Proposal of Bisgaardia hudsonensis gen. nov., sp. nov. and an additional genomospecies, isolated from seals, as new members of the family Pasteurellaceae

Phenotypic and phylogenetic studies were performed on eight Gram-negative-staining, rod-shaped bacteria isolated from seals. Biochemical and physiological studies showed identical profiles for all of the isolates and indicated that they were related to the family Pasteurellaceae. 16S rRNA gene sequencing demonstrated that the organism represented a distinct cluster with two sublines within the family Pasteurellaceae with <96% sequence similarity to any recognized species. Multilocus sequence analysis (MLSA) including rpoB, infB and recN genes further confirmed these findings with the eight isolates forming a genus-like cluster with two branches. Genome relatedness as deduced from recN gene sequences suggested that the isolates represented a new genus with two species. On the basis of the results of the phylogenetic analysis and phenotypic criteria, it is proposed that these bacteria from seals are classified as Bisgaardia hudsonensis gen. nov., sp. nov. (the type species) and Bisgaardia genomospecies 1. The G+C content of the DNA was 39.5 mol%. The type strain of Bisgaardia hudsonensis gen. nov., sp. nov. is M327/99/2(T) (=CCUG 43067(T)=NCTC 13475(T)=98-D-690B(T)) and the reference strain of Bisgaardia genomospecies 1 is M1765/96/5 (=CCUG 59551=NCTC 13474).

Bioresorbable vascular scaffold treatment induces the formation of neointimal cap that seals the underlying plaque without compromising the luminal dimensions: a concept based on serial optical coherence tomography data.

Aims: To evaluate the implications of an Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Absorb BVS) on the morphology of the superficial plaques. Methods and results: Forty-six patients who underwent Absorb BVS implantation and 20 patients implanted with bare metal stents (BMS) who had serial optical coherence tomographic examination at baseline and follow-up were included in this analysis. The thin-capped fibroatheromas (TCFA) were identified in the device implantation regions and in the adjacent native coronary segments. Within all regions, circumferential locations of TCFA and calcific tissues were identified, and the neointimal thickness was measured at follow-up. At six to 12-month follow-up, only 8% of the TCFA detected at baseline were still present in the Absorb BVS and 27% in the BMS implantation segment (p=0.231). Sixty percent of the TCFA in native segments did not change their phenotype at follow-up. At short-term follow-up, significant reduction in the lumen area of the BMS was noted, which was higher compared to that reported in the Absorb BVS group (-2.11±1.97 mm2 vs. -1.34±0.99 mm2, p=0.026). In Absorb BVS, neointima tissue continued to develop at midterm follow-up (2.17±0.48 mm2 vs. 1.38±0.52 mm2, p<0.0001) and covered the underlying tissues without compromising the luminal dimensions (5.93±1.49 mm2 vs. 6.14±1.49 mm2, p=0.571) as it was accommodated by the expanded scaffold (8.28±1.74 mm2 vs. 7.67±1.28 mm2, p<0.0001). Conclusions: Neointimal tissue develops following either Absorb BVS or BMS implantation and shields lipid tissues. The neointimal response in the BMS causes a higher reduction of luminal dimensions compared to the Absorb BVS. Thus, Absorb BVS may have a value in the invasive re-capping of high-risk plaques.

Seals and the Need for more Deference to Vienna by WTO Adjudicators

This paper asks how World Trade Organization (WTO) panels and the Appellate Body (AB) take public international law (PIL) into account when interpreting WTO rules as a part of international economic law (IEL). Splendid isolation of the latter is not new; indeed it is intended by the negotiators of the Understanding on the Settlement of Disputes (DSU). At the same time, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) is quite clear when it provides the general rules and the supplementary means of treaty interpretation. Despite such mandatory guidance, WTO adjudicators (when given a choice and assuming they see the conflict) prefer deference to WTO law over deference to Vienna and take a dogmatic way out of interpretation quandaries. The AB and panels make abundant reference to Vienna, though less so to substantive PIL. Often times, however, they do so simply in order to buttress their findings of violations of WTO rules. Perhaps tellingly, however, none of the reports in EC – Seals contains even a single mention of VCLT, despite numerous references to international standards addressing indigenous rights and animal welfare. In the longer term, and absent a breakthrough on the negotiation front, this pattern of carefully eschewing international treaty law and using PIL just for the sake of convenience could have serious consequences for the credibility and acceptance of the multilateral trading system. Following the adage ‘negotiate or litigate’ recourse to WTO dispute settlement increases when governments are less ready to make treaty commitments commensurate with the challenges of globalisation. This is true even for ‘societal choice’ cases on the margins of classic trade disputes. We will argue here that it is precisely for cases such as these that VCLT and PIL should be used more systematically by panels and the AB. Failing that, instead of building bridges for more coherent international regulation, WTO adjudicators could burn those same bridges which the DSU interpretation margin leaves open for accomplishing their job which is to find a ‘positive solution’. Worse, judicial incoherence could return to WTO dispute settlement like a boomerang and damage the credibility and thus the level of acceptance of the multilateral trading system per se.