University of Jena

About: University of Jena is a education organization based out in Jena, Thüringen, Germany. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Laser & Population. The organization has 22198 authors who have published 45159 publications receiving 1401514 citations. The organization is also known as: Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena & Friedrich Schiller University Jena.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.

Abstract: Objective To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, “Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock,” published in 2004.

Exact Solutions of Einstein's Field Equations

Abstract: A paperback edition of a classic text, this book gives a unique survey of the known solutions of Einstein's field equations for vacuum, Einstein-Maxwell, pure radiation and perfect fluid sources. It introduces the foundations of differential geometry and Riemannian geometry and the methods used to characterize, find or construct solutions. The solutions are then considered, ordered by their symmetry group, their algebraic structure (Petrov type) or other invariant properties such as special subspaces or tensor fields and embedding properties. Includes all the developments in the field since the first edition and contains six completely new chapters, covering topics including generation methods and their application, colliding waves, classification of metrics by invariants and treatments of homothetic motions. This book is an important resource for graduates and researchers in relativity, theoretical physics, astrophysics and mathematics. It can also be used as an introductory text on some mathematical aspects of general relativity.

Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab versus Sunitinib in Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma

Abstract: Background Nivolumab plus ipilimumab produced objective responses in patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma in a pilot study. This phase 3 trial compared nivolumab plus ipilimumab with sunitinib for previously untreated clear-cell advanced renal-cell carcinoma. Methods We randomly assigned adults in a 1:1 ratio to receive either nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram of body weight) plus ipilimumab (1 mg per kilogram) intravenously every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 2 weeks, or sunitinib (50 mg) orally once daily for 4 weeks (6-week cycle). The coprimary end points were overall survival (alpha level, 0.04), objective response rate (alpha level, 0.001), and progression-free survival (alpha level, 0.009) among patients with intermediate or poor prognostic risk. Results A total of 1096 patients were assigned to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab (550 patients) or sunitinib (546 patients); 425 and 422, respectively, had intermediate or poor risk. At a median follo...

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008 (Intensive Care Medicine (2008) 34, (17-60))

Abstract: OBJECTIVE To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, \"Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock,\" published in 2004. DESIGN Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding. METHODS We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation (1) indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost) or clearly do not. Weak recommendations (2) indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations. RESULTS Key recommendations, listed by category, include early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for postoperative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B), targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization (2C); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); and a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). CONCLUSIONS There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Poly(ethylene glycol) in Drug Delivery: Pros and Cons as Well as Potential Alternatives

Abstract: Poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) is the most used polymer and also the gold standard for stealth polymers in the emerging field of polymer-based drug delivery. The properties that account for the overwhelming use of PEG in biomedical applications are outlined in this Review. The first approved PEGylated products have already been on the market for 20 years. A vast amount of clinical experience has since been gained with this polymer--not only benefits, but possible side effects and complications have also been found. The areas that might need consideration and more intensive and careful examination can be divided into the following categories: hypersensitivity, unexpected changes in pharmacokinetic behavior, toxic side products, and an antagonism arising from the easy degradation of the polymer under mechanical stress as a result of its ether structure and its non-biodegradability, as well as the resulting possible accumulation in the body. These possible side effects will be discussed in this Review and alternative polymers will be evaluated.