Left ventricular free wall impeding rupture in post-myocardial infarction period diagnosed by myocardial contrast echocardiography: Case report

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular free wall rupture occurs in up to 10% of the in-hospital deaths following myocardial infarction. It is mainly associated with posterolateral myocardial infarction and its antemortem diagnosis is rarely made. Contrast echocardiography has been increasingly used for the evaluation of myocardial perfusion in patients with acute myocardial infarction, with important prognostic implications. In this case, we reported its use for the detection of a mechanical complication following myocardial infarction. CASE PRESENTATION: A 50-year-old man with acute myocardial infarction in the lateral wall underwent myocardial contrast echocardiography for the evaluation of myocardial perfusion in the third day post-infarction. A perfusion defect was detected in lateral and inferior walls as well as the presence of contrast extrusion from the left ventricular cavity into the myocardium, forming a serpiginous duct extending from the endocardium to the epicardial region of the lateral wall, without communication with the pericardial space. Magnetic resonance imaging confirmed the diagnosis of impending rupture of the left ventricular free wall. While waiting for cardiac surgery, patient presented with cardiogenic shock and died. Anatomopathological findings were consistent with acute myocardial infarction in the lateral wall and a left ventricular free wall rupture at the infarct site. CONCLUSION: This case illustrates the early diagnosis of left ventricular free wall rupture by contrast echocardiography. Due to its ability to be performed at bedside this modality of imaging has the potential to identify this catastrophic condition in patients with acute myocardial infarction and help to treat these patients with emergent surgery

Sensitivity of South American tropical forests to an extreme climate anomaly

NERC Knowledge Exchange Fellowship (NE/V018760/1) to E.N.H.C.The tropical forest carbon sink is known to be drought sensitive, but it is unclear which forests are the most vulnerable to extreme events. Forests with hotter and drier baseline conditions may be protected by prior adaptation, or more vulnerable because they operate closer to physiological limits. Here we report that forests in drier South American climates experienced the greatest impacts of the 2015–2016 El Niño, indicating greater vulnerability to extreme temperatures and drought. The long-term, ground-measured tree-by-tree responses of 123 forest plots across tropical South America show that the biomass carbon sink ceased during the event with carbon balance becoming indistinguishable from zero (−0.02 ± 0.37 Mg C ha−1 per year). However, intact tropical South American forests overall were no more sensitive to the extreme 2015–2016 El Niño than to previous less intense events, remaining a key defence against climate change as long as they are protected.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Sensitivity of South American tropical forests to an extreme climate anomaly

Abstract: The tropical forest carbon sink is known to be drought sensitive, but it is unclear which forests are the most vulnerable to extreme events. Forests with hotter and drier baseline conditions may be protected by prior adaptation, or more vulnerable because they operate closer to physiological limits. Here we report that forests in drier South American climates experienced the greatest impacts of the 2015–2016 El Niño, indicating greater vulnerability to extreme temperatures and drought. The long-term, ground-measured tree-by-tree responses of 123 forest plots across tropical South America show that the biomass carbon sink ceased during the event with carbon balance becoming indistinguishable from zero (−0.02 ± 0.37 Mg C ha−1 per year). However, intact tropical South American forests overall were no more sensitive to the extreme 2015–2016 El Niño than to previous less intense events, remaining a key defence against climate change as long as they are protected

Sensitivity of South American tropical forests to an extreme climate anomaly

Funder: A Moore Foundation grant, Royal Society Global Challenges grant (Sensitivity of Tropical Forest Ecosystem Services to Climate Changes), CNPq grants (441282/2016-4, 403764/2012-2 and 558244/2009-2), FAPEAM grants 1600/2006, 465/2010 and PPFOR 147/2015, CNPq grants 473308/2009-6 and 558320/2009-0. European Research Council (ERC Advanced Grant 291585 - 'T-FORCES'), the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation (#1656 'RAINFOR', and 'MonANPeru'), the European Union's Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Framework Programme (EVK2-CT-1999-00023 - 'CARBONSINK-LBA', 283080 - 'GEOCARBON', 282664 - 'AMAZALERT), the Natural Environment Research Council (NE/ D005590/1 - 'TROBIT', NE/F005806/1 - 'AMAZONICA', E/M0022021/1 - 'PPFOR'), several NERC Urgency and New Investigators Grants, the NERC/State of Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) consortium grants 'BIO-RED' (NE/N012542/1), 'ECOFOR' (NE/K016431/1, 2012/51872-5, 2012/51509-8), 'ARBOLES' (NE/S011811/1, FAPESP 2018/15001-6), 'SEOSAW' (NE/P008755/1), 'SECO' (NE/T01279X/1), Brazilian National Research Council (PELD/CNPq 403710/2012-0), the Royal Society (University Research Fellowships and Global challenges Awards) (ICA/R1/180100 - 'FORAMA'), the National Geographic Society, US National Science Foundation (DEB 1754647) and Colombia's Colciencias. We thank the National Council for Science and Technology Development of Brazil (CNPq) for support to the Cerrado/Amazonia Transition Long-Term Ecology Project (PELD/441244/2016-5), the PPBio Phytogeography of Amazonia/Cerrado Transition Project (CNPq/PPBio/457602/2012-0), PELD-RAS (CNPq, Process 441659/2016-0), RESFLORA (Process 420254/2018-8), Synergize (Process 442354/2019-3), the Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuaria - Embrapa (SEG: 02.08.06.005.00), the Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo - FAPESP (2012/51509-8 and 2012/51872-5), the Goias Research Foundation (FAPEG/PELD: 2017/10267000329) the EcoSpace Project (CNPq 459941/2014-3) and several PVE and Productivity Grants. We also thank the "Investissement d'Avenir" program (CEBA, ref. ANR-10LABX-25-01), the Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP 03/12595-7) and the Sustainable Landscapes Brazil Project (through Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (EMBRAPA), the US Forest Service, USAID, and the US Department of State) for supporting plot inventories in the Atlantic Forest sites in Sao Paulo, Brazil. L.E.O.C.A. was supported by CNPq (processes 305054/2016-3 and 442371/2019-5). We thank to the National Council for Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq) for the financial support of the PELD project (441244/2016-5, 441572/2020-0) and FAPEMAT (0346321/2021). NE/B503384/1, NE/N012542/1 - 'BIO-RED', ERC Advanced Grant 291585 - 'T-FORCES', NE/F005806/1 - 'AMAZONICA', NE/N004655/1 - 'TREMOR', NERC New Investigators Awards, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation ('RAINFOR', 'MonANPeru'), ERC Starter Grant 758873 -'TreeMort', EU Framework 6, a Royal Society University Research Fellowship, and a Leverhulme Trust Research Fellowship.AbstractThe tropical forest carbon sink is known to be drought sensitive, but it is unclear which forests are the most vulnerable to extreme events. Forests with hotter and drier baseline conditions may be protected by prior adaptation, or more vulnerable because they operate closer to physiological limits. Here we report that forests in drier South American climates experienced the greatest impacts of the 2015–2016 El Niño, indicating greater vulnerability to extreme temperatures and drought. The long-term, ground-measured tree-by-tree responses of 123 forest plots across tropical South America show that the biomass carbon sink ceased during the event with carbon balance becoming indistinguishable from zero (−0.02 ± 0.37 Mg C ha−1 per year). However, intact tropical South American forests overall were no more sensitive to the extreme 2015–2016 El Niño than to previous less intense events, remaining a key defence against climate change as long as they are protected.</jats:p

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field