Electronic band structure and carrier effective mass in calcium aluminates

First-principles electronic band structure investigations of five compounds of the CaO-Al2O3 family, 3CaO.Al2O3, 12CaO.7Al2O3, CaO.Al2O3, CaO.2Al2O3 and CaO.6Al2O3, as well as CaO and alpha-, theta- and kappa-Al2O3 are performed. We find that the conduction band in the complex oxides is formed from the oxygen antibonding p-states and, although the band gap in Al2O3 is almost twice larger than in CaO, the s-states of both cations. Such a hybrid nature of the conduction band leads to isotropic electron effective masses which are nearly the same for all compounds investigated. This insensitivity of the effective mass to variations in the composition and structure suggests that upon a proper degenerate doping, both amorphous and crystalline phases of the materials will possess mobile extra electrons

Nonmechanical Revision Indications Portend Repeat Limb-Salvage Failure Following Total Femoral Replacement.

BackgroundThere is scant evidence to guide decision-making for patients considering total femoral replacement (TFR). We aimed to identify the indication, patient, disease, and surgical technique-related factors associated with failure. We hypothesized that failure occurs more frequently in the setting of revision surgical procedures, with infection as the predominant failure mode.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of patients receiving total femoral endoprostheses for oncological and revision arthroplasty indications; 166 patients met these criteria. Our primary independent variable of interest was TFR for a revision indication (arthroplasty or limb salvage); the primary outcome was failure. Analyses were performed for patient variables (age, sex, diagnosis group, indication), implant variables (model, decade, length, materials), and treatment variables. We analyzed TFR failures with respect to patient factors, operative technique, and time to failure. We conducted bivariate logistic regressions predicting failure and used a multivariate model containing variables showing bivariate associations with failure.ResultsForty-four patients (27%) had treatment failure. Failure occurred in 24 (23%) of 105 primary TFRs and in 20 (33%) of 61 revision TFRs; the difference was not significant (p = 0.134) in bivariate analysis but was significant (p = 0.044) in multivariate analysis. The mean age at the time of TFR was 37 years in the primary group and 51 years in the revision group (p = 0.0006). Of the patients who had mechanical failure, none had reoccurrence of their original failure mode, whereas all 8 patients from the nonmechanical cohort had reoccurrence of the original failure mode; this difference was significant (p = 0.0001).ConclusionsTFR has a high failure rate and a propensity for deep infection, especially in the setting of revision indications and prior infection. All failed TFRs performed for revision indications for infection or local recurrence failed by reoccurrence of the original failure mode and resulted in amputation.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence

Nonmechanical Revision Indications Portend Repeat Limb-Salvage Failure Following Total Femoral Replacement

BackgroundThere is scant evidence to guide decision-making for patients considering total femoral replacement (TFR). We aimed to identify the indication, patient, disease, and surgical technique-related factors associated with failure. We hypothesized that failure occurs more frequently in the setting of revision surgical procedures, with infection as the predominant failure mode.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of patients receiving total femoral endoprostheses for oncological and revision arthroplasty indications; 166 patients met these criteria. Our primary independent variable of interest was TFR for a revision indication (arthroplasty or limb salvage); the primary outcome was failure. Analyses were performed for patient variables (age, sex, diagnosis group, indication), implant variables (model, decade, length, materials), and treatment variables. We analyzed TFR failures with respect to patient factors, operative technique, and time to failure. We conducted bivariate logistic regressions predicting failure and used a multivariate model containing variables showing bivariate associations with failure.ResultsForty-four patients (27%) had treatment failure. Failure occurred in 24 (23%) of 105 primary TFRs and in 20 (33%) of 61 revision TFRs; the difference was not significant (p = 0.134) in bivariate analysis but was significant (p = 0.044) in multivariate analysis. The mean age at the time of TFR was 37 years in the primary group and 51 years in the revision group (p = 0.0006). Of the patients who had mechanical failure, none had reoccurrence of their original failure mode, whereas all 8 patients from the nonmechanical cohort had reoccurrence of the original failure mode; this difference was significant (p = 0.0001).ConclusionsTFR has a high failure rate and a propensity for deep infection, especially in the setting of revision indications and prior infection. All failed TFRs performed for revision indications for infection or local recurrence failed by reoccurrence of the original failure mode and resulted in amputation.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence

National Landscape of Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Positive Deceased Organ Donors in the United States

Background Organ transplantation from donors with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) to recipients with HIV (HIV D+/R+) presents risks of donor-derived infections. Understanding clinical, immunologic, and virologic characteristics of HIV-positive donors is critical for safety. Methods We performed a prospective study of donors with HIV-positive and HIV false-positive (FP) test results within the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act in Action studies of HIV D+/R+ transplantation (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02602262, NCT03500315, and NCT03734393). We compared clinical characteristics in HIV-positive versus FP donors. We measured CD4 T cells, HIV viral load (VL), drug resistance mutations (DRMs), coreceptor tropism, and serum antiretroviral therapy (ART) detection, using mass spectrometry in HIV-positive donors. Results Between March 2016 and March 2020, 92 donors (58 HIV positive, 34 FP), representing 98.9% of all US HOPE donors during this period, donated 177 organs (131 kidneys and 46 livers). Each year the number of donors increased. The prevalence of hepatitis B (16% vs 0%), syphilis (16% vs 0%), and cytomegalovirus (CMV; 91% vs 58%) was higher in HIV-positive versus FP donors; the prevalences of hepatitis C viremia were similar (2% vs 6%). Most HIV-positive donors (71%) had a known HIV diagnosis, of whom 90% were prescribed ART and 68% had a VL <400 copies/mL. The median CD4 T-cell count (interquartile range) was 194/mu L (77-331/mu L), and the median CD4 T-cell percentage was 27.0% (16.8%-36.1%). Major HIV DRMs were detected in 42%, including nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (33%), integrase strand transfer inhibitors (4%), and multiclass (13%). Serum ART was detected in 46% and matched ART by history. Conclusion The use of HIV-positive donor organs is increasing. HIV DRMs are common, yet resistance that would compromise integrase strand transfer inhibitor-based regimens is rare, which is reassuring regarding safety. Under the HOPE Act, 92 donors (58 human immunodeficiency virus [HIV] positive, 34 false-positive) donated 177 organs to recipients with HIV. Many donors (64%) were taking antiretrovirals, and although HIV drug resistance was common (42%), multiclass (12%) and integrase strand transfer inhibitor resistance (4%) was rare

National Landscape of Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Positive Deceased Organ Donors in the United States.

BackgroundOrgan transplantation from donors with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) to recipients with HIV (HIV D+/R+) presents risks of donor-derived infections. Understanding clinical, immunologic, and virologic characteristics of HIV-positive donors is critical for safety.MethodsWe performed a prospective study of donors with HIV-positive and HIV false-positive (FP) test results within the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act in Action studies of HIV D+/R+ transplantation (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02602262, NCT03500315, and NCT03734393). We compared clinical characteristics in HIV-positive versus FP donors. We measured CD4 T cells, HIV viral load (VL), drug resistance mutations (DRMs), coreceptor tropism, and serum antiretroviral therapy (ART) detection, using mass spectrometry in HIV-positive donors.ResultsBetween March 2016 and March 2020, 92 donors (58 HIV positive, 34 FP), representing 98.9% of all US HOPE donors during this period, donated 177 organs (131 kidneys and 46 livers). Each year the number of donors increased. The prevalence of hepatitis B (16% vs 0%), syphilis (16% vs 0%), and cytomegalovirus (CMV; 91% vs 58%) was higher in HIV-positive versus FP donors; the prevalences of hepatitis C viremia were similar (2% vs 6%). Most HIV-positive donors (71%) had a known HIV diagnosis, of whom 90% were prescribed ART and 68% had a VL &lt;400 copies/mL. The median CD4 T-cell count (interquartile range) was 194/µL (77-331/µL), and the median CD4 T-cell percentage was 27.0% (16.8%-36.1%). Major HIV DRMs were detected in 42%, including nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (33%), integrase strand transfer inhibitors (4%), and multiclass (13%). Serum ART was detected in 46% and matched ART by history.ConclusionThe use of HIV-positive donor organs is increasing. HIV DRMs are common, yet resistance that would compromise integrase strand transfer inhibitor-based regimens is rare, which is reassuring regarding safety

The Sedimentary Geochemistry and Paleoenvironments Project.

Authors thank the donors of The American Chemical Society Petroleum Research Fund for partial support of SGP website development (61017-ND2). EAS is funded by National Science Foundation grant (NSF) EAR-1922966. BGS authors (JE, PW) publish with permission of the Executive Director of the British Geological Survey, UKRI.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe