Displaying all 6 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Sakamoto T, Shimura M, Kitano S, Ohji M, Ogura Y, Yamashita H, et al.
    Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 2022 Feb;260(2):477-487.
    PMID: 34477927 DOI: 10.1007/s00417-021-05308-8
    PURPOSE: The MERCURY study aimed to evaluate the effects on visual acuity and psychological symptoms, and safety, of ranibizumab and subsequent treatment in patients with diabetic macular oedema (DME) and impaired visual acuity (VA). We report data from the prespecified 12-month interim analysis.

    METHODS: This was a 24-month, phase 4, open-label, single-arm, prospective, observational study conducted at 20 specialised retinal centres in Japan. Participants were 209 patients with DME and impaired VA, not previously treated with either intravitreal or systemic anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents, who initiated ranibizumab 0.5 mg per investigator discretion. Following ranibizumab administration, patients were treated per routine clinical practice. Other treatments were allowed. The main outcome measure was the mean change in best-corrected VA (BCVA) in logarithmic minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) from baseline to month 12. An exploratory objective was to assess patients' psychological status using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS).

    RESULTS: The mean ± standard deviation BCVA at baseline was 0.43 ± 0.39 logMAR. The mean number of injections of ranibizumab and anti-VEGF agents from baseline to month 11 was 3.2 ± 2.0 and 3.6 ± 2.4, respectively. The BCVA change from baseline to 12 months was - 0.08 ± 0.34 logMAR (p = 0.011), showing a significant improvement; the HADS-anxiety score also decreased significantly (p = 0.001) and the depression score decreased numerically (p = 0.080).

    CONCLUSION: MERCURY study data confirm the effectiveness of real-world treatment initiated with ranibizumab in Japanese patients with DME. In addition, treatment was able to positively influence anxiety via VA improvement.

  2. Ohta M, Seki Y, Wong SK, Wang C, Huang CK, Aly A, et al.
    Obes Surg, 2019 02;29(2):534-541.
    PMID: 30306499 DOI: 10.1007/s11695-018-3539-7
    INTRODUCTION: The Asia-Pacific Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Society (APMBSS) held its congress in Tokyo at the end of March, 2018, and representatives from Asia-Pacific countries presented the current status of bariatric/metabolic surgery in the "National Reports" session. The data are summarized here to show the current status and problems in the Asia-Pacific region in 2017.

    METHODS: A questionnaire including data of 2016 and 2017 and consisting of eight general questions was prepared and sent to representatives in 18 Asia-Pacific countries by e-mail before the congress. After the congress, the data were analyzed and summarized.

    RESULTS: Seventeen of 18 countries responded to the survey. The frequency of obesity (BMI ≥ 30) in the 4 Gulf countries was > 30%, much higher than that in the other countries. In total, 1640 surgeons and 869 institutions were engaging in bariatric/metabolic surgery. In many East and Southeast Asian countries, the indication for bariatric surgery was BMI ≥ 35 or ≥ 37, whereas in many Gulf countries and Australia, it was BMI ≥ 40 or ≥ 35 with obesity-related disease. Ten of the 17 countries (58.8%) but only one of the 5 Southeast Asian countries (20.0%) had public health insurance coverage for bariatric surgery. In 2017, 95,125 patients underwent bariatric/metabolic surgery, with sleeve gastrectomy accounting for 68.0%, bypass surgery for 19.5%, and others for 12.5%. Current problems included public insurance coverage, training system, national registry, and lack of awareness and comprehension.

    CONCLUSION: This summary showed that bariatric/metabolic surgery is rapidly developing along with various problems in Asia-Pacific countries.

  3. Chiu PWY, Ng SC, Inoue H, Reddy DN, Ling Hu E, Cho JY, et al.
    Gut, 2020 Jun;69(6):991-996.
    PMID: 32241897 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-321185
    Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 has become a global pandemic. Risk of transmission may occur during endoscopy and the goal is to prevent infection among healthcare professionals while providing essential services to patients. Asia was the first continent to have a COVID-19 outbreak, and this position statement of the Asian Pacific Society for Digestive Endoscopy shares our successful experience in maintaining safe and high-quality endoscopy practice at a time when resources are limited. Sixteen experts from key societies of digestive endoscopy in Asia were invited to develop position statements, including patient triage and risk assessment before endoscopy, resource prioritisation and allocation, regular monitoring of personal protective equipment, infection control measures, protective device training and implementation of a strategy for stepwise resumption of endoscopy services after control of the COVID-19 outbreak.
  4. Mayumi T, Okamoto K, Takada T, Strasberg SM, Solomkin JS, Schlossberg D, et al.
    J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2018 Jan;25(1):96-100.
    PMID: 29090868 DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.519
    Management bundles that define items or procedures strongly recommended in clinical practice have been used in many guidelines in recent years. Application of these bundles facilitates the adaptation of guidelines and helps improve the prognosis of target diseases. In Tokyo Guidelines 2013 (TG13), we proposed management bundles for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. Here, in Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18), we redefine the management bundles for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. Critical parts of the bundles in TG18 include the diagnostic process, severity assessment, transfer of patients if necessary, and therapeutic approach at each time point. Observance of these items and procedures should improve the prognosis of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. Studies are now needed to evaluate the dissemination of these TG18 bundles and their effectiveness. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.
  5. Yokoe M, Hata J, Takada T, Strasberg SM, Asbun HJ, Wakabayashi G, et al.
    J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2018 Jan;25(1):41-54.
    PMID: 29032636 DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.515
    The Tokyo Guidelines 2013 (TG13) for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis were globally disseminated and various clinical studies about the management of acute cholecystitis were reported by many researchers and clinicians from all over the world. The 1st edition of the Tokyo Guidelines 2007 (TG07) was revised in 2013. According to that revision, the TG13 diagnostic criteria of acute cholecystitis provided better specificity and higher diagnostic accuracy. Thorough our literature search about diagnostic criteria for acute cholecystitis, new and strong evidence that had been released from 2013 to 2017 was not found with serious and important issues about using TG13 diagnostic criteria of acute cholecystitis. On the other hand, the TG13 severity grading for acute cholecystitis has been validated in numerous studies. As a result of these reviews, the TG13 severity grading for acute cholecystitis was significantly associated with parameters including 30-day overall mortality, length of hospital stay, conversion rates to open surgery, and medical costs. In terms of severity assessment, breakthrough and intensive literature for revising severity grading was not reported. Consequently, TG13 diagnostic criteria and severity grading were judged from numerous validation studies as useful indicators in clinical practice and adopted as TG18/TG13 diagnostic criteria and severity grading of acute cholecystitis without any modification. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.
  6. Miura F, Okamoto K, Takada T, Strasberg SM, Asbun HJ, Pitt HA, et al.
    J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2018 Jan;25(1):31-40.
    PMID: 28941329 DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.509
    The initial management of patients with suspected acute biliary infection starts with the measurement of vital signs to assess whether or not the situation is urgent. If the case is judged to be urgent, initial medical treatment should be started immediately including respiratory/circulatory management if required, without waiting for a definitive diagnosis. The patient's medical history is then taken; an abdominal examination is performed; blood tests, urinalysis, and diagnostic imaging are carried out; and a diagnosis is made using the diagnostic criteria for cholangitis/cholecystitis. Once the diagnosis has been confirmed, initial medical treatment should be started immediately, severity should be assessed according to the severity grading criteria for acute cholangitis/cholecystitis, and the patient's general status should be evaluated. For mild acute cholangitis, in most cases initial treatment including antibiotics is sufficient, and most patients do not require biliary drainage. However, biliary drainage should be considered if a patient does not respond to initial treatment. For moderate acute cholangitis, early endoscopic or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage is indicated. If the underlying etiology requires treatment, this should be provided after the patient's general condition has improved; endoscopic sphincterotomy and subsequent choledocholithotomy may be performed together with biliary drainage. For severe acute cholangitis, appropriate respiratory/circulatory management is required. Biliary drainage should be performed as soon as possible after the patient's general condition has been improved by initial treatment and respiratory/circulatory management. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links