Detection of Maize rough dwarf virus in Spain: a survey of susceptible host genotypes and molecular characterization of two genomic segments of the virus

An increase in the number of plants infected with Maize rough dwarf disease (MRDD) has been reported recently in Spain. The disease was presumed to be caused by Maize rough dwarf virus (MRDV), but there was no conclusive evidence for this assumption. Two viruses have been associated with MRDD: Rice black streaked dwarf virus (RBSDV) and MRDV. In this study, maize plants showing MRDD in the Ebro zone province of Lerida, Spain were assessed using common primers for MRDV and RBSDV. Molecular characterization of one isolate and phylogenetic analysis were also carried out. Polyacrylamide electrophoretic profiles of genome segments of dsRNA, the size of PCR amplified fragments and the nucleotide sequence comparison matched closely with Maize rough dwarf virus Italian isolate (MRDV accession no. L76561), confirming that MRDV is present in maize plants showing MRDD in Spain. The phylogenetic analysis made with segments S9 and S10 from Fijivirus and the MRDV-Sp isolate obtained in the present study, showed that: i) MRDV is closely related to RBSDV; ii) there is high variability within isolates clustering as RBSDV in S9, especially in the ORF1 at the amino acid level, which allowed grouping one isolate close to MRDV; and iii) the grouping of RBSDV isolates at the 3’NCR of S9 was correlated with the host. The incidence of MRDD varied between two locations sampled, probably associated with sowing date, the presence of the winged form of the MRDV vector Laodelphax striatellus and differences in the abundance of virus reservoir plants

Outcomes of abdominal surgery in patients with liver cirrhosis

Patients suffering from liver cirrhosis (LC) frequently require non-hepatic abdominal surgery, even before liver transplantation. LC is an important risk factor itself for surgery, due to the higher than average associated morbidity and mortality. This high surgical risk occurs because of the pathophysiology of liver disease itself and to the presence of contributing factors, such as coagulopathy, poor nutritional status, adaptive immune dysfunction, cirrhotic cardiomyopathy, and renal and pulmonary dysfunction, which all lead to poor outcomes. Careful evaluation of these factors and the degree of liver disease can help to reduce the development of complications both during and after abdominal surgery. In the emergency setting, with the presence of decompensated LC, alcoholic hepatitis, severe/advanced LC, and significant extrahepatic organ dysfunction conservative management is preferred. A multidisciplinary, individualized, and specialized approach can improve outcomes; preoperative optimization after risk stratification and careful management are mandatory before surgery. Laparoscopic techniques can also improve outcomes. We review the impact of LC on surgical outcome in non-hepatic abdominal surgeries required in this cirrhotic population before, during, and after surgery

Outcomes of abdominal surgery in patients with liver cirrhosis

Patients suffering from liver cirrhosis (LC) frequently require non-hepatic abdominal surgery, even before liver transplantation. LC is an important risk factor itself for surgery, due to the higher than average associated morbidity and mortality. This high surgical risk occurs because of the pathophysiology of liver disease itself and to the presence of contributing factors, such as coagulopathy, poor nutritional status, adaptive immune dysfunction, cirrhotic cardiomyopathy, and renal and pulmonary dysfunction, which all lead to poor outcomes. Careful evaluation of these factors and the degree of liver disease can help to reduce the development of complications both during and after abdominal surgery. In the emergency setting, with the presence of decompensated LC, alcoholic hepatitis, severe/advanced LC, and significant extrahepatic organ dysfunction conservative management is preferred. A multidisciplinary, individualized, and specialized approach can improve outcomes; preoperative optimization after risk stratification and careful management are mandatory before surgery. Laparoscopic techniques can also improve outcomes. We review the impact of LC on surgical outcome in non-hepatic abdominal surgeries required in this cirrhotic population before, during, and after surgery

Outcomes of abdominal surgery in patients with liver cirrhosis

Patients suffering from liver cirrhosis (LC) frequently require non-hepatic abdominal surgery, even before liver transplantation. LC is an important risk factor itself for surgery, due to the higher than average associated morbidity and mortality. This high surgical risk occurs because of the pathophysiology of liver disease itself and to the presence of contributing factors, such as coagulopathy, poor nutritional status, adaptive immune dysfunction, cirrhotic cardiomyopathy, and renal and pulmonary dysfunction, which all lead to poor outcomes. Careful evaluation of these factors and the degree of liver disease can help to reduce the development of complications both during and after abdominal surgery. In the emergency setting, with the presence of decompensated LC, alcoholic hepatitis, severe/advanced LC, and significant extrahepatic organ dysfunction conservative management is preferred. A multidisciplinary, individualized, and specialized approach can improve outcomes; preoperative optimization after risk stratification and careful management are mandatory before surgery. Laparoscopic techniques can also improve outcomes. We review the impact of LC on surgical outcome in non-hepatic abdominal surgeries required in this cirrhotic population before, during, and after surgery

Drotrecogin alfa (Activated) in adults with septic shock

There have been conflicting reports on the efficacy of recombinant human activated protein C, or drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA), for the treatment of patients with septic shock.In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, we assigned 1697 patients with infection, systemic inflammation, and shock who were receiving fluids and vasopressors above a threshold dose for 4 hours to receive either DrotAA (at a dose of 24 μg per kilogram of body weight per hour) or placebo for 96 hours. The primary outcome was death from any cause 28 days after randomization.At 28 days, 223 of 846 patients (26.4%) in the DrotAA group and 202 of 834 (24.2%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk in the DrotAA group, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.28; P=0.31). At 90 days, 287 of 842 patients (34.1%) in the DrotAA group and 269 of 822 (32.7%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.19; P=0.56). Among patients with severe protein C deficiency at baseline, 98 of 342 (28.7%) in the DrotAA group had died at 28 days, as compared with 102 of 331 (30.8%) in the placebo group (risk ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.17; P=0.54). Similarly, rates of death at 28 and 90 days were not significantly different in other predefined subgroups, including patients at increased risk for death. Serious bleeding during the treatment period occurred in 10 patients in the DrotAA group and 8 in the placebo group (P=0.81).DrotAA did not significantly reduce mortality at 28 or 90 days, as compared with placebo, in patients with septic shock. (Funded by Eli Lilly; PROWESS-SHOCK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00604214.)