Analiza otkaza napuknutog cilindra trostupanjskog velikog kompresora u tvornici amonijaka

Failure analysis of a giant compressor cracked cylinder has been performed using complex numerical and experimental methods. Further operating parameters for expected lifetime (with regard to the crack propagation) at reduced pressure are given based on the results of the investigations.Analiza otkaza napuknutog cilindra velikog kompresora napravljena je pomoću složenih numeričkih i eksperimentalnih metoda. Temeljem rezultata istraživanja određeni su radni parametri za daljnji rad i vjerojatni radni vijek (s obzirom na širenje pukotine) pod smanjenim tlakom

The global prevalence of infections in urology study. a long term worldwide surveillance study on urological infections

The Global Prevalence of Infections in Urology (GPIU) study is a worldwide-performed point prevalence study intended to create surveillance data on antibiotic resistance, type of urogenital infections, risk factors and data on antibiotic consumption, specifically in patients at urological departments with healthcare-associated urogenital infections (HAUTI). Investigators registered data through a web-based application (http://gpiu.esiu.org/). Data collection includes the practice and characteristics of the hospital and urology ward. On a certain day in November, each year, all urological patients present in the urological department at 8:00 a.m. are screened for HAUTI encompassing their full hospital course from admission to discharge. Apart from the GPIU main study, several side studies are taking place, dealing with transurethral resection of the prostate, prostate biopsy, as well as urosepsis. The GPIU study has been annually performed since 2003. Eight-hundred fifty-six urology units from 70 countries have participated so far, including 27,542 patients. A proxy for antibiotic consumption is reflected by the application rates used for antibiotic prophylaxis for urological interventions. Resistance rates of most uropathogens against antibiotics were high, especially with a note of multidrug resistance. The severity of HAUTI is also increasing, 25% being urosepsis in recent years. KEYWORDS

Antimicrobial resistance in urosepsis: outcomes from the multinational, multicenter global prevalence of infections in urology (GPIU) study 2003–2013

Primary objective was to identify the (1) relationship of clinical severity of urosepsis with the pathogen spectrum and resistance and (2) appropriateness of using the pathogen spectrum and resistance rates of health-care-associated urinary tract infections (HAUTI) as representative of urosepsis. The secondary objective was to provide an overview of the pathogens and their resistance profile in patients with urosepsis. POPULATION AND METHODS: A point prevalence study carried out in 70 countries (2003-2013). Population studied included; 408 individuals with microbiologically proven urosepsis, 1606 individuals with microbiological proof of HAUTI and 27,542 individuals hospitalised in urology wards. Main outcomes are pathogens and resistance identified in HAUTIs and urosepsis including its clinical severity. A statistical model that included demographic factors (study year, geographical location, hospital setting) was used for analysis. RESULTS: Amongst urology practices, the prevalence of microbiologically proven HAUTI and urosepsis was 5.8 and 1.5 %, respectively. Frequent pathogens in urosepsis were E. coli (43 %), Enterococcus spp. (11 %), P. aeruginosa (10 %) and Klebsiella spp. (10 %). Resistance to commonly prescribed antibiotics was high and rates ranged from 8 % (imipenem) to 62 % (aminopenicillin/β lactamase inhibitors); 45 % of Enterobacteriaceae and 21 % of P. aeruginosa were multidrug-resistant. Resistance rates in urosepsis were higher than in other clinical diagnosis of HAUTI (Likelihood ratio <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: It is not appropriate to use the pathogen spectrum and resistance rates of other HAUTIs as representative of urosepsis to decide on empirical treatment of urosepsis. Resistance rates in urosepsis are high, and precautions should be made to avoid further increas

Erratum to: 36th International Symposium on Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s13054-016-1208-6.]

Biomarkers in urinary tract infections - which ones are suitable for diagnostics and follow-up?

Introduction: Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are one of the most common infections worldwide. Under special circumstances, clinicians must rely on laboratory findings, which might have a weak predicting value, misguiding the practitioners and leading to incorrect diagnosis and overuse of antibiotics. Therefore, there is an urgent need for reliable biomarkers in UTIs.Methods: We performed a literature search for biomarkers used in UTIs from January 1999 until May 2020. We used "urinary tract infection" and "biomarker" as the main key words in the PubMed, Medline and Cochrane databases. After peer review, we excluded the duplicates and identified the suitable articles, from which we collected the data and divided the available biomarkers into 5 groups: i) conventional markers; ii) promising, thoroughly studied biomarkers; iii) promising biomarkers that need further studies; iv) biomarkers of unknown significance; v) controversial, not useful markers.Results: We found 131 articles, mostly from the paediatric population. Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) and interleukins (IL) have a leading role in diagnosing and differentiating UTIs based on a lot of observational, comparative trials. Heparin Binding Protein (HBP), Lactoferrin (LF), Heat-Shock Protein-70 (HSP-70), Human Defensin-5 (HD-5), Lipopolysaccharide Binding Protein (LBP) and mass spectrometry studies are promising, but confirming data are lacking. The measurable components of the innate immune system and local host cell response could be appropriate biomarkers, but their significance is currently unknown.Conclusions: Conventional biomarkers for UTIs have low specificity. The use of urinary NGAL and interleukins could improve the sensitivity and specificity of laboratory diagnosis of UTIs