Search

To assess the influence of rainfall simulator type and plot dimensions on runoff and erosion, seven small portable rainfall simulators from Freiberg, Tübingen, Trier (all Germany), Valencia, Zaragoza (both Spain), Basel (Switzerland) and Wageningen (the Netherlands) were compared on a prepared bare fallow field. The experiments were carried out during an international rainfall simulator workshop, organized at Trier University (Germany) from 30th of June to 1st of July 2011. The tested rainfall simulators differ in design, rainfall intensities, rain spectra, etc. and represent most of the devices which have been used over the last decade in Europe. The plots for the different rainfall simulators were selected as similar as possible concerning soil physical and chemical properties, aspect and inclination and were chosen to be placed side by side in horizontal direction. Test procedure was standardized in order to examine the influence of the rainfall simulator and plot dimension only. The results show a clear and consistent relationship in runoff, erosion and infiltration behaviour of the different used rainfall simulators. With all the devices total soil loss is measurable, but different plot sizes, intensities and kinetic energies of the simulated rainfall caused differences in soil loss and runoff quantities per unit of area. Regarding course characteristics over runs, similarities could be observed especially in runoff behaviour. The rainfall simulators (< 1 m² plot size) are able to reproduce infiltration and interrill-erosion processes. With an increase of plot size (= 1 m²), rill-erosion will be also reflected. Therefore it can be concluded that up to a certain plot size, the results of the different simulators are comparable and depend in their magnitude on the properties of the applied rainfall. The increase in process complexity with increasing plot size shows, that the scale of the simulation is one of the most important parameters to be taken into account when comparing values of erosion and runoff.

Fragestellung:Scoresysteme wie APACHE (Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation) sind für unselektionierte Intensivpatienten evaluiert. Sind sie auch zur Risikostratifikation und Qualitätskontrolle bei Untergruppen wie älteren Patienten anwendbar? Methoden:Über einen 3-Jahres-Zeitraum wurde bei allen Patienten einer 12-Betten-Intensivstation eine Datenerhebung durchgeführt. Die Berechnung der Scores sowie Mortalitätsprognosen erfolgte mit APACHE II und III. Die Diskriminierungsfähigkeit wurde mittels Receiver-Operating-Characteristic-(ROC-)Analyse und die Kalibrierungsfähigkeit mit standardisierter Mortalitätsrate (SMR) und Goodness-of-Fit-Statistik analysiert. Ergebnisse:Von 3382 Intensivaufenthalten gemäß Ausschlußkriterien-Analyse von 2795 Patienten, davon 1396 (49,9 %) ≥ 65 Jahre, Durchschnittsalter 75 (65 – 99) Jahre. 62,5 % waren nichtoperative, 37,5 % postoperative Aufnahmen, davon 35 % Notfalloperationen. Die Intensivmortalität betrug 11,7 %, die Krankenhausmortalität 25,1 %. Die Flächen unter der ROC-Kurve betrugen für APACHE II 0,77 und für APACHE III 0,79 (Gesamtkollektiv 0,83 bzw. 0,85). Die SMR lag für APACHE II bei 1,17 und für APACHE III bei 1,23 (Gesamtkollektiv 1,06 bzw. 1,22). Die Kalibrierung war somit für APACHE II mit einem Chi2von 19 (p < 0,025) als auch für APACHE II mit Chi2von 41 (p < 0,001) nicht ausreichend (Gesamtkollektiv APACHE II Chi212, p > 0,1, APACHE III Chi248, p < 0,001). Schlußfolgerungen:Beide Scoresysteme diskriminieren gut, sowohl für das Gesamtkollektiv als auch für die älteren Patienten, für letztere allerdings etwas schlechter. Sie sind bei unseren Patienten insofern zur Risikogruppen-Bildung geeignet. Die Mortalitätsprognose ist nur beim Gesamtkollektiv für APACHE II gut, bei den älteren Patienten für beide Scores dagegen nicht. APACHE II könnte zur Qualitätskontrolle zumindest intern herangezogen werden, jedoch nicht ohne weiteres für Subgruppen wie ältere Patienten. Objective:Scores like APACHE (Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation) were evaluated for unselected intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. Can they also be used for risk stratification and quality assurance in selected subgroups like elderly patients? Methods:Over a 3-year period data of all admissions of a 12 bed interdisciplinary ICU were collected. APACHE II and III scores and probabilities of hospital deaths were compared with observed outcomes. The discriminatory power was evaluated by calculating the areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Calibration was analyzed with standardized mortality ratios (SMR) and the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit statistic. Results:Of 3382 admissions due to exclusion criteria, 2795 patients were analyzed, 1396 (49,9 %) of these were ≥ 65 years, mean age 75 (65–99) years. 62.5 % were non-operative, 37.5 % postoperative admissions, 35 % after emergency operations. ICU mortality was 11.7 %, hospital mortality 25.1 %. The areas under the ROC curves were 0.77 for APACHE II and 0.79 for APACHE III (whole collective 0.83 and 0.85, respectively). The SMR was 1.17 for APACHE II and 1.23 for APACHE III compared with 1.06 and 1.22 for all patients, respectively. Calibration for elderly patients was insufficient for APACHE II (Hosmer-Lemeshow chi-square = 19, p < 0.025) as well as for APACHE III (chi-square = 41, p < 0.001), while it was good for all patients for APACHE II (chi-square = 12, p > 0.1) but not so for APACHE III (chi-square = 48, p < 0.001). Conclusions:APACHE II and III both show good discrimination for elderly patients although a little inferior than for all patients. Both scores can be used for risk stratification of elderly ICU patients. Mortality prognosis is not sufficient for geriatric patients although: APACHE II calibrates well for all. Application of these scores for quality assurance in selected subgroups like elderly patients cannot be recommended based on these data.

Cyclic voltammetry measurements on pentafluorophenylonium compounds of [C6F5X]+Y–type with X = Xe, N2, C6F5Br, C6F5I, and (C6F5)3P were carried out. In these series [C6F5Xe]+shows the lowest and [(C6F5)4P]+the highest reduction potential. One electron reduction of [C6F5Xe]+and [C6F5N2]+followed by the loss of Xe or N2, respectively, leads to the generation of the [C6F5]·radical. Favoured following reactions of the [C6F5]·radical are the abstraction of hydrogen from MeCN or dimerisation. After the first reduction step the other onium cations split off the pentafluorophenyl element molecule such as (C6F5)3P, C6F5Br, or C6F5I, respectively. These molecules undergo further reductions. The low reduction potential of [C6F5Xe]+is in contrast to former measurements on partially fluorinated or chlorinated phenylxenonium cations. A plausible explaination for the different behaviour of these Xe–C compounds in electrochemical reduction processes is given.

Objective:Evaluation of the scores APACHE II and III, SAPS II, and MPM II for risk stratification and quality control in patients of a German interdisciplinary intensive care unit (ICU). Methods:The data of all consecutive patients of a 12 bed interdisciplinary intensive care unit were collected over a 12 month period. The score values and probabilities of hospital deaths were compared with observed outcomes. The discriminatory power was analyzed by calculating the areas under the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration by standardized mortality ratios (SMR), and goodness-of-fit statistic. Results:Of 1,000 admissions 96 were repeated ICU stays. Due to exclusion criteria of the scores 883 patients could be analyzed for APACHE II, 775 for APACHE III and SAPS II, and 638 for MPM II. Mean age was 61.5 (16–96) years, 67.2% were medical, 32.8% surgical admissions, 37.4% of those after emergency surgery. ICU stay lasted 3.9 days, hospital stay 26.4 days. ICU mortality was 7.6%, hospital mortality 17.2%. Areas under the ROC curves were calculated as 0.81 (APACHE II), 0.82 (APACHE III), and 0.83 (SAPS II and MPM II). The SMR was 1.00 for APACHE II, 1.19 for APACHE II, 1.09 for SAPS II, and 0.99 for MPM II. Calibration was good for APACHE II (chi-square 6, p>0.5), SAPS II (chi-square 9, p>0.3), and MPM II (chi-square 12, p>0.1), but insufficient for APACHE III (chi-square 19, p<0.025). Mortality ratios for various diagnostic groups differed as well as the pattern of the four score systems in different risk strata. Discussion:Discriminatory power of all four score systems was similar in our patients. Calibration was insufficient for APACHE III, but good for APACHE II, SAPS II, and MPM II. These three systems could be used for internal quality control in our unit. But differing prognostic accuracy for various risk strata and subgroups as well as differences between the scores indicate that other factors than the overall quality of an ICU influence the results. Fragestellung:Lassen sich die Scoresysteme APACHE II und III, SAPS II und MPM II bei Patienten einer deutschen interdisziplinären Intensivstation zur Risikostratifikation and Qualitätskontrolle anwenden? Methoden:Datenerhebung bei allen Patienten einer 12-Betten-Intensivstation über 12 Monate. Berechnung der Scores APACHE II und III, SAPS II und MPM-24 II. Vergleich der Mortalitätsprognosen der 4 Systeme mit der Krankenhausmortalität. Analyse der Diskriminierungsfähigkeit mittels Receiver-Operating-Characteristic-(ROC-)Analyse und der Kalibrierungsfähigkeit mit standardisierter Mortalitätsrate (SMR) und Goodness-of-Fit-Statistik. Ergebnisse:904 Patienten hatten 1000 Intensivaufenthalte. Gemäß den Score-Ausschlußkriterien konnten 833 Patienten für APACHE II, 775 für APACHE III und SAPS II und 638 für MPM II ausgewertet werden. Das Durchschnittsalter war 61,5 (16–96) Jahre, 67,2% waren nichtoperative, 32,8% postoperative Aufnahmen, davon 37,4% nach Notfalloperationen. Der Intensivaufenthalt dauerte 3,9, der im Krankenhaus 26,4 Tage. Die Intensivmortalität lag bei 7,6%, die Krankenhausmortalität bei 17,2%. Die Flächen unter der ROC-Kurve betrugen für APACHE II 0,81, für APACHE III 0,82, für SAPS II und MPM II 0,83. Die SMR betrug jeweils 1,00 für APACHE II, 1,19 für APACHE III, 1,09 für SAPS II und 0,99 für MPM II. Die Kalibrierung im Goodness-of-Fit Test war für APACHE II mit Chi-Quadrat 6 (p>0,5), SAPS II mit 9 (p>0,3) und MPM II mit 12 (p>0,1) gut und für APACHE III mit Chi-Quadrat 19 (p<0,025) unzureichend. Die Mortalitätsraten waren für verschiedene diagnostische Untergruppen sowie auch zwischen den Scores zum Teil sehr unterschiedlich. Schlußfolgerungen:Alle Scoresysteme diskriminieren bei unseren Patienten ausreichend gut. Die Kalibration ist für APACHE III unzureichend, für APACHE II, SAPS II und MPM II gut, so daß diese Systeme bei unseren Patienten für interne Qualitätskontrollen geeignet erscheinen. Wegen sehr unterschiedlicher Prognosefähigkeit bei Untergruppen müssen allerdings andere Einflußfaktoren als nur die Qualität der Intensivtherapie beachtet werden.

A nonresonant background suppression technique using coherent cancellation through phase mismatching is discussed and applied for a noncollinear beam configuration. A cuvette structure consisting of a glass, a sample, and a glass layer is regarded. Phase mismatching is shown to be a useful method to suppress nonresonant contributions from cuvette glass walls as well as those originating from the sample. A numerical calculation reveals a limit for the background suppression which can be achieved with this technique. Measurements using ethanol as a sample show the possibility to compensate the nonresonant background originating from the cuvette walls and to effectively suppress the nonresonant contribution in the spectrum of the sample by a factor of 10–50, yielding Lorentzian bands biased by a constant background. Direct measurement of depolarization ratios without interfering nonresonant background is demonstrated for ethanol and shows that this technique can readily be combined with the polarization sensitive CARS technique.

The compensation of pulse-to-pulse fluctuations and the improvement of spectral reproducibility of scanned coherent anti-Stokes Raman scattering (CARS) spectra of dispersing media are discussed. A simple reference CARS setup is presented that needs a minimum number of optical components as a result of using the same optical path for both signals. Variations in spectral profile were found to be caused by mechanical play in the translation stage, which is used to adjust the matching angle. Using retroreflection, the matching angle adjustment is made insensitive to these mechanical imperfections. The multiple interference of probe and signal beam that may occur in thin cuvette walls and its effect on the detected CARS signals are shown, and possible solutions are discussed.

Summary In a multicentre study patients with liver metastases stratified to the histology of the primary tumour were investigated. A total of 102 patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma, non-small-cell lung cancer, pancreatic cancer, primary liver carcinoma and malignant melanoma were treated with the thioether lipid ilmofosine. The drug was administered orally as a tablet at a dosage of 150–300 mg/day (75 mg/tablet). The tolerability of ilmofosine was poor. There was a dose-limiting gastrointestinal toxicity with nausea, vomiting and loss of appetite (WHO grade II-IV) in 67% of patients. During the period of therapy (1–29 weeks, 8.5 weeks mean) no complete remission and no partial response were observed. We thus conclude that treatment with oral ilmofosine is not effective in patients with liver metastases due to various malignancies.