| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Vialas, Vital, et al.
(författare)
-
A multicentric study to evaluate the use of relative retention times in targeted proteomics
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of Proteomics. - : Elsevier BV. - 1874-3919. ; 152, s. 138-149
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Despite the maturity reached by targeted proteomic strategies, reliable and standardized protocols are urgently needed to enhance reproducibility among different laboratories and analytical platforms, facilitating a more widespread use in biomedical research. To achieve this goal, the use of dimensionless relative retention times (iRT), defined on the basis of peptide standard retention times (RT), has lately emerged as a powerful tool. The robustness, reproducibility and utility of this strategy were examined for the first time in a multicentric setting, involving 28 laboratories that included 24 of the Spanish network of proteomics laboratories (ProteoRed-ISCIII). According to the results obtained in this study, dimensionless retention time values (iRTs) demonstrated to be a useful tool for transferring and sharing peptide retention times across different chromatographic set-ups both intra- and inter-laboratories. iRT values also showed very low variability over long time periods. Furthermore, parallel quantitative analyses showed a high reproducibility despite the variety of experimental strategies used, either MRM (multiple reaction monitoring) or pseudoMRM, and the diversity of analytical platforms employed. Biological significance From the very beginning of proteomics as an analytical science there has been a growing interest in developing standardized methods and experimental procedures in order to ensure the highest quality and reproducibility of the results. In this regard, the recent (2012) introduction of the dimensionless retention time concept has been a significant advance. In our multicentric (28 laboratories) study we explore the usefulness of this concept in the context of a targeted proteomics experiment, demonstrating that dimensionless retention time values is a useful tool for transferring and sharing peptide retention times across different chromatographic set-ups.
|
|
| 5. |
- Ferrando, Carlos, et al.
(författare)
-
Individualised perioperative open-lung approach versus standard protective ventilation in abdominal surgery (iPROVE) : a randomised controlled trial
- 2018
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Respiratory Medicine. - : ELSEVIER SCI LTD. - 2213-2600 .- 2213-2619. ; 6:3, s. 193-203
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background The effects of individualised perioperative lung-protective ventilation (based on the open-lung approach [OLA]) on postoperative complications is unknown. We aimed to investigate the effects of intraoperative and postoperative ventilatory management in patients scheduled for abdominal surgery, compared with standard protective ventilation. Methods We did this prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled trial in 21 teaching hospitals in Spain. We enrolled patients who were aged 18 years or older, were scheduled to have abdominal surgery with an expected time of longer than 2 h, had intermediate-to-high-risk of developing postoperative pulmonary complications, and who had a body-mass index less than 35 kg/m(2). Patients were randomly assigned (1: 1: 1: 1) online to receive one of four lung-protective ventilation strategies using low tidal volume plus positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP): open-lung approach (OLA)-iCPAP (individualised intraoperative ventilation [individualised PEEP after a lung recruitment manoeuvre] plus individualised postoperative continuous positive airway pressure [CPAP]), OLA-CPAP (intraoperative individualised ventilation plus postoperative CPAP), STD-CPAP (standard intraoperative ventilation plus postoperative CPAP), or STD-O-2 (standard intraoperative ventilation plus standard postoperative oxygen therapy). Patients were masked to treatment allocation. Investigators were not masked in the operating and postoperative rooms; after 24 h, data were given to a second investigator who was masked to allocations. The primary outcome was a composite of pulmonary and systemic complications during the first 7 postoperative days. We did the primary analysis using the modified intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02158923. Findings Between Jan 2, 2015, and May 18, 2016, we enrolled 1012 eligible patients. Data were available for 967 patients, whom we included in the final analysis. Risk of pulmonary and systemic complications did not differ for patients in OLA-iCPAP (110 [46%] of 241, relative risk 0.89 [95% CI 0.74-1.07; p=0.25]), OLA-CPAP (111 [47%] of 238, 0.91 [0.76-1.09; p=0.35]), or STD-CPAP groups (118 [48%] of 244, 0.95 [0.80-1.14; p=0.65]) when compared with patients in the STD-O-2 group (125 [51%] of 244). Intraoperatively, PEEP was increased in 69 (14%) of patients in the standard perioperative ventilation groups because of hypoxaemia, and no patients from either of the OLA groups required rescue manoeuvres. Interpretation In patients who have major abdominal surgery, the different perioperative open lung approaches tested in this study did not reduce the risk of postoperative complications when compared with standard lung-protective mechanical ventilation.
|
|
| 6. |
- Ferrando, Carlos, et al.
(författare)
-
Rationale and study design for an individualised perioperative open-lung ventilatory strategy with a high versus conventional inspiratory oxygen fraction (iPROVE-O2) and its effects on surgical site infection : study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
- 2017
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 7:7
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction Surgical site infection (SSI) is a serious postoperative complication that increases morbidity and healthcare costs. SSIs tend to increase as the partial pressure of tissue oxygen decreases: previous trials have focused on trying to reduce them by comparing high versus conventional inspiratory oxygen fractions (FIO 2) in the perioperative period but did not use a protocolised ventilatory strategy. The open-lung ventilatory approach restores functional lung volume and improves gas exchange, and therefore it may increase the partial pressure of tissue oxygen for a given FIO 2. The trial presented here aims to compare the efficacy of high versus conventional FIO 2 in reducing the overall incidence of SSIs in patients by implementing a protocolised and individualised global approach to perioperative open-lung ventilation. Methods and analysis This is a comparative, prospective, multicentre, randomised and controlled two-arm trial that will include 756 patients scheduled for abdominal surgery. The patients will be randomised into two groups: (1) a high FIO 2 group (80% oxygen; FIO 2 of 0.80) and (2) a conventional FIO 2 group (30% oxygen; FIO 2 of 0.30). Each group will be assessed intra-and postoperatively. The primary outcome is the appearance of postoperative SSI complications. Secondary outcomes are the appearance of systemic and pulmonary complications. Ethics and dissemination The iPROVE-O2 trial has been approved by the Ethics Review Board at the reference centre (the Hospital Clinico Universitario in Valencia). Informed consent will be obtained from all patients before their participation. If the approach using high FIO 2 during individualised open-lung ventilation decreases SSIs, use of this method will become standard practice for patients scheduled for future abdominal surgery. Publication of the results is anticipated in early 2019.
|
|
