Audiometric Characteristics in Patients With Noise-Induced Hearing Loss After Sodium Enoxaparin Treatment

OBJECTIVES:The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of sodium enoxaparin treatment on patients with noise-induced hearing loss. METHODS: Sixty patients with noise-induced hearing loss were included and randomly divided into two numerically equal groups. Group A underwent therapy with sodium enoxaparin for 10 days, followed by an additional 10 days of treatment after 10 days of no treatment. Group B received placebo as a control. Before treatment, at the end of treatment, and 2 months after the end of treatment, all patients underwent evaluation by laboratory tests, pure tone audiometry, transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs) testing, distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) testing, and auditory brain stem response testing. RESULTS: In contrast to group B, at the end of the treatment in group A pure tone audiometry showed a significant (p < 0.05) improvement of the audiometric thresholds at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 8 kHz. Depending on the air and bone conduction thresholds, TEOAEs and DPOAEs, which had previously been absent, were evoked at the frequencies examined. These improvements were confirmed at last follow-up. We found no significant differences in auditory brain stem responses or laboratory results. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary data encourage further studies to collect additional evidence on the effect of sodium enoxaparin in preventing the development of noise-induced hearing loss

Microsurgery robots: addressing the needs of high-precision surgical interventions

Robots can help surgeons perform better quality operations, leading to reductions in the hospitalisation time of patients and in the impact of surgery on their postoperative quality of life

To whom does the law speak? Canvassing a neglected picture of law’s interpretive field

Among the most common strategies underlying the so-called indeterminacy thesis is the following two-step argument: (1) that law is an interpretive practice, and that evidently legal actors more generally hold different (and competing) theories of meaning, which lead to disagreements as to what the law says (that is, as to what the law is); (2) and that, as there is no way to establish the prevalence of one particular theory of meaning over the other, indeterminacy is pervasive in law. In this paper I offer some reflections to resist this trend. In particular I claim that a proper understanding of law as an authoritative communicative enterprise sheds new light on the relation between the functioning of the law and our theories of interpretation, leading to what can be considered a neglected conclusion: the centrality of the linguistic criterion of meaning in our juridical interpretive practices. In the first part of the chapter I discuss speech-act theory in the study of law, assessing its relevance between alternative options. Then I tackle the ‘to whom does the law speak?’ question, highlighting the centrality of lay-people for our juridical practices. Lastly, I examine the consequences of this neglected fact for our interpretive theories

Unlocking legal validity. Some remarks on the artificial ontology of law

Following Kelsen’s influential theory of law, the concept of validity has been used in the literature to refer to different properties of law (such as existence, membership, bindingness, and more) and so it is inherently ambiguous. More importantly, Kelsen’s equivalence between the existence and the validity of law prevents us from accounting satisfactorily for relevant aspects of our current legal practices, such as the phenomenon of ‘unlawful law’. This chapter addresses this ambiguity to argue that the most important function of the concept of validity is constituting the complex ontological paradigm of modern law as an institutional-normative practice. In this sense validity is an artificial ontological status that supervenes on that of existence of legal norms, thus allowing law to regulate its own creation and creating the logical space for the occurrence of ‘unlawful law’. This function, I argue in the last part, is crucial to understanding the relationship between the ontological and epistemic dimensions of the objectivity of law. For given the necessary practice-independence of legal norms, it is the epistemic accessibility of their creation that enables the law to fulfill its general action-guiding (and thus coordinating) function

Predictors of HBeAg status and hepatitis B viraemia in HIV-infected patients with chronic hepatitis B in the HAART era in Brazil

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>HBV-HIV co-infection is associated with an increased liver-related morbidity and mortality. However, little is known about the natural history of chronic hepatitis B in HIV-infected individuals under highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) receiving at least one of the two drugs that also affect HBV (TDF and LAM). Information about HBeAg status and HBV viremia in HIV/HBV co-infected patients is scarce. The objective of this study was to search for clinical and virological variables associated with HBeAg status and HBV viremia in patients of an HIV/HBV co-infected cohort.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed, of HBsAg-positive HIV-infected patients in treatment between 1994 and 2007 in two AIDS outpatient clinics located in the São Paulo metropolitan area, Brazil. The baseline data were age, sex, CD4 T+ cell count, ALT level, HIV and HBV viral load, HBV genotype, and duration of antiretroviral use. The variables associated to HBeAg status and HBV viremia were assessed using logistic regression.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 86 HBsAg patients were included in the study. Of these, 48 (56%) were using combination therapy that included lamivudine (LAM) and tenofovir (TDF), 31 (36%) were using LAM monotherapy, and 7 patients had no previous use of either one. Duration of use of TDF and LAM varied from 4 to 21 and 7 to 144 months, respectively. A total of 42 (48. 9%) patients were HBeAg positive and 44 (51. 1%) were HBeAg negative. The multivariate analysis revealed that the use of TDF for longer than 12 months was associated with undetectable HBV DNA viral load (serum HBV DNA level < 60 UI/ml) (<it>p </it>= 0. 047). HBeAg positivity was associated with HBV DNA > 60 UI/ml (p = 0. 001) and ALT levels above normality (<it>p </it>= 0. 038).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Prolonged use of TDF containing HAART is associated with undetectable HBV DNA viral load. HBeAg positivity is associated with HBV viremia and increased ALT levels.</p

THE CONCEPT OF LAW AND EFFICACY

Jedno od značenja izraza ‘učinkovitost’ odnosi se na činjenicu da se adresati pravnih normi stvarno ponašaju onako kako to od njih zahtijevaju pravne norme. To se značenje izraza obično koristi u filozofskopravnim raspravama glede toga je li učinkovitost bitan element pojma prava. Prema pravnom pozitivizmu, učinkovitost je u nekim slučajevima i na određene načine uvjet važenja (vrijeđenja) pravnih normi i pravnih sustava. S druge strane, pravni je realizam sklon potpunom poistovjećivanju pravnog važenja s učinkovitosti ili njegovu svođenju na učinkovitost. Prema tome, u oba je filozofskopravna pravca učinkovitost u pravilu uključena u oblikovanje njihovih pojmova prava. Međutim, dok pravnopozitivističko shvaćanje ne utječe na najuobičajenije značenje važenja pravne norme (pripadanje pravne norme pravnom sustavu), a utvrđivanjem učinkovitosti kao kriterija postojanja pravnog sustava ne dodaje mnogo objašnjenju pojma prava, pravnorealističko se shvaćanje suočava s ozbiljnim prigovorima glede svoje objašnjavalačke prikladnosti.One of the senses of the term ‘efficacy’ refers to the fact that norm-addresses actually behave as is required of them by legal norms. This sense of the term is one which is generally used within the jurisprudential discussions about whether efficacy is the essential element of the concept of law. According to legal positivism, efficacy is in some cases and in certain ways the condition of legal validity of both legal norms and legal systems. On the other hand, legal realism tends to entirely identify legal validity or reduce it to efficacy. Thus, in both jurisprudential approaches, efficacy tends to play a role in shaping their respective concepts of law. However, while the legal positivistic view does not affect the most standard sense of legal validity of the legal norm (i.e. the legal norms’ membership in the legal system), and does not add much to the explanation of the concept of law by identifying efficacy as the criterion of legal systems’ existence, the legal realistic view is faced with some serious objections regarding its explanatory adequacy