http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Prospects of Activated Sludge Process in Japan - Its Past, Present, and Future -
Masanori Fujita 한국습지학회 2007 한국습지학회지 Vol.9 No.1
Our life totally depends on activated sludgeprocess for treatment of wastewater: sewage and industrial wastewater. Activated sludge process was the epoch-making technology in Environmental field. One century has been almost passed since the process was developed in England, and the process is still on the development of improvement. Here, history of activated sludge process, its mechanismsof treating the wastewater, expectations that we had on the process in the past, and future image and possibility on the process were presented. By reviewing the events related to the process, we can foresee potentials for new possibility of activated sludge process.
Masanori Furukawa,Akira Mitoro,Takahiro Ozutumi,Yukihisa Fujinaga,Keisuke Nakanishi,Koh Kitagawa,Soichiro Saikawa,Sinya Sato,Yasuhiko Sawada,Hiroaki Takaya,Kosuke Kaji,Hideto Kawaratani,Tadashi Namisa 대한소화기내시경학회 2021 Clinical Endoscopy Vol.54 No.3
Background/Aims: Endoscopic resection (ER) for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) is challenging. Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) is also problematic due to the anatomical features of the duodenum. Wecompared the safety and efficacy of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) with those of CEMR through a retrospectiveanalysis. Methods: Altogether, 44 consecutive patients with 46 SNADETs underwent ER (18 CEMR cases and 28 UEMR cases) betweenJanuary 2016 and October 2019. We investigated the proportions of en bloc resection, R0 resection, complications, resection time,and total procedure time and compared the outcomes of patients from the CEMR group with those of patients from the UEMRgroup. Results: The median tumor size was 8.0 mm (range, 2.0–20.0 mm). The UEMR group showed a higher proportion of en blocresection (96.4% vs. 72.2%, p<0.05) and significantly lower median resection time and total procedure time (4 min vs. 9.5 min,p<0.05 and 13 min vs. 19 min, p<0.05; respectively) than the CEMR group. No complications were observed. However, two patientstreated with piecemeal resection in the CEMR group had residual tumors. Conclusions: UEMR is a feasible therapeutic option for SNADETs. It can be recommended as a standard treatment.