Detection of crenosoma spp., angiostrongylus vasorum and aelurostrongylus abstrusus in gastropods in Eastern Austria

Canine and feline cardiorespiratory parasites are of utmost relevance in veterinary medicine. Key epizootiological information on major pet metastrongyloids, i.e., Angiostrongylus vasorum and Crenosoma vulpis infecting dogs, and Aelurostrongylus abstrusus and Troglostrongylus brevior infecting cats, is missing from Austria. This study investigated their occurrence in 1320 gastropods collected in the Austrian provinces of Styria, Burgenland, Lower Austria, and in metropolitan Vienna. Metastrongyloid larvae were microscopically detected in 25 samples, and sequence analysis confirmed the presence of metastrongyloids in nine samples, i.e., A. vasorum in one slug (Arion vulgaris) (0.07%), C. vulpis in five slugs (one Limax maximus and four A. vulgaris) (0.4%), A. abstrusus in two A. vulgaris (0.17%), and the hedgehog lungworm Crenosoma striatum was detected in one A. vulgaris. The present study confirms the enzooticity of major cardiorespiratory nematodes in Austria and that canine and feline populations are at risk of infection

Radiation from Accelerated Branes

The radiation emitted by accelerated fundamental strings and D-branes is studied within the linear approximation to the supergravity limit of string theory. We show that scalar, gauge field and gravitational radiation is generically emitted by such branes. In the case where an external scalar field accelerates the branes, we derive a Larmor-type formula for the emitted scalar radiation and study the angular distribution of the outgoing energy flux. The classical radii of the branes are calculated by means of the corresponding Thompson scattering cross sections. Within the linear approximation, the interaction of the external scalar field with the velocity fields of the branes gives a contribution to the observed gauge field and gravitational radiation.Comment: LaTeX, 25 pages, 2 figures; v2: added comments on the validity of the linear approximation, minor changes; version to appear in Physical Review

Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P < 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

Outcomes Associated With Infection of Chronic Pain Spinal Implantable Electronic Devices: Insights From a Nationwide Inpatient Sample Study

Objectives Chronic pain spinal implantable electronic devices (CPSIEDs) include devices that provide spinal cord stimulation and intrathecal drug therapy. In this study, we sought to evaluate the trends of CPSIED infections, related complications, and outcomes following the treatment of infection. Materials and Methods The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database contains data from 48 states, and the District of Columbia was used to identify patients with a primary diagnosis of CPSIED infection during the years 2005-2014. Patients with intrathecal pumps for the treatment of spasticity were excluded to limit the study population to patients with chronic pain disorders. Treatments were categorized as: 1) without device removal, 2) pulse generator or pump only removal, 3) intrathecal pump system removal, and 4) spinal cord stimulation system removal. Complications associated with CPSIED infections were identified using administrative billing codes. Results During the study period 2005-2014, a total of 11,041 patients were admitted to the hospital with CPSIED infections. The majority of the patients were treated without surgical intervention (56%), and a smaller proportion underwent complete system explantation (22.7%). In-hospital mortality or permanent disability due to paralysis after CPSIED infection was around 1.83% and 2.77%, respectively. Infectious complications such as meningitis, abscess formation, and osteomyelitis occurred in 4.93%, 5.08%, and 1.5%, respectively. The median cost of hospitalization was around US $14,118.00, and the median length of stay was approximately six days (interquartile range = 4-13 days). Conclusions The complications of CPSIED infection were higher among patients that did not undergo device removal.12 month embargo; first published: 14 September 2020This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]