Background and Objectives: To estimate the clinical outcomes of uniportal and biportal full-endoscopic spine surgery for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease (LDD), and to provide the latest evidence for clinical selection. Materials and Methods: Relevant literatures published in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, and WanFang Database before 21 November 2021 were searched systematically. Two researchers independently screened the studies, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias of the included studies. The systematic review and meta-analysis were performed using the Review Manager software (version 5.4; The Cochrane Collaboration). Results: A total of seven studies were included in this meta-analysis, including 198 patients in a uniportal endoscopy group and 185 patients in a biportal endoscopy group. The results of this meta-analysis demonstrated that the biportal endoscopy group experienced less intraoperative estimated blood loss (WMD = −2.54, 95%CI [−4.48, −0.60], p = 0.01), while the uniportal endoscopy group displayed significantly better recovery results in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) assessments of the back within 3 days of surgery (WMD = 0.69, 95%CI [0.02, 1.37], p = 0.04). However, no significant differences in operation time, length of hospital stay, complication rates, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (within 3 months), ODI (last follow-up), VAS for back (within 3 months), VAS for back (last follow-up), and VAS for leg (within 3 days, within 3 months, last follow-up) were identified between the two groups. Conclusions: According to our meta-analysis, patients who underwent the uniportal endoscopic procedure had more significant early postoperative back pain relief than those who underwent the biportal endoscopic procedure. Nevertheless, both surgical techniques are safe and effective.

Objective: This meta-analysis aims to refine the understanding of the optimal choice between different cage shapes in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) by systematically comparing perioperative data, radiological outcomes, clinical results, and complications associated with banana-shaped and straight bullet cages.Methods: A meticulous literature search encompassing PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, China Knowledge Network, and Wanfang Data was executed up to October 5, 2023. Inclusion criteria focused on studies comparing banana-shaped and straight bullet cages in TLIF. The quality of included studies was assessed using appropriate tools such as the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for nonrandomized studies. Rigorous evaluations were performed for radiographic outcomes, including disc height (DH), segmental lordosis (SL), lumbar lordosis (LL), subsidence, and fusion rates. Clinical outcomes were meticulously evaluated using visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and complications.Results: The analysis incorporated 7 studies, involving 573 patients (297 with banana-shaped cages, 276 with straight cages), all with NOS ratings exceeding 5 stars. No statistically significant differences were observed in operative time, blood loss, or hospitalization between the 2 cage shapes. Banana-shaped cages exhibited greater changes in DH (p = 0.001), SL (p = 0.02), and LL (p = 0.01). Despite statistically higher changes in ODI for straight cages (26.33, p < 0.0001), the actual value remained similar to banana-shaped cages (26.15). Both cage types demonstrated similar efficacy in VAS, complication rates, subsidence, and fusion rates.Conclusion: Although banana-shaped cages can excel in restoring DH, SL, and LL, straight bullet cages can provide comparable functional improvements, pain relief, and complication rates.

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a major source of morbidity after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). The purpose of this retrospective study comparing 1-layer pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) with 2-layer PJ after PD was to evaluate whether the 1-layer duct-to-mucosa PJ after PD can reduce the incidence of POPF. A total of 194 consecutive patients who underwent PD by one group of surgeons (led by Y.M.) from January 2011 to February 2014 were included in this study. Among those patients, 104 underwent 1-layer PJ (1-layer group), and 90 patients underwent 2-layer PJ (2-layer group). Preoperative clinicopathologic features, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative morbidity with a focus on POPF were compared between the 2 groups. The overall incidence of POPF was 19.6% (38 of 194 patients), and clinically relevant grade B and C POPF rates were 8.6% (16 of 194 patients) and 3.1% (6 of 194 patients), respectively. There were no differences in patient demographics and operation-related factors between the 2 groups. However, the incidence of POPF in the 1-layer group was significantly lower than in the 2-layer group [13.5% (14 of 104) of patients and 26.7% (24 of 90) of patients, respectively; P = 0.021]. The median postoperative hospital stay was also significantly shorter in the 1-layer group compared with the 2-layer group (13 versus 15 days, P = 0.035). One patient in the 2-layer group died of postoperative hemorrhage. One-layer duct-to-mucosa PJ is a simple and easy technique for pancreaticojejunal anastomosis after PD, and it can reduce the POPF rate in comparison with the 2-layer technique.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a widespread degenerative joint disease. The current treatment mainly focuses on relieving symptoms, so its targeted therapy has attracted more and more attention from physicians. Multi-omics Mendelian randomization analysis provides innovative perspectives for uncovering possible therapeutic targets. This study utilized data from multi-omics analyses, including expression quantitative trait loci, protein quantitative trait loci, and methylation quantitative trait loci, combined with summary-data-based Mendelian randomization and colocalization analyses, to explore genetic markers and molecular pathways associated with OA. We also performed single-cell sequencing analysis to investigate gene expression in cartilage with OA and utilized molecular docking techniques to predict drug candidates. Finally, to explore the involvement of core proteins in OA, we carried out USP8-centered protein–protein interaction and enrichment analyses. The 4 genes linked to OA were found after integrating multi-omics results: USP8, DLK1, OMG, and SNUPN. Among them, USP8, as a first-level gene, has strong multi-omics evidence that it is closely related to OA. The other key genes identified were DLK1, OMG, and SNUPN as tertiary, quaternary, and quaternary genes, respectively. Molecular docking results showed that GDC-0134 could effectively target DLK1, which provided a new target for targeted therapy of DLK1. In addition, several genetic associations were validated in a replication cohort, and protein–protein interaction and enrichment analyses were conducted to explore the molecular networks linked to OA. The multi-omics integration identified several key genes and pathways associated with OA, providing a comprehensive understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying the disease. USP8 and DLK1 were highlighted as promising therapeutic targets. These results offer promising avenues for creating novel therapies aimed at modifying OA progression.