The Use of Microtechnology to Monitor Collision Performance in Professional Rugby Union.

PURPOSE: To determine if microtechnology-derived collision loads discriminate between collision performance and compare the physical and analytical components of collision performance between positional groups. METHODS: Thirty-seven professional male rugby union players participated in this study. Collision events from 11 competitive matches were coded using specific tackle and carry classifications based on the ball-carrier's collision outcome. Collisions were automatically detected using 10 Hz microtechnology units. Collision events were identified, coded (as tackle or carry), and timestamped at the collision contact point using game analysis software. Attacking and defensive performances of 1609 collision events were analyzed. RESULTS: Collision loads were significantly greater during dominant compared with neutral and passive collisions (P < .001; effect size [ES] = 0.53 and 0.80, respectively), tackles (P < .0001; ES = 0.60 and 0.56, respectively), and carries (P < .001; ES = 0.48 and 0.79, respectively). Overall, forwards reported a greater number and frequency of collisions but lower loads per collision and velocities at collision point than did backs. Microtechnology devices can also accurately, sensitively, and specifically identify collision events (93.3%, 93.8%, and 92.8%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Microtechnology is a valid means of discriminating between tackle and carry performance. Thus, microtechnology-derived collision load data can be utilized to track and monitor collision events in training and games.

Vasoactivity of rucaparib, a PARP-1 inhibitor, is a complex process that involves myosin light chain kinase, P2 receptors, and PARP itself.

Therapeutic inhibition of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP), as monotherapy or to supplement the potencies of other agents, is a promising strategy in cancer treatment. We previously reported that the first PARP inhibitor to enter clinical trial, rucaparib (AG014699), induced vasodilation in vivo in xenografts, potentiating response to temozolomide. We now report that rucaparib inhibits the activity of the muscle contraction mediator myosin light chain kinase (MLCK) 10-fold more potently than its commercially available inhibitor ML-9. Moreover, rucaparib produces additive relaxation above the maximal degree achievable with ML-9, suggesting that MLCK inhibition is not solely responsible for dilation. Inhibition of nitric oxide synthesis using L-NMMA also failed to impact rucaparib's activity. Rucaparib contains the nicotinamide pharmacophore, suggesting it may inhibit other NAD+-dependent processes. NAD+ exerts P2 purinergic receptor-dependent inhibition of smooth muscle contraction. Indiscriminate blockade of the P2 purinergic receptors with suramin abrogated rucaparib-induced vasodilation in rat arterial tissue without affecting ML-9-evoked dilation, although the specific receptor subtypes responsible have not been unequivocally identified. Furthermore, dorsal window chamber and real time tumor vessel perfusion analyses in PARP-1-/- mice indicate a potential role for PARP in dilation of tumor-recruited vessels. Finally, rucaparib provoked relaxation in 70% of patient-derived tumor-associated vessels. These data provide tantalising evidence of the complexity of the mechanism underlying rucaparib-mediated vasodilation.

A single-center study of the technical aspects and outcome of third and subsequent renal transplants.

BACKGROUND: Third, fourth, and fifth renal transplants are historically associated with poor outcomes. The reasons for these inferior results are unclear. In the current work, we analyzed the outcome of third and subsequent transplants and determined whether technical failure accounted for significant allograft loss. METHODS: The outcome and operative details of 49 transplants performed in 38 patients from a single center were reviewed. Thirty-eight patients received a third transplant, nine patients received a fourth transplant, and two patients received a fifth transplant. RESULTS: Actuarial patient survival was 100% and 97% at 5 and 10 years, respectively. One- and 5-year actuarial graft survival for third transplants was 90% and 62%, respectively, and for fourth transplants, 67% and 55%, respectively. Technical failure accounted for the loss of 2 third allografts and for no fourth or fifth allografts. Of the remaining third grafts, 12 failed as the result of chronic allograft nephropathy, and one failed as the result of recurrent membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis (type I). Of the fourth allografts, one failed as the result of acute rejection, two failed as the result of chronic allograft nephropathy, and one failed as the result of primary nonfunction. The mean graft survival of third and fourth transplants after a biopsy-proven acute rejection episode requiring steroid boost was significantly reduced. Of the fifth transplants, one graft failed as the result of hyperacute rejection, and one patient died with a functioning graft. Favorable human leukocyte antigen matching and a panel-reactive antibody less than 80% provided no statistical benefit to graft survival. CONCLUSIONS: The major cause of graft loss of third and fourth renal transplants is immune mediated. Although technically demanding, surgical failure is an unusual cause of graft loss.

The effects of spinal anesthesia vs epidural anesthesia on 3 potential postoperative complications: pain, urinary retention, and mobility following inguinal herniorrhaphy.

This study was conducted to determine the effects of spinal (n = 113) vs epidural (n = 31) anesthetic techniques on 3 common postoperative complications: pain, urinary retention, and mobility for patients undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy. The study design was a retrospective chart review. Data were collected on 144 subjects who underwent herniorrhaphy between January 1 and December 31, 1999, had an ASA classification of I to III, and were older than 18 years. The local anesthetics used to provide spinal anesthesia were 5% lidocaine, 0.75% bupivacaine, and 1% tetracaine solutions. The anesthetics used to provide epidural anesthesia were a solution of 2% lidocaine with epinephrine or 3% chloroprocaine with epinephrine. Results revealed that pain was not significantly different between the 2 anesthetic groups (P = .65); however, subjects in the epidural anesthesia group were able to ambulate (P = .008) and void (P = .02) sooner than subjects in the spinal anesthesia group. This study demonstrates that epidural anesthesia results in less urinary retention and earlier mobility than spinal anesthesia in men undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy. Minimizing postoperative complications is essential in order for the nurse anesthetist to provide a satisfactory anesthetic experience. This study's findings suggest that epidural anesthesia optimizes recovery for the patient undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy.