多囊卵巢综合征患者基础LH升高对IVF-ET结局影响

目的比较应用拮抗剂方案对多囊卵巢综合征（PCOS）不孕患者进行IVF-ET助孕治疗中，血清基础黄体生成素（LH）升高与LH正常两组患者的操作性促排卵结果及新鲜周期胚胎移植后妊娠结局的差异。方法回顾性分析2015年1月至2021年12月在中山大学附属第六医院生殖医学研究中心，行体外受精胚胎移植治疗的PCOS不孕患者的临床资料，根据其基础LH水平，将其分为LH升高组（LH≥10 U/L）与LH正常组（LH<10 U/L），其中升高组236例，正常组548例。比较两组患者的促排卵结果和新鲜周期胚胎移植的妊娠结局，包括：促性腺激素（Gn）启动剂量、Gn天数、Gn总量、获卵数、两原核（PN）率、可利用胚胎率、优质胚胎率、囊胚形成率、HCG阳性率、临床妊娠率、流产率、持续妊娠率和活产率；并分析两组促排卵过程中激素变化趋势的差异。结果与LH正常组比较，升高组Gn总剂量显著低于LH正常组（P<0.001）。两组获卵数、2PN率、可利用胚胎率、优质胚胎率与囊胚形成率均无显著差异（P均>0.05）；LH升高组的取消新鲜周期移植率及因预防OHSS而取消移植率与LH正常组比较差异无统计学意义（P均>0.05）。在新鲜移植周期中，LH升高组的HCG阳性率、临床妊娠率、流产率、持续妊娠率与活产率与LH正常组比较，均差异无统计学意义（P均>0.05）。结论PCOS不孕患者中，基础LH水平升高并不影响促排结果与新鲜胚胎移植的妊娠结局，促排卵治疗前是否需降低LH水平及基础LH水平升高患者是否需行全胚冷冻，还需要进一步研究

Review of Research on Regional Land Use Change and Its environmental Impacts

以黄土高原为重点 ,对植被变化及其引起的土地利用变化的环境影响的有关研究进行了比较系统的阐述。对植被研究态势 ,土地利用变化对水文生态过程、土壤环境及生物多样性影响做了简要的述评 ,对该领域的目前存在的问题进行了分析 ,并提出了有关进一步研究的建

缺水环境下造林苗木生根萌芽机理与造林关键技术研究

该研究针对黄土高原人工造林成活率低问题中的关键技术，系统研究了苗木定植后生根萌芽、展叶过程中内源激素与水分变化特征及其对生根萌芽的调控规律；缺水环境下内源激素变化规律和不同苗木在大气干旱和土壤水分亏缺下自身水分平衡的维持能力，水分平衡、激素消长与生根萌芽的关系等取得了以下研究成果：1、首次证明沙棘具有节水型御旱特性和典型的耐旱特性。双重作用使沙棘成为强抗旱性植物。 2、造林苗木成活过程中的水分平衡与致死机理研究提示了顺序性变化在4个树种（沙棘、杨树、刺槐、油松）中具有普遍性。系统研究了不同土壤水分含量对黄土高原4个树种的耗水特性、生长及干物质积累的过程以及水分利用效率（WUE）的影响。3、幼林生长特性研究表明干旱下树种生长受干旱影响程度不同，沙棘在干旱条件下生长受影响程度小于杨树、刺槐、油松等。 4、苗木水分平衡的抗旱造林技术措施，主要是减少蒸腾失水，促进根系吸水，保证苗体水分平衡，调控内源激素比例，达到提高造林成活率目的。可利用黄土透气性好推广截杆、埋苗等措施 5、不同立地条件下的林木生产力与水分关系研究和沙棘杨树混交林研究不仅提示了沙棘杨树混交林促进杨树生长机理，而且对黄土高原大面积人工林的利用和生态建设具有重要的指导意义。6、针对黄土高原4个乡土树种水分生理生态特征和不同立地条件水分特征研究，为黄土高原人工造林提供了科学依据。并对取得的单项和综合性技术成果通过示范推广，已在不同类型区建立了人工林，获得了社会生态经济效益，可在我国西部同类型区进行推广应用

绿色农业新技术集成研究与示范

一、该项目针对农业生产中食品安全和环境污染问题,开展了S-诱抗素、新奥霉素、壳寡糖、棉铃虫病毒杀虫剂与昆虫病原线虫生物制剂、功能性堆肥及其浸提液工业化生产等的试验和示范,立项准确,针对性强,意义重大。 二、项目研究出S-诱抗素等生物制剂及其生产工艺、工厂化技术;研究开发出昆虫病原线虫活体繁殖技术,实现了工厂化生产;研究开发了两种功能性堆肥及浸提液,提出了“功能性堆肥+秸秆生物反应堆+堆肥浸提液+S-诱抗素等生物制剂”健康、安全设施蔬菜生产模式;在宁夏实现了地上、地下,土壤、作物生物制剂联防技术体系,为低耗、高效、安全、健康农产品生产开辟了新途径。 三、在S-诱抗素、新奥霉素高产菌株的生产工艺,昆虫病原线虫活体繁殖工厂化生产方面取得了新突破;在S-诱抗素、新奥霉素、壳寡糖、棉铃虫病毒杀虫剂、功能性堆肥及其浸提液集成应用控制作物病虫害等方面有创新。研究成果达到了国内先进水平,S-诱抗素、新奥霉素高产菌株的生产工艺研究达到国际领先。 四、项目执行期间,在宁夏15个市县建立核心试验基地14个,示范推广点40个,累计推广面积17万亩,新增效益9600万元。获得发明专利4项,实用新型专利1项,制定地方标准5项,专著1部,发表论文19篇(其中SCI收录6篇)。培训农技人员300人次,农民4700多人次

Aripiprazole versus other atypical antipsychotics for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND: In most western industrialised countries, second generation (atypical) antipsychotics are recommended as first line drug treatments for people with schizophrenia. In this review we specifically examine how the efficacy and tolerability of one such agent - aripiprazole - differs from that of other comparable second generation antipsychotics. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of aripiprazole compared with other atypical antipsychotics for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (November 2011), inspected references of all identified studies for further trials, and contacted relevant pharmaceutical companies, drug approval agencies and authors of trials for additional information. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing aripiprazole (oral) with oral and parenteral forms of amisulpride, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, sertindole, ziprasidone or zotepine for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychoses. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random-effects model. Where possible, we calculated illustrative comparative risks for primary outcomes. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD), again based on a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias for each included study. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 trials involving 6389 patients. Aripiprazole was compared to olanzapine, risperidone and ziprasidone. All trials were sponsored by an interested drug manufacturer. The overall number of participants leaving studies early was 30% to 40%, limiting validity (no differences between groups).When compared with olanzapine no differences were apparent for global state (no clinically important change: n = 703, 1 RCT, RR short-term 1.00 95% CI 0.81 to 1.22; n = 317, 1 RCT, RR medium-term 1.08 95% CI 0.95 to 1.22) but mental state tended to favour olanzapine (n = 1360, 3 RCTs, MD total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) 4.68 95% CI 2.21 to 7.16). There was no significant difference in extrapyramidal symptoms (n = 529, 2 RCTs, RR 0.99 95% CI 0.62 to 1.59) but fewer in the aripiprazole group had increased cholesterol levels (n = 223, 1 RCT, RR 0.32 95% CI 0.19 to 0.54) or weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight (n = 1095, 3 RCTs, RR 0.39 95% CI 0.28 to 0.54).When compared with risperidone, aripiprazole showed no advantage in terms of global state (n = 384, 2 RCTs, RR no important improvement 1.14 95% CI 0.81 to 1.60) or mental state (n = 372, 2 RCTs, MD total PANSS 1.50 95% CI -2.96 to 5.96).One study compared aripiprazole with ziprasidone (n = 247) and both the groups reported similar change in the global state (n = 247, 1 RCT, MD average change in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) score -0.03 95% CI -0.28 to 0.22) and mental state (n = 247, 1 RCT, MD change PANSS -3.00 95% CI -7.29 to 1.29).When compared with any one of several new generation antipsychotic drugs the aripiprazole group showed improvement in global state in energy (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.69 95% CI 0.56 to 0.84), mood (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.77 95% CI 0.65 to 0.92), negative symptoms (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.82 95% CI 0.68 to 0.99), somnolence (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.80 95% CI 0.69 to 0.93) and weight gain (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.84 95% CI 0.76 to 0.94). Significantly more people given aripiprazole reported symptoms of nausea (n = 2881, 3 RCTs, RR 3.13 95% CI 2.12 to 4.61) but weight gain (7% or more of total body weight) was less common in people allocated aripiprazole (n = 330, 1 RCT, RR 0.35 95% CI 0.19 to 0.64). Aripiprazole may have value in aggression but data are limited. This will be the focus of another review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Information on all comparisons are of limited quality, are incomplete and problematic to apply clinically. Aripiprazole is an antipsychotic drug with a variant but not absent adverse effect profile. Long-term data are sparse and there is considerable scope for another update of this review as new data emerges from the many Chinese studies as well as from ongoing larger, independent pragmatic trials