Spermiogenesis and spermatozoon ultrastructure of the bothriocephalidean cestode Clestobothrium crassiceps (Rudolphi, 1819), a parasite of the teleost fish Merluccius merluccius (Gadiformes: Merlucciidae)

Spermiogenesis and the ultrastructure of the spermatozoon of the bothriocephalidean cestode Clestobothrium crassiceps (Rudolphi, 1819), a parasite of the teleost fish Merluccius merluccius (Linnaeus, 1758), have been studied by means of transmission electron microscopy. Spermiogenesis involves firstly the formation of a differentiation zone. It is characterized by the presence of two centrioles associated with striated rootlets, an intercentriolar body and an electron-dense material in the apical region of this zone. Later, two flagella develop from the centrioles, growing orthogonally in relation to the median cytoplasmic process. Flagella then undergo a rotation of 90° until they become parallel to the median cytoplasmic process, followed by the proximodistal fusion of the flagella with the median cytoplasmic process. The nucleus elongates and afterwards it migrates along the spermatid body. Spermiogenesis finishes with the appearance of the apical cone surrounded by the single helical crested body at the base of the spermatid. Finally, the narrowing of the ring of arched membranes detaches the fully formed spermatozoon. The mature spermatozoon of C. crassiceps is filiform and contains two axonemes of the 9 + '1' trepaxonematan pattern, a parallel nucleus, parallel cortical microtubules, and electron-dense granules of glycogen. The anterior extremity of the gamete exhibits a short electron-dense apical cone and one crested body, which turns once around the sperm cell. The first axoneme is surrounded by a ring of thick cortical microtubules that persist until the appearance of the second axoneme. Later, these thick cortical microtubules disappear and thus, the mature spermatozoon exhibits two bundles of thin cortical microtubules. The posterior extremity of the male gamete presents only the nucleus. Results are discussed and compared particularly with the available ultrastructural data on the former 'pseudophyllideans'. Two differences can be established between spermatozoa of Bothriocephalidea and Diphyllobothriidea, the type of spermatozoon (II vs I) and the presence/absence of the ring of cortical microtubules.

Stress ulcer prophylaxis in non-critically ill patients: a prospective evaluation of the practice in a surgical ward

Introduction The benefit of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) in noncriticallyill patients has not been proved. Over-prescription of SUP isnot devoided of risks (i.e. drug-drug interactions, adverse events).This prospective study aimed to evaluate the use of proton pumpinhibitors (PPIs) for SUP in a visceral surgery ward.Materials & Methods Data collection was performed prospectivelyduring a 8-week period on patients hospitalized in a visceral surgeryward (58 beds). Patients with a PPI prescription for the treatment ofulcers, gastroesophageal reflux disease, esophagitis or epigastralgiawere excluded as well as patients hospitalized twice during the studyperiod. The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists guidelineson SUP were used to assess the appropriateness of de novo PPIprescriptions.Results Among 255 patients in the study, 138 (54.1%) received aprophylaxis with PPI, of which 86 (62.3%) were de novo PPI prescriptions.93.5% of patients received esomeprazole (according to thehospital drug formulary) mainly orally at 40 mg qd. 79.1% of patientshad no risk factors for SUP. 17.9% and 3.0% had one and two riskfactors, respectively. 95% of the patients with PPI were not hospitalizedin the intensive care unit (ICU) before their stay in the visceralsurgery ward. At discharge, PPI therapy was continued in 34.2% ofpatients with a de novo PPI prescription.Discussion & Conclusion This study highlights the over-utilizationof PPIs in non-ICU patients and the inappropriate continuation of PPIprescriptions at discharge. The PPI dosage prescribed for prophylaxiswas probably too high compared with the data of the literature.Treatment recommendations for SUP are needed to restrict PPIuse for justified indications.