219 research outputs found
Pancreas and islet cell transplantation
Currently, for the patient with type 1 diabetes, a definitive treatment without resorting to the use of exogenous insulin can be achieved only with pancreas or islet cell transplantation. These means of restoring β-cell mass can completely maintain essentially normal long-term glucose homeostasis, although the need for powerful immunosuppressive regimens limits their application to only a subgroup of adult patients. Apart from the shortage of donors that has limited all kinds of transplantation, however, the widespread use of β-cell replacement has been precluded until recently by the drawbacks associated with both organ and islet cell transplantation. Although the study of recurrence of diabetes has generated attention, the fundamental obstacle to pancreas and islet transplantation has been, and remains, the alloimmune response. With a better elucidation of the mechanisms of alloengraftment achieved during the last 3 years, the stage has been set for further advances
The Effect and Complication of Botulinum Toxin Type A Injection with Serial Casting for the Treatment of Spastic Equinus Foot
Cuff Leak Test and Airway Obstruction in Mechanically Ventilated ICU Patients (COMIC) : a pilot randomised controlled trial protocol
Ser ou não ser Mãe/Pai? Eis a questão –Motivações para a parentalidade
Background Local and/or regional recurrence and metachronous primary tumor arising in a previously irradiated area are rather frequent events in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Re‐treatment is associated with an increased risk of serious toxicity and impaired quality of life (QOL) with an uncertain survival advantage. Methods We analyzed the literature on the efficacy and toxicity of photon/electron‐based external beam reirradiation for previously irradiated patients with HNSCC of non‐nasopharyngeal origin. Studies were grouped according to the radiotherapy technique used for reirradiation. Patient selection criteria, target volume identification method, tumor dose, fractionation schedule, systemic therapy administration, and toxicities were reviewed. Results In addition to disease‐related factors, current comorbidities and preexisting organ dysfunction must be considered when selecting patients for reirradiation. As morbidity from re‐treatment may be considerable and differ depending on which mode of re‐treatment is used, it is important to give patients information on potential morbidity outcomes so that an informed choice can be made within a shared decision‐making context. With improved dose distribution and adequate imaging support, including positron emission tomography‐CT, modern radiotherapy techniques may improve local control and reduce toxicity of reirradiation. A reirradiation dose of ≥60 Gy and a volume encompassing the gross tumor with up to a 5‐mm margin are recommended. Concomitant administration of systemic therapeutics and reirradiation is likely to be of similar benefit as observed in large randomized studies of upfront therapy. Conclusion Reirradiation, administered either with or without concurrent systemic therapy, is feasible and tolerable in properly selected patients with recurrent or a new primary tumor in a previously irradiated area of the head and neck, offering a meaningful survival (in the range of 10% to 30% at 2 years). Whenever feasible, salvage surgery is the method of choice for curative intent; patients at high‐risk for local recurrence should be advised that postoperative reirradiation is expected to increase locoregional control at the expense of higher toxicity and without survival advantage compared to salvage surgery without reirradiation. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 37 : 134–150, 2015Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/110100/1/hed23542.pd
The Polycentric State: New Spaces of Empowerment and Engagement?
New Labour claims to have radically reformed territorial governance structures in the UK by
devolving political power to the Celtic nations and London, begetting the most enduring legacy
of the first Blair government. More recently it has sought to extend its devolution agenda by
embracing city-regionalism and the new localism, ostensibly to create new spaces of
empowerment and engagement. But devolution is not the whole story of New Labour’s attitude
to power. On the contrary, this article argues that New Labour is a modern Janus because its
commitment to devolving power, so clear in principle, is more equivocal in practice. Drawing
on these three devolution narratives, the article concludes by assessing the implications for the
current debate about relational versus territorial readings of place politics
Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial
Background:
Many patients with COVID-19 have been treated with plasma containing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.
Methods:
This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]) is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 177 NHS hospitals from across the UK. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either usual care alone (usual care group) or usual care plus high-titre convalescent plasma (convalescent plasma group). The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.
Findings:
Between May 28, 2020, and Jan 15, 2021, 11558 (71%) of 16287 patients enrolled in RECOVERY were eligible to receive convalescent plasma and were assigned to either the convalescent plasma group or the usual care group. There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality between the two groups: 1399 (24%) of 5795 patients in the convalescent plasma group and 1408 (24%) of 5763 patients in the usual care group died within 28 days (rate ratio 1·00, 95% CI 0·93–1·07; p=0·95). The 28-day mortality rate ratio was similar in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including in those patients without detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at randomisation. Allocation to convalescent plasma had no significant effect on the proportion of patients discharged from hospital within 28 days (3832 [66%] patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 3822 [66%] patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·94–1·03; p=0·57). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at randomisation, there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients meeting the composite endpoint of progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death (1568 [29%] of 5493 patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 1568 [29%] of 5448 patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·93–1·05; p=0·79).
Interpretation:
In patients hospitalised with COVID-19, high-titre convalescent plasma did not improve survival or other prespecified clinical outcomes.
Funding:
UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research
Audit of 10,000 Steps providers
This report from 10,000 Steps details the findings of the recent audit of 10,000 Steps Providers. This study highlighted the Providers use of the 10,000 Steps programs and resources since the program rolled out nationally in 2004
- …
