19 research outputs found
NLTE analysis of spectra: OBA stars
Methods of calculation of NLTE model atmosphere are discussed. The NLTE trace
element procedure is compared with the full NLTE model atmosphere calculation.
Differences between LTE and NLTE atmosphere modeling are evaluated. The ways of
model atom construction are discussed. Finally, modelling of expanding
atmospheres of hot stars with winds is briefly reviewed.Comment: in Determination of Atmospheric Parameters of B-, A-, F- and G-Type
Stars, E. Niemczura et al. eds., Springer, in pres
The evolution of rotating stars
First, we review the main physical effects to be considered in the building
of evolutionary models of rotating stars on the Upper Main-Sequence (MS). The
internal rotation law evolves as a result of contraction and expansion,
meridional circulation, diffusion processes and mass loss. In turn,
differential rotation and mixing exert a feedback on circulation and diffusion,
so that a consistent treatment is necessary.
We review recent results on the evolution of internal rotation and the
surface rotational velocities for stars on the Upper MS, for red giants,
supergiants and W-R stars. A fast rotation is enhancing the mass loss by
stellar winds and reciprocally high mass loss is removing a lot of angular
momentum. The problem of the ``break-up'' or -limit is critically
examined in connection with the origin of Be and LBV stars. The effects of
rotation on the tracks in the HR diagram, the lifetimes, the isochrones, the
blue to red supergiant ratios, the formation of W-R stars, the chemical
abundances in massive stars as well as in red giants and AGB stars, are
reviewed in relation to recent observations for stars in the Galaxy and
Magellanic Clouds. The effects of rotation on the final stages and on the
chemical yields are examined, as well as the constraints placed by the periods
of pulsars. On the whole, this review points out that stellar evolution is not
only a function of mass M and metallicity Z, but of angular velocity
as well.Comment: 78 pages, 7 figures, review for Annual Review of Astronomy and
Astrophysics, vol. 38 (2000
Immunoglobulin, glucocorticoid, or combination therapy for multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: a propensity-weighted cohort study
Background Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), a hyperinflammatory condition associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, has emerged as a serious illness in children worldwide. Immunoglobulin or glucocorticoids, or both, are currently recommended treatments. Methods The Best Available Treatment Study evaluated immunomodulatory treatments for MIS-C in an international observational cohort. Analysis of the first 614 patients was previously reported. In this propensity-weighted cohort study, clinical and outcome data from children with suspected or proven MIS-C were collected onto a web-based Research Electronic Data Capture database. After excluding neonates and incomplete or duplicate records, inverse probability weighting was used to compare primary treatments with intravenous immunoglobulin, intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, or glucocorticoids alone, using intravenous immunoglobulin as the reference treatment. Primary outcomes were a composite of inotropic or ventilator support from the second day after treatment initiation, or death, and time to improvement on an ordinal clinical severity scale. Secondary outcomes included treatment escalation, clinical deterioration, fever, and coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN69546370. Findings We enrolled 2101 children (aged 0 months to 19 years) with clinically diagnosed MIS-C from 39 countries between June 14, 2020, and April 25, 2022, and, following exclusions, 2009 patients were included for analysis (median age 8·0 years [IQR 4·2–11·4], 1191 [59·3%] male and 818 [40·7%] female, and 825 [41·1%] White). 680 (33·8%) patients received primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin, 698 (34·7%) with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, 487 (24·2%) with glucocorticoids alone; 59 (2·9%) patients received other combinations, including biologicals, and 85 (4·2%) patients received no immunomodulators. There were no significant differences between treatments for primary outcomes for the 1586 patients with complete baseline and outcome data that were considered for primary analysis. Adjusted odds ratios for ventilation, inotropic support, or death were 1·09 (95% CI 0·75–1·58; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids and 0·93 (0·58–1·47; corrected p value=1·00) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Adjusted average hazard ratios for time to improvement were 1·04 (95% CI 0·91–1·20; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, and 0·84 (0·70–1·00; corrected p value=0·22) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Treatment escalation was less frequent for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids (OR 0·15 [95% CI 0·11–0·20]; p<0·0001) and glucocorticoids alone (0·68 [0·50–0·93]; p=0·014) versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Persistent fever (from day 2 onward) was less common with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids compared with either intravenous immunoglobulin alone (OR 0·50 [95% CI 0·38–0·67]; p<0·0001) or glucocorticoids alone (0·63 [0·45–0·88]; p=0·0058). Coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution did not differ significantly between treatment groups. Interpretation Recovery rates, including occurrence and resolution of coronary artery aneurysms, were similar for primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin when compared to glucocorticoids or intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids. Initial treatment with glucocorticoids appears to be a safe alternative to immunoglobulin or combined therapy, and might be advantageous in view of the cost and limited availability of intravenous immunoglobulin in many countries. Funding Imperial College London, the European Union's Horizon 2020, Wellcome Trust, the Medical Research Foundation, UK National Institute for Health and Care Research, and National Institutes of Health