Chih-Cheng Lai

Dr. Chih-Cheng Lai

Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Tainan Branch
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

18Years (2009-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
5 August 2022 in Journal of Microbiology, Immunology and Infection
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
CLChih-Cheng Lai
Chih-Cheng Lai
CHChi-Kuei Hsu
Chi-Kuei Hsu
MYMuh-Yong Yen
Muh-Yong Yen
PLPing-Ing Lee
Ping-Ing Lee
WKWen-Chien Ko
Wen-Chien Ko
PHPo-Ren Hsueh
Po-Ren Hsueh
The emergence of the monkeypox outbreak in early 2022 has posed a new global health threat. As of July 8, 2022, 9069 laboratory-confirmed cases have been reported, and most of them are from non-endemic countries. The monkeypox virus is an enveloped double-stranded DNA virus, and preliminary genetic data suggest that the 2022 monkeypox virus belongs to the West African clade. In the current outbreak, human-to-human transmission has been the primary transmission mode. Although direct skin-to-skin contact with lesions during sexual activities can spread the virus, it remains unclear whether monkeypox can spread through sexual contact, specifically through contaminated body fluids. The typical presentation of monkeypox includes prodromal symptoms, followed by a rash that usually begins within 1–3 days of symptom onset, and the skin lesions can last for 2–4 weeks and then gradually resolve. However, the monkeypox outbreak in 2022 may exhibit atypical features. A definite diagnosis of monkeypox virus infection requires nucleic acid amplification testing via the polymerase chain reaction method. Supportive care is essential, and antiviral therapy is not considered for all affected patients, but recommended for those at highrisk for severe diseases. The mitigation of monkeypox outbreaks include enhanced case detection, case isolation, contact tracing, and post-exposure vaccination. In conclusion, the current monkeypox outbreak is a new threat during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinicians should be aware of this new situation, which presents a different scenario from those of prior outbreaks. Global health systems should develop effective strategies to mitigate the spread of monkeypox.

15 October 2022 in Journal of Microbiology, Immunology and Infection
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
CLChih-Cheng Lai
Chih-Cheng Lai
CHChi-Kuei Hsu
Chi-Kuei Hsu
MYMuh-Yong Yen
Muh-Yong Yen
PLPing-Ing Lee
Ping-Ing Lee
WKWen-Chien Ko
Wen-Chien Ko
PHPo-Ren Hsueh
Po-Ren Hsueh
At present, there are more than 560 million confirmed cases of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) worldwide. Although more than 98% of patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection can survive acute COVID, a significant portion of survivors can develop residual health problems, which is termed as long COVID. Although severe COVID-19 is generally associated with a high risk of long COVID, patients with asymptomatic or mild disease can also show long COVID. The definition of long COVID is inconsistent and its clinical manifestations are protean. In addition to general symptoms, such as fatigue, long COVID can affect many organ systems, including the respiratory, neurological, psychosocial, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, and metabolic systems. Moreover, patients with long COVID may experience exercise intolerance and impaired daily function and quality of life. Long COVID may be caused by SARS-CoV-2 direct injury or its associated immune/inflammatory response. Assessment of patients with long COVID requires comprehensive evaluation, including history taking, physical examination, laboratory tests, radiography, and functional tests. However, there is no known effective treatment for long COVID. Based on the limited evidence, vaccines may help to prevent the development of long COVID. As long COVID is a new clinical entity that is constantly evolving, there are still many unknowns, and further investigation is warranted to enhance our understanding of this disease.

5 June 2014 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HTHung-Jen Tang
Hung-Jen Tang
WLWei-Lun Liu
Wei-Lun Liu
HLHsin-Lan Lin
Hsin-Lan Lin
CLChih-Cheng Lai
Chih-Cheng Lai
The study of candidemia in cancer patients has been limited. This retrospective study aims to investigate the epidemiologic characteristics and prognostic factors of candidemia among cancer patients. From 2009 to 2012, cancer patients with candidemia were identified at a hospital in Taiwan. The medical records of all patients with bloodstream infections due to Candida species were retrospectively reviewed. During the four-year period, a total of 242 episodes of candidemia were identified among cancer patients. Half of these patients were classified as elderly (≥65 years old), and more than 95% of the candidemia episodes were classified as healthcare-associated infections. Among the 242 cancer patients with candidemia, head and neck cancer was the most common, followed by gastrointestinal tract and lung cancer. Additionally, most of the patients had variable underlying conditions, such as the presence of CVC (99%) or prior exposure to broad-spectrum antibiotics (93%) and were receiving an immunosuppressant (86%). Overall, C. albicans (n = 132, 54.5%) was the most common pathogen, followed by C. tropicalis (n = 52, 21.5%), C. parapsilosis (n = 38, 15.7%), and C. glabrata (n = 29, 12.0%). Seventeen patients had polycandidal candidemia, and 77 patients had concomitant bacteremia. Approximately one-third of the patients required admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) or mechanical ventilation, and the overall in-hospital mortality was 50.8%. Multivariable analysis showed that the in-hospital mortality was significantly associated with only the non-use of antifungal agents and acute respiratory failure (P<.001). Candidemia can develop in patients with both solid cancer and hematological malignancy, especially for patients with underlying conditions. Overall, the associated morbidity and mortality due to Candidemia remain high. It was also determined that the non-use of antifungal agents and acute respiratory failure conditions were associated with in-hospital mortality.

25 August 2018 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MHMeng-hsuen Hsieh
Meng-hsuen Hsieh
MHMeng-hsuen Hsieh
Meng-hsuen Hsieh
CCChin-Ming Chen
Chin-Ming Chen
CHChia-Chang Hsieh
Chia-Chang Hsieh
CCChien-Ming Chao
Chien-Ming Chao
CLChih-Cheng Lai
Chih-Cheng Lai
Background: Successful weaning from mechanical ventilation is important for patients in intensive care units (ICUs). The aim was to construct neural networks to predict successful extubation in ventilated patients in ICUs. Methods: Data from 1 December 2009 through 31 December 2011 of 3602 patients with planned extubation in Chi-Mei Medical Center’s ICUs was used to train and test an artificial neural network (ANN). The input was 37 clinical risk factors, and the output was a failed extubation prediction. Results: One hundred eighty-five patients (5.1%) had a failed extubation. Multivariate analyses revealed that failure was positively associated with therapeutic intervention scoring system (TISS) scores (odds ratio [OR]: 1.814; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.283–2.563), chronic hemodialysis (OR: 12.264; 95% CI: 8.556–17.580), rapid shallow breathing (RSI) (OR: 2.003; 95% CI: 1.378–2.910), and pre-extubation heart rate (OR: 1.705; 95% CI: 1.173–2.480), but negatively associated with pre-extubation PaO2/FiO2 (OR: 0.529; 95%: 0.370–0.750) and maximum expiratory pressure (MEP) (OR: 0.610; 95% CI: 0.413–0.899). A multilayer perceptron ANN model with 19 neurons in a hidden layer was developed. The overall performance of this model was F1: 0.867, precision: 0.939, and recall: 0.822. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.85, which is better than any one of the following predictors: TISS: 0.58 (95% CI: 0.54–0.62; p < 0.001); 0.58 (95% CI: 0.53–0.62; p < 0.001); and RSI: 0.54 (95% CI: 0.49–0.58; p = 0.097). Conclusions: The ANN performed well when predicting failed extubation, and it will help predict successful planned extubation.

8 July 2023 in Critical Care
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JWJheng-Yan Wu
Jheng-Yan Wu
YTYa-Wen Tsai
Ya-Wen Tsai
WHWan-Hsuan Hsu
Wan-Hsuan Hsu
TLTing-Hui Liu
Ting-Hui Liu
PHPo-Yu Huang
Po-Yu Huang
CLChih-Cheng Lai
Chih-Cheng Lai
Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of systemic corticosteroids in the treatment of patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia (sCAP). Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted using the Medline, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Scopus databases for articles published until April 24, 2023. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the clinical efficacy and safety of adjunctive corticosteroids for treating sCAP were included. The primary outcome was the 30-day all-cause mortality. Results: A total of seven RCTs involving 1689 patients were included in this study. Overall, the study group had a lower mortality rate at day 30 than the control group (risk ratio [RR], 0.61; 95% CI 0.44 to 0.85; p < 0.01) with low heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, p = 0.42). Compared to the control group, the study group had a lower risk of the requirement of mechanical ventilation (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.45 to 0.73; p < 0.001), shorter length of intensive care unit (MD − 0.8; 95% CI − 1.4 to − 0.1; p = 0.02), and hospital stay (MD − 1.1; 95% CI − 2.0 to − 0.1; p = 0.04). Finally, no significant difference was observed between the study and the control groups in terms of gastrointestinal tract bleeding (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.49 to 2.18; p = 0.93), healthcare-associated infection (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.32; p = 0.56), and acute kidney injury (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.21 to 2.26; p = 0.53). Conclusions: In patients with sCAP, adjunctive corticosteroids can provide survival benefits and improve clinical outcomes without increasing adverse events. However, because the pooled evidence remains inconclusive, further studies are required.

2 August 2022 in Viruses
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CLChih-Cheng Lai
Chih-Cheng Lai
YWYa-Hui Wang
Ya-Hui Wang
KCKuang-Hung Chen
Kuang-Hung Chen
CCChao-Hsien Chen
Chao-Hsien Chen
CWCheng-Yi Wang
Cheng-Yi Wang
This network meta-analysis compared the clinical efficacy and safety of anti-viral agents for the prevention of disease progression among non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched from their inception to 28 May 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the clinical efficacy of anti-viral agents for non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were included. Three RCTs involving 4241 patients were included. Overall, anti-viral agents were associated with a significantly lower risk of COVID-19 related hospitalization or death compared with the placebo (OR, 0.23; 95% CI: 0.06–0.96; p = 0.04). Compared with the placebo, patients receiving nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir had the lowest risk of hospitalization or death (OR, 0.12; 95% CI: 0.06–0.24), followed by remdesivir (OR, 0.13; 95% CI: 0.03–0.57) and then molnupiravir (OR, 0.67; 95% CI: 0.46–0.99). The rank probability for each treatment calculated using the P-score revealed that nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir was the best anti-viral treatment, followed by remdesivir and then molnupiravir. Finally, anti-viral agents were not associated with an increased risk of adverse events compared with the placebo. For non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who are at risk of disease progression, the currently recommended three anti-viral agents, nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir, molnupiravir and remdesivir, should continue to be recommended for the prevention of disease progression. Among them, oral nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir and intravenous remdesivir seem to be the better choice, followed by molnupiravir, as determined by this network meta-analysis. Additionally, these three anti-viral agents were shown to be as tolerable as the placebo in this clinical setting.