Qionglai Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine

This study aimed to evaluate whether combined therapy with PD-1 blockade (anti-PD-1) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is superior to RFA monotherapy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

A total of 127 patients who underwent anti-PD-1 plus RFA treatment (n = 41) or RFA alone (n = 86) for recurrent HCC were included in this retrospective study. A matched cohort comprising 40 patients from each group was selected after propensity score matching analysis. Clinical data including post-RFA HCC recurrence (primary endpoint), overall survival (OS) (secondary endpoint), adverse events, and toxic effects were retrospectively analyzed.

The 1-year recurrence-free survival rates for the anti-PD-1 plus RFA and RFA groups were 32.5% and 10.0% after propensity score matching. There were statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of the recurrence-free survival rate (p = 0.001) and OS rate (p = 0.016). Tumor number, tumor-node metastasis (TNM) stage, antiviral therapy, and anti-PD-1 treatment were demonstrated to be important factors associated with 1-year recurrence-free survival probability by univariate and multivariate analyses. Univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated that tumor number, TNM stage and anti-PD-1 treatment were significant prognostic factors for OS. RFA treatment-related adverse events included pleural effusions that require drainage and a mild or moderate increase in body temperature. Grade 3 or higher events related to anti-PD-1 treatment occurred in 12.8% (6) of patients and were infrequent.

Combination therapy with anti-PD-1 plus RFA was superior to RFA alone in improving survival in patients with recurrent HCC.

To compare the clinical effects and safety of the proximal femur bionic nail (PFBN) with those of proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) and InterTAN for the treatment of intertrochanteric femoral fracture (IFF).

Studies comparing the clinical efficacy of PFBN with that of PFNA and InterTAN in the treatment of IFF published before 16 December 2025 in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases were retrieved. After the research data were extracted, Review Manager 5.4 (RevMan 5.4 ) was used for data analysis.

A total of 15 studies involving 990 patients were included. The meta-analysis results indicated that the PFBN group had advantages over the control group in terms of the postoperative partial and full weight-bearing time, fracture healing time, fracture reduction quality, hospital stay, postoperative Harris score, intraoperative fluoroscopy time and postoperative complication rate (partial weight-bearing time: standardized mean difference ( SMD ) = −3.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) [−4.47 to −2.52], P < 0.00001; full weight-bearing time: SMD = −1.78, 95% CI [−2.86 to −0.70], P = 0.001; fracture healing time: SMD = −0.61, 95% CI −[0.86 to −0.37], P < 0.00001; fracture reduction quality: relative risk ( RR ) = 1.07, 95% CI [1.01∼1.13], P = 0.02; hospital stay: SMD = −0.44, 95% CI [−0.81 to −0.08], P = 0.02; postoperative complication rate: RR = 0.36, 95% CI [0.22∼0.59], P < 0.0001; postoperative Harris score: SMD = 0.32, 95% CI [0.04∼0.60], P = 0.02; intraoperative fluoroscopy time: SMD = 0.76, 95% CI [0.10∼1.42], P = 0.02). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss, operation duration, postoperative hip range of motion, postoperative VAS score, or incision length (intraoperative blood loss: SMD = −0.30, 95% CI [−0.81∼0.21], P = 0.25; operation duration: SMD = 0.41, 95% CI [−0.03∼0.85], P = 0.07; postoperative flexion and extension motion: SMD = 0.28, 95% CI [−0.18∼0.73], P = 0.23; postoperative rotational motion: SMD = 0.20, 95% CI [−0.25∼0.66], P = 0.38; incision length: SMD = 0.23, 95% CI [−0.44∼0.89], P = 0.50; postoperative VAS score: SMD = −0.29, 95% CI [−0.82∼0.23], P = 0.27).

For the treatment of IFF , the PFBN is more effective and has a lower risk than the PFNA and InterTAN.