Explore the vast range of titles available.

We introduce a theoretical model for the photocurrent-voltage (I-V) characteristics designed to elucidate the interfacial phenomena in photoelectrochemical cells (PECs). This model investigates the sources of voltage losses and the distribution of photocurrent across the semiconductor–electrolyte interface (SEI). It calculates the whole exchange current parameter to derive cell polarization data at the SEI and visualizes the potential drop across n-type cells. The I-V model’s simulation outcomes are utilized to distinguish between the impacts of bulk recombination and space charge region (SCR) recombination within semiconductor cells. Furthermore, we develop an advanced deep neural network model to analyze the electron–hole transfer dynamics using the I-V characteristic curve. The model’s robustness is evaluated and validated with real-time experimental data, demonstrating a high degree of concordance with observed results.

BackgroundBariatric surgery gains attention as a potential treatment for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The present study aimed to evaluate improvement of NAFLD after the two most common bariatric procedures with validated non-invasive instruments.Material and MethodsN = 100 patients scheduled for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) were included. NAFLD was evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively with liver stiffness measurement by transient elastography and laboratory-based fibrosis scores. Clinical data included body mass index (BMI), total weight loss (%TWL), excess weight loss (%EWL), age, gender, comorbidities, and the Edmonton obesity staging system (EOSS).ResultsThere were significant improvements of BMI, %TWL, %EWL, and EOSS after bariatric surgery. Liver stiffness was significantly improved from pre- to postoperative (12.9 ± 10.4 vs. 7.1 ± 3.7 kPa, p < 0.001) at median follow-up of 12.5 months. Additionally, there were significant improvements of liver fibrosis scores (aspartate aminotransferase (AST)/alanine aminotransferase (ALT) ratio 0.8 ± 0.3 vs. 1.1 ± 0.4, p < 0.001; NAFLD fibrosis score − 1.0 ± 1.8 vs. − 1.7 ± 1.3, p < 0.001; APRI score 0.3 ± 0.2 vs. 0.3 ± 0.1, p = 0.009; BARD score 2.3 ± 1.2 vs. 2.8 ± 1.1, p = 0.008) and laboratory parameters (ALT, AST, and GGT). After adjustment for baseline liver stiffness, RYGB showed higher improvements than LSG, and there was no gender difference. Improvement of liver stiffness was not correlated to improvement of BMI, %TWL, %EWL, or EOSS.ConclusionsNAFLD seems to be improved by bariatric surgery as measured by validated non-invasive instruments. Furthermore, it appears that RYGB is more effective than LSG. No correlation could be detected between NAFLD and weight loss. The present study highlights the potential of bariatric surgery for successful treatment of NAFLD. Further research is required to understand the exact mechanisms.

Objectives To assess the diagnostic accuracy of 64-multidetector CT (MDCT) for restaging of patients with oesophageal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant therapy. Methods Results of pathological staging were correlated with those from 64-MDCT before and after neoadjuvant treatment in 35 patients using the American Joint Committee on Cancer/TNM classification (7th edition). CT response was determined using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) method, modified for one-dimensional tumour diameter measurement. Results 64-MDCT predicted T stage correctly in 34 % (12/35), overstaged in 49 % (17/35) and understaged in 17 % (6/35). Sensitivity/specificity values were as follows: T0, 20 %/92 %; T1–T2, 31 %/59 %; T3, 60 %/64 %; T4, 100 %/4 %. Negative predictive values for T3/T4 were 80 %/100 %. MDCT accurately predicted complete histopathological response in 20 % (accuracy 74 %) and overstaged in 80 %. Tumour regression grade was predicted correctly in only 8 % (2/25) and underestimated in 68 % (17/25). Accurate N stage was noted in 69 % (24/35). Conclusion Although MDCT tends to be able to exclude advanced tumour stages (T3, T4) with a higher likelihood, the diagnostic accuracy of high resolution MDCT for restaging oesophageal cancer and assessing the response to neoadjuvant therapy has not improved in comparison to older-generation CT. Therefore, the future assessment of oesophageal tumour response should focus on combined morphologic and metabolic imaging. Key Points • Multidetector CT (MDCT) has been beneficial for the evaluation of many tumours. • However diagnostic accuracy for restaging oesophageal cancer has not improved with MDCT. • MDCT tends to be able to exclude advanced tumour stages (T3/T4). • MDCT has a low accuracy for determining lymph node metastasis. • Oesophageal tumour response should be assessed by combined morphological and metabolic imaging.

We present the case of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a 48-year-old woman with an active history of smoking. The patient initially presented to her general practitioner with a progressive swelling on the neck. Further investigations diagnosed a metastatic lung tumour, and palliative chemotherapy was started. After 5 months of treatment, by newly reported amenorrhoea, cautiously before a restaging CT scan of the abdomen, a pregnancy test was performed and was positive. Both the gynaecological examination and the hormonal panel yielded no signs of pregnancy. Immunohistochemically, staining of the tumour was strongly positive for β-subunit of human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) suggesting that the tumour was responsible for high β-hCG levels.Paraneoplastic β-hCG secretion from adenocarcinomas is rare. In the literature, only a few such cases have been reported. Previous studies suggested that the ability to secrete β-hCG in tumours may correlate to some extent to chemoresistance and thus, to a worse prognosis.

Key Clinical Message First, patients may always develop a second severe illness, even a second cancer. Second, things are not always as they are expected to be. So, careful diagnosis is mandatory. Third, morphology is very important, but sometimes misleading. Always be aware of morphological variants! First, patients may always develop a second severe illness, even a second cancer. Second, things are not always as they are expected to be. So, careful diagnosis is mandatory. Third, morphology is very important, but sometimes misleading. Always be aware of morphological variants!