This research article shows that a high intensity exercise program compared to a low intensity exercise program of the same session duration and frequency, increases insulin sensitivity to a larger extend in healthy subjects. It also shows that the short insulin tolerance test can be used to detect differences in insulin sensitivity in intervention studies.
LINK
Background: Ventilation management may differ between COVID–19 ARDS (COVID–ARDS) patients and patients with pre–COVID ARDS (CLASSIC–ARDS); it is uncertain whether associations of ventilation management with outcomes for CLASSIC–ARDS also exist in COVID–ARDS. Methods: Individual patient data analysis of COVID–ARDS and CLASSIC–ARDS patients in six observational studies of ventilation, four in the COVID–19 pandemic and two pre–pandemic. Descriptive statistics were used to compare epidemiology and ventilation characteristics. The primary endpoint were key ventilation parameters; other outcomes included mortality and ventilator–free days and alive (VFD–60) at day 60. Results: This analysis included 6702 COVID–ARDS patients and 1415 CLASSIC–ARDS patients. COVID–ARDS patients received lower median VT (6.6 [6.0 to 7.4] vs 7.3 [6.4 to 8.5] ml/kg PBW; p < 0.001) and higher median PEEP (12.0 [10.0 to 14.0] vs 8.0 [6.0 to 10.0] cm H2O; p < 0.001), at lower median ΔP (13.0 [10.0 to 15.0] vs 16.0 [IQR 12.0 to 20.0] cm H2O; p < 0.001) and higher median Crs (33.5 [26.6 to 42.1] vs 28.1 [21.6 to 38.4] mL/cm H2O; p < 0.001). Following multivariable adjustment, higher ΔP had an independent association with higher 60–day mortality and less VFD–60 in both groups. Higher PEEP had an association with less VFD–60, but only in COVID–ARDS patients. Conclusions: Our findings show important differences in key ventilation parameters and associations thereof with outcomes between COVID–ARDS and CLASSIC–ARDS. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov (identifier NCT05650957), December 14, 2022.
A local operating theater ventilation device to specifically ventilate the wound area has been developed and investigated. The ventilation device is combined with a blanket which lies over the patient during the operation. Two configurations were studied: Configuration 1 where HEPA-filtered air was supplied around and parallel to the wound area and Configuration 2 where HEPA-filtered air was supplied from the top surface of the blanket, perpendicular to the wound area. A similar approach is investigated in parallel for an instrument table. The objective of the study was to verify the effectiveness of the local device. Prototype solutions developed were studied experimentally (laboratory) and numerically (CFD) in a simplified setup, followed by experimental assessment in a full scale mock-up. Isothermal as well as non-isothermal conditions were analyzed. Particle concentrations obtained in proposed solutions were compared to the concentration without local ventilation. The analysis procedure followed current national guidelines for the assessment of operating theater ventilation systems, which focus on small particles (<10 mm). The results show that the local system can provide better air quality conditions near the wound area compared to a theoretical mixing situation (proof-of-principle). It cannot yet replace the standard unidirectional downflow systems as found for ultraclean operating theater conditions. It does, however, show potential for application in temporary and emergency operating theaters
