Effectiveness of bridge V.A.C. dressings in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers

Objectives: This is a prospective study of the clinical efficacy of the V.A.C. Granufoam Bridge Dressing for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. Materials and methods: Five consecutive patients with diabetic foot ulcers were treated with V.A.C. Granufoam Bridge Dressings and studied over a period of 22–48 days. The indications for treatment included diabetic patients with open ray amputation wounds and wounds post-drainage for abscess with exposed deep structures. Clinical outcome was measured in terms of reduction in wound dimensions, presence of wound granulation, microbial clearance, and development of wound complications. Results: Our results showed that with V.A.C. therapy, wound healing occurred in all patients. The number of dressings required ranged from 8 to 10. The baseline average wound size was 23.1 cm2. Wound areas shrunk by 18.4–41.7%. All subjects achieved 100% wound bed granulation with an average length of treatment of 33 days. Microbial clearance was achieved in all cases. All wounds healed by secondary intention in one case and four cases required split-thickness skin grafting. Conclusion: The V.A.C. Granufoam Bridge Dressing is effective in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. It promotes reduction of wound area, wound bed granulation, and microbial clearance. By allowing placement of the suction pad outside the foot, it allowed patients to wear protective shoes and to walk non-weight bearing with crutches during V.A.C. therapy

Preliminary Results from NEOWISE: An Enhancement to the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer for Solar System Science

The Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) has surveyed the entire sky at four infrared wavelengths with greatly improved sensitivity and spatial resolution compared to its predecessors, the Infrared Astronomical Satellite and the Cosmic Background Explorer. NASA's Planetary Science Division has funded an enhancement to the WISE data processing system called "NEOWISE" that allows detection and archiving of moving objects found in the WISE data. NEOWISE has mined the WISE images for a wide array of small bodies in our solar system, including near-Earth objects (NEOs), Main Belt asteroids, comets, Trojans, and Centaurs. By the end of survey operations in 2011 February, NEOWISE identified over 157,000 asteroids, including more than 500 NEOs and ~120 comets. The NEOWISE data set will enable a panoply of new scientific investigations

IRAS sky survey atlas: Explanatory supplement

This Explanatory Supplement accompanies the IRAS Sky Survey Atlas (ISSA) and the ISSA Reject Set. The first ISSA release in 1991 covers completely the high ecliptic latitude sky, absolute value of beta is greater than 50 deg, with some coverage down to the absolute value of beta approx. equal to 40 deg. The second ISSA release in 1992 covers ecliptic latitudes of 50 deg greater than the absolute value of beta greater than 20 deg, with some coverage down to the absolute value of beta approx. equal to 13 deg. The remaining fields covering latitudes within 20 deg of the ecliptic plane are of reduced quality compared to the rest of the ISSA fields and therefore are released as a separate IPAC product, the ISSA Reject Set. The reduced quality is due to contamination by zodiacal emission residuals. Special care should be taken when using the ISSA Reject images. In addition to information on the ISSA images, some information is provided in this Explanatory Supplement on the IRAS Zodiacal History File (ZOHF), Version 3.0, which was described in the December 1988 release memo. The data described in this Supplement are available at the National Space Science Data Center (NSSDC) at the Goddard Space Flight Center. The interested reader is referred to the NSSDC for access to the IRAS Sky Survey Atlas (ISSA)

Initial Performance of the NEOWISE Reactivation Mission

NASA's Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) spacecraft has been brought out of hibernation and has resumed surveying the sky at 3.4 and 4.6 μm. The scientific objectives of the NEOWISE reactivation mission are to detect, track, and characterize near-Earth asteroids and comets. The search for minor planets resumed on 2013 December 23, and the first new near-Earth object (NEO) was discovered 6 days later. As an infrared survey, NEOWISE detects asteroids based on their thermal emission and is equally sensitive to high and low albedo objects; consequently, NEOWISE-discovered NEOs tend to be large and dark. Over the course of its three-year mission, NEOWISE will determine radiometrically derived diameters and albedos for ~2000 NEOs and tens of thousands of Main Belt asteroids. The 32 months of hibernation have had no significant effect on the mission's performance. Image quality, sensitivity, photometric and astrometric accuracy, completeness, and the rate of minor planet detections are all essentially unchanged from the prime mission's post-cryogenic phase

Preliminary Results from NEOWISE: An Enhancement to the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer for Solar System Science

The \emph{Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer} has surveyed the entire sky at four infrared wavelengths with greatly improved sensitivity and spatial resolution compared to its predecessors, the \emph{Infrared Astronomical Satellite} and the \emph{Cosmic Background Explorer}. NASA's Planetary Science Division has funded an enhancement to the \WISE\ data processing system called "NEOWISE" that allows detection and archiving of moving objects found in the \WISE\ data. NEOWISE has mined the \WISE\ images for a wide array of small bodies in our Solar System, including Near-Earth Objects (NEOs), Main Belt asteroids, comets, Trojans, and Centaurs. By the end of survey operations in February 2011, NEOWISE identified over 157,000 asteroids, including more than 500 NEOs and $\sim$120 comets. The NEOWISE dataset will enable a panoply of new scientific investigations.Comment: ApJ accepte

Disagreement in primary study selection between systematic reviews on negative pressure wound therapy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Primary study selection between systematic reviews is inconsistent, and reviews on the same topic may reach different conclusions. Our main objective was to compare systematic reviews on negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) regarding their agreement in primary study selection.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This retrospective analysis was conducted within the framework of a systematic review (a full review and a subsequent rapid report) on NPWT prepared by the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG).</p> <p>For the IQWiG review and rapid report, 4 bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and CINAHL) were searched to identify systematic reviews and primary studies on NPWT versus conventional wound therapy in patients with acute or chronic wounds. All databases were searched from inception to December 2006.</p> <p>For the present analysis, reviews on NPWT were classified as eligible systematic reviews if multiple sources were systematically searched and the search strategy was documented. To ensure comparability between reviews, only reviews published in or after December 2004 and only studies published before June 2004 were considered.</p> <p>Eligible reviews were compared in respect of the methodology applied and the selection of primary studies.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 5 systematic reviews (including the IQWiG review) and 16 primary studies were analysed. The reviews included between 4 and 13 primary studies published before June 2004. Two reviews considered only randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Three reviews considered both RCTs and non-RCTs. The overall agreement in study selection between reviews was 96% for RCTs (24 of 25 options) and 57% for non-RCTs (12 of 21 options). Due to considerable disagreement in the citation and selection of non-RCTs, we contacted the review authors for clarification (this was not initially planned); all authors or institutions responded. According to published information and the additional information provided, most differences between reviews arose from variations in inclusion criteria or inter-author study classification, as well as from different reporting styles (citation or non-citation) for excluded studies.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The citation and selection of primary studies differ between systematic reviews on NPWT, particularly with regard to non-RCTs. Uniform methodological and reporting standards need to be applied to ensure comparability between reviews as well as the validity of their conclusions.</p

Negative pressure wound therapy: Potential publication bias caused by lack of access to unpublished study results data

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is widely applied, although the evidence base is weak. Previous reviews on medical interventions have shown that conclusions based on published data alone may no longer hold after consideration of unpublished data. The main objective of this study was to identify unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on NPWT within the framework of a systematic review.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>RCTs comparing NPWT with conventional wound therapy were identified using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library. Every database was searched from inception to May 2005. The search was updated in December 2006. Reference lists of original articles and systematic reviews, as well as congress proceedings and online trial registers, were screened for clues to unpublished RCTs. Manufacturers of NPWT devices and authors of conference abstracts were contacted and asked to provide study information. Trials were considered nonrandomised if concealment of allocation to treatment groups was classified as "inadequate". The study status was classified as "completed", "discontinued", "ongoing" or "unclear". The publication status of completed or discontinued RCTs was classified as "published" if a full-text paper on final study results (completed trials) or interim results (discontinued trials) was available, and "unpublished" if this was not the case. The type of sponsorship was also noted for all trials.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 28 RCTs referring to at least 2755 planned or analysed patients met the inclusion criteria: 13 RCTs had been completed, 6 had been discontinued, 6 were ongoing, and the status of 3 RCTs was unclear. Full-text papers were available on 30% of patients in the 19 completed or discontinued RCTs (495 analysed patients in 10 published RCTs vs. 1154 planned patients in 9 unpublished RCTs). Most information about conference abstracts and unpublished study information referring to trials that were unpublished at the time these documents were generated was obtained from the manufacturer Kinetic Concepts Inc. (KCI) (19 RCTs), followed by The Cochrane Library (18) and a systematic review (15). We were able to obtain some information on the methods of unpublished RCTs, but results data were either not available or requests for results data were not answered; the results of unpublished RCTs could therefore not be considered in the review. One manufacturer, KCI, sponsored the majority of RCTs (19/28; 68%). The sponsorship of the remaining trials was unclear.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Multi-source comprehensive searches identify unpublished RCTs. However, lack of access to unpublished study results data raises doubts about the completeness of the evidence base on NPWT.</p