Kick-starting Green Business Process Management – Suitable Modeling Languages and Key Processes for Green Perfomance Mesaurement

In this paper we examine an initial step towards Green Business Process Management. We give insights from a research project with the goal of monitoring and redesigning business processes in an environmentally sustainable manner. Using literature analysis and three case studies we derive suitable languages and software for business process modeling. In addition, we show business processes that can act as key examples for green process monitoring and redesign. The results show that enterprises can build up on process modeling and energy monitoring to become more environmentally sustainable

The AquaNES Project: Coupling Riverbank Filtration and Ultrafiltration in Drinking Water Treatment

Natural water treatment techniques combined with engineered solutions were investigated at demonstration sites in Europe within the AquaNES project. Ultrafiltration is well-established in water treatment, but is not feasible for many water utilities due to its high operational costs compared to conventional treatment. These differences in cost are caused by membrane fouling and the associated cleaning required. This study aims to assess the economic and energetic operation factors based on studies of an out/in ultrafiltration treatment plant for river water and bank filtrate. The fouling potential of both raw water sources was investigated as well as the quality of the resulting water. In addition, the results show the potential utility of a combined approach utilizing bank filtration followed by ultrafiltration in drinking water treatment. In a separate consideration of the treatment process, the water quality does not fulfill the requirements of the German drinking water ordinance. A new method for the removal of dissolved manganese from the bank filtrate is presented by inline electrolysis. While this improves water quality, this also has a significant influence on fouling potential and, thus, on operating costs of ultrafiltration. These aspects lead to a fundamental decision for operators to choose between more costly ultrafiltration with enhanced microbiological safety compared to cost-effective but less stringent drinking water treatment via open filtration

Pulmonary hypertension: Hemodynamic evaluation. Updated Recommendations of the Cologne Consensus Conference 2011

The 2009 European Guidelines on Diagnosis and Treatment of Pulmonary Hypertension have been adopted for Germany. The guidelines contain detailed recommendations for the diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension. However, the practical implementation of the European Guidelines in Germany requires the consideration of several country-specific issues and already existing novel data. This requires a detailed commentary to the guidelines, and in some aspects an update already appears necessary. In June 2010, a Consensus Conference organized by the PH working groups of the German Society of Cardiology (DGK), the German Society of Respiratory Medicine (DGP) and the German Society of Pediatric Cardiology (DGPK) was held in Cologne, Germany. This conference aimed to solve practical and controversial issues surrounding the implementation of the European Guidelines in Germany. To this end, a number of working groups was initiated, one of which was specifically dedicated to the invasive hemodynamic evaluation of pulmonary hypertension. This manuscript describes in detail the results and recommendations of the working group which were last updated in October 2011. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved

Pulmonary hypertension associated with left heart disease: Updated Recommendations of the Cologne Consensus Conference 2018

In the summer of 2016, delegates from the German Society of Cardiology (DGK), the German Respiratory Society (DGP), and the German Society of Pediatric Cardiology (DGPK) met in Cologne, Germany, to define consensus-based practice recommendations for the management of patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH). These recommendations were built on the 2015 European Pulmonary Hypertension guidelines, aiming at their practical implementation, considering country-specific issues, and including newevidence, where available. To this end, a number of working groups was initiated, one of which was specifically dedicated to PH associated with left heart disease. In this context, the European Guidelines point out that the drugs currently approved to treat patients with PAH (prostanoids, endothelin receptor antagonists, phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors, sGC stimulators) have not sufficiently been investigated in other forms of PH. However, despite the lack of respective efficacy data, an uncritical use of targeted PAH drugs in patients with PH associated with left heart disease is currently observed at an increasing rate. This development is a matter of concern. On the other hand, PH is a frequent problem that is highly relevant for morbidity and mortality in patients with left heart disease. In that sense, the distinction between isolated post-capillary pulmonary hypertension (IpcPH) and combined post-and pre-capillary pulmonary hypertension (CpcPH) and their proper definition may be of particular relevance. The detailed results and recommendations of the working group on PH associated with left heart disease, which were last updated in the spring of 2018, are summarized in this article. (c) 2018 Published by Elsevier B.V

A Survey of Empirical Results on Program Slicing

International audienceBACKGROUND:Patients with peripheral artery disease have an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Antiplatelet agents are widely used to reduce these complications.METHODS:This was a multicentre, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial for which patients were recruited at 602 hospitals, clinics, or community practices from 33 countries across six continents. Eligible patients had a history of peripheral artery disease of the lower extremities (previous peripheral bypass surgery or angioplasty, limb or foot amputation, intermittent claudication with objective evidence of peripheral artery disease), of the carotid arteries (previous carotid artery revascularisation or asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis of at least 50%), or coronary artery disease with an ankle-brachial index of less than 0·90. After a 30-day run-in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive oral rivaroxaban (2·5 mg twice a day) plus aspirin (100 mg once a day), rivaroxaban twice a day (5 mg with aspirin placebo once a day), or to aspirin once a day (100 mg and rivaroxaban placebo twice a day). Randomisation was computer generated. Each treatment group was double dummy, and the patient, investigators, and central study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke; the primary peripheral artery disease outcome was major adverse limb events including major amputation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01776424, and is closed to new participants.FINDINGS:Between March 12, 2013, and May 10, 2016, we enrolled 7470 patients with peripheral artery disease from 558 centres. The combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone reduced the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (126 [5%] of 2492 vs 174 [7%] of 2504; hazard ratio [HR] 0·72, 95% CI 0·57-0·90, p=0·0047), and major adverse limb events including major amputation (32 [1%] vs 60 [2%]; HR 0·54 95% CI 0·35-0·82, p=0·0037). Rivaroxaban 5 mg twice a day compared with aspirin alone did not significantly reduce the composite endpoint (149 [6%] of 2474 vs 174 [7%] of 2504; HR 0·86, 95% CI 0·69-1·08, p=0·19), but reduced major adverse limb events including major amputation (40 [2%] vs 60 [2%]; HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·45-1·00, p=0·05). The median duration of treatment was 21 months. The use of the rivaroxaban plus aspirin combination increased major bleeding compared with the aspirin alone group (77 [3%] of 2492 vs 48 [2%] of 2504; HR 1·61, 95% CI 1·12-2·31, p=0·0089), which was mainly gastrointestinal. Similarly, major bleeding occurred in 79 (3%) of 2474 patients with rivaroxaban 5 mg, and in 48 (2%) of 2504 in the aspirin alone group (HR 1·68, 95% CI 1·17-2·40; p=0·0043).INTERPRETATION:Low-dose rivaroxaban taken twice a day plus aspirin once a day reduced major adverse cardiovascular and limb events when compared with aspirin alone. Although major bleeding was increased, fatal or critical organ bleeding was not. This combination therapy represents an important advance in the management of patients with peripheral artery disease. Rivaroxaban alone did not significantly reduce major adverse cardiovascular events compared with asprin alone, but reduced major adverse limb events and increased major bleeding