A prospective, randomized study of the clinical effects of shock wave delivery for unilateral kidney stones: 60 versus 120 shocks per minute.

PURPOSE: We assessed the effects of different shock wave delivery rates in patients treated with shock wave lithotripsy for renal stones, particularly treatment success, degree of renal injury and pain experienced, and analgesic demand. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 206 patients with renal stones were prospectively randomized to receive shock waves delivered at 60 (group 1) or 120 (group 2) shocks per minute using a Sonolith® Vision at a single institution in October 2008 and August 2010. The primary outcome was successful treatment 12 weeks after 1 lithotripsy session. Secondary outcome measures included the degree of renal injury, as reflected by changes in urinary markers of renal injury, as well as patient pain scores and analgesia consumed during treatment. RESULTS: Mean stone size in groups 1 and 2 was 8.95 and 9.28 mm, respectively (p = 0.525). The overall treatment success rate was 43.2%. It was significantly better in group 1 than in group 2 (50.5% vs 35.9%, p = 0.035). There was no between group difference in the success rate for stones 10 mm or less but the success rate was statistically better for group 1 patients with stones greater than 10 mm (p = 0.002). Immediately after shock wave lithotripsy there was a statistically significant greater increase in urinary NAG (p = 0.003) and interleukin-18 (p = 0.022) in group 1. There was no between group difference in pain scores, analgesic consumption during shock wave lithotripsy or unplanned hospital visits. CONCLUSIONS: Slower shock wave delivery yielded better treatment outcomes, particularly for stones greater than 10 mm, without increasing patient pain or analgesic demand. However, slower shock wave delivery also appeared to cause a statistically significant increase in acute renal injury markers, although the clinical implication was uncertain.

No evidence for substantial aerobic methane emission by terrestrial plants: a 13C-labelling approach.

* The results of a single publication stating that terrestrial plants emit methane has sparked a discussion in several scientific journals, but an independent test has not yet been performed. * Here it is shown, with the use of the stable isotope (13)C and a laser-based measuring technique, that there is no evidence for substantial aerobic methane emission by terrestrial plants, maximally 0.3% (0.4 ng g(-1) h(-1)) of the previously published values. * Data presented here indicate that the contribution of terrestrial plants to global methane emission is very small at best. * Therefore, a revision of carbon sequestration accounting practices based on the earlier reported contribution of methane from terrestrial vegetation is redundant.

Transfusion to blood group A and O patients of group B RBCs that have been enzymatically converted to group O.

BACKGROUND: The transfusion of ABO-incompatible RBCs is the leading cause of fatal transfusion reactions. Group O RBCs, lacking terminal immunodominant A and B sugars to which humans are immunized, are safe for transfusion to persons of any ABO blood group. With the use of a recombinant alpha-galactosidase to remove terminal galactose from group B RBCs, the safety and efficacy of enzyme-converted group-B-to-group-O (ECO) RBC components were studied in transfusion-dependent patients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Twenty-four patients (blood groups A and O) were randomly assigned to receive transfusion(s) of either ECO or control group O RBCs. If a second transfusion was given, the other blood component was administered. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were given ECO RBCs; 18 also underwent control transfusions. One patient received only a small aliquot for RBC survival studies, instead of a full-unit transfusion, because his serum was incompatible with ECO RBCs. No adverse events occurred. Both ECO and control transfusions resulted in appropriate Hb increments and comparable (51)Cr-labeled RBC survival studies. One patient developed a transient, weak-positive DAT, without hemolysis. Two weeks after transfusion, 5 of 19 evaluable ECO RBC recipients had increases in anti-B titers. CONCLUSION: ECO RBCs were comparable to group O cells for safety and efficacy in this study. The clinical significance of the increase in anti-B and of occasional serologic incompatibilities with ECO RBCs is unclear. If strategies can be developed to remove A epitopes, enzymatic conversion could be used to create a universal (group O) donor blood supply.