Search

ZnGa 2 O 4 nanoparticles are obtained by microwave-hydrothermal method through homogeneous coprecipitation reaction using urea as precipitant with surfactant assembly. Synthetic temperature, surfactant, and calcination temperature have the obvious effect on the formation and photocatalytic activity of ZnGa 2 O 4 . ZnGa 2 O 4 nanoparticles synthesized in the optimal conditions are highly dispersed and uniform with average diameter of 16.2 nm possessing a surface area of 70 m 2 g −1 . Under ultraviolet (UV) light illumination, the ZnGa 2 O 4 nanoparticles show an efficient photocatalytic activity in liquid phase degradation of organic dyes. The decomposition rates of methyl orange and methylene blue over the present ZnGa 2 O 4 nanoparticles are higher than those of commercial P25 (Degussa Co). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although ablations are performed with conscious sedation or general anesthesia, microwave ablations can be painful post procedure. Newer analgesic modalities, including regional blocks, have promoted the proliferation of less invasive anesthesia care for ablative procedures. This study evaluates whether bilateral paravertebral blocks reduce the need for additional analgesics in comparison to unilateral blocks in microwave ablations. In this retrospective study, individuals undergoing microwave ablation who underwent unilateral versus bilateral nerve blocks at a single institution from 2017 to 2019 were compared. Categorical variables were analyzed using Pearson's chi-squared tests. Comparisons of means were completed using multiple T-tests corrected using the Holm-Sidak method with α = 0.05. Regression modeling was used to identify factors related to increased MME (milligram morphine equivalent) usage and post-procedure admission rates. A total of 106 patients undergoing 112 liver MWA procedures were included in this analysis, with patients receiving either a bilateral or unilateral block. Pre-procedural characteristics demonstrated no significant differences in age or gender. Bilateral blocks were associated with decreased usage of gabapentin (14% vs. 0%, p = 0.01) and a lower rate of post-procedure admissions (OR 0.23, p = 0.003). Therefore, when using paravertebral blocks, bilateral blocks are superior to unilateral blocks, as demonstrated by decreased rates of hospital admission and reduced use of systemic neuropathic pain medication. Additionally, reducing post-procedural MME may reduce the rate of admission to the hospital. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although ablations are performed with conscious sedation or general anesthesia, microwave ablations can be painful post procedure. Newer analgesic modalities, including regional blocks, have promoted the proliferation of less invasive anesthesia care for ablative procedures. This study evaluates whether bilateral paravertebral blocks reduce the need for additional analgesics in comparison to unilateral blocks in microwave ablations. In this retrospective study, individuals undergoing microwave ablation who underwent unilateral versus bilateral nerve blocks at a single institution from 2017 to 2019 were compared. Categorical variables were analyzed using Pearson's chi-squared tests. Comparisons of means were completed using multiple T-tests corrected using the Holm-Sidak method with α = 0.05. Regression modeling was used to identify factors related to increased MME (milligram morphine equivalent) usage and post-procedure admission rates. A total of 106 patients undergoing 112 liver MWA procedures were included in this analysis, with patients receiving either a bilateral or unilateral block. Pre-procedural characteristics demonstrated no significant differences in age or gender. Bilateral blocks were associated with decreased usage of gabapentin (14% vs. 0%, p = 0.01) and a lower rate of post-procedure admissions (OR 0.23, p = 0.003). Therefore, when using paravertebral blocks, bilateral blocks are superior to unilateral blocks, as demonstrated by decreased rates of hospital admission and reduced use of systemic neuropathic pain medication. Additionally, reducing post-procedural MME may reduce the rate of admission to the hospital. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To access if the (MC)2 scoring system can identify patients at risk for major adverse events following percutaneous microwave ablation of renal tumors. Retrospective review of all adult patients who underwent percutaneous renal microwave ablation at two centers. Patient demographics, medical histories, laboratory work, technical details of the procedure, tumor characteristics, and clinical outcomes were collected. The (MC)2 score was calculated for each patient. Patients were assigned to low-risk (<5), moderate-risk (5–8) and high-risk (>8) groups. Adverse events were graded according to the criteria from the Society of Interventional Radiology guidelines. A total of 116 patients (mean age = 67.8 [95%CI 65.5–69.9], 66 men) were included. 10 (8.6%) and 22 (19.0%) experienced major or minor adverse events, respectively. The mean (MC)2 score for patients with major adverse events (4.6 [95%CI 3.3–5.8]) was not higher than those with either minor adverse events (4.1 [95%CI 3.4–4.8], p = 0.49) or no adverse events (3.7 [95%CI 3.4–4.1], p = 0.25). However, mean tumor size was greater in those with major adverse events (3.1 cm [95%CI 2.0–4.1]) than minor adverse events (2.0 cm [95%CI 1.8–2.3], p = 0.01). Patients with central tumors were also more likely to experience major adverse events compared to those without central tumors (p = 0.02). The area under the receiver operator curve to predict major adverse events was 0.61 (p = 0.15), indicating a poor ability of the (MC)2 score to predict major adverse events. The (MC)2 risk scoring system does not accurately identify patients at risk for major adverse events from percutaneous microwave ablation of renal tumors. The mean tumor size and central tumor location may serve as a better indicator for risk assessment of major adverse events. • (MC)2 score was not higher in patients with major adverse events, compared to minor or no events. • Tumor size was greater in patients with major adverse events than patients with minor adverse events. • Patients with central tumors were also more likely to experience major adverse events compared to those without central tumors. • (MC)2 score has poor ability to predict major adverse events. • Tumor size and tumor centrality may serve as better predictive factors of major adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]