Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in children aged 0 to 19 years in childcare facilities and schools after their reopening in May 2020, Baden-Württemberg, Germany.

We investigated data from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infected 0-19 year olds, who attended schools/childcare facilities, to assess their role in SARS-CoV-2 transmission after these establishments' reopening in May 2020 in Baden-Württemberg, Germany. Child-to-child transmission in schools/childcare facilities appeared very uncommon. We anticipate that, with face mask use and frequent ventilation of rooms, transmission rates in schools/childcare facilities would remain low in the next term, even if classes' group sizes were increased.

Nitrosovibrio spp., the Dominant Ammonia-Oxidizing Bacteria in Building Sandstone.

In five historical buildings in the Federal Republic of Germany, ammonia-oxidizing bacteria of the genera Nitrosovibrio, Nitrosospira, and Nitrosomonas were detected in high cell numbers. In building stones, Nitrosovibrio was the most abundant ammonia-oxidizing organism. In the soil at the foot of each building, Nitrosomonas spp. were the most common ammonia oxidizers, whereas Nitrosovibrio spp. were not detected.

M2 muscarinic receptors on the iris sphincter muscle differ from those on iris noradrenergic nerves.

The pre- and postjunctional affinity constants of a series of muscarinic antagonists were determined in guinea pig and rabbit irises. Field stimulation-evoked [3H]noradrenaline release from superfused isolated irises was concentration dependently inhibited by (+/-)-methacholine, confirming the presence on the iris noradrenergic nerves of prejunctional inhibitory muscarinic receptors. The affinity constants of the antagonists at the pre- and postjunctional receptors are compatible with the coexistence in the iris of two different M2 receptors: the cardiac (M2 alpha) subtype on the noradrenergic nerves and the smooth muscle (M2 beta) subtype on the iris sphincter muscle. The rank order of potency of the antagonists studied at the prejunctional site was: atropine greater than himbacine greater than AF-DX 116 greater than pirenzepine greater than hexahydrosiladifenidol. The order of potency at the postjunctional receptors mediating the methacholine-induced isotonic contraction of the isolated rabbit iris sphincter was: atropine greater than hexahydrosiladifenidol greater than pirenzepine greater than himbacine greater than AF-DX 116.

Glycopyrronium bromide blocks differentially responses mediated by muscarinic receptor subtypes.

To analyse the potency of glycopyrronium bromide in blocking responses mediated via subtypes of muscarinic receptors in vitro, we tried to determine its equilibrium dissociation constants at prejunctional muscarinic receptors inhibiting the twitch response of rabbit vas deferens (presumed M1 type), at M2 (paced at left atria), M3 (guinea pig ileum) muscarinic receptor subtypes and at the muscarinic receptor of the rabbit iris sphincter (not M1-M4, not m5). Glycopyrronium bromide shifted to the right the curve for inhibition of the twitch response induced by the agonist McN-A-343, and the methacholine-induced curves for inhibition of rat atrial contraction, and for tonic contraction of guinea pig ileum and rabbit iris sphincter. Glycopyrronium bromide blocked with very high potency (> 11, apparent -log KB) the response in rabbit vas deferens. Its affinity was low (9.09) for the M2 subtype, and intermediate (10.31 or 10.13) for the ileal M3 and the atypical iris muscarinic receptor subtype, respectively. Except at the receptors in rabbit vas deferens, the blockade of agonist effect appeared to be of simple competitive type. In conclusion, glycopyrronium bromide is about 10 or 100 fold more potent in preventing a response to activation of the prejunctional receptor in rabbit vas deferens than in blocking an M3 or M2 muscarinic receptor subtype, respectively, in vitro. The low affinity for M2 receptors may, in part, explain the low incidence of unwanted tachycardia in therapy. The drug failed to discriminate between an M3 receptor and the atypical rabbit iris sphincter receptor.

Purinoceptor-mediated modulation by endogenous and exogenous agonists of stimulation-evoked [3H]noradrenaline release on rat iris.

To investigate whether endogenous purinoceptor agonists affect the sympathetic neurotransmission in the rat isolated iris, and to classify the purinoceptors modulating exocytotic [3H]-noradrenaline release, we have determined the effect of adenosine receptor antagonists on, and the relative potency of selected agonists in modulating, the field stimulation-evoked (3 Hz, 2 min) [3H]-noradrenaline overflow. In addition, the apparent affinity constants of 8-phenyltheophylline (8-PT) and 1,3-dipropyl-8-cyclopentylxanthine (DPCPX) in antagonizing the prejunctional effects of purinoceptor agonists were estimated. The relatively A1-selective DPCPX 10 and 100 nmol/l increased the evoked [3H]-noradrenaline overflow by about 25%-35% indicating a minor inhibition of evoked release by endogenous purinoceptor agonists probably via an A1 adenosine receptor. Whereas the A1/A2-antagonist 8-PT failed to increase the evoked [3H]-noradrenaline overflow in the absence of exogenous agonists (without or with dipyridamole 1 mumol/l present), the relatively A2-selective antagonist CP-66,713 (4-amino-8-chloro-1-phenyl(1,2,4)triazolo(4,3-a)quinoxaline) 100 nmol/l decreased it by 20%-30% in the absence and continuous presence of DPCPX. This may be compatible with a minor A2-mediated facilitation by an endogenous purinoceptor agonist. All exogenous agonists tested (except UTP 100 mumol/1) inhibited the evoked [3H]-noradrenaline overflow. The relative order of agonist potency (IC40, concentration in mumol/l for inhibition of evoked release by 40%) was CPA (N6-(cyclopentyl)adenosine, 0.004) greater than R-PIA (R(-)N6-(2-phenylisopropyl)adenosine, 0.066) = CHA (N6-(cyclohexyl)adenosine, 0.082) greater than NECA (N5-(ethyl-carboxamido)adenosine 0.44) greater than ADO (adenosine, 4.1). ATP was nearly equipotent with ADO. Maximum inhibition was 70%-80% and similar for all agonists.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

A prospective, randomized multicenter study comparing APD and CAPD treatment.

OBJECTIVE: The goals for maintenance dialysis treatment are to improve patient survival, reduce patient morbidity, and improve patient quality of life. This is the first randomized prospective study comparing automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) treatment with respect to quality of life and clinical outcomes in relation to therapy costs. DESIGN: A prospective, randomized multicenter study. SETTING: Three Danish CAPD units. PATIENTS: Thirty-four adequately dialyzed patients with high or high-average peritoneal transport characteristics were included in the study.Twenty-five patients completed the study. INTERVENTIONS: After randomization, 17 patients were allocated to APD treatment and 17 patients to CAPD treatment for a period of 6 months. Medical and biochemical parameters were evaluated at monthly controls in the CAPD units. Quality-of-life parameters were assessed at baseline and after 6 months by the self-administered short-form SF-36 generic health survey questionnaire supplemented with disease- and treatment-specific questions. Therapy costs were compared by evaluating dialysis-related expenses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality-of-life parameters, dialysis-related complications, dialysis-related expenses. RESULTS: The quality-of-life studies showed that significantly more time for work, family, and social activities was available to patients on APD compared to those on CAPD (p < 0.001). Although the difference was not significant, there was a tendency for less physical and emotional discomfort caused by dialysis fluid in the APD group. Sleep problems, on the other hand, tended to be more marked in the APD group. Any positive effect of APD compared to CAPD on dialysis-related hospital days or complication rates could not be confirmed. With larger patient samples, it is possible, however, that a significant difference might have been achieved. The running costs for APD treatment were US $75 per day and for CAPD treatment US $61 per day. CONCLUSION: If APD treatment can help to keep selected patients vocationally or socially active, paying the extra cost seems reasonable.