| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Carra, Serena, et al.
(författare)
-
The growing world of small heat shock proteins : from structure to functions
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Cell Stress and Chaperones. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1355-8145 .- 1466-1268. ; 22:4, s. 601-611
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Small heat shock proteins (sHSPs) are present in all kingdoms of life and play fundamental roles in cell biology. sHSPs are key components of the cellular protein quality control system, acting as the first line of defense against conditions that affect protein homeostasis and proteome stability, from bacteria to plants to humans. sHSPs have the ability to bind to a large subset of substrates and to maintain them in a state competent for refolding or clearance with the assistance of the HSP70 machinery. sHSPs participate in a number of biological processes, from the cell cycle, to cell differentiation, from adaptation to stressful conditions, to apoptosis, and, even, to the transformation of a cell into a malignant state. As a consequence, sHSP malfunction has been implicated in abnormal placental development and preterm deliveries, in the prognosis of several types of cancer, and in the development of neurological diseases. Moreover, mutations in the genes encoding several mammalian sHSPs result in neurological, muscular, or cardiac age-related diseases in humans. Loss of protein homeostasis due to protein aggregation is typical of many age-related neurodegenerative and neuromuscular diseases. In light of the role of sHSPs in the clearance of un/misfolded aggregation-prone substrates, pharmacological modulation of sHSP expression or function and rescue of defective sHSPs represent possible routes to alleviate or cure protein conformation diseases. Here, we report the latest news and views on sHSPs discussed by many of the world’s experts in the sHSP field during a dedicated workshop organized in Italy (Bertinoro, CEUB, October 12–15, 2016).
|
|
| 3. |
- DeAngelis, Nicola, et al.
(författare)
-
2020 WSES guidelines for the detection and management of bile duct injury during cholecystectomy
- 2021
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Emergency Surgery. - : BMC. - 1749-7922. ; 16:1
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Bile duct injury (BDI) is a dangerous complication of cholecystectomy, with significant postoperative sequelae for the patient in terms of morbidity, mortality, and long-term quality of life. BDIs have an estimated incidence of 0.4-1.5%, but considering the number of cholecystectomies performed worldwide, mostly by laparoscopy, surgeons must be prepared to manage this surgical challenge. Most BDIs are recognized either during the procedure or in the immediate postoperative period. However, some BDIs may be discovered later during the postoperative period, and this may translate to delayed or inappropriate treatments. Providing a specific diagnosis and a precise description of the BDI will expedite the decision-making process and increase the chance of treatment success. Subsequently, the choice and timing of the appropriate reconstructive strategy have a critical role in long-term prognosis. Currently, a wide spectrum of multidisciplinary interventions with different degrees of invasiveness is indicated for BDI management. These World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) guidelines have been produced following an exhaustive review of the current literature and an international expert panel discussion with the aim of providing evidence-based recommendations to facilitate and standardize the detection and management of BDIs during cholecystectomy. In particular, the 2020 WSES guidelines cover the following key aspects: (1) strategies to minimize the risk of BDI during cholecystectomy; (2) BDI rates in general surgery units and review of surgical practice; (3) how to classify, stage, and report BDI once detected; (4) how to manage an intraoperatively detected BDI; (5) indications for antibiotic treatment; (6) indications for clinical, biochemical, and imaging investigations for suspected BDI; and (7) how to manage a postoperatively detected BDI.
|
|
| 4. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.
|
|
