La endoscopía y el diagnóstico de los trastornos de la deglución en gatos. Estudio retrospectivo

We present a retrospective study of endoscopies performed in cats with swallowing disorders and a review of the subject. Materials and Methods. All cats referred to the Department of Endoscopy for swallowing disorders between 2006 and 2010, were identified. The following data were analyzed: age, sex, race, associated clinical signs, course and endoscopic findings. Results. Out of 78 endoscopies performed in cats, we analyzed those in which dysphagia / regurgitation was the reason for referral. 45% of them (35/78) were upper gastrointestinal endoscopies and swallowing disorders was observed in 34% of them (12/35). Endoscopic findings were: stomatitis 8%, mass in oropharynx 17%, foreign bodies 17%, tonsillitis 8%, esophageal stricture 17%, esophagitis 17%, unremarkable 17%. In 34% of the cases, the endoscopy was diagnostic and therapeutic. Discussion and conclusions. In 75% of the cases, changes were found. This would indicate that the endoscopy is essential for the recognition of lesions in patients presenting these signs. Moreover, in 34% of the cases, endoscopy had a diagnostic function as well as a therapeutic one, thus preventing the patient from suffering and undergoing long-term treatments.Se presenta un informe retrospectivo sobre estudios endoscópicos realizados en gatos con trastornos de la deglución (disfagia y/o regurgitación) y una revisión sobre el tema. Materiales y Métodos. Se identificaron todos los felinos derivados al Servicio de Endoscopia por presentar trastornos de la deglución entre los años 2006 y 2010. Se analizaron los siguientes datos: edad, sexo, raza, signos clínicos asociados, evolución y hallazgos endoscópicos. Resultados. Sobre 78 endoscopias realizadas en felinos, se analizaron aquellas cuyo signo motivo de la derivación era disfagia y/o regurgitación. El 45 % (35/78) fueron digestivas altas y los problemas en la deglución se presentaban en el 34% (12/35). Los hallazgos endoscópicos fueron: estomatitis 8%, masa en orofaringe 17%, cuerpos extraños 17%, tonsilitis 8%, estenosis esofágica 17%, esofagitis 17 %, sin particularidades 17%. En el 34 % de los casos la endoscopia fue diagnóstica y terapéutica. Discusión y conclusiones. En 75% de los casos se encontraron alteraciones, lo que indicaría que el estudio endoscópico resulta indispensable para el reconocimiento de lesiones en pacientes con esos signos. Por otro lado, en 34% de los casos la endoscopía tuvo una función diagnóstica y al mismo tiempo terapéutica evitando al paciente sufrimientos y tratamientos prolongados

Swine hemoplasmosis detected in farms of Argentina by a new nested PCR assay

Swine hemoplasmosis or swine infectious anemia is a worldwide distribution disease caused by the hemotropic mycoplasmas Mycoplasma suis and Mycoplasma parvum. The aim of this study was to determine the presence of M. suis-M. parvum infection in subclinical pigs from herds of Buenos Aires province, Argentina, by means of new nested PCR. The PCR assay primers were designed based on the 16S ribosomal gene sequences of swine hemoplasmas available at GenBank. To standardize the assay, pig blood samples positive for hemoplasma by May Grünwald-Giemsa (MGG) stained blood smears were used. A total of 482 pig blood samples were analyzed. A 32% (154/482) of MGG stained blood smears were positive to M. suis o M. parvum. From these 154 samples, 47% (72/154) were positive by PCR. Sequences of PCR products amplified with these primers always showed identity with M. suisor M. parvum, validating their specificity and highlighting the unspecific amplification with hemoplasmas of other species. This is the first assay designed in Argentina to identify M. suis and M. parvum. However, considering the advances in the knowledge of the genome of hemoplasmas worldwide, further studies should be performed to standardize new assays for the diagnosis of swine hemoplasmosis in Argentina

The lncRNA HOTAIR transcription is controlled by HNF4α-induced chromatin topology modulation

The expression of the long noncoding RNA HOTAIR (HOX Transcript Antisense Intergenic RNA) is largely deregulated in epithelial cancers and positively correlates with poor prognosis and progression of hepatocellular carcinoma and gastrointestinal cancers. Furthermore, functional studies revealed a pivotal role for HOTAIR in the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, as this RNA is causal for the repressive activity of the master factor SNAIL on epithelial genes. Despite the proven oncogenic role of HOTAIR, its transcriptional regulation is still poorly understood. Here hepatocyte nuclear factor 4-α (HNF4α), as inducer of epithelial differentiation, was demonstrated to directly repress HOTAIR transcription in the mesenchymal-to epithelial transition. Mechanistically, HNF4α was found to cause the release of a chromatin loop on HOTAIR regulatory elements thus exerting an enhancer-blocking activity

Hepatic wound repair

BACKGROUND: Human chronic liver diseases (CLDs) with different aetiologies rely on chronic activation of wound healing that represents the driving force for fibrogenesis progression (throughout defined patterns of fibrosis) to the end stage of cirrhosis and liver failure. ISSUES: Fibrogenesis progression has a major worldwide clinical impact due to the high number of patients affected by CLDs, increasing mortality rate, incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma and shortage of organ donors for liver transplantation. BASIC SCIENCE ADVANCES: Liver fibrogenesis is sustained by a heterogeneous population of profibrogenic hepatic myofibroblasts (MFs), the majority being positive for alpha smooth muscle actin (alphaSMA), that may originate from hepatic stellate cells and portal fibroblasts following a process of activation or from bone marrow-derived cells recruited to damaged liver and, in a method still disputed, by a process of epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) involving cholangiocytes and hepatocytes. Recent experimental and clinical data have identified, at tissue, cellular and molecular level major profibrogenic mechanisms: (a) chronic activation of the wound-healing reaction, (b) oxidative stress and related reactive intermediates, and (c) derangement of epithelial-mesenchymal interactions. CLINICAL CARE RELEVANCE: Liver fibrosis may regress following specific therapeutic interventions able to downstage or, at least, stabilise fibrosis. In cirrhotic patients, this would lead to a reduction of portal hypertension and of the consequent clinical complications and to an overall improvement of liver function, thus extending the complication-free patient survival time and reducing the need for liver transplantation. CONCLUSION: Emerging mechanisms and concepts related to liver fibrogenesis may significantly contribute to clinical management of patients affected by CLDs

Identifying xenobiotic metabolites with in silico prediction tools and LCMS suspect screening analysis

Understanding the metabolic fate of a xenobiotic substance can help inform its potential health risks and allow for the identification of signature metabolites associated with exposure. The need to characterize metabolites of poorly studied or novel substances has shifted exposure studies towards non-targeted analysis (NTA), which often aims to profile many compounds within a sample using high-resolution liquid-chromatography mass-spectrometry (LCMS). Here we evaluate the suitability of suspect screening analysis (SSA) liquid-chromatography mass-spectrometry to inform xenobiotic chemical metabolism. Given a lack of knowledge of true metabolites for most chemicals, predictive tools were used to generate potential metabolites as suspect screening lists to guide the identification of selected xenobiotic substances and their associated metabolites. Thirty-three substances were selected to represent a diverse array of pharmaceutical, agrochemical, and industrial chemicals from Environmental Protection Agency’s ToxCast chemical library. The compounds were incubated in a metabolically-active in vitro assay using primary hepatocytes and the resulting supernatant and lysate fractions were analyzed with high-resolution LCMS. Metabolites were simulated for each compound structure using software and then combined to serve as the suspect screening list. The exact masses of the predicted metabolites were then used to select LCMS features for fragmentation via tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS). Of the starting chemicals, 12 were measured in at least one sample in either positive or negative ion mode and a subset of these were used to develop the analysis workflow. We implemented a screening level workflow for background subtraction and the incorporation of time-varying kinetics into the identification of likely metabolites. We used haloperidol as a case study to perform an in-depth analysis, which resulted in identifying five known metabolites and five molecular features that represent potential novel metabolites, two of which were assigned discrete structures based on in silico predictions. This workflow was applied to five additional test chemicals, and 15 molecular features were selected as either reported metabolites, predicted metabolites, or potential metabolites without a structural assignment. This study demonstrates that in some–but not all–cases, suspect screening analysis methods provide a means to rapidly identify and characterize metabolites of xenobiotic chemicals

International entrepreneurship in SMEs: a study of influencing factors in the textile industry

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11365-012-0242-3International entrepreneurship is an incipient research area with a rapidly increasing body of knowledge and contributions. An important part of this literature has focused on the analysis of the contributing factors to IE development. From these studies, this work attempts to analyse and validate through an integrative model the effect on this construct in SME of some of the main factors proposed by the literature such as Skills and Competences, Attitude and Proactiveness, Creativity and Innovation, Networking, Employees and Activity. To proceed with this aim, we conducted an empirical research focused on 174 textile SME in Spain. The results obtained confirm a positive relationship between the studied factors and the IE development. In consequence, this work agrees with previous literature that point out the need to use multi-theoretical perspectives, combining multiple factors.Gil Pechuán, I.; Expósito Langa, M.; Tomas Miquel, JV. (2013). International entrepreneurship in SMEs: a study of influencing factors in the textile industry. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. 9(1):45-57. doi:10.1007/s11365-012-0242-3S455791Akgün, A., Keskin, H., & Byrne, J. (2012). Organizational emotional memory. Management Decision, 50(1), 95–114.Andersén, J. (2011). Strategic resources and firm performance. Management Decision, 49(1), 87–98.Anderson, A. R., Dodd, S. D., & Jack, S. L. (2012). Entrepreneurship as connecting: some implications for theorising and practice. Management Decision, 50(5), 958–971.Appelbaum, S. H., Roy, M., & Gilliland, T. (2011). Globalization of performance appraisals: theory and applications. Management Decision, 49(4), 570–585.Arribas, I., Hernández, P., Urbano, A., & Vila, J. E. (2012). Are social and entrepreneurial attitudes compatible? A behavioral and self-perceptional analysis. Management Decision, 50(10), 1739–1757.Audretsch, D. (2012). Entrepreneurship research. Management Decision, 50(5), 755–764.Autio, E., Sapienza, H. J., & Almeida, J. G. (2000). Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity, and imitability on international growth. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 909–924.Bannon, L. (1998). Mattel plans to double sales abroad. Wall Street Journal, February 11, (A3 and A8).Battistella, C., Biotto, G., & De Toni, A. (2012). From design driven innovation to meaning strategy. Management Decision, 50(4), 718–743.Bell, J., McNaughton, J., Young, R., & Crick, D. (2003). Towards an integrative model of small firm internationalization. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1, 339–362.Bonzo, P., Valadares de Oliveira, P., & McCormarck. (2012). Planning, capabilities, and performance: an integrated value approach. Management Decision, 50(6), 1001–1021.Bossak, J., & Nagashima, S. (1997). Corporate strategies for a borderless world: sharpening your competitive edge. Tokyo: Asian Productivity Organization.Cambra-Fierro, J., Florin, J., Perez, L., & Whitelock, J. (2011). Inter-firm market orientation as antecedent of knowledge transfer, innovation and value creation in networks. Management Decision, 49(3), 444–467.Cantarello, S., Nosella, A., Petroni, G., & Venturini, K. (2011). External technology sourcing: evidence from design-driven innovation. Management Decision, 49(6), 962–983.Chang, Y. Y., Hughes, M., & Hotho, S. (2011). Internal and external antecedents of SMEs’ innovation ambidexterity outcomes. Management Decision, 49(10), 1658–1676.Chaston, I., & Scott, G. J. (2012). Entrepreneurship and open innovation in an emerging economy. Management Decision, 50(7), 1161–1177.Coviello, N. E., & Jones, M. V. (2004). Methodological issues in international entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Venturing, 19, 485–508.Coviello, N. E., & McAuley, A. (1999). Internationalization and the smaller firm: a review of contemporary empirical research. Management International Review, 39, 223–256.Covin, J., & Slevin, D. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75–87.Covin, J., & Slevin, D. (1991). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16, 7–25.Davis, D., Morris, M., & Allen, J. (1991). Perceived environmental turbulence and its effect on selected entrepreneurship, marketing, and organizational characteristics in industrial firms. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19(1), 43–51.Dean, C. C., Thibodeaux, M. S., Beyerlein, M., Ebrahimi, B., & Molina, D. (1993). Corporate entrepreneurship and competitive aggressiveness. A comparison of U.S. firms operating in eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States with U.S. firms in other high-risk environments. Advances in International Comparative Management, 8, 31–54.Dess, G. G., & Robinson, R. B. (1984). Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: the case of privately held firms and conglomerate business units. Strategic Management Journal, 5, 265–273.Dess, G. G., Lumpkin, G. T., & Covin, J. G. (1997). Entrepreneurial strategy making and firm performance: tests of contingency and configurational models. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 677–695.Díaz-Casero, J. C., Díaz-Aunión, A., Sánchez-Escobedo, M. C., Coduras-Martinez, A., & Hernández-Mogollón, R. (2012). Economic freedom and entrepreneurial activity. Management Decision, 50(9), 1686–1711.Dimitratos, P., & Plakoyiannaki, E. (2003). Theoretical foundations of an international entrepreneurial culture. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1, 187–215.Dubini, P., & Aldrich, H. (1991). Personal and extended networks are central to the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing, 6, 305–313.Felício, J. A., Rodrigues, R., & Caldeirinha, V. R. (2012). The effect of intrapreneurship on corporate performance. Management Decision, 50(10), 1717–1738.Goktan, A. B., & Miles, G. (2011). Innovation speed and radicalness: are they inversely related? Management Decision, 49(4), 533–547.Gómez-Haro, S., Aragón-Correa, J. A., & Cordón-Pozo, E. (2011). Differentiating the effects of the institutional environment on corporate entrepreneurship. Management Decision, 49(10), 1677–1693.Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., Camp, S. M., & Sexton, L. D. (2001). Strategic entrepreneurship: entrepreneurial strategies for wealth creation [Special Issue]. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6), 479–492.Hotho, S., & Champion, K. (2011). Small businesses in the new creative industries: innovation as a people management challenge. Management Decision, 49(1), 29–54.Hu, Y.-S. (1995). The international transferability of competitive advantage. California Management Review, 37(4), 73–88.Huarng, K. H., & Yu, T. H. K. (2011). Entrepreneurship, process innovation and value creation by a non-profit SME. Management Decision, 49(2), 284–296.Jones, M. V. (1999). The internationalization of small UK high technology based firms. Journal of International Marketing, 7, 15–41.Jones, M. V., & Coviello, N. E. (2005). Internationalization: conceptualising and entrepreneurial process of behaviour in time. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(3):284–303.Khandwalla, P. (1977). The design of organizations. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Knight, G. A., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2004). Innovation, organization capabilities, and the born-global firm. Journal of International Business Studies, 35, 124–141.Kropp, F., Lindsay, N. J., & Shoham, A. (2006). Entrepreneurial, market, and learning orientations and international entrepreneurial business venture performance in South African firms. International Marketing Review, 23(5), 504–523.Liebeskind, J. P. (1996). Knowledge, strategy, and the theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 93–107.Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21, 135–172.McDougall, P. P., & Oviatt, B. M. (2000). International entrepreneurship: the intersection of two research paths. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 902–908.McDougall, P. P., Shane, S., & Oviatt, B. M. (1994). Explaining the formation of international new ventures: the limits of theories from international business research. Journal of Business Venturing, 9, 469–487.McGrath, R. G., MacMillan, I. C., & Venkataraman, S. (1995). Global dimensions of new competencies. In S. Birley & I. C. MacMillan (Eds.), International entrepreneurship. New York: Routledge.McNaughton, R. B. (2001). The export mode decision-making process in small knowledge- intensive firms. Market Intelligence and Planning, 19, 12–20.McNaughton, R. B. (2003). The number of export markets that a firm serves: process models versus the born-global phenomenon. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1, 297–311.Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure and process. New York: McGraw-Hill.Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7), 770–791.Miller, D., & Friesen, P. (1984). Organizations: a quantum view. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Morrow, J. F. (1988). International entrepreneurship: a new growth opportunity. New Management, 3, 59–61.Murphy, G. B., Trailer, J. W., & Hill, R. C. (1996). Measuring performance in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Research, 36, 15–23.Naman, J. L., & Slevin, D. P. (1993). Entrepreneurship and the concept of fit: a model and empirical tests. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 137–153.Naranjo-Valencia, J. C., Jiménez-Jiménez, D., & Sanz-Valle, R. (2011). Innovation or imitation? The role of organizational culture. Management Decision, 49(1), 55–72.Oviatt, B. M., & McDougall, P. P. (1994). Toward a theory of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(1), 45–64.Oviatt, B. M., & McDougall, P. P. (1999). A framework for understanding accelerated international entrepreneurship. In R. Wright (Ed.), Research in global strategic management (pp. 23–40). Stamford: JAI Press.Oviatt, B. M., & McDougall, P. P. (2005). Defining international entrepreneurship and modeling the speed of internalization. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 29(5), 537–554.Peiris, I.K., Akoorie, M.E.M., & Sinha, P.N. (2012). International entrepreneurship: A critical analysis of studies in the past two decades and future directions for research. Journal of International Entrepreneurship. Article in press.Pinchot, G., III. (1985). Intrapreneuring: why you don’t have to leave the corporation to become entrepreneur. New York: Harper and Row Publishers.Porter, M. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. London: Collier-Macmillan.Renko, M., Shrader, R. C., & Simon, M. (2012). Perception of entrepreneurial opportunity: a general framework. Management Decision, 50(7), 1233–1251.Sandulli, F. D., Fernandez-Menendez, J., Rodriguez-Duarte, A., & Lopez-Sanchez, J. I. (2012). Testing the Schumpeterian hypotheses on an open innovation framework. Management Decision, 50(7), 1222–1232.Santos, F. J., Romero, I., & Fernández-Serrano, J. (2012). SMEs and entrepreneurial quality from a macroeconomic perspective. Management Decision, 50(8), 1382–1395.Shama, A. (1995). Entry strategies of U.S. firms to the former Soviet Bloc and Eastern Europe. California Management Review, 37(3), 90–109.Simon, H. (1996). Hidden champions: lessons from 500 of the world’s best unknown companies. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Singh, S., Darwish, T. K., Costa, A. C., & Anderson, N. (2012). Measuring HRM and organisational performance: concepts, issues, and framework. Management Decision, 50(4), 651–667.Smart, T. (1996). GE’s Welch: ‘Fighting like hell to be No. 1’. Business Week, July 8, 48.Snow, C., & Hrebiniak, L. (1980). Strategy, distinctive competence, and organizational performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 317–336.Stevenson, H. H., & Jarillo, J. C. (1990). A paradigm of entrepreneurship: entrepreneurial management. Strategic Management Journal, 11, 17–27.Styles, C., & Seymour, R. G. (2006). Opportunities for marketing researchers in international entrepreneurship. International Marketing Review, 23(2), 126–145.Turner, R., Ledwith, A., & Kelly, J. (2012). Project management in small to medium-sized enterprises: tailoring the practices to the size of company. Management Decision, 50(5), 942–957.Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research: a comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11, 801–814.Vlasic, B. (1998). The little car that could carry Chrysler overseas. Business Week, 19, 39.Welbourne, T. M., Neck, H., & Meyer, G. D. (2012). The entrepreneurial growth ceiling: using people and innovation to mitigate risk and break through the growth ceiling in initial public offerings. Management Decision, 50(5), 778–796.Williamson, P. J. (1997). Asia’s new competitive game. Harvard Business Review, 75(5), 55–67.Yeoh, P. L. (2004). International learning: antecedents and performance implications among newly internationalizing companies in an exporting context. International Marketing Review, 21(4/5), 511–535.Zahra, S. A. (1991). Predictors and financial outcomes of corporate entrepreneurship. An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 6(4), 259–285.Zahra, S. A. (1993a). Environment, corporate entrepreneurship and financial performance. A taxonomic approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(4), 319–340.Zahra, S. A. (1993b). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior: a critique and extensión. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 17(4), 5–21.Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). International entrepreneurship: the current status of the field and future agenda. In M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, S. M. Camp, & D. L. Sexton (Eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: creating a new mindset. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Zahra, S. A., Jennings, D. F., & Kuratko, D. F. (1999). The antecedents and consequences of firm-level entrepreneurship: the state of the field. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 24(2), 45–63.Zhou, L. (2007). The effects of entrepreneurial proclivity and foreign market knowledge on early internationalization. Journal of World Business, 42(3), 281–293