Bronchial airway anastomotic complications after pediatric lung transplantation: Incidence, cause, management, and outcome

ObjectiveAirway complications are a recognized surgical complication and an important source of morbidity after adult lung transplantation. Little is known about these complications after pediatric lung transplantation.MethodsData of pediatric lung transplants performed between January 1990 and December 2002 in a single pediatric institution were reviewed retrospectively.ResultsA total of 214 patients, with a mean age of 9.8 ± 6.1 years (range 0.01-19.7 years), underwent 239 lung transplants: 231 bilateral and 8 single. Mean follow-up was 3.4 years. Forty-two airway complications requiring interventions (stenosis = 36; dehiscence = 4; malacia = 2) developed in 30 recipients (complication rate: 9% of 470 bronchial anastomoses at risk). There were airway complications in 29 bilateral lung transplants (13%) and 1 single lung transplant (13%). Mean time to diagnosis was 51 ± 27 days (median: 53, range 1-96 days), and diagnoses were made in 90% of patients within the first 3 months after transplantation. Preoperative Pseudomonas cepacia, postoperative fungal lung infection, and days on mechanical ventilator were found to be significant risk factors on multivariate analysis (P = .002, P = .013 and P = .003, respectively). Treatment included rigid bronchoscopic dilatation in 17 patients, balloon dilatation in 13 patients, and stent placement in 12 patients. Other treatments consisted of debridement, fibrin glue application, chest tube placement, and pneumonectomy followed by retransplantation. No patients died as a direct result of airway complications. There was no significant difference in the incidence of bronchiolitis obliterans or overall survival in comparison with patients who did not have airway complications.ConclusionsAirway complications are a significant cause of morbidity after pediatric lung transplantation. The majority are successfully treated, and patient outcomes are not adversely affected

Recommendations for the design of laboratory studies on non-target arthropods for risk assessment of genetically engineered plants

This paper provides recommendations on experimental design for early-tier laboratory studies used in risk assessments to evaluate potential adverse impacts of arthropod-resistant genetically engineered (GE) plants on non-target arthropods (NTAs). While we rely heavily on the currently used proteins from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) in this discussion, the concepts apply to other arthropod-active proteins. A risk may exist if the newly acquired trait of the GE plant has adverse effects on NTAs when they are exposed to the arthropod-active protein. Typically, the risk assessment follows a tiered approach that starts with laboratory studies under worst-case exposure conditions; such studies have a high ability to detect adverse effects on non-target species. Clear guidance on how such data are produced in laboratory studies assists the product developers and risk assessors. The studies should be reproducible and test clearly defined risk hypotheses. These properties contribute to the robustness of, and confidence in, environmental risk assessments for GE plants. Data from NTA studies, collected during the analysis phase of an environmental risk assessment, are critical to the outcome of the assessment and ultimately the decision taken by regulatory authorities on the release of a GE plant. Confidence in the results of early-tier laboratory studies is a precondition for the acceptance of data across regulatory jurisdictions and should encourage agencies to share useful information and thus avoid redundant testing

Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency–Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research