Immature rats show ovulatory defects similar to those in adult rats lacking prostaglandin and progesterone actions

Gonadotropin-primed immature rats (GPIR) constitute a widely used model for the study of ovulation. Although the equivalence between the ovulatory process in immature and adult rats is generally assumed, the morphological and functional characteristics of ovulation in immature rats have been scarcely considered. We describe herein the morphological aspects of the ovulatory process in GPIR and their response to classical ovulation inhibitors, such as the inhibitor of prostaglandin (PG) synthesis indomethacin (INDO) and a progesterone (P) receptor (PR) antagonist (RU486). Immature Wistar rats were primed with equine chorionic gonadotropin (eCG) at 21, 23 or 25 days of age, injected with human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) 48 h later, and sacrificed 16 h after hCG treatment, to assess follicle rupture and ovulation. Surprisingly, GPIR showed age-related ovulatory defects close similar to those in adult rats lacking P and PG actions. Rats primed with eCG at 21 or 23 days of age showed abnormally ruptured corpora lutea in which the cumulus-oocyte complex (COC) was trapped or had been released to the ovarian interstitum, invading the ovarian stroma and blood and lymphatic vessels. Supplementation of immature rats with exogenous P and/or PG of the E series did not significantly inhibit abnormal follicle rupture. Otherwise, ovulatory defects were practically absent in rats primed with eCG at 25 days of age. GPIR treated with INDO showed the same ovulatory alterations than vehicle-treated ones, although affecting to a higher proportion of follicles. Blocking P actions with RU486 increased the number of COC trapped inside corpora lutea and decreased ovulation. The presence of ovulatory defects in GPIR, suggests that the capacity of the immature ovary to undergo the coordinate changes leading to effective ovulation is not fully established in Wistar rats primed with eCG before 25 days of age

Author-paper affiliation network architecture influences the methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of psoriasis

<div><p>Moderate-to-severe psoriasis is associated with significant comorbidity, an impaired quality of life, and increased medical costs, including those associated with treatments. Systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) of randomized clinical trials are considered two of the best approaches to the summarization of high-quality evidence. However, methodological bias can reduce the validity of conclusions from these types of studies and subsequently impair the quality of decision making. As co-authorship is among the most well-documented forms of research collaboration, the present study aimed to explore whether authors’ collaboration methods might influence the methodological quality of SRs and MAs of psoriasis. Methodological quality was assessed by two raters who extracted information from full articles. After calculating total and per-item Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) scores, reviews were classified as low (0-4), medium (5-8), or high (9-11) quality. Article metadata and journal-related bibliometric indices were also obtained. A total of 741 authors from 520 different institutions and 32 countries published 220 reviews that were classified as high (17.2%), moderate (55%), or low (27.7%) methodological quality. The high methodological quality subnetwork was larger but had a lower connection density than the low and moderate methodological quality subnetworks; specifically, the former contained relatively fewer nodes (authors and reviews), reviews by authors, and collaborators per author. Furthermore, the high methodological quality subnetwork was highly compartmentalized, with several modules representing few poorly interconnected communities. In conclusion, structural differences in author-paper affiliation network may influence the methodological quality of SRs and MAs on psoriasis. As the author-paper affiliation network structure affects study quality in this research field, authors who maintain an appropriate balance between scientific quality and productivity are more likely to develop higher quality reviews.</p></div

Summary statistics for the co-authorship networks based on methodology quality.

<p>Summary statistics for the co-authorship networks based on methodology quality.</p

Influence of authors’ scientific quality and productivity on methodological quality of SRs and MAs about psoriasis.

<p>Panel (a-c): Bubble plot that represents the number of publications by author. Bubble size is proportional to the author’s H-index. Authors are sorted by their institution’s country. Panel (d-f) represents a scatter plot of author’s H-index vs. number of authored publications. Smoothed fitted lines represent predictions using linear regression for every country. Points and lines are colored based on author institution country.</p

Whole author-paper affiliation network.

<p>(a). Nodes that represent authors are colored and labeled based on their institution’s country. Grey nodes represent the reviews on psoriasis which were finally included. Node size is proportional to the author’s H-index or AMSTAR score respectively. Edges connect both types of nodes, thus every author and their collaborators are linked to the shared publication. (b). Same network, although only nodes representing articles are colored based on AMSTAR levels.</p

Cumulative frequency of node degree distributions.

<p>The cumulative node degree distribution shows the cumulative number of nodes of each degree class. The distribution of degree values over all nodes characterizes the network as a whole.</p

Author-paper affiliation subnetworks based on methodological quality of the reviews.

<p>Nodes that represent authors are colored and labeled based on their institution’s country. Grey nodes represent the SRs and MAs on psoriasis which were finally included. Node size is proportional to the author’s H-index or AMSTAR score respectively. Edges connect both types of nodes, thus every author and their collaborators are connected to the shared publication.</p

Comparison of 1-year outcome in patients with severe aorta stenosis treated conservatively or by aortic valve replacement or by percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve implantation (data from a multicenter Spanish registry)

The factors that influence decision making in severe aortic stenosis (AS) are unknown. Our aim was to assess, in patients with severe AS, the determinants of management and prognosis in a multicenter registry that enrolled all consecutive adults with severe AS during a 1-month period. One-year follow-up was obtained in all patients and included vital status and aortic valve intervention (aortic valve replacement [AVR] and transcatheter aortic valve implantation [TAVI]). A total of 726 patients were included, mean age was 77.3 ± 10.6 years, and 377 were women (51.8%). The most common management was conservative therapy in 468 (64.5%) followed by AVR in 199 (27.4%) and TAVI in 59 (8.1%). The strongest association with aortic valve intervention was patient management in a tertiary hospital with cardiac surgery (odds ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 1.8 to 4.1, p <0.001). The 2 main reasons to choose conservative management were the absence of significant symptoms (136% to 29.1%) and the presence of co-morbidity (128% to 27.4%). During 1-year follow-up, 132 patients died (18.2%). The main causes of death were heart failure (60% to 45.5%) and noncardiac diseases (46% to 34.9%). One-year survival for patients treated conservatively, with TAVI, and with AVR was 76.3%, 94.9%, and 92.5%, respectively, p <0.001. One-year survival of patients treated conservatively in the absence of significant symptoms was 97.1%. In conclusion, most patients with severe AS are treated conservatively. The outcome in asymptomatic patients managed conservatively was acceptable. Management in tertiary hospitals is associated with valve intervention. One-year survival was similar with both interventional strategies