Nanotopography modulates mechanotransduction of stem cells and induces differentiation through focal adhesion kinase

10.1021/nn304966zACS Nano764785-479

Agonist-Induced Capping of Adhesion Proteins and Microparticle Shedding in Cultures of Human Renal Microvascular Endothelial Cells

Capping and release of membranous, small (<1.5 &#119 m) endothelial microparticles were quantified by immunofluorescence microscopy and flow cytometry after treatment of cultures of human renal microvascular endothelial cells with agonists tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF- &#102 ) or mitomycin C. For constitutive marker CD31, both agonist-treated attached, monolayer, and detached, free endothelial cells formed caps and released microparticles. TNF- &#102 and mitomycin C induced dissimilar appearing CD31-containing caps after 3 h, followed by endothelial microparticle release after 6 h. The degree of capping correlated with increasing counts of released microparticles. For lymphokine-inducible CD54, TNF- &#102 also induced CD54-containing caps and microparticle release, but mitomycin C failed to induce the expression of either entity. Neither capping nor microparticle release caused by TNF- &#102 was part of an apoptotic pathway that involved caspase 3. Mitomycin C treatment of endothelial cells caused capping and microparticle release with a time course similar to TNF- &#102 induction for 15 to 24 h, but assays for caspase 3 were positive, confirming the apoptotic action of mitomycin C. Membrane capping and microparticle release from endothelial cells are a convenient experimental model for studying protein movement, release of microparticles, and their possible biological significance

Surviving sepsis campaign international guidelines for the management of septic shock and sepsis-associated organ dysfunction in children.

Contains fulltext : 230013.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for children (including infants, school-aged children, and adolescents) with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction. DESIGN: A panel of 49 international experts, representing 12 international organizations, as well as three methodologists and three public members was convened. Panel members assembled at key international meetings (for those panel members attending the conference), and a stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in November 2018. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the chairs, co-chairs, methodologists, and group heads, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development process. METHODS: The panel consisted of six subgroups: recognition and management of infection, hemodynamics and resuscitation, ventilation, endocrine and metabolic therapies, adjunctive therapies, and research priorities. We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes question to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or as a best practice statement. In addition, "in our practice" statements were included when evidence was inconclusive to issue a recommendation, but the panel felt that some guidance based on practice patterns may be appropriate. RESULTS: The panel provided 77 statements on the management and resuscitation of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction. Overall, six were strong recommendations, 49 were weak recommendations, and nine were best-practice statements. For 13 questions, no recommendations could be made; but, for 10 of these, "in our practice" statements were provided. In addition, 52 research priorities were identified. CONCLUSIONS: A large cohort of international experts was able to achieve consensus regarding many recommendations for the best care of children with sepsis, acknowledging that most aspects of care had relatively low quality of evidence resulting in the frequent issuance of weak recommendations. Despite this challenge, these recommendations regarding the management of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction provide a foundation for consistent care to improve outcomes and inform future research.1 februari 202

Surviving Sepsis Campaign International Guidelines for the Management of Septic Shock and Sepsis-Associated Organ Dysfunction in Children

Contains fulltext : 218601.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for children (including infants, school-aged children, and adolescents) with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction. DESIGN: A panel of 49 international experts, representing 12 international organizations, as well as three methodologists and three public members was convened. Panel members assembled at key international meetings (for those panel members attending the conference), and a stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in November 2018. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the chairs, co-chairs, methodologists, and group heads, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development process. METHODS: The panel consisted of six subgroups: recognition and management of infection, hemodynamics and resuscitation, ventilation, endocrine and metabolic therapies, adjunctive therapies, and research priorities. We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes question to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or as a best practice statement. In addition, "in our practice" statements were included when evidence was inconclusive to issue a recommendation, but the panel felt that some guidance based on practice patterns may be appropriate. RESULTS: The panel provided 77 statements on the management and resuscitation of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction. Overall, six were strong recommendations, 52 were weak recommendations, and nine were best-practice statements. For 13 questions, no recommendations could be made; but, for 10 of these, "in our practice" statements were provided. In addition, 49 research priorities were identified. CONCLUSIONS: A large cohort of international experts was able to achieve consensus regarding many recommendations for the best care of children with sepsis, acknowledging that most aspects of care had relatively low quality of evidence resulting in the frequent issuance of weak recommendations. Despite this challenge, these recommendations regarding the management of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction provide a foundation for consistent care to improve outcomes and inform future research