1.Gastric Electrical Stimulation Is an Option for Patients with Refractory Cyclic Vomiting Syndrome.
Inderpreet GROVER ; Richard KIM ; Danielle C SPREE ; Christopher J LAHR ; Archana KEDAR ; Shivangi KOTHARI ; David FLEISHER ; Thomas L ABELL
Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2016;22(4):643-649
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) is a disabling migraine variant manifesting as severe episodes of nausea and vomiting and often refractory to many therapies. Gastric electrical stimulation (GES), which can reduce nausea and vomiting in gastroparesis, may provide symptomatic relief for drug-refractory CVS. This study assessed the utility GES in reducing the symptoms of CVS and improving the quality of life. METHODS: A one-year, non-randomized, clinical study was conducted. Eleven consecutive patients with drug refractory, cyclic vomiting syndrome based on Rome III criteria and North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN), underwent treatment with temporary GES (Temp GES) and permanent GES (Perm GES). Post-treatment follow up was done up to one year after permanent gastric electrical stimulation therapy. RESULTS: Total symptom score decreased by 68% and 40% after temporary and permanent GES therapies, respectively. Hospital admission events significantly decreased to 1.50 (± 1.00) events from 9.14 (± 7.21) annual admissions prior to treatment with permanent GES. Vomiting episodes fell by 83% post Temp GES and 69% after Perm GES treatments. Mucosal electrogram values also changed after temporary stimulation. CONCLUSIONS: In a small group of drug-refractory CVS patients, treatments with temporary and permanent GES significantly reduced the severity of gastrointestinal symptoms and frequency of hospital admissions.
Clinical Study
;
Electric Stimulation Therapy
;
Electric Stimulation*
;
Follow-Up Studies
;
Gastroenterology
;
Gastroparesis
;
Humans
;
Migraine Disorders
;
Nausea
;
Quality of Life
;
Vomiting*
2.TGF-β induces Smad2 Phosphorylation, ARE Induction, and Trophoblast Differentiation
Renee E ALBERS ; Kaisa SELESNIEMI ; David R C NATALE ; Thomas L BROWN
International Journal of Stem Cells 2018;11(1):111-120
BACKGROUND: Transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β) signaling has been shown to control a large number of critical cellular actions such as cell death, differentiation, and development and has been implicated as a major regulator of placental function. SM10 cells are a mouse placental progenitor cell line, which has been previously shown to differentiate into nutrient transporting, labyrinthine-like cells upon treatment with TGF-β. However, the signal transduction pathway activated by TGF-β to induce SM10 progenitor differentiation has yet to be fully investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study the SM10 labyrinthine progenitor cell line was used to investigate TGF-β induced differentiation. Activation of the TGF-β pathway and the ability of TGF-β to induce differentiation were investigated by light microscopy, luciferase assays, and Western blot analysis. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: In this report, we show that three isoforms of TGF-β have the ability to terminally differentiate SM10 cells, whereas other predominant members of the TGF-β superfamily, Nodal and Activin A, do not. Additionally, we have determined that TGF-β induced Smad2 phosphorylation can be mediated via the ALK-5 receptor with subsequent transactivation of the Activin response element. Our studies identify an important regulatory signaling pathway in SM10 progenitor cells that is involved in labyrinthine trophoblast differentiation.
Activins
;
Animals
;
Blotting, Western
;
Cell Death
;
Luciferases
;
Mice
;
Microscopy
;
Phosphorylation
;
Placenta
;
Protein Isoforms
;
Response Elements
;
Signal Transduction
;
Stem Cells
;
Transcriptional Activation
;
Transforming Growth Factor beta
;
Trophoblasts
3.Automated Brainstem Segmentation Detects Differential Involvement in Atypical Parkinsonian Syndromes
Martina BOCCHETTA ; Juan Eugenio IGLESIAS ; Viorica CHELBAN ; Edwin JABBARI ; Ruth LAMB ; Lucy L. RUSSELL ; Caroline V. GREAVES ; Mollie NEASON ; David M. CASH ; David L. THOMAS ; Jason D. WARREN ; John WOODSIDE ; Henry HOULDEN ; Huw R. MORRIS ; Jonathan D. ROHRER
Journal of Movement Disorders 2020;13(1):39-46
Objective:
Brainstem segmentation has been useful in identifying potential imaging biomarkers for diagnosis and progression in atypical parkinsonian syndromes (APS). However, the majority of work has been performed using manual segmentation, which is time consuming for large cohorts.
Methods:
We investigated brainstem involvement in APS using an automated method. We measured the volume of the medulla, pons, superior cerebellar peduncle (SCP) and midbrain from T1-weighted MRIs in 67 patients and 42 controls. Diagnoses were corticobasal syndrome (CBS, n = 14), multiple system atrophy (MSA, n = 16: 8 with parkinsonian syndrome, MSA-P; 8 with cerebellar syndrome, MSA-C), progressive supranuclear palsy with a Richardson’s syndrome (PSP-RS, n = 12), variant PSP (n = 18), and APS not otherwise specified (APS-NOS, n = 7).
Results:
All brainstem regions were smaller in MSA-C (19–42% volume difference, p < 0.0005) and in both PSP groups (18–33%, p < 0.0005) than in controls. MSA-P showed lower volumes in all regions except the SCP (15–26%, p < 0.0005). The most affected region in MSA-C and MSA-P was the pons (42% and 26%, respectively), while the most affected regions in both the PSP-RS and variant PSP groups were the SCP (33% and 23%, respectively) and midbrain (26% and 24%, respectively). The brainstem was less affected in CBS, but nonetheless, the pons (14%, p < 0.0005), midbrain (14%, p < 0.0005) and medulla (10%, p = 0.001) were significantly smaller in CBS than in controls. The brainstem was unaffected in APS-NOS.
Conclusion
Automated methods can accurately quantify the involvement of brainstem structures in APS. This will be important in future trials with large patient numbers where manual segmentation is unfeasible.
4.American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline update on chemotherapy for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer.
Christopher G AZZOLI ; Sherman BAKER ; Sarah TEMIN ; William PAO ; Timothy ALIFF ; Julie BRAHMER ; David H JOHNSON ; Janessa L LASKIN ; Gregory MASTERS ; Daniel MILTON ; Luke NORDQUIST ; David G PFISTER ; Steven PIANTADOSI ; Joan H SCHILLER ; Reily SMITH ; Thomas J SMITH ; John R STRAWN ; David TRENT ; Giuseppe GIACCONE
Chinese Journal of Lung Cancer 2010;13(3):171-189
5.Silent Intracerebral Hemorrhage in Patients Randomized to Stenting or Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis
Mandy D MÜLLER ; Lisa M JONGEN ; Aysun ALTINBAS ; Kristine A BLACKHAM ; Paul J NEDERKOORN ; Sumaira MACDONALD ; Rolf JÄGER ; Thomas WOLFF ; Philippe A LYRER ; L Jaap KAPPELLE ; Stephan G WETZEL ; Toby RICHARDS ; Jeroen HENDRIKSE ; Gert J DE BORST ; H Bart VAN DER WORP ; Stefan T ENGELTER ; David J WERRING ; Martin M BROWN ; Leo H BONATI
Journal of Stroke 2019;21(1):116-119
No abstract available.
Carotid Stenosis
;
Cerebral Hemorrhage
;
Endarterectomy
;
Humans
;
Stents