Burying the 'refuse revolution': the rise of controlled tipping in Britain 1920-1960

The definitive, peer-reviewed and edited version of this article is published in Environment and Planning A, 42, 5, 1033-1048, 2010, 10.1068/a42120.This paper investigates the emergence of ‘controlled tipping’ as the dominant method of municipal waste disposal in Britain between 1920 and 1960. The triumph of controlled tipping, despite the availability of alternative disposal technologies, needs to be understood in the context of the contested meanings of ‘waste’ and ‘wasteland’, which helped to determine attitudes and approaches to disposal. Following the conclusion of the First World War there was an urgent requirement for a cheap means of disposing of increasing amounts of urban municipal waste. The obvious choice was tipping. Before the war, however, refuse tipping had been rejected as insanitary by the emerging waste disposal profession. Public cleansing professionals therefore had to recuperate tipping as a medically and environmentally benign mode of disposal that was reconcilable with the needs of sanitary science and landscape preservation. Controlled tipping, with its combined claims to scientific progress and the revalorization of refuse, enabled dumping to be successfully re-produced as the dominant mode of municipal refuse disposal in Britain. However, tipping faced further challenges after 1945 from changing popular understandings of the value of ‘derelict’ landscapes and from the politics of amenity. The ‘refuse revolution’ was a work in progress

Esophageal sphincter device for gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease who have a partial response to proton-pump inhibitors often seek alternative therapy. We evaluated the safety and effectiveness of a new magnetic device to augment the lower esophageal sphincter. METHODS We prospectively assessed 100 patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease before and after sphincter augmentation. The study did not include a concurrent control group. The primary outcome measure was normalization of esophageal acid exposure or a 50% or greater reduction in exposure at 1 year. Secondary outcomes were 50% or greater improvement in quality of life related to gastroesophageal reflux disease and a 50% or greater reduction in the use of proton-pump inhibitors at 1 year. For each outcome, the prespecified definition of successful treatment was achievement of the outcome in at least 60% of the patients. The 3-year results of a 5-year study are reported. RESULTS The primary outcome was achieved in 64% of patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 54 to 73). For the secondary outcomes, a reduction of 50% or more in the use of proton-pump inhibitors occurred in 93% of patients, and there was improvement of 50% or more in quality-of-life scores in 92%, as compared with scores for patients assessed at baseline while they were not taking proton-pump inhibitors. The most frequent adverse event was dysphagia (in 68% of patients postoperatively, in 11% at 1 year, and in 4% at 3 years). Serious adverse events occurred in six patients, and in six patients the device was removed. CONCLUSIONS In this single-group evaluation of 100 patients before and after sphincter augmentation with a magnetic device, exposure to esophageal acid decreased, reflux symptoms improved, and use of proton-pump inhibitors decreased. Follow-up studies are needed to assess long-term safety. (Funded by Torax Medical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00776997.

Efficacy of transoral fundoplication vs omeprazole for treatment of regurgitation in a randomized controlled trial.

Background The aim of this randomized, crossover study was to determine if transoral fundoplication (TF) could further improve clinical outcomes in partial responders to high-dose (HD) proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy and to evaluate durability of TF. Methods In seven United States centers, patients with hiatal hernia ≤2 cm and abnormal esophageal acid exposure (EAE) were randomized to TF (n = 40) or HD PPIs (n = 23) group. At 6-month follow-up, PPI patients underwent crossover. We assessed clinical outcomes 6-month post TF in crossover patients (COP), as compared to 6-month of HD PPI therapy, and 12-month outcomes in patients initially randomized to TF. The primary outcome was symptom control evaluated by Reflux Disease Questionnaire and Reflux Symptom Index. Secondary outcomes included healing of esophagitis, normalization of EAE and PPI use after TF. We analyzed 21 COP and 39 TF patients. McNemar’s test or Fisher exact test was used to compare proportions. Results Of 63 randomized patients, 3 were lost to follow-up, leaving 39 TF and 21 COP for analyses. In the COP, TF further improved control of regurgitation and of atypical symptoms achieved after six months of HD PPIs. Of 20 patients with GERD symptoms after six months of high-dose PPI therapy, 65% (13/20) reported global elimination of troublesome regurgitation and atypical symptoms post TF off PPIs; 67% (6/9) reported no troublesome regurgitation. Esophagitis further healed in 75% (6/8) of patients. Seventy-one percent of COP patients were off PPIs six months following TF. Normalization of EAE decreased from 52% after HD PPIs (on PPIs) to 33% after TF (off PPIs), p =0.388. In the original TF group, 12-month post TF, 77% of patients achieved complete symptom control, 82% ceased PPI therapy, 100% healed esophagitis and 45% normalized EAE. Conclusions The results of this study indicate that in patients with incomplete symptom control on high-dose PPI therapy TF may provide further elimination of symptoms and esophagitis healing. In the original TF group, the clinical outcomes of TF remained stable between 6- and 12-month follow-up. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01647958

Different tissue reaction of oesophagus and diaphragm after mesh hiatoplasty. Results of an animal study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Laparoscopic mesh-reinforcement of the hiatal region in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and paraesophageal hernia (PEH) reduces the risk of recurrence. However, there are still controversies about the technique of mesh placement, shape, structure and material. We therefore compared tissue integration and scar formation after implantation of two different polypropylene-meshes in a rabbit model.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A total of 20 female chinchilla rabbits were included in this study. Two different meshes (Polypropylene PP, Polyglecaprone 25 Composite PP-PG) were implanted on the abdominal diaphragm around the oesophagus. After 3 months the implanted meshes were excised en-bloc. Histological and morphological analyses were carried out accordingly proliferation rate, apoptosis and collagen type I/III ratio.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Regarding proliferation rate of oesophagus PP (9.31 ± 3.4%) and PP-PG (13.26 ± 2.54%) differ in a significant (p = 0.0097) way. In the diaphragm we found a significant (p = 0.00066) difference between PP (9.43 ± 1.45%) and PP-PG (18.73 ± 5.92%) respectively. Comparing oesophagus and diaphragm we could prove a significant difference within PP-PG-group (p = 0.0195). Within PP-group the difference reached no statistical significance (p = 0.88). We found analogous results regarding apoptosis.</p> <p>Furthermore, there is a significant (p = 0.00013) difference of collagen type I/III ratio in PP-PG (12.28 ± 0.8) compared to PP (8.44 ± 1,63) in case of oesophageal tissue. Concerning diaphragm we found a significant difference (p = 0.000099) between PP-PG (8.85 ± 0.81) and PP (6.32 ± 1.07) as well.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The histologic and morphologic characteristics after prosthetic enforcement of the hiatus in this animal model show a more distinct tissue integration using PP-PG compared to PP. Additionally, different wound healing and remodelling capability influence tissue integration of the mesh in diaphragm and oesophagus.</p

A Controversy That Has Been Tough to Swallow: Is the Treatment of Achalasia Now Digested?

Esophageal achalasia is a rare neurodegenerative disease of the esophagus and the lower esophageal sphincter that presents within a spectrum of disease severity related to progressive pathological changes, most commonly resulting in dysphagia. The pathophysiology of achalasia is still incompletely understood, but recent evidence suggests that degeneration of the postganglionic inhibitory nerves of the myenteric plexus could be due to an infectious or autoimmune mechanism, and nitric oxide is the neurotransmitter affected. Current treatment of achalasia is directed at palliation of symptoms. Therapies include pharmacological therapy, endoscopic injection of botulinum toxin, endoscopic dilation, and surgery. Until the late 1980s, endoscopic dilation was the first line of therapy. The advent of safe and effective minimally invasive surgical techniques in the early 1990s paved the way for the introduction of laparoscopic myotomy. This review will discuss the most up-to-date information regarding the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of achalasia, including a historical perspective. The laparoscopic Heller myotomy with partial fundoplication performed at an experienced center is currently the first line of therapy because it offers a low complication rate, the most durable symptom relief, and the lowest incidence of postoperative gastroesophageal reflux