• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Timing of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the treatment of acute cholangitis of different severity

    2022-10-24 09:15:40YaoChiHuangChiHuanWuMuHsienLeeShengFuWangYungKuanTsouChengHuiLinKaiFengSungNaiJenLiu
    World Journal of Gastroenterology 2022年38期

    Yao-Chi Huang, Chi-Huan Wu, Mu Hsien Lee, Sheng Fu Wang, Yung-Kuan Tsou, Cheng-Hui Lin, Kai-FengSung,Nai-Jen Liu

    Abstract

    Key Words: Acute cholangitis; Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; severity; Timing; Thirtyday mortality; Length of hospital stay

    lNTRODUCTlON

    Without treatment, patients with acute cholangitis (AC) may progress to septicemia and organ failure resulting in mortality[1,2]. Over the past two decades, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) has been generally accepted as a first-line treatment for AC[3,4]. Although delayed biliary drainage may not affect the risk of complications in patients who respond well to antibiotics, some patients with AC require early ERCP to avoid (persistent) organ failure or mortality[2,5,6]. Despite consensus on the need for biliary drainage, the optimal timing for early ERCP remains unclear due to mixed results in the literature[7]. Different definitions of early ERCP have been used in the literature,ranging from 12 h to 72 h[2,5,8-11]. The varied definitions among studies have led to inconsistent conclusions. In addition, the definitions of AC are not uniform across studies. More importantly, most studies did not define the timing of ERCP by stratifying the severity of AC[7]. In this context, the recently published Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18) provide not only a diagnosis of AC but also a severity grading, which is important for predicting prognosis and determining treatment strategies[3]. However,although TG18 recommends early or urgent biliary drainage for moderate or severe cholangitis, there is no specific timing for early or urgent ERCP. Therefore, this study aims to investigate whether the timing of ERCP is associated with improved outcomes in AC patients with different severities.

    MATERlALS AND METHODS

    This was a retrospective study conducted at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Linkou Center. At our center, ERCP has been the first-line of treatment for patients with AC for the past two decades. This study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital (IRB No. 202200881B0). Since this was a retrospective study using routine clinical treatment or diagnostic medical records, the Chang Gung Medical Foundation Institutional Review Board approved the waiver of the participant's consent. All methods were carried out under relevant guidelines and regulations.

    Definition of acute cholangitis

    The diagnostic criteria for AC were based on the 2018 Tokyo Guidelines, including systemic inflammation, cholestasis and imaging findings[3]. Systemic inflammation included fever (body temperature >38 °C) or evidence of an inflammatory response [white blood cell (WBC) count < 4000 or > 10000/μL or C-reactive protein ≥ 1 mg/dL]. Cholestasis included jaundice (serum total bilirubin ≥ 2 mg/dL) or abnormal liver function tests (serum alkaline phosphatase, r-glutamyl transferase, aspartate aminotransferase, or alanine aminotransferase > 1.5 times the upper limit of the normal value). Imaging findings included bile duct dilatation or imaging evidence of etiology such as strictures, stones or stents. A definite diagnosis of AC was defined as one item in systemic inflammation, one item in cholestasis and one item in imaging findings.

    Definition of the severity of acute cholangitis

    AC severity was divided into three grades based on the 2018 Tokyo Guidelines[3]. Grade III (severe) AC was AC associated with the onset of dysfunction in at least one of the following organs/systems:cardiovascular dysfunction (defined as hypotension requiring dopamine ≥ 5 μg/kg per min, or any dose of norepinephrine), neurological dysfunction (presence of conscious disturbance), respiratory dysfunction (defined as PaO2/FiO2ratio < 300), renal dysfunction (oliguria, serum creatinine > 2.0 mg/dL), hepatic dysfunction [defined as prothrombin time-international normalized ratio (PT-INR) >1.5] or hematological dysfunction (defined as platelet count < 100 × 103/μL). Grade II (moderate) AC was AC associated with any two of the following conditions: abnormal WBC count (> 12000/μL or <4000/μL), high fever (≥ 39 °C), old age (≥ 75 years), hyperbilirubinemia (serum total bilirubin ≥ 5 mg/dL), or hypoalbuminemia (< lower limit of normal value × 0.7). Grade I (mild) AC was AC that did not meet the criteria of “Grade III” or “Grade II” AC at initial diagnosis.

    Definition of time to ERCP

    Time to ERCP was defined as the time from the emergency department visit to the commencement of ERCP.

    Patient selection and clinical variables

    The study flow chart is shown in Figure 1. Between 2016 and 2017, 2121 patients who underwent ERCP in our center were retrospectively collected from the computer database of the Therapeutic Endoscopy Center. The inclusion criteria were patients who met the TG18/TG13 criteria for a definite diagnosis of AC. The exclusion criteria were: (1) Patients who did not meet the criteria for a definite diagnosis of AC;(2) inpatients who developed AC after hospitalization; and (3) patients who received ERCP 7 or more days after an emergency department visit. For patients readmitted for AC during the study period, we included only the first admission and the ERCP procedure.

    Medical records were reviewed, and the following data were obtained: sex; age; clinical manifestations, including body temperature, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, saturation, respiratory rate and urine output; laboratory values including WBC count, platelet count, PT-INR, C-reactive protein,creatinine, bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, r-glutamyl transferase, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase and albumin; diagnosis and treatment of ERCP, including causes of obstruction (such as stones, malignant strictures or stent dysfunction); and the timing of ERCP.

    Outcome assessments

    The primary outcome was 30-d mortality. Secondary outcomes were ICU admission rate, length of hospital stay (LOHS) and 30-d readmission rate. The results were first compared for patients receiving ERCP ≤ 24 hvs> 24 h and then for patients receiving ERCP ≤ 48 hvs> 48 h. Subgroup analyses were also performed in patients with grade I, II, and III AC.

    Statistical analysis

    Continuous variable data are represented by the median and interquartile range (IQR); categorical variables are presented as a number (%). For comparisons, the Kruskal-Wallis test was used for continuous variable data and the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test was used for suitable categorical variables. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with 30-d mortality.Only variables with aPvalue < 0.05 in the univariate analysis were included in the multivariate analysis. Two-tailedPvalues < 0.05 were considered statistically significant andPvalues = 0.05 were considered marginally significant. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software (version 22.0;SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, United States).

    Figure 1 Study flow chart. AC: Acute cholangitis; ERCP: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

    RESULTS

    A total of 683 patients who met the eligibility criteria were included in the study. Among them, there were 170 (24.9%) grade III AC patients, 179 grade II AC patients (26.4%) and 334 grade I AC patients(48.9%).

    Patient characteristics

    The baseline characteristics of the patients are presented in Table 1. The median (IQR) age of the patients was 66 (53-78) years; 57.2% were male. The median body temperature was 37.5 (36.8-38.4) °C and 58.4% of patients had abnormal WBC counts. The median platelet count was 198 × 103(148 × 103-251× 103)/μL. The median serum levels of aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase and alkaline phosphatase were 150 U/L, 166 U/L and 265 U/L, respectively. Serum amylase and lipase data were available for 307 (44.9%) and 487 (71.3%) patients with median levels of 65 U/L and 37 U/L,respectively. The median serum bilirubin level was 3.7 (2.3-6.3) mg/dL and the median creatine level was 0.93 (0.73-1.24) mg/dL. The median PT/INR was 1.1 (1.1-1.2). Only 133 (19.5%) patients had data on serum albumin and the median level was 3.56 (3.05-3.98) g/dL. Twenty-nine (4.2%) patients had cardiovascular dysfunction, 35 (5.1%) patients had neurological dysfunction and 48 (7%) patients had respiratory dysfunction.

    Comparisons between ERCP ≤ 24 h and ERCP > 24 h:Compared with ERCP > 24 h, patients with ERCP ≤ 24 h had significantly lower body temperature (median, 37.2 °Cvs37.5 °C.P= 0.003),significantly higher serum alanine aminotransferase (median, 194 U/Lvs156 U/L,P= 0.02) and serum creatinine levels (median, 0.96vs0.93,P= 0.004), and significantly higher proportions of abnormal WBC counts (70.9%vs55.4%,P= 0.001), cardiovascular dysfunction (11.2%vs2.6%,P< 0.001) and respiratory dysfunction (14.2%vs5.3%,P< 0.001).

    Comparisons between ERCP ≤ 48 h and ERCP > 48 h:Compared with ERCP > 48 h, patients with ERCP ≤ 48 h had significantly lower body temperature (median, 37.4 °Cvs37.6 °C,P= 0.009),significantly higher serum alanine aminotransferase levels (median, 188 U/Lvs142 U/L,P= 0.004) and significantly lower PT/INR (median, 1.1vs1.2,P= 0.001).

    ERCP characteristics and causes of AC

    The characteristics of ERCP are listed in Table 2. Causes of AC included common bile duct stones(CBDS, 74.4%), malignant biliary obstruction (MBO, 10.2%), biliary stent dysfunction (8.9%), benign biliary stricture (4.5%) and others (1.9%). ERCP failed in 1% of patients. For patients with successful ERCP, endoscopic treatments during ERCP included endoscopic sphincterotomy (81.7%), endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (0.7%), bile duct stone retrieval (73.5%), stone-free bile duct clearance (5.4%),removal of old biliary stents (8.8%), insertion of new biliary stents (27.4%), dilation of biliary strictures(1%) and others (0.4%).

    Comparisons between ERCP ≤ 24 h and ERCP > 24 h:The median time to ERCP was 17.7 (9.0-20.4) h in the ERCP ≤ 24 h group and 67.6 (43.6-98.9) h in the ERCP > 24 h group. Only malignant biliary obstruction as a cause of AC was significantly less common in the ERCP ≤ 24 h group (5.2%vs11.5%,P= 0.032). In therapeutic ERCP, bile duct stone retrieval was higher in the ERCP ≤ 24 h group (80.6%vs71.8%,P= 0.038) whereas the old biliary stent removal rate was lower (4.5%vs9.8%,P= 0.049).

    Table 1 Characteristics of the patients

    Comparisons between ERCP ≤ 48 h and ERCP > 48 h:The median time to ERCP was 26.0 (18.8-40.1) h in the ERCP ≤ 48 h group and 88.5 (67.2-114.6) h in the ERCP > 48 h group. Regarding indications for ERCP, CBDS was more common in the ERCP ≤ 48 h group (81.5%vs68.3%,P< 0.001) whereas malignant biliary obstruction (6.1%vs13.8%,P< 0.001) and stent dysfunction were less common (5.4%vs11.9%,P= 0.003). In therapeutic ERCP, endoscopic sphincterotomy (85.7%vs78.3%,P= 0.013) and bile duct stone retrieval (79.6%vs68.3%,P= 0.001) were more frequent in the ERCP ≤ 48 h group whereas the removal of old biliary stents (5.4%vs11.7%,P= 0.004) and the insertion of new biliary stents (22.3%vs31.7%,P= 0.006) were less frequent.

    Primary and secondary outcomes

    The primary and secondary outcomes are summarized in Table 3.

    Overall patients:Overall, the 30-d mortality rate was 1.02% (or 7/683). The ICU admission rate was 5.4%; the median LOHS was 7 (5-10) d; and the 30-d readmission rate was 12.7%.

    (1) Comparisons between ERCP ≤ 24 h and ERCP > 24 h: The overall 30-d mortality rate was 0 in the ERCP ≤ 24 h group and 1.3% in the ERCP > 24 h group. However, the difference did not reach statistical significance (P= 0.356). Regarding secondary outcomes, the ERCP ≤ 24 h group had significantly higher ICU admission rates (11.2%vs4.0%,P= 0.001) and shorter LOHS (median, 6 dvs7 d,P= 0.018).

    (2) Comparisons between ERCP ≤ 48 h and ERCP > 48 h: Overall, the 30-d mortality rate was significantly lower in the ERCP ≤ 48 h group than in the ERCP > 48 h group (0vs1.9%,P= 0.017). For secondary outcomes, the ERCP ≤ 48 h group had a significantly shorter LOHS (median, 6 dvs8 d,P<0.001).

    Table 2 Characteristics of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

    Patients with Grade III AC:The 30-d mortality rate was 3.5% (or 6/170) for patients with grade III AC.The ICU admission rate was 15.3%; the median LOHS was 7 (7-14) d; and the 30-d readmission rate was 13.5% in this patient group.

    (1) Comparisons between ERCP ≤ 24 h and ERCP > 24 h: The 30-d mortality rate for grade III AC patients was 0 in the ERCP ≤ 24 h group and 4.6% in the ERCP > 24 h group. However, the difference did not reach statistical significance (P= 0.338). Regarding secondary outcomes, the ERCP ≤ 24 h group had significantly higher ICU admission rates (9.0%vs2.6%,P= 0.002).

    (2) Comparisons between ERCP ≤ 48 h and ERCP > 48 h: Among grade III AC patients, the 30-d mortality rate was significantly lower in the ERCP ≤ 48 h group than in the ERCP > 48 h group (0vs6.1%,P= 0.039). Regarding secondary outcomes, the ERCP ≤ 48 h group had significantly higher ICU admission rates (22.2%vs10.2%,P= 0.031).

    Patients with Grade II AC:The 30-d mortality rate was 0 for patients with grade II AC. The ICU admission rate was 2.8%; the median LOHS was 7 (5-10) d; and the 30-d readmission rate was 13.4% in this patient group.

    (1) Comparisons between ERCP ≤ 24 h and ERCP > 24 h: The only significant finding in grade II AC patients was that the LOHS was shorter (median, 6 dvs7 d,P= 0.047) in the ERCP ≤ 24 h group.

    (2) Comparisons between ERCP ≤ 48 h and ERCP > 48 h: Among grade II AC patients, the only significant finding was that the LOHS was shorter (median, 6 dvs8 d,P= 0.001) in the ERCP ≤ 48 h group.

    Patients with Grade I AC:The 30-d mortality rate was 0.3% (or 1/334) for patients with grade I AC. The ICU admission rate was 1.8%; the median LOHS was 6 (5-9) d; and the 30-d readmission rate was 12% in this patient group.

    (1) Comparisons between ERCP ≤ 24 h and ERCP > 24 h: The only significant finding in grade I AC patients was that the LOHS was shorter (median, 6 dvs7 d,P= 0.005) in the ERCP ≤ 24 h group.

    Table 3 Primary and secondary outcomes

    (2) Comparisons between ERCP ≤ 48 h and ERCP > 48 h: Among grade I AC patients, the only significant finding was that the LOHS was shorter (median, 6 dvs7 d,P< 0.001) in the ERCP ≤ 48 h group.

    Factors associated with 30-d mortality

    The results of the univariate and multivariate analyses are listed in Table 4. The univariate analysis revealed that malignant biliary obstruction (OR: 6.817, 95%CI: 1.494-31.109,P= 0.013), hepatic dysfunction (OR: 8.896, 95%CI: 1.645-48.119,P= 0.011), respiratory dysfunction (OR: 10.517, 95%CI:2.284-48.431,P= 0.003), neurological dysfunction (OR: 15.094, 95%CI: 3.241-70.298,P= 0.001),cardiovascular dysfunction (OR: 18.750, 95%CI: 3.990-88.112,P< 0.001), severity of AC (severevsmoderate + mild, OR: 18.732, 95%CI: 2.239-156.728,P= 0.007), ICU admission (OR: 7.326, 95%CI: 1.373-39.101,P= 0.02), and time to ERCP (every 1-d delay, OR: 1.950, 95%CI: 1.252-3.038,P= 0.003) were associated with 30-d mortality. The multivariate analysis revealed that time to ERCP (every 1-d delay,OR: 2.081, 95%CI: 1.154-3.753,P= 0.015) was the only independent factor associated with 30-d mortality.However, cardiovascular dysfunction (OR: 17.756, 95%CI: 0.994-317.241,P= 0.050) was of marginal significance.

    DlSCUSSlON

    Kiriyamaet al[3] reported that early or urgent ERCP significantly reduced 30-d mortality only in patients with grade II AC compared with patients who did not receive early or urgent ERCP. This result may be due to the lack of well-defined timing for early or urgent ERCP. In a meta-analysis published in 2020, Duet al[7] reported that early ERCP reduced in-hospital mortality regardless of whether it was defined as < 24 h, < 48 h or < 72 h. In the present study, we found that ERCP ≤ 48 h but not ERCP ≤ 24 hsignificantly reduced 30-d mortality. Our results were consistent with the 2021 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines recommending ERCP ≤ 48 h in AC patients[12]. In that study,however, the data were insufficient to stratify by disease severity. In a subgroup analysis, we found that the same survival benefit was observed only in patients with grade III AC but not in patients with grade II or I AC. These results were because patients with grade III AC had significantly higher 30-d mortality than those with grade II or I AC (3.5%vs0vs0.3%,P= 0.001). Hakutaet al[10] reported that time to ERCP was not associated with clinical outcomes (including in-hospital mortality) in patients with nongrade III AC. Therefore, we recommend emergent ERCP (≤ 48 h) for patients with grade III AC in terms of survival benefit.

    Table 4 Univariate and multivariate analyses of the factors associated with 30-d mortality

    However, 30-d mortality in AC has been reported to range from 1% to 16% between studies, which may be one of the reasons leading to inconsistent conclusions about the optimal timing of ERCP[11,13-15]. Differences in mortality may be due to different patient populations in different studies,e.g.,patients with AC due to CBDS and MBO may have different clinical courses and prognoses. Kiriyamaet al[14] reported that patients with AC associated with MBO had a higher 30-d mortality rate than those with AC associated with CBDS. In our univariate analysis, MBO was a factor associated with 30-d mortality. Therefore, one of the reasons for the low 30-d mortality in our study was the low proportion of patients with MBO (10.2%). In contrast, Tanet al[11] included 43% of MBO patients in their study and reported a 30-d mortality rate of 16%. However, Parket al[15] included only patients with AC associated with distal MBO and reported an overall 30-d mortality rate of 4.8%. Therefore, there may be some other factors associated with 30-d mortality between studies.

    Of the five organ failure criteria used to diagnose grade III AC, cardiovascular dysfunction was the only independent factor associated with 30-d mortality in the current study. Therefore, among grade III AC patients, those with cardiovascular dysfunction may need to be treated differently[16,17]. Karvellaset al[17] reported an overall mortality rate of 37% in 260 patients with AC-related septic shock. They found that delayed biliary decompression > 12 h from the onset of shock was one of three independent factors associated with mortality. The 2019 European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines recommend biliary drainage (preferably endoscopic) within 12 h of shock onset for AC patients with CBDS-related septic shock[16]. Therefore, cardiovascular dysfunction should be weighed when developing new guidelines in the future.

    Some studies found no survival benefit but did find early ERCP to reduce the LOHS[18-21]. Houet al[20] reported that in a multivariate analysis, the LOHS increased by 1.44 d for every 1-d delay in ERCP (P< 0.001). Similar results were seen in the study by Zhuet al[18]: LOHS increased by 1.49 d for every 1-d delay in biliary drainage (P< 0.0001). However, these findings were not stratified by disease severity.Although we did not perform a multivariate analysis of the LOHS, our results suggested that the LOHS could be significantly reduced regardless of ERCP ≤ 24 h or ≤ 48 h. In subgroup analyses stratified by disease severity, this benefit was only observed in patients with grade I or II AC. The benefit of early ERCP in shortening the LOHS might be offset by higher ICU admission rates in grade III AC patients.Similar findings were found by Janget al[19], who recommended urgent ERCP (≤ 24 h) for patients with grade I or II AC because it can shorten the LOHS.

    This study has several limitations. First, this retrospective, single-center study might have inherent selection bias. Patients with cardiovascular dysfunction and respiratory dysfunction tended to receive ERCP ≤ 24 h. Therefore, caution is required when interpreting the results of this subgroup analysis.Second, we identified patients from the endoscopy database. AC patients who died before receiving ERCP might not have been included in this study, resulting in an underestimation of 30-d mortality.Third, data on albumin, one of the criteria for class II AC, were available in only 19.5% of patients.Therefore, some patients with grade II AC may be misclassified as grade I AC and vice versa.

    CONCLUSlON

    ERCP ≤ 48 h but not ≤ 24 h has a survival benefit in AC patients; this benefit is only observed in patients with grade III AC. Early ERCP is also recommended for patients with grade I or II AC because it shortens the LOHS.

    ARTlCLE HlGHLlGHTS

    Research methods

    The retrospective cohort study included 683 patients who met the diagnostic criteria for acute cholangitis defined by the 2018 Tokyo Guidelines. Among them, there were 170 (24.9%) grade III acute cholangitis patients, 179 grade II acute cholangitis patients (26.4%) and 334 grade I acute cholangitis patients (48.9%). Results are first compared between patients receiving ERCP ≤ 24 h and > 24 h, and then between patients receiving ERCP ≤ 48 h and > 48 h. Subgroup analyses are performed on patients with grade III, II or I acute cholangitis.

    Research results

    When 24 h was considered a critical value for ERCP timing, we found that patients with malignant biliary obstruction received ERCP ≤ 24 h less frequently when compared with ERCP > 24 h (5.2%vs11.5%). Patients with organ dysfunction such as cardiovascular dysfunction (11.2%vs2.6%) and respiratory dysfunction (14.2%vs5.3%) or those admitted to the ICU (11.2%vs4%) tended to receive ERCP ≤ 24 h. Patients with ERCP ≤ 24 h had significantly shorter hospital stays (median, 6 dvs7 d).Stratified by the severity of acute cholangitis, higher ICU admission was only observed in grade III acute cholangitis and a shorter length of hospital stay was only observed in grade I and II acute cholangitis. Regarding 30-d mortality, the results of ERCP ≤ 24 h and > 24 h were not significantly different, either in the overall population or in patients with grade I, II or III acute cholangitis. When 48 h was considered a critical value for ERCP timing, patients with choledocholithiasis received ERCP ≤ 48 h more frequently (81.5%vs68.3%). Patients who received ERCP ≤ 48 h had significantly lower 30-d mortality (0vs1.9%) and shorter hospital stays (6 dvs8 d). Stratified by the severity of acute cholangitis,lower 30-d mortality (0vs6.1%) and higher ICU admission rates (22.2%vs10.2%) were only observed in grade III acute cholangitis and a shorter length of hospital stay was only observed in grade I and II acute cholangitis. In the multivariate analysis, cardiovascular dysfunction and time to ERCP were two independent factors associated with 30-d mortality.

    Research conclusions

    ERCP ≤ 48 h but not ≤ 24 h has a survival benefit in acute cholangitis patients; this benefit is only observed in patients with grade III acute cholangitis. Early ERCP is also recommended for patients with grade I and II acute cholangitis because it shortens the length of hospital stay.

    Research perspectives

    Of the five organ failure criteria used to diagnose grade III AC, cardiovascular dysfunction was the only independent factor associated with 30-d mortality in the current study. Therefore, cardiovascular dysfunction should be weighed more heavily in the development of new guidelines in the future.

    FOOTNOTES

    Author contributions:Huang YC contributed to the conceptualization of the study and original manuscript; Wu CH,Lee MH and Wang SF contributed to data planning, interpretation and formal analysis; Lin CH and Sung KF contributed to data collection; Tsou YK is committed to the conceptualization of the study, manuscript writing,review and editing; Liu NJ contributed to revising the final version of the manuscript for submission.

    lnstitutional review board statement:This study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital (IRB No. 202200881B0).

    lnformed consent statement:Since this was a retrospective study using clinical routine treatment or diagnostic medical records, the Chang Gung Medical Foundation Institutional Review Board approved the waiver of the participant's consent.

    Conflict-of-interest statement:All the authors report no relevant conflicts of interest for this article.

    Data sharing statement:Technical appendix, statistical code and dataset available from the corresponding author at flying@adm.cgmh.org.tw.

    STROBE statement:The authors have read the STROBE Statement-checklist of items, and the manuscript was prepared and revised according to the STROBE Statement-checklist of items.

    Open-Access:This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BYNC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is noncommercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/

    Country/Territory of origin:Taiwan

    ORClD number:Chi-Huan Wu 0000-0002-3913-8010; Mu Hsien Lee 0000-0003-3664-5313; Sheng Fu Wang 0000-0002-7856-2957; Yung-Kuan Tsou 0000-0002-7254-7369; Cheng-Hui Lin 0000-0001-8102-0625; Kai-Feng Sung 0000-0001-6118-0234;Nai-Jen Liu 0000-0002-7992-0234.

    S-Editor:Gong ZM

    L-Editor:Filipodia

    P-Editor:Gong ZM

    2018国产大陆天天弄谢| 亚洲 国产 在线| 一个人免费看片子| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 男的添女的下面高潮视频| 中文欧美无线码| 日韩伦理黄色片| xxx大片免费视频| 一级片'在线观看视频| www.精华液| 中文字幕av电影在线播放| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 不卡av一区二区三区| 久久精品亚洲熟妇少妇任你| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区| 五月天丁香电影| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 国产成人影院久久av| 久久九九热精品免费| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 首页视频小说图片口味搜索 | 黄色 视频免费看| 欧美黑人精品巨大| 久久国产精品大桥未久av| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 高清不卡的av网站| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 国产一级毛片在线| 少妇精品久久久久久久| 老汉色av国产亚洲站长工具| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线| www.熟女人妻精品国产| 精品国产国语对白av| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 黄色 视频免费看| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 免费观看人在逋| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 天堂8中文在线网| 一级黄片播放器| 男人添女人高潮全过程视频| 欧美激情高清一区二区三区| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 一级黄色大片毛片| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品| 香蕉丝袜av| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站 | 欧美国产精品一级二级三级| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 日本五十路高清| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 一区二区av电影网| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 丝袜脚勾引网站| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 最黄视频免费看| 搡老乐熟女国产| 在线 av 中文字幕| 久久精品国产a三级三级三级| 熟女av电影| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 中文字幕人妻熟女乱码| 国产高清videossex| www日本在线高清视频| 自线自在国产av| avwww免费| 欧美日韩黄片免| 999久久久国产精品视频| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 亚洲精品国产av蜜桃| 欧美黑人精品巨大| 日本黄色日本黄色录像| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 最黄视频免费看| 首页视频小说图片口味搜索 | 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 免费日韩欧美在线观看| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 91国产中文字幕| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| videos熟女内射| videosex国产| 国产精品一国产av| 91麻豆av在线| 久久综合国产亚洲精品| 热99国产精品久久久久久7| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三 | 男女无遮挡免费网站观看| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 久久免费观看电影| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 久久久久久久精品精品| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| cao死你这个sao货| 如日韩欧美国产精品一区二区三区| 亚洲国产av影院在线观看| 国产精品三级大全| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 婷婷色综合www| 一级黄色大片毛片| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 少妇精品久久久久久久| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 天堂中文最新版在线下载| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 国产一区二区 视频在线| 人妻人人澡人人爽人人| 亚洲av综合色区一区| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 又大又黄又爽视频免费| 9色porny在线观看| 一个人免费看片子| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 午夜福利视频精品| 赤兔流量卡办理| 日本午夜av视频| 咕卡用的链子| 亚洲av美国av| 一级毛片 在线播放| 久久久久网色| 成人免费观看视频高清| 欧美另类一区| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 一本综合久久免费| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站 | 999精品在线视频| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 精品第一国产精品| 亚洲图色成人| 免费看十八禁软件| 中文字幕av电影在线播放| 日本91视频免费播放| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 久久久久久久精品精品| 国产亚洲精品第一综合不卡| 大香蕉久久成人网| 午夜福利视频精品| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 日本午夜av视频| 日韩免费高清中文字幕av| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 深夜精品福利| 操美女的视频在线观看| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密 | 老熟女久久久| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 不卡av一区二区三区| 亚洲第一青青草原| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 婷婷成人精品国产| 黄频高清免费视频| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲 | 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 久久精品成人免费网站| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看 | 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 久久久精品免费免费高清| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 亚洲欧美日韩另类电影网站| 天堂中文最新版在线下载| 黄片播放在线免费| tube8黄色片| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 欧美人与善性xxx| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 满18在线观看网站| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 美女中出高潮动态图| 成人黄色视频免费在线看| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 尾随美女入室| 又粗又硬又长又爽又黄的视频| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 国产91精品成人一区二区三区 | 高清欧美精品videossex| 激情视频va一区二区三区| 老汉色av国产亚洲站长工具| 最黄视频免费看| 脱女人内裤的视频| 久久人人爽人人片av| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 桃花免费在线播放| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 国产在线观看jvid| 欧美在线一区亚洲| 成人三级做爰电影| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 成年av动漫网址| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 免费看十八禁软件| 亚洲精品国产一区二区精华液| 在线 av 中文字幕| 丁香六月天网| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 香蕉国产在线看| 亚洲av电影在线观看一区二区三区| 男人爽女人下面视频在线观看| 亚洲成人免费av在线播放| 老司机影院毛片| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 99国产精品免费福利视频| 亚洲天堂av无毛| 看免费av毛片| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 亚洲一区二区三区欧美精品| 亚洲精品日本国产第一区| 国产三级黄色录像| 国产成人av激情在线播放| av在线老鸭窝| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 777米奇影视久久| 我要看黄色一级片免费的| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 国产成人精品无人区| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久 | 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| 只有这里有精品99| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 婷婷色av中文字幕| 男女床上黄色一级片免费看| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 久久ye,这里只有精品| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 美女脱内裤让男人舔精品视频| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 热re99久久国产66热| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 国产av精品麻豆| xxx大片免费视频| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 男女边摸边吃奶| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲 | 美女高潮到喷水免费观看| 制服人妻中文乱码| 韩国精品一区二区三区| 男女之事视频高清在线观看 | 99九九在线精品视频| 精品亚洲成国产av| 亚洲一区二区三区欧美精品| 脱女人内裤的视频| 自线自在国产av| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 一级片免费观看大全| 精品一区在线观看国产| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 国产精品av久久久久免费| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| av片东京热男人的天堂| 我要看黄色一级片免费的| 成年动漫av网址| 汤姆久久久久久久影院中文字幕| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 另类精品久久| 国产三级黄色录像| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 久久久精品免费免费高清| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 1024香蕉在线观看| 一区二区av电影网| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av | 欧美日韩精品网址| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 国产一区二区三区av在线| 9191精品国产免费久久| 欧美97在线视频| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 啦啦啦在线免费观看视频4| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 日韩av在线免费看完整版不卡| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 日本91视频免费播放| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 日韩视频在线欧美| 1024视频免费在线观看| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站| 两个人看的免费小视频| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 欧美激情高清一区二区三区| 精品一区在线观看国产| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 9色porny在线观看| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 满18在线观看网站| 在线观看国产h片| av线在线观看网站| 国产精品 国内视频| 久久 成人 亚洲| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 69精品国产乱码久久久| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 超碰成人久久| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 黄色视频不卡| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 国产高清视频在线播放一区 | 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 国产视频一区二区在线看| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 两个人看的免费小视频| 精品亚洲成国产av| 欧美成狂野欧美在线观看| 婷婷色综合www| 亚洲国产精品999| 极品人妻少妇av视频| 久久久久国产精品人妻一区二区| 国产精品.久久久| 国产精品欧美亚洲77777| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 两个人看的免费小视频| 97在线人人人人妻| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| av视频免费观看在线观看| 黄色片一级片一级黄色片| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播 | 欧美大码av| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 久久99精品国语久久久| 日本欧美国产在线视频| www.av在线官网国产| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 亚洲国产av新网站| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 亚洲一区二区三区欧美精品| 国产无遮挡羞羞视频在线观看| 国产精品一国产av| www.自偷自拍.com| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 一边亲一边摸免费视频| 熟女av电影| 午夜免费鲁丝| 黄色一级大片看看| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 久久九九热精品免费| 免费在线观看影片大全网站 | 在线观看www视频免费| 亚洲天堂av无毛| 18禁观看日本| 国产成人91sexporn| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 蜜桃在线观看..| 91老司机精品| 大香蕉久久网| 欧美人与性动交α欧美软件| 久久免费观看电影| 国产一级毛片在线| 性少妇av在线| 精品视频人人做人人爽| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 视频区欧美日本亚洲| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 激情视频va一区二区三区| 99香蕉大伊视频| 亚洲av在线观看美女高潮| 一本色道久久久久久精品综合| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 1024香蕉在线观看| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 色网站视频免费| 亚洲精品日本国产第一区| 日韩av在线免费看完整版不卡| 久久久精品区二区三区| 精品国产一区二区久久| 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 国产片内射在线| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 欧美xxⅹ黑人| 亚洲熟女毛片儿| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 亚洲国产毛片av蜜桃av| 国产视频首页在线观看| 九草在线视频观看| 男人操女人黄网站| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 日韩av免费高清视频| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 国产1区2区3区精品| 久久人妻福利社区极品人妻图片 | 久9热在线精品视频| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 成人影院久久| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 精品高清国产在线一区| 成年美女黄网站色视频大全免费| 99热全是精品| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 久久狼人影院| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频 | 老汉色av国产亚洲站长工具| 国产免费一区二区三区四区乱码| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 另类精品久久| 一级毛片 在线播放| 午夜免费观看性视频| 久久热在线av| 色网站视频免费| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 大码成人一级视频| 一本一本久久a久久精品综合妖精| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 久久人人爽人人片av| 操出白浆在线播放| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 天天添夜夜摸| 少妇 在线观看| 操出白浆在线播放| 亚洲国产看品久久| xxxhd国产人妻xxx| 日本a在线网址| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 亚洲av电影在线观看一区二区三区| 成人免费观看视频高清| 亚洲欧美中文字幕日韩二区| 日本午夜av视频| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 国产一区二区 视频在线| 国产男女超爽视频在线观看| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 最黄视频免费看| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 两个人看的免费小视频| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 国产一区二区三区av在线| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 国产视频首页在线观看| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸 | 另类精品久久| 亚洲成国产人片在线观看| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 永久免费av网站大全| 国产成人欧美| 成人三级做爰电影| 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| www日本在线高清视频| 制服诱惑二区| 日本欧美视频一区| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看 | 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| 精品第一国产精品| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 午夜福利乱码中文字幕| 国产视频首页在线观看| 亚洲精品一二三| 欧美另类一区| 一区福利在线观看| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| av一本久久久久| 国产成人精品在线电影| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 老司机午夜十八禁免费视频| 久久亚洲精品不卡| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 精品亚洲成国产av| 久久热在线av| 男女之事视频高清在线观看 | 大香蕉久久网| 国精品久久久久久国模美| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| 99国产精品99久久久久| a级毛片在线看网站| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 男女国产视频网站| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲 | 国产精品成人在线| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 久久久久久人人人人人| 亚洲精品国产一区二区精华液| 国产三级黄色录像| 一级黄色大片毛片| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 国产精品二区激情视频| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 9191精品国产免费久久| 国产精品成人在线| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 国产黄色免费在线视频| av在线老鸭窝| 啦啦啦在线免费观看视频4| 久久免费观看电影| 国产亚洲精品第一综合不卡| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影 | 日本av手机在线免费观看| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版| 男人舔女人的私密视频| av天堂久久9| 天堂中文最新版在线下载| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 免费观看人在逋| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 欧美国产精品一级二级三级| 丝袜美腿诱惑在线| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 欧美另类一区| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 久久久久久久大尺度免费视频| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 久久久久久久大尺度免费视频| 国产片内射在线| 黄频高清免费视频| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 在线看a的网站| 老熟女久久久| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 亚洲成人免费av在线播放| 国精品久久久久久国模美| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 久久久久久久精品精品| 欧美激情高清一区二区三区| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 在线天堂中文资源库| 最新在线观看一区二区三区 |