Avería gruesa

Fil: Vazquez, María José. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Derecho. Buenos Aires, ArgentinaFil: Verna, Graciela. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Derecho. Buenos Aires, ArgentinaFil: Zavala, Claudia. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Derecho. Buenos Aires, Argentina"Trabajo realizado en la cátedra del profesor doctor Fernández Brital, profesor adjunto doctor Barbano

Spatial–temporal trends and economic losses associated with bovine abortifacients in central Argentina

The aims of this work are, firstly, to provide the geolocalization of cases of bovine abortion with definitive diagnosis and, secondly, to estimate the economic losses due to the most frequent abortifacients diagnosed agents in cattle in Buenos Aires province, Argentina. The total beef and dairy cattle population at risk of abortion is 8,358,186 and 538,076, respectively. In beef cattle, the overall risk of abortion was estimated at 4.5% for all pregnancies, where 27.9% are due to Campylobacter fetus, Neospora caninum, Leptospira spp., Brucella abortus, and bovine viral diarrhea virus with economic losses of US$440 per abortion, being the annual loss to the beef industry of US$ 50,144,101. In dairy cattle, there was an 8.0% risk of suffering abortion, 26.1% produced by the same abortigenic agents. The economic losses were estimated at US$1,415 per abortion, which equals a total loss of US$ 17,298,498 for the dairy industry in the region. The results of this study show that infectious causes are highly prevalent in Buenos Aires province, and they caused severe economic impacts in the dairy and beef industries. Furthermore, changes in temporal trends of infectious abortion occurrence were detected, probably related to the inclusion of molecular diagnostic techniques with more sensitivity or different epidemiological or husbandry conditions in the region analyzed.EEA BalcarceFil: Cantón, Germán José. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Moreno, Fabiana Carina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Fiorentino, María Andrea. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Hecker, Yanina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Spetter, Lucas Maximiliano. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Fiorani, Franco. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Fiorani, Franco. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina.Fil: Monterubbianesi, María Gloria. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina.Fil: García, Juan. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: González Altamiranda, Erika. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Cirone, Karina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Cirone, Karina Mariela. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina.Fil: Louge Uriarte, Enrique Leopoldo. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Verna, Andrea. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Marin, Maia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Cheuquepán Valenzuela, Felipe. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Malena, Rosana Claudia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Morsella, Claudia Graciela. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Paolicchi, Fernando. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Paolicchi, Fernando. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina.Fil: Morrel, Eleonora Lidia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Moore, Dadin Prando. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina.Fil: Moore, Dadin Prando. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina

Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline

Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease

BACKGROUND Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, 121.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 124.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used