Pore Volume and Porosity Changes under Uniaxial Strain Conditions

Expressions for the changes that occur in the pore volume and the porosity of a porous rock, due to changes in the pore pressure, overburden stress, and temperature, are derived within the context of the linearised theory of poroelasticity. The resulting expressions are compared to the commonly used equations proposed by Palmer and Mansoori, and it is shown that their expressions are consistent with the exact expressions if their factor f is identified with (1+ν)/3(1−ν)(1+ν)/3(1−ν) , where νν is the Poisson’s ratio of the porous rock. Finally, the first derivation is given, within the context of the fully coupled linearised theory of poroelasticity, that under uniaxial strain, the partial differential equation that governs the evolution of the pore pressure is a pure diffusion equation, with a total compressibility term that (exactly) equals the sum of the fluid compressibility and the uniaxial pore volume compressibility

Improved clinical investigation and evaluation of high-risk medical devices: the rationale and objectives of CORE-MD (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices)

: In the European Union (EU) the delivery of health services is a national responsibility but there are concerted actions between member states to protect public health. Approval of pharmaceutical products is the responsibility of the European Medicines Agency, whereas authorizing the placing on the market of medical devices is decentralized to independent 'conformity assessment' organizations called notified bodies. The first legal basis for an EU system of evaluating medical devices and approving their market access was the medical device directives, from the 1990s. Uncertainties about clinical evidence requirements, among other reasons, led to the EU Medical Device Regulation (2017/745) that has applied since May 2021. It provides general principles for clinical investigations but few methodological details-which challenges responsible authorities to set appropriate balances between regulation and innovation, pre- and post-market studies, and clinical trials and real-world evidence. Scientific experts should advise on methods and standards for assessing and approving new high-risk devices, and safety, efficacy, and transparency of evidence should be paramount. The European Commission recently awarded a Horizon 2020 grant to a consortium led by the European Society of Cardiology and the European Federation of National Associations of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, that will review methodologies of clinical investigations, advise on study designs, and develop recommendations for aggregating clinical data from registries and other real-world sources. The CORE-MD project (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices) will run until March 2024; here we describe how it may contribute to the development of regulatory science in Europe

Regulatory safety evaluation of nanomedical products: key issues to refine.

Nanotechnologies enable great opportunities for the development and use of innovative (nano)medicines. As is common for scientific and technical developments, recognized safety evaluation methods for regulatory purposes are lagging behind. The specific properties responsible for the desired functioning also hamper the safety evaluation of such products. Pharmacokinetics determination of the active pharmaceutical ingredient as well as the nanomaterial component is crucial. Due to their particulate nature, nanomedicines, similar to all nanomaterials, are primarily removed from the circulation by phagocytizing cells that are part of the immune system. Therefore, the immune system can be potentially a specific target for adverse effects of nanomedicines, and thus needs special attention during the safety evaluation. This DDTR special issue on the results of the REFINE project on a regulatory science framework for nanomedical products presents a highly valuable body of knowledge needed to address regulatory challenges and gaps in currently available testing methods for the safety evaluation of nanomedicines

Detection of the Presence of Gold Nanoparticles in Organs by Transmission Electron Microscopy

Gold nanoparticles of 10 nm and 250 nm were intravenously injected in rats. At 24 h after administration, tissues were collected and prepared for transmission electron microscopy (TEM). In the liver and spleen of animals treated with 10 nm gold nanoparticles, groups of nanoparticles were observed that could be positively identified by Energy Dispersive X-ray (EDX) analysis to contain gold, while nanoparticles could not be detected in the heart, kidney and brain. The 10 nm gold nanoparticles were present in the phagocytic cells of the reticulo-endothelial system (RES). The 250 nm gold nanoparticles could not be detected in any of the organs investigated. Considering the number of 250 nm gold nanoparticles administered, calculations showed that it would indeed be almost impossible to detect the 250 nm gold nanoparticles in TEM preparations in view of the very low number of particles that would be theoretically present in one TEM tissue section. This shows that relatively high numbers of nanoparticles need to be administered to enable the detection of nanoparticles in organs by TEM. In a number of samples, several globular structures of approximately the expected size were found in liver cells and the endothelium of blood vessels in the brain. However, elemental analysis with EDX detection showed that these structures did not contain gold. Our studies thus indicate that the in vivo identification of nanoparticles cannot only depend on the detection of nanosized structures in cells. An additional identification of the composing elements of the nanomaterial is necessary for a positive identification of the nanomaterial

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement: clinical safety and performance data.

Introduction: Patients with severe aortic stenosis and regurgitation who are inoperable or at high-risk for surgery can be treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive overview of the literature of TAVR and reported clinical and performance outcomes. Areas covered: A total of 16 devices, described in 204 articles describing clinical and performance outcomes, were included. The most frequently observed outcome was 30-day mortality, ranging between 0-23%. Other commonly reported clinical outcomes were 30-day stroke, ranging between 0-14.3% and pacemaker implantation, ranging from 0-44.9%. The most common valve performance outcome was aortic valve regurgitation, however, mostly reported at 7 days follow-up. Next to a follow-up period of 30 days, numerous articles reported outcomes at 6 months and 1 year. The numbers of articles describing outcomes with a longer follow-up as well as including intermediate and low-risk patients were limited. Expert commentary: This literature review provided a clear overview of the reported clinical and performance outcomes of TAVR devices. Despite the frequently used VARC-2 definitions, we identified a huge variation across studies. Future studies using standardized definitions of study set-ups and outcomes are essential and might lead to better insights of TAVR

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement: clinical safety and performance data.

Introduction: Patients with severe aortic stenosis and regurgitation who are inoperable or at high-risk for surgery can be treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive overview of the literature of TAVR and reported clinical and performance outcomes. Areas covered: A total of 16 devices, described in 204 articles describing clinical and performance outcomes, were included. The most frequently observed outcome was 30-day mortality, ranging between 0-23%. Other commonly reported clinical outcomes were 30-day stroke, ranging between 0-14.3% and pacemaker implantation, ranging from 0-44.9%. The most common valve performance outcome was aortic valve regurgitation, however, mostly reported at 7 days follow-up. Next to a follow-up period of 30 days, numerous articles reported outcomes at 6 months and 1 year. The numbers of articles describing outcomes with a longer follow-up as well as including intermediate and low-risk patients were limited. Expert commentary: This literature review provided a clear overview of the reported clinical and performance outcomes of TAVR devices. Despite the frequently used VARC-2 definitions, we identified a huge variation across studies. Future studies using standardized definitions of study set-ups and outcomes are essential and might lead to better insights of TAVR