic 动脉损伤患者进行了评估。大部分患者为男性(V005,38 [74.5%];V017,16 [100%]),平均(标清)年龄相似(V005,33.5 [13.6]岁;V017,34.2 [9.0]岁),平均(标清)损伤严重程度评分相似(V005,20.8 [10.5];V017,20.1 [18.9])。穿透性损伤占多数(V005,29 名患者 [56.9%];V017,14 名患者 [87.5%])。在 V005 和 V017 试验的第 30 天,ATEV 一级通畅率分别为 84.3%(95% CI,72.0%-91.8%)和 93.8%(95% CI,71.7%-98.9%);二级通畅率分别为 90.2%(95% CI,79.0%-95.7%)和 93.8%(95% CI,71.7%-98.9%);截肢率分别为 9.8%(95% CI,4.3%-21.0%)和 0%(95% CI,0.0%-19.4%);ATEV 感染率为 2.0%(95% CI,0.4%-10.3%)和 0%(95% CI,0.0%-19.4%);死亡率为 5.9%(95% CI,2.0%-15.9%)和 0%(95% CI,0.0%-19.4%)(没有因 ATEV 导致的死亡)。第30天合成移植物基准如下:二次通畅率78.9%;截肢率24.3%;感染率8.4%;死亡率3.4%:在民用和实际军事环境中进行的两项单臂试验结果表明,ATEV 在通畅性、肢体挽救和抗感染方面具有优势。将 ATEV 的疗效与合成移植物的基准进行比较后发现,治疗四肢急性血管损伤的效果更好:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers:NCT03005418、NCT05873959。
{"title":"Bioengineered Human Arteries for the Repair of Vascular Injuries.","authors":"Ernest E Moore, Michael Curi, Nicholas Namias, Rishi Kundi, Ying Wei Lum, Charles J Fox, Ravi R Rajani, Todd E Rasmussen, Oleksandr Sokolov, Laura E Niklason, Zakaria Khondker, Shamik J Parikh","doi":"10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4893","DOIUrl":"10.1001/jamasurg.2024.4893","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Importance: &lt;/strong&gt;Vascular injuries require urgent repair to minimize loss of limb and life. Standard revascularization relies on autologous vein or synthetic grafts, but alternative options are needed when adequate vein is not feasible and when clinical conditions preclude safe use of synthetic materials.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt;To evaluate the performance of the acellular tissue engineered vessel (ATEV) in the repair of arterial injuries.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Design, setting, and participants: &lt;/strong&gt;Two open-label, single-arm, nonrandomized clinical trials, including 1 prospective civilian study (CLN-PRO-V005 [V005]) and 1 retrospective observational study in a war zone (CLN-PRO-V017 [V017]), were conducted from September 2018 to January 2024 (follow-up ongoing) at 19 level 1 trauma centers in the US and Israel and 5 frontline hospitals in Ukraine. Patients had vascular injury, no autologous vein available for emergent revascularization, and risk factors for wound infection. Data were analyzed from September 2023 to January 2024.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Intervention: &lt;/strong&gt;The ATEV is a bioengineered vascular conduit grown from human vascular cells, available off the shelf, and implantable without immunosuppression.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Main outcomes and measures: &lt;/strong&gt;Primary patency at day 30 was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included limb salvage, graft infection, and patient survival. A systematic literature review identified synthetic graft benchmarks in the treatment of arterial trauma for the same end points.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;The V005 and V017 studies evaluated 69 and 17 patients, respectively, and included 51 in V005 and 16 in V017 with noniatrogenic arterial injuries of the extremities. The majority were male (V005, 38 [74.5%]; V017, 16 [100%]), the mean (SD) ages were similar (V005, 33.5 [13.6] years; V017, 34.2 [9.0] years), and the mean (SD) Injury Severity Scores were similar (V005, 20.8 [10.5]; V017, 20.1 [18.9]). Penetrating injuries dominated (V005, 29 patients [56.9%]; V017, 14 patients [87.5%]). At day 30 for the V005 and V017 trials, respectively, ATEV primary patency was 84.3% (95% CI, 72.0%-91.8%) and 93.8% (95% CI, 71.7%-98.9%); secondary patency was 90.2% (95% CI, 79.0%-95.7%) and 93.8% (95% CI, 71.7%-98.9%); amputation rate was 9.8% (95% CI, 4.3%-21.0%) and 0% (95% CI, 0.0%-19.4%); ATEV infection rate was 2.0% (95% CI, 0.4%-10.3%) and 0% (95% CI, 0.0%-19.4%); and death rate was 5.9% (95% CI, 2.0%-15.9%) and 0% (95% CI, 0.0%-19.4%) (no deaths attributed to the ATEV). Day 30 synthetic graft benchmarks were as follows: secondary patency, 78.9%; amputation, 24.3%; infection, 8.4%; and death, 3.4%.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions and relevance: &lt;/strong&gt;Results of 2 single-arm trials in civilian and real-world military settings suggest that the ATEV provides benefits in terms of patency, limb salvage, and infection resistance. Comparing ATEV outcomes with synthetic graft benchmarks demonstrates im","PeriodicalId":14690,"journal":{"name":"JAMA surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":15.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11579887/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142675809","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
JAMA surgery
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1