HLA and TAP associations in Chinese systemic lupus erythematosus patients

Tissue Antigens463 I213-216TSAN

On the level of mechanical loss in metallic glasses

Metallic glass samples with compositions Zr 65 Al 7.5 Cu 27.5 and Pd 77 Cu 6Si 17 , for which loss factors of up to 10 -2 have been reported, are reinvestigated with an electrostatic vibrating cantilever technique that detects dissipation factors tan δ as low as 10 -4 . It is found that tan δ ≈ 4×10 -4 is a typical value for these alloys well below T g , suggesting that previous results were limited by instrumental resolution. While aging the glasses increases their elastic moduli considerably, the measured loss factor is affected only marginally by thermal history. Copyright EDP Sciences, SIF, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection for huge (≥10 cm) liver tumors: an international multicenter propensity-score matched cohort study of 799 cases

Background: The use of laparoscopic (LLR) and robotic liver resections (RLR) has been safely performed in many institutions for liver tumours. A large scale international multicenter study would provide stronger evidence and insight into application of these techniques for huge liver tumours >_10 cm. Methods: This was a retrospective review of 971 patients who underwent LLR and RLR for huge (>_10 cm) tumors at 42 international centers between 2002-2020. Results: One hundred RLR and 699 LLR which met study criteria were included. The comparison between the 2 approaches for patients with huge tumors were performed using 1:3 propensity-score matching (PSM) (73 vs. 219). Before PSM, LLR was associated with significantly increased frequency of previous abdominal surgery, malignant pathology, liver cirrhosis and increased median blood. After PSM, RLR and LLR was associated with no significant difference in key perioperative outcomes including media operation time (242 vs. 290 min, P=0.286), transfusion rate rate (19.2% vs. 16.9%, P=0.652), median blood loss (200 vs. 300 mL, P=0.694), open conversion rate (8.2% vs. 11.0%, P=0.519), morbidity (28.8% vs. 21.9%, P=0.221), major morbidity (4.1% vs. 9.6%, P=0.152), mortality and postoperative length of stay (6 vs. 6 days, P=0.435). Conclusions: RLR and LLR can be performed safely for selected patients with huge liver tumours with excellent outcomes. There was no significant difference in perioperative outcomes after RLR or LLR