Hui Peng

The Radix Bupleuri and Radix Paeoniae Alba herb-pair (RRH) are the most classic compatible drug pair for the treatment of hepatitis. However, the underlying mechanism remains unclear. Therefore, network pharmacology and molecular docking were conducted to investigate the prospective therapeutic constituents, targets, and pharmacological mechanisms of RRH in the treatment of hepatitis. The active components of RRH from the TCMSP database and disease-related targets from the OMIM, PharmGkb, GeneCards, TTD, and DrugBank databases were identified. The “drug-target-disease” network diagram and protein–protein interaction (PPI) network were constructed using Cytoscape (v3.8.0) and Online STRING 11.0. GO and KEGG pathway enrichment analyses were performed using R version 4.1.2, and molecular docking was performed to verify the results. We placed 176 overlapping cross genes into Online STRING 11.0 and obtained 14 core targets. A “Component-Target-GO-KEGG” network diagram was constructed, which was composed of 7 components, 14 targets, 10 biological processes, and 10 signal pathways. A total of 2413 GO biological processes and 174 KEGG pathways were explored for hepatitis treatment. Quercetin, kaempferol, isorhamnetin, and beta-sitosterol, which are the main bioactive components, were employed to bind the disease's hub targets, ensuring fulfillment of spatial and energy matching. The anti-hepatitis mechanism of RRH may be associated with several targets including RELA, AKT1, JUN, MAPK1, TP53, CCND1, MYC, NFKBIA, CDKN1A, and their respective signaling pathways. The main bioactive components in RRH, including quercetin, kaempferol, isorhamnetin, and beta-sitosterol, were used to bind the hub targets of the disease, which may provide insights into drug development for hepatitis.

Background: This study aimed to clarify the optimal management of the LigaSure technique and conventional techniques during splenectomy. Methods: All databases, including CBM, CNKI, WFPD, Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane databases up to April 2023, were searched for relevant studies comparing the LigaSure technique with conventional techniques. Six studies, extracted by 2 independent reviewers, were evaluated for blood loss, operative time, conversion, mortality, hospital stay, and transfusion. Results: The blood loss was significantly higher in the convention group than in the LigaSure group (WMD = −48.98, 95% CI: −62.41 to −35.55, P < .00001). Meanwhile, the mean operative time was significantly shorter in LigaSure group than in convention group (WMD = −10.57; 95% CI: −12.35 to −8.78), P < .00001). No significant differences were found regarding the conversion rate, hospital stay, morbidity, and transfusion. Conclusions: The LigaSure technique has comparable effects to conventional techniques, but to some extent reduces blood loss and operative time.