Notes![what is notes.io? What is notes.io?](/theme/images/whatisnotesio.png)
![]() ![]() Notes - notes.io |
Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) has become an established treatment to control symptoms. AF ablation either by cryoballoon or radiofrequency using three-dimensional (3D) electroanatomical mapping exposes patients and medical staff to increased doses of radiation.
To compare radiation exposure in patients during cryoballoon ablation compared to 3D electro-anatomic mapping catheter ablation in AF patients.
Atotal of 30 patients referred for AF ablation underwent full history taking, 12-lead ECG, echocardiogram, and pulmonary vein isolation either by 3D mapping system or cryoballoon. Procedure duration and fluoroscopy time were collected and analyzed. Radiation exposure was measured using thermoluminescent dosimeters placed at different sites related to patients and medical staff.
The procedural time was statistically significantly longer with 3D mapping compared to cryoballoon but showed no significant difference regarding fluoroscopy time. There was asignificantly higher radiation skin dose at the right scapular area in the cryoballoon ablation group, in addition to higher peak skin dose compared to the 3D mapping ablation group. There was no statistically significant correlation between peak skin doses and fluoroscopy duration but astatistically significant correlation between peak skin dose and usage of high frame rate and the high dose area product.
Cryoballoon ablation was found to be associated with higher peak skin radiation doses especially in the right scapular area. Knowing dose area product and peak skin dose is more important than fluoroscopy time alone.
Cryoballoon ablation was found to be associated with higher peak skin radiation doses especially in the right scapular area. Knowing dose area product and peak skin dose is more important than fluoroscopy time alone.Nipple shields (shield) may reduce pain during breastfeeding, but the impact on infant sucking dynamics is not known. We examined the effects of shield use on sucking dynamics, milk removal and nipple pain in two groups of breastfeeding dyads pain group (PG) shield used for nipple pain; comparison group (CG) no breastfeeding difficulties. Twenty PG (6 ± 4 weeks postnatal) and 28 CG dyads (8 ± 6 weeks postnatal) attended 2 monitored breastfeeding sessions with shield use randomised. Within-subject outcomes were compared. PG shield use did not affect intra-oral vacuum (peak p = 0.17, baseline p = 0.59), sucking frequency (p = 0.20) or milk transfer (40 mL vs 48 mL, p = 0.80; percentage of available milk removed (PAMR) 55% vs 57%, p = 0.88), and reduced McGill pain scores (p = 0.012). CG shield use increased non-nutritive sucking (10% more, p = 0.049), and reduced nutritive sucking (18% less, p = 0.017) and milk transfer (63 mL vs 31 mL p less then 0.001, PAMR 65% vs 36% p less then 0.001). For both groups, feeding duration increased by 2 min (p less then 0.0001) and non-nutritive portions of the feed increased with shield use.Conclusion Nipple shield use improved maternal comfort and did not impact milk removal or sucking strength in PG, but significantly reduced milk transfer and nutritive sucking in CG. What is Known • Mothers report that nipple shields reduce nipple pain and enable continued breastfeeding. • Concerns that nipple shield use may reduce milk transfer and alter infant sucking patterns are based on limited published evidence. What is New • Nipple shield use is associated with a 25% reduction in pain scores in breastfeeding mothers with chronic nipple pain. • Milk transfer is not reduced in dyads that regularly use a shield for chronic nipple pain. • Intra-oral vacuums are not impacted by nipple shield use in mothers experiencing pain.Microbial spatial distribution has mostly been studied at field to global scales (i.e., ecosystem scales). However, the spatial organization at small scales (i.e., centimeter to millimeter scales), which can help improve our understanding of the impacts of spatial communities structure on microbial functioning, has received comparatively little attention. Previous work has shown that small-scale spatial structure exists in soil microbial communities, but these studies have not compared soils from geographically distant locations, nor have they utilized community ecology approaches, such as the core and satellite hypothesis and/or abundance-occupancy relationships, often used in macro-ecology, to improve the description of the spatial organization of communities. In the present work, we focused on bacterial diversity (i.e., 16S rRNA gene sequencing) occurring in micro-samples from a variety of locations with different pedo-climatic histories (i.e., from semi-arid, alpine, and temperate climates) and physicochemical properties. The forms of ecological spatial relationships in bacterial communities (i.e., occupancy-frequency and abundance-occupancy) and taxa distributions (i.e., habitat generalists and specialists) were investigated. The results showed that bacterial composition differed in the four soils at the small scale. Moreover, one soil presented a satellite mode distribution, whereas the three others presented bimodal distributions. Interestingly, numerous core taxa were present in the four soils among which 8 OTUs were common to the four sites. AG-120 concentration These results confirm that analyses of the small-scale spatial distribution are necessary to understand consequent functional processes taking place in soils, affecting thus ecosystem functioning.Duckweeds represent a small, free-floating aquatic family (Lemnaceae) of the monocot order Alismatales with the fastest growth rate among flowering plants. They comprise five genera (Spirodela, Landoltia, Lemna, Wolffiella, and Wolffia) varying in genome size and chromosome number. Spirodela polyrhiza had the first sequenced duckweed genome. Cytogenetic maps are available for both species of the genus Spirodela (S. polyrhiza and S. intermedia). However, elucidation of chromosome homeology and evolutionary chromosome rearrangements by cross-FISH using Spirodela BAC probes to species of other duckweed genera has not been successful so far. We investigated the potential of chromosome-specific oligo-FISH probes to address these topics. We designed oligo-FISH probes specific for one S. intermedia and one S. polyrhiza chromosome (Fig. 1a). Our results show that these oligo-probes cross-hybridize with the homeologous regions of the other congeneric species, but are not suitable to uncover chromosomal homeology across duckweeds genera.
Here's my website: https://www.selleckchem.com/products/ag-120-Ivosidenib.html
![]() |
Notes is a web-based application for online taking notes. You can take your notes and share with others people. If you like taking long notes, notes.io is designed for you. To date, over 8,000,000,000+ notes created and continuing...
With notes.io;
- * You can take a note from anywhere and any device with internet connection.
- * You can share the notes in social platforms (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, instagram etc.).
- * You can quickly share your contents without website, blog and e-mail.
- * You don't need to create any Account to share a note. As you wish you can use quick, easy and best shortened notes with sms, websites, e-mail, or messaging services (WhatsApp, iMessage, Telegram, Signal).
- * Notes.io has fabulous infrastructure design for a short link and allows you to share the note as an easy and understandable link.
Fast: Notes.io is built for speed and performance. You can take a notes quickly and browse your archive.
Easy: Notes.io doesn’t require installation. Just write and share note!
Short: Notes.io’s url just 8 character. You’ll get shorten link of your note when you want to share. (Ex: notes.io/q )
Free: Notes.io works for 14 years and has been free since the day it was started.
You immediately create your first note and start sharing with the ones you wish. If you want to contact us, you can use the following communication channels;
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: http://twitter.com/notesio
Instagram: http://instagram.com/notes.io
Facebook: http://facebook.com/notesio
Regards;
Notes.io Team