Heated Optical Fiber for Distributed Soil-Moisture Measurements: A Lysimeter Experiment

An Actively Heated Fiber Optics (AHFO) method to estimate soil moisture is tested and the analysis technique improved on. The measurements were performed in a lysimeter uniformly packed with loam soil with variable water content profiles. In the first meter of the soil profi le, 30 m of fiber optic cable were installed in a 12 loops coil. The metal sheath armoring the fiber cable was used as an electrical resistance heater to generate a heat pulse, and the soil response was monitored with a Distributed Temperature Sensing (DTS) system. We study the cooling following three continuous heat pulses of 120 s at 36 W m(-1) by means of long-time approximation of radial heat conduction. The soil volumetric water contents were then inferred from the estimated thermal conductivities through a specifically calibrated model relating thermal conductivity and volumetric water content. To use the pre-asymptotic data we employed a time correction that allowed the volumetric water content to be estimated with a precision of 0.01-0.035 (m(3) m(-3)). A comparison of the AHFO measurements with soil-moisture measurements obtained with calibrated capacitance-based probes gave good agreement for wetter soils [discrepancy between the two methods was less than 0.04 (m(3) m(-3))]. In the shallow drier soils, the AHFO method underestimated the volumetric water content due to the longertime required for the temperature increment to become asymptotic in less thermally conductive media [discrepancy between the two methods was larger than 0.1 (m(3) m(-3))]. The present work suggests that future applications of the AHFO method should include longer heat pulses, that longer heating and cooling events are analyzed, and, temperature increments ideally be measured with higher frequency.

First explicit criteria to decide on the appropriateness of therapy of ulcerative colitis: the European EPATUC panel

Background: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic disease with a wide variety of treatment options many of which are not evidence based. Supplementing available guidelines, which are often broadly defined, consensus-based and generally not tailored to specifically reflect the individual patient situation, we developed explicit appropriateness criteria to assist, and improve treatment decisions. Methods: We used the RAND appropriateness method which does not force consensus. An extensive literature review was compiled based on and supplementing, where necessary, the ECCO UC 2011 guidelines. EPATUC (endorsed by ECCO) was formed by 7 gastroenterologists, 2 surgeons and 2 general practitioners from throughout Europe. Clinical scenarios reflecting practice were rated on a 9-point scale from 1 (extremely inappropriate) to 9 (extremely appropriate), based on the expert's experience and the available literature. After extensive discussion, all scenarios were re-rated at a two-day panel meeting. Median and disagreement (D) were used to categorize ratings into 3 categories: appropriate (A), uncertain (U) and inappropriate (I). Results: 718 clinical scenarios were rated, structured in 13 main clinical presentations: not refractory (n = 64) or refractory (n = 33) proctitis, mild to moderate left-sided (n = 72) or extensive (n = 48) colitis, severe colitis (n = 36), steroid- dependant colitis (n = 36), steroid-refractory colitis (n = 55), acute pouchitis (n = 96), maintenance of remission (n = 248), colorectal cancer prevention (n = 9) and fulminant colitis (n = 9). Overall, 100 indications were judged appropriate (14%), 129 uncertain (18%) and 489 inappropriate (68%). Disagreement between experts was very low (6%). Conclusions: For the very first time, explicit appropriateness criteria for therapy of UC were developed that allow both specific and rapid therapeutic decision making and prospective assessment of treatment appropriateness. Comparison of these detailed scenarios with patient profiles encountered in the Swiss IBD cohort study indicates good concordance. EPATUC criteria will be freely accessible on the internet (epatuc.ch)

First aid in burn injuries with counterintuitive warm water improves outcome

Objective: Cooling is considered a panacea in burn injury. However, burn injuries are characterized by an ischemic zone prone to progression, a phenomenon that can substantially increase morbidity. Cold-induced vasoconstriction potentially aggravates ischemia and promotes progression. Therefore we compared the effect of warm (37°C) and cold (17°C) water on burn progression. Methods: The comb burn model creates 4 rectangular burned surfaces separated by 3 unburned interspaces that become necrotic if untreated. After heating in boiling water the template was applied for 60 seconds on 24 Wistar rats randomized into 3 groups: no treatment (CON); treatment for 20 minutes with cold water (17°C: CW) or warm water (37°C: WW). Burn progression in surface (planimetry) and Departmenth (histology), as well as microcirculatory perfusion (laser Doppler flowmetry) were assessed after 1h, as well as 1, 4, and 7 days. Results: Both CW and WW delayed burn progression without reducing the final burn Departmenth (deep dermis). In contrast, only WW but not CW increased dermal perfusion (81 ± 2% (WW) vs. 62 ± 2% (CW) and 63 ± 1% (CON), p< 0·05) already 1 hour after burn induction. The difference observed after one hour led to a complete flow recovery during the observation period and translated into increased interspace survival, respectively less necrosis with WW(65 ± 4% vs. 81 + 4% (CW) and 91 ± 2% (CON), p< 0·05) after 7 days. Conclusions: Application of warm water significantly improved dermal perfusion, increased interspace survival, and delayed burn progression.However it didn't alter the ultimate burn Departmenth of the actually burned area. Therefore, warm water can create a therapeutic window for targeted nonsurgical treatment of burn progression.

Safety of artemether-lumefantrine exposure in first trimester of pregnancy: an observational cohort.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data available regarding safety profile of artemisinins in early pregnancy. They are, therefore, not recommended by WHO as a first-line treatment for malaria in first trimester due to associated embryo-foetal toxicity in animal studies. The study assessed birth outcome among pregnant women inadvertently exposed to artemether-lumefantrine (AL) during first trimester in comparison to those of women exposed to other anti-malarial drugs or no drug at all during the same period of pregnancy. METHODS: Pregnant women with gestational age <20 weeks were recruited from Maternal Health clinics or from monthly house visits (demographic surveillance), and followed prospectively until delivery. RESULTS: 2167 pregnant women were recruited and 1783 (82.3%) completed the study until delivery. 319 (17.9%) used anti-malarials in first trimester, of whom 172 (53.9%) used (AL), 78 (24.4%) quinine, 66 (20.7%) sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) and 11 (3.4%) amodiaquine. Quinine exposure in first trimester was associated with an increased risk of miscarriage/stillbirth (OR 2.5; 1.3-5.1) and premature birth (OR 2.6; 1.3-5.3) as opposed to AL with (OR 1.4; 0.8-2.5) for miscarriage/stillbirth and (OR 0.9; 0.5-1.8) for preterm birth. Congenital anomalies were identified in 4 exposure groups namely AL only (1/164[0.6%]), quinine only (1/70[1.4%]), SP (2/66[3.0%]), and non-anti-malarial exposure group (19/1464[1.3%]). CONCLUSION: Exposure to AL in first trimester was more common than to any other anti-malarial drugs. Quinine exposure was associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes which was not the case following other anti-malarial intake. Since AL and quinine were used according to their availability rather than to disease severity, it is likely that the effect observed was related to the drug and not to the disease itself. Even with this caveat, a change of policy from quinine to AL for the treatment of uncomplicated malaria during the whole pregnancy period could be already envisaged.