Moving device as well as a component placement device provided with such a moving device

Samenvatting van US 2011194923 (A1) A moving device comprises at least a first element provided with main magnets and a second element provided with coils. The main magnets are arranged in a grid of rows and columns, wherein main magnets in adjacent rows are oppositely polarised and staggered relative to each other. The coils can be energized for moving the first element relative to the second element in a direction parallel to the rows as well as in a direction parallel to the columns. Auxiliary magnets of the same polarity are disposed between the main magnets at least in a number of rows, wherein the strength of the magnetic field of said auxiliary magnets is different from that of the main magnets

Moving device as well as a component placement device provided with such a moving device

Samenvatting van US 2011194923 (A1) A moving device comprises at least a first element provided with main magnets and a second element provided with coils. The main magnets are arranged in a grid of rows and columns, wherein main magnets in adjacent rows are oppositely polarised and staggered relative to each other. The coils can be energized for moving the first element relative to the second element in a direction parallel to the rows as well as in a direction parallel to the columns. Auxiliary magnets of the same polarity are disposed between the main magnets at least in a number of rows, wherein the strength of the magnetic field of said auxiliary magnets is different from that of the main magnets

Stoma-free survival after anastomotic leak following rectal cancer resection: worldwide cohort of 2470 patients

Background: The optimal treatment of anastomotic leak after rectal cancer resection is unclear. This worldwide cohort study aimed to provide an overview of four treatment strategies applied. Methods: Patients from 216 centres and 45 countries with anastomotic leak after rectal cancer resection between 2014 and 2018 were included. Treatment was categorized as salvage surgery, faecal diversion with passive or active (vacuum) drainage, and no primary/secondary faecal diversion. The primary outcome was 1-year stoma-free survival. In addition, passive and active drainage were compared using propensity score matching (2: 1). Results: Of 2470 evaluable patients, 388 (16.0 per cent) underwent salvage surgery, 1524 (62.0 per cent) passive drainage, 278 (11.0 per cent) active drainage, and 280 (11.0 per cent) had no faecal diversion. One-year stoma-free survival rates were 13.7, 48.3, 48.2, and 65.4 per cent respectively. Propensity score matching resulted in 556 patients with passive and 278 with active drainage. There was no statistically significant difference between these groups in 1-year stoma-free survival (OR 0.95, 95 per cent c.i. 0.66 to 1.33), with a risk difference of -1.1 (95 per cent c.i. -9.0 to 7.0) per cent. After active drainage, more patients required secondary salvage surgery (OR 2.32, 1.49 to 3.59), prolonged hospital admission (an additional 6 (95 per cent c.i. 2 to 10) days), and ICU admission (OR 1.41, 1.02 to 1.94). Mean duration of leak healing did not differ significantly (an additional 12 (-28 to 52) days). Conclusion: Primary salvage surgery or omission of faecal diversion likely correspond to the most severe and least severe leaks respectively. In patients with diverted leaks, stoma-free survival did not differ statistically between passive and active drainage, although the increased risk of secondary salvage surgery and ICU admission suggests residual confounding