Mediterranean-climate streams and rivers: geographically separated but ecologically comparable freshwater systems

Streams and rivers in mediterranean-climate regions (med-rivers in med-regions) are ecologically unique, with flow regimes reflecting precipitation patterns. Although timing of drying and flooding is predictable, seasonal and annual intensity of these events is not. Sequential flooding and drying, coupled with anthropogenic influences make these med-rivers among the most stressed riverine habitat worldwide. Med-rivers are hotspots for biodiversity in all med-regions. Species in med-rivers require different, often opposing adaptive mechanisms to survive drought and flood conditions or recover from them. Thus, metacommunities undergo seasonal differences, reflecting cycles of river fragmentation and connectivity, which also affect ecosystem functioning. River conservation and management is challenging, and trade-offs between environmental and human uses are complex, especially under future climate change scenarios. This overview of a Special Issue on med-rivers synthesizes information presented in 21 articles covering the five med-regions worldwide: Mediterranean Basin, coastal California, central Chile, Cape region of South Africa, and southwest and southern Australia. Research programs to increase basic knowledge in less-developed med-regions should be prioritized to achieve increased abilities to better manage med-rivers

Comparison of transmucosal midazolam with inhalation sedation for dental extractions in children. A randomized, cross-over, clinical trial

Background:  The transmucosal route for conscious sedation in children has been reported widely in the field of medicine, but less so in dental patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of midazolam (0.2 mg/kg) administered by the buccal transmucosal route, in comparison with nitrous oxide/oxygen inhalation sedation, for orthodontic extractions in 10–16-year-old dental patients. Methods:  Each patient attended for two visits and was randomly allocated to receive buccal midazolam (0.2 mg/kg) or nitrous oxide/oxygen titrated to 30%/70% at the first visit, the alternative being used at the second visit. The patients’ vital signs, sedation levels and behavioural scores were recorded throughout. Post-operatively, side-effects, recall of the visit and satisfaction levels were recorded via questionnaire. Results:  Thirty-six patients, with a mean age of 12.9 years, completed both arms of the trial. The maximum level of sedation was achieved with buccal midazolam in a mean time of 14.42 min, compared with 7.05 min with inhalation sedation. The vital signs with both types of sedation remained within acceptable limits and the reported side-effects were of no clinical significance. Buccal midazolam was found to be acceptable by 65.7%. Only 28.6% of cases preferred this technique, the main disadvantage being the taste of the solution. Conclusion:  Buccal midazolam sedation (0.2 mg/kg) seems to be equally as safe and effective as nitrous oxide/oxygen for the extraction of premolar teeth in anxious children. However, further research is required to refine the midazolam vehicle to improve acceptability