scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Ghent University

EducationGhent, Belgium
About: Ghent University is a education organization based out in Ghent, Belgium. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Context (language use). The organization has 36170 authors who have published 111042 publications receiving 3774501 citations. The organization is also known as: UGent & University of Ghent.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Dexmedetomidine as discussed by the authors is an α2-adrenoceptor agonist with sedative, anxiolytic, sympatholytic, and analgesic-sparing effects, and minimal depression of respiratory function.
Abstract: Dexmedetomidine is an α2-adrenoceptor agonist with sedative, anxiolytic, sympatholytic, and analgesic-sparing effects, and minimal depression of respiratory function. It is potent and highly selective for α2-receptors with an α2:α1 ratio of 1620:1. Hemodynamic effects, which include transient hypertension, bradycardia, and hypotension, result from the drug’s peripheral vasoconstrictive and sympatholytic properties. Dexmedetomidine exerts its hypnotic action through activation of central pre- and postsynaptic α2-receptors in the locus coeruleus, thereby inducting a state of unconsciousness similar to natural sleep, with the unique aspect that patients remain easily rousable and cooperative. Dexmedetomidine is rapidly distributed and is mainly hepatically metabolized into inactive metabolites by glucuronidation and hydroxylation. A high inter-individual variability in dexmedetomidine pharmacokinetics has been described, especially in the intensive care unit population. In recent years, multiple pharmacokinetic non-compartmental analyses as well as population pharmacokinetic studies have been performed. Body size, hepatic impairment, and presumably plasma albumin and cardiac output have a significant impact on dexmedetomidine pharmacokinetics. Results regarding other covariates remain inconclusive and warrant further research. Although initially approved for intravenous use for up to 24 h in the adult intensive care unit population only, applications of dexmedetomidine in clinical practice have been widened over the past few years. Procedural sedation with dexmedetomidine was additionally approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2003 and dexmedetomidine has appeared useful in multiple off-label applications such as pediatric sedation, intranasal or buccal administration, and use as an adjuvant to local analgesia techniques.

521 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Oct 2017-Europace
TL;DR: This 2017 Consensus Statement is to provide a state-of-the-art review of the field of catheter and surgical ablation of AF and to report the findings of a writing group, convened by these five international societies.
Abstract: During the past three decades, catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) have evolved from investigational procedures to their current role as effective treatment options for patients with AF. Surgical ablation of AF, using either standard, minimally invasive, or hybrid techniques, is available in most major hospitals throughout the world. Catheter ablation of AF is even more widely available, and is now the most commonly performed catheter ablation procedure. In 2007, an initial Consensus Statement on Catheter and Surgical AF Ablation was developed as a joint effort of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), and the European Cardiac Arrhythmia Society (ECAS).1 The 2007 document was also developed in collaboration with the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) and the American College of Cardiology (ACC). This Consensus Statement on Catheter and Surgical AF Ablation was rewritten in 2012 to reflect the many advances in AF ablation that had occurred in the interim.2 The rate of advancement in the tools, techniques, and outcomes of AF ablation continue to increase as enormous research efforts are focused on the mechanisms, outcomes, and treatment of AF. For this reason, the HRS initiated an effort to rewrite and update this Consensus Statement. Reflecting both the worldwide importance of AF, as well as the worldwide performance of AF ablation, this document is the result of a joint partnership between the HRS, EHRA, ECAS, the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), and the Latin American Society of Cardiac Stimulation and Electrophysiology (Sociedad Latinoamericana de Estimulacion Cardiaca y Electrofisiologia [SOLAECE]). The purpose of this 2017 Consensus Statement is to provide a state-of-the-art review of the field of catheter and surgical ablation of AF and to report the findings of a writing group, convened by these five international societies. The writing group is charged with defining the indications, techniques, and outcomes of AF ablation procedures. Included within this document are recommendations pertinent to the design of clinical trials in the field of AF ablation and the reporting of outcomes, including definitions relevant to this topic. The writing group is composed of 60 experts representing 11 organizations: HRS, EHRA, ECAS, APHRS, SOLAECE, STS, ACC, American Heart Association (AHA), Canadian Heart Rhythm Society (CHRS), Japanese Heart Rhythm Society (JHRS), and Brazilian Society of Cardiac Arrhythmias (Sociedade Brasileira de Arritmias Cardiacas [SOBRAC]). All the members of the writing group, as well as peer reviewers of the document, have provided disclosure statements for all relationships that might be perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest. All author and peer reviewer disclosure information is provided in Appendix A and Appendix B. In writing a consensus document, it is recognized that consensus does not mean that there was complete agreement among all the writing group members. Surveys of the entire writing group were used to identify areas of consensus concerning performance of AF ablation procedures and to develop recommendations concerning the indications for catheter and surgical AF ablation. These recommendations were systematically balloted by the 60 writing group members and were approved by a minimum of 80% of these members. The recommendations were also subject to a 1-month public comment period. Each partnering and collaborating organization then officially reviewed, commented on, edited, and endorsed the final document and recommendations. The grading system for indication of class of evidence level was adapted based on that used by the ACC and the AHA.3,4 It is important to state, however, that this document is not a guideline. The indications for catheter and surgical ablation of AF, as well as recommendations for procedure performance, are presented with a Class and Level of Evidence (LOE) to be consistent with what the reader is familiar with seeing in guideline statements. A Class I recommendation means that the benefits of the AF ablation procedure markedly exceed the risks, and that AF ablation should be performed; a Class IIa recommendation means that the benefits of an AF ablation procedure exceed the risks, and that it is reasonable to perform AF ablation; a Class IIb recommendation means that the benefit of AF ablation is greater or equal to the risks, and that AF ablation may be considered; and a Class III recommendation means that AF ablation is of no proven benefit and is not recommended. The writing group reviewed and ranked evidence supporting current recommendations with the weight of evidence ranked as Level A if the data were derived from high-quality evidence from more than one randomized clinical trial, meta-analyses of high-quality randomized clinical trials, or one or more randomized clinical trials corroborated by high-quality registry studies. The writing group ranked available evidence as Level B-R when there was moderate-quality evidence from one or more randomized clinical trials, or meta-analyses of moderate-quality randomized clinical trials. Level B-NR was used to denote moderate-quality evidence from one or more well-designed, well-executed nonrandomized studies, observational studies, or registry studies. This designation was also used to denote moderate-quality evidence from meta-analyses of such studies. Evidence was ranked as Level C-LD when the primary source of the recommendation was randomized or nonrandomized observational or registry studies with limitations of design or execution, meta-analyses of such studies, or physiological or mechanistic studies of human subjects. Level C-EO was defined as expert opinion based on the clinical experience of the writing group. Despite a large number of authors, the participation of several societies and professional organizations, and the attempts of the group to reflect the current knowledge in the field adequately, this document is not intended as a guideline. Rather, the group would like to refer to the current guidelines on AF management for the purpose of guiding overall AF management strategies.5,6 This consensus document is specifically focused on catheter and surgical ablation of AF, and summarizes the opinion of the writing group members based on an extensive literature review as well as their own experience. It is directed to all health care professionals who are involved in the care of patients with AF, particularly those who are caring for patients who are undergoing, or are being considered for, catheter or surgical ablation procedures for AF, and those involved in research in the field of AF ablation. This statement is not intended to recommend or promote catheter or surgical ablation of AF. Rather, the ultimate judgment regarding care of a particular patient must be made by the health care provider and the patient in light of all the circumstances presented by that patient. The main objective of this document is to improve patient care by providing a foundation of knowledge for those involved with catheter ablation of AF. A second major objective is to provide recommendations for designing clinical trials and reporting outcomes of clinical trials of AF ablation. It is recognized that this field continues to evolve rapidly. As this document was being prepared, further clinical trials of catheter and surgical ablation of AF were under way.

521 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Jan De Houwer1
TL;DR: A modified version of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) is described in this paper, which is based on a comparison of perfor- mance on trials within a single task.
Abstract: A modified version of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) is described that is based on a comparison of perfor- mance on trials within a single task rather than on a comparison of performance on different tasks. In two experiments, participants saw white words that needed to be classified on the basis of stimulus valence and colored words that were to be classified on the basis of color. On trials where the colored word referred to a positive target concept (e.g., "flowers," "self "), performance was superior when the correct response was the response that was also assigned to positive white words. The reverse was true on trials where the colored word represented a negative target concept (e.g., "insect"). This variant of the IAT is less susceptible to nonassociative effects of task recoding and can be used to assess single and multiple attitudes.

521 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The huge trapping times without the use of a cavity reveal new perspectives for dispersion and time control within photonic crystals.
Abstract: We show the real-space observation of fast and slow pulses propagating inside a photonic crystal waveguide by time-resolved near-field scanning optical microscopy. Local phase and group velocities of modes are measured. For a specific optical frequency we observe a localized pattern associated with a flat band in the dispersion diagram. During at least 3 ps, movement of this field is hardly discernible: its group velocity would be at most c/1000. The huge trapping times without the use of a cavity reveal new perspectives for dispersion and time control within photonic crystals.

521 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Adalimumab therapy seems to be an efficacious option for the treatment of children with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis.
Abstract: Background Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) has a pathogenic role in juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of adalimumab, a fully human monoclonal anti-TNF antibody, in children with polyarticular-course juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. Methods Patients 4 to 17 years of age with active juvenile rheumatoid arthritis who had previously received treatment with nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs underwent stratification according to methotrexate use and received 24 mg of adalimumab per square meter of body-surface area (maximum dose, 40 mg) subcutaneously every other week for 16 weeks. We randomly assigned patients with an American College of Rheumatology Pediatric 30% (ACR Pedi 30) response at week 16 to receive adalimumab or placebo in a double-blind fashion every other week for up to 32 weeks. Results Seventy-four percent of patients not receiving methotrexate (64 of 86) and 94% of those receiving methotrexate (80 of 85) had an ACR Pedi 30 response at week 16 and were eligible for d...

520 citations


Authors

Showing all 36585 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Stephen V. Faraone1881427140298
Peter Carmeliet164844122918
Monique M.B. Breteler15954693762
Dirk Inzé14964774468
Rajesh Kumar1494439140830
Vishva M. Dixit14535596471
Ruth J. F. Loos14264792485
Martin Grunewald1401575126911
Willy Verstraete13992076659
Barbara Clerbaux138139496447
Peter Vandenabeele13572981692
Michael Tytgat134144994133
Pascal Vanlaer133127091850
Filip Moortgat132111897714
Emelia J. Benjamin13164099972
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
176.5K papers, 6.2M citations

95% related

Utrecht University
139.3K papers, 6.2M citations

94% related

University of California, Davis
180K papers, 8M citations

93% related

University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign
225.1K papers, 10.1M citations

93% related

McGill University
162.5K papers, 6.9M citations

93% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023254
2022887
20217,438
20206,963
20196,787
20186,377