Search

The geometry of collapsible latex tubes was measured while fluid flows at static loading and steady flow. Measurement of static tube laws yielded results which were in agreement with previous findings while steady state flow geometrical measurements were significantly different from theoretical models. This technique for measuring the geometry of a tube is important in understanding the field of flow through collapsible tubes and can be applied in large amplitude wave propagation or fluid dynamic behavior acrossan elastic jump.

Abstract Background One of the goals in the field of structural DNA nanotechnology is the use of DNA to build up 2- and 3-D nanostructures. The research in this field is motivated by the remarkable structural features of DNA as well as by its unique and reversible recognition properties. Nucleic acids can be used alone as the skeleton of a broad range of periodic nanopatterns and nanoobjects and in addition, DNA can serve as a linker or template to form DNA-hybrid structures with other materials. This approach can be used for the development of new detection strategies as well as nanoelectronic structures and devices. Method Here we present a new method for the generation of unprecedented all-organic conjugated-polymer nanoparticle networks guided by DNA, based on a hierarchical self-assembly process. First, microphase separation of amphiphilic block copolymers induced the formation of spherical nanoobjects. As a second ordering concept, DNA base pairing has been employed for the controlled spatial definition of the conjugated-polymer particles within the bulk material. These networks offer the flexibility and the diversity of soft polymeric materials. Thus, simple chemical methodologies could be applied in order to tune the network's electrical, optical and mechanical properties. Results and conclusions One- two- and three-dimensional networks have been successfully formed. Common to all morphologies is the integrity of the micelles consisting of DNA block copolymer (DBC), which creates an all-organic engineered network.

Objective: Persistent pain is a common complication after breast cancer surgery. We sought to determine the characteristics of persistent pain after breast cancer surgery and identify perioperative risk factors associated with its development. Methods: This prospective cohort study uses data from a prior randomized controlled trial of 100 patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. Patients were assessed on the presence and characteristics of pain at 3 months after surgery. Baseline and perioperative data were explored for potential associations with persistent pain in univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. Results: Fifty-three percent of patients reported persistent pain 3-months after surgery. Pain was primarily located in the axilla, chest, and shoulder, with the vast majority of patients with pain (96.2%) reporting a neuropathic pain feature. The mean intensity of pain was 2.5 (standard deviation [SD] 2.4, on a 0 to 10 pain scale) and persistent pain was associated with worse quality of life scores (p = 0.004) and increased use of analgesics (p = 0.015). Variables found to be associated with persistent pain in our univariable and multivariable-adjusted analyses were preoperative employment (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.04–9.66, p = 0.042), acute postoperative pain during movement (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.06–2.51, p = 0.027), and adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 3.30, 95% CI 1.19 to 9.15, p = 0.022). Conclusions: Persistent pain after breast cancer surgery is neuropathic and is associated with reduced quality of life and increased analgesic need. Future research should focus on perioperative interventions to reduce acute postoperative pain and consideration of modified adjuvant chemotherapy regimens to address modifiable risk factors and potentially reduce the incidence of persistent pain after breast cancer surgery.

Abstract General anesthesia is frequently administered during oocyte retrieval. Its effects on the outcomes of IVF cycles are uncertain. This study investigated whether administration of general anesthesia (specifically propofol) during oocyte retrieval affects IVF outcomes. A total of 245 women undergoing IVF cycles were included in this retrospective cohort study. IVF outcomes of 129 women who underwent oocyte retrieval under propofol anesthesia and 116 without anesthesia were compared. Data were adjusted for age, BMI, estradiol on triggering day and total gonadotropin dose. The primary outcomes were fertilization, pregnancy and live birth rates. A secondary outcome was the efficiency of follicle retrieval associated with the use of anesthesia. Fertilization rate was lower in retrievals under anesthesia compared to without (53.4% ± 34.8 vs. 63.7% ± 33.6, respectively; p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in the ratio of expected to retrieved oocytes between retrievals with and without anesthesia (0.8 ± 0.4 vs. 0.8 ± 0.8, respectively, p = 0.96). The differences in pregnancy and live birth rates between the groups were not statistically significant. General anesthesia administered during oocyte retrieval may have adverse effects on the fertilization potential of oocytes. This impact on the developmental potential of oocytes may lead to negative IVF outcomes and should be investigated further.

For over a decade, the use of targeted killing has been one of the most controversial issues in counterterrorism policy and law. One longstanding debate over this tactic concerns the allocation of decision making and oversight authority among the branches of government. The recent executive-legislative confrontation over a law passed following the lethal targeting of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani offers a powerful illustration ofthe constitutional ambiguity surrounding the issue. As attempts to resolve the ambiguity through textual and historical sources yield indeterminant answers, scholars tend to examine it through a functionalist prism, asking what institutional structures best serve the interests of national security while ensuring adequate accountability and preventing unnecessary force. This Article, retaining the functionalist framing of that issue, will approach the question through a comparative law analysis. Three of the countries most heavily engaged in global counterterrorism--the United States, the United Kingdom, and Israel--have adopted substantially different approaches for regulating counterterrorism targeting, each according a primary supervisory role to a different governmental actor: the Executive in the United States, Parliament in the United Kingdom, and the Judiciary in Israel. This Article describes, compares, and critically analyzes these approaches. Drawing on comparative institutional analysis theory, it then examines the findings and reaches three main conclusions. First, that in light of the judiciary's unique structural perspective and expertise, somejudicial involvement in developing the legal standard that guides and constrains government action is desirable. Second, that suboptimal decision making and illegality due to executive bias are more likely to occur where the executive is accountable only to its own internal oversight mechanisms. And third, that in both presidential and parliamentarian systems, legislators do not have and are unlikely to have any sort of meaningful influence on executive behavior in this domain. The Article concludes by suggesting a few possible institutional reforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In many Western democracies, and particularly in the United States, foreign affairs are primarily an executive enterprise. The travel ban, the exit from the Iran nuclear deal, and the airstrikes against the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria are just a few recent illustrations of unilateral assertions of presidential power. A large part of the justification for treating foreign affairs differently than other areas of public policy, in which political and judicial checks on the executive are more robust, is functional. Owing to the executive's relative institutional advantages over the legislature and the judiciary--in expertise, knowledge, speed, unitary structure, and democratic accountability--courts afford the President considerable deference in cases relating to foreign affairs. But there is something deeply flawed in the way judges apply functionalist reasoning in this context. Instead of using functionalism for what it is--a contextual and adaptable paradigm for ascertaining whether and how much deference is desired in order to make the challenged policy or act work best--judges frequently simply rely on the executive's special competence to apply a de facto presumption of near-total deference. I term this practice "totemic functionalism." This Article traces the conceptual underpinnings of totemic functionalism and critically analyzes its pervasive effect in foreign affairs law. Using three case studies and other recent examples, it then shows how totemic functionalism undermines the system of checks and balances, first between the organs of government and then, indirectly, inside the executive branch. As a result, while judicial deference in foreign affairs is often excused with the assertion that other non-judicial checks provide adequate substitute, I show that the near-total deference arising from totemic functionalism insulates the President from any sort of accountability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]