http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Hyeong Seok Kim, M.D.,Youngmin Han, M.S.,Jae Seung Kang, M.D.,Doo-ho Lee, M.D.,Jae Ri Kim, M.D., M.S.,Wooil Kwon, M.D., Ph.D.,Sun-Whe Kim, M.D., Ph.D.,Jin-Young Jang, M.D., Ph.D. 대한내시경복강경외과학회 2018 Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery Vol.21 No.4
Purpose: Robotic-associated minimally invasive surgery is a novel method for overcoming some limitations of laparoscopic surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes (postoperative pain, cosmesis, surgeon’s workload) of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) vs. single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) vs. conventional three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (3PLC). Methods: 134 patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic cholecystectomy at a single center during 2016~2017 were enrolled. Prospectively collected data included demographics, operative outcomes, questionnaire regarding pain and cosmesis, and NASA-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX) scores for surgeon’s workload. Results: 55 patients underwent SIRC, 29 SILC, and 50 3PLC during the same period. 3PLC patient group was older than the others (SIRC vs. SILC vs. 3PLC: 48.1 vs. 42.2 vs. 54.1 years, p<0.001). Operative time was shortest with 3PLC (44.1 vs. 38.8 vs. 25.4 min, p<0.001). Estimated blood loss, postoperative complications, and postoperative stay were similar among the groups. Pain control was lowest in the 3PLC group (98.2% vs. 100% vs. 84.0%, p=0.004), however, at 2 weeks postoperatively there were no differences among the groups (p=0.374). Cosmesis scores were also worst after 3PLC (17.5 vs. 18.4 vs. 13.3, p<0.001). NASA-TLX score was highest in the SILC group (21.9 vs. 44.3 vs. 25.2, p<0.001). Conclusion: Although SIRC and SILC take longer than 3PLC, they produce superior cosmetic outcomes. Compared with SILC, SIRC is more ergonomic, lowering the surgeon’s workload. Despite of higher cost, SIRC could be an alternative for treating gallbladder disease in selected patients.
Perello, D.,Dong Jae Bae,Kim, M.J.,DongKyu Cha,Seung Yol Jeong,Bo Ram Kang,Woo Jong Yu,He Younge Lee,Minhee Yun IEEE 2009 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NANOTECHNOLOGY Vol.8 No.3
<P>In this paper, we investigated carbon nanotube FETs (CNT FETs) utilizing semiconducting single-walled CNTs (SWCNTs). Multiple devices, each of different metal source and drain contacts, were fabricated on a single SWCNT. Over specific temperature regimes, transport properties of the devices were found to be consistent with the Bethe theory of thermionic emission for Schottky contacts, and the Poole-Frenkel emission was dependent on the device position. As was expected, transport from thermionic emission over the barrier was found to be the dominant mechanism. Barriers of 25-41 meV were present, as found by activation energy analysis for temperatures ranging from 20 to 300 K for the devices. A Schottky diode was also fabricated on a separate nanotube using an ohmic contact at the Pd source and a Schottky contact for the Ag drain electrode. Assuming the same physical assumptions for an Si semiconductor device, the results indicate an ideality factor greater than 2, Schottky barrier of ~0.37 eV, and image charge lowering of ~0.1 eV.</P>
Circulating TNF receptors predict cardiovascular disease in patients with chronic kidney disease
Bae, Eunjin,Cha, Ran-Hui,Kim, Yong C.,An, Jung N.,Kim, Dong K.,Yoo, Kyung D.,Lee, Su M.,Kim, Myoung-Hee,Park, Jung T.,Kang, Shin-Wook,Park, Jae Y.,Lim, Chun S.,Kim, Yon S.,Yang, Seung H.,Lee, Jung P. Williams & Wilkins Co 2017 Medicine Vol.96 No.19
<P>We prospectively recruited 984 patients with CKD from 11 centers between 2006 and 2012. The levels of cTNFR1 and cTNFR2 were determined by performing an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. During the mean follow-up period of 4 years, 36 patients experienced a CVD event. The median serum concentrations of cTNFR1 and cTNFR2 were 2703.4 (225.6-13,057.7) and 5661.0 (634.9-30,599.6) pg/mL, respectively, and the cTNFR1 level was closely correlated with the cTNFR2 level (r=0.86, P < .0001). The urinary protein-to-creatinine ratio (UPCR) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were significantly correlated with the cTNFR2 level (r=0.21 for UPCR, r=-0.67 for eGFR; P<.001 for all). Similar correlations were observed for serum cTNFR1 (r=0.21 for UPCR, r=-0.75 for eGFR; P < .001 for all). In the Cox proportional hazard analyses, cTNFR1 (hazard ratio [HR] 2.506, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.186-5.295, P=.016) and cTNFR2 (HR4.156, 95% CI 1.913-9.030, P < .001) predictedCVDrisk even after adjustment for clinical covariates, such as UPCR, eGFR, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. cTNFR1 and 2 are associated with CVD and other risk factors in CKD, independently of eGFR and UPCR. Furthermore, cTNFRs could be relevant predictors of CVD in CKD patients.</P>