The Largest Known Maars on Earth, Seward Peninsula, Northwest Alaska

The Espenberg Maars on the northern Seward Peninsula of Alaska were formed by a series of Pleistocene basaltic eruptions through thick permafrost. The maars were excavated as much as 300 m into older lithologies; ranging from 4 to 8 km in diameter, they are the four largest known maars on earth. Hydromagmatic eruptions which derive water from ground ice are evidently extremely explosive. The high heat capacity of ice in permafrost modulates the supply of water interacting with magma during the eruption, producing consistently low coolant-to-fuel ratios in an environment with a sustained, abundant water supply. The Espenberg Maars demonstrate that, under certain conditions, eruptions which involve the interaction of lava and permafrost are powerful enough to produce craters as large as small calderas.Les maars de l'Espenberg situés dans la partie septentrionale de la péninsule Seward en Alaska ont été formés par une série d'éruptions basaltiques datant du pléistocène, à travers une forte épaisseur de pergélisol. Les maars ont été creusés à une profondeur allant jusqu'à 300 m dans d'anciennes roches; d'un diamètre variant entre 4 et 8 km, ils sont les quatre plus grands maars connus sur Terre. Les éruptions hydromagmatiques qui tirent l'eau de la glace de sol sont, comme on l'a déjà constaté, extrêmement explosives. La grande capacité thermique de la glace dans le pergélisol détermine l'approvisionnement en eau qui interagit avec le magma au cours de l'éruption, donnant régulièrement lieu à un faible rapport refroidissant / combustible dans un environnement où l'eau est constamment abondante. Les maars de l'Espenberg démontrent que, dans certaines conditions, les éruptions qui déclenchent une interaction lave-pergélisol sont suffisamment puissantes pour donner naissance à des cratères de la grandeur de petites calderas

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

The Role of Polyethylene Design on Postoperative TKA Flexion: An Analysis of 1534 Cases

The range of motion after TKA depends on many patient, surgical technique, and implant factors. Recently, high-flexion designs have been introduced as a means of ensuring or gaining flexion after TKA. We therefore evaluated factors affecting postoperative flexion to determine whether implant design influences longterm flexion. We prospectively collected data on patients receiving a primary Genesis II™ total knee replacement with a minimum of 1-year followup (mean, 5.4 years; range, 1–13 years). We recorded pre- and postoperative outcome measures, patient demographics, and implant design (cruciate retaining [CR, n = 160], posterior stabilized [PS, n = 1177], high-flex posterior stabilized [HF-PS, n = 197]). Backward stepwise linear regression modeling identified the following factors affecting postoperative flexion: preoperative flexion, gender, body mass index, and implant design. Independent of gender, body mass index, and preoperative flexion, patients who received a HF-PS and PS design implant had a mean of 8° and 5° more flexion, respectively, than those who received a CR implant. Patients with low flexion preoperatively (< 100°) were more likely to gain flexion, whereas those with high flexion preoperatively (> 120°) were most likely to maintain or lose flexion postoperatively. Controlling for implant design, patients with high flexion preoperatively (> 120°) were more likely to gain flexion with the HF-PS design implant (HF-PS = 32.0%; PS = 15.1%; CR = 4.5%)

The John Insall Award: Gender-specific Total Knee Replacement: Prospectively Collected Clinical Outcomes

Gender-specific total knee replacement design is a recent and debated topic. We determined the survivorship and clinical outcomes of a large primary total knee arthroplasty cohort, specifically assessing any differences between gender groups. A consecutive cohort of 3817 patients with 5279 primary total knee replacements (3100 female, 2179 male) with a minimum of 2 years followup were evaluated. Preoperative, latest, and change in clinical outcome scores (WOMAC, SF-12, KSCRS) were compared. While men had higher raw scores preoperatively, women had greater improvement in all WOMAC domains including pain (29.87 versus 27.3), joint stiffness (26.78 versus 24.26), function (27.21 versus 23.09), and total scores (28.35 versus 25.09). There were no gender differences in improvements of the SF-12 physical scores. Men had greater improvement in Knee Society function (22.1 versus 18.63) and total scores (70.01 versus 65.42), but not the Knee Society knee score (47.83 versus 46.64). Revision rates were 10.2% for men and 8% for women. Women demonstrated greater implant survivorship, greater improvement in WOMAC scores, equal improvements in SF-12 scores, and less improvement in only the Knee Society function and total scores. The data refute the hypothesis of inferior clinical outcome for women following total knee arthroplasty when using standard components