Objectives The physiologic relationship between slow-wave activity (SWA) (0–4 Hz) on the electroencephalogram (EEG) and high-frequency (0.1–0.4 Hz) cardiopulmonary coupling (CPC) derived from electrocardiogram (ECG) sleep spectrograms is not known. Because high-frequency CPC appears to be a biomarker of stable sleep, we tested the hypothesis that that slow-wave EEG power would show a relatively fixed-time relationship to periods of high-frequency CPC. Furthermore, we speculated that this correlation would be independent of conventional nonrapid eye movement (NREM) sleep stages. Methods We analyzed selected datasets from an archived polysomnography (PSG) database, the Sleep Heart Health Study I (SHHS-I). We employed the cross-correlation technique to measure the degree of which 2 signals are correlated as a function of a time lag between them. Correlation analyses between high-frequency CPC and delta power (computed both as absolute and normalized values) from 3150 subjects with an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) of ≤5 events per hour of sleep were performed. Results The overall correlation (r) between delta power and high-frequency coupling (HFC) power was 0.40 ± 0.18 (P = .001). Normalized delta power provided improved correlation relative to absolute delta power. Correlations were somewhat reduced in the second half relative to the first half of the night (r = 0.45 ± 0.20 vs r = 0.34 ± 0.23). Correlations were only affected by age in the eighth decade. There were no sex differences and only small racial or ethnic differences were noted. Conclusions These results support a tight temporal relationship between slow wave power, both within and outside conventional slow wave sleep periods, and high frequency cardiopulmonary coupling, an ECG-derived biomarker of “stable” sleep. These findings raise mechanistic questions regarding the cross-system integration of neural and cardiopulmonary control during sleep.

No abstract

Particulate matter 2.5 (PM2.5)‐induced pulmonary inflammation has become a public concern in recent years. In which, the activation of the NLRP3/caspase‐1 pathway was closely related to the inflammatory response of various diseases. However, the promotion effect of the NLRP3/caspase‐1 pathway on PM2.5‐induced pulmonary inflammation remains largely unclear. Here, our data showed that PM2.5 exposure caused lung injury in the mice by which inflammatory cell infiltration occurred in lung and alveolar structure disorder. Meanwhile, the exposure of human bronchial epithelial cells (16HBE) to PM2.5 resulted in suppressed cell viability, as well as elevated cell apoptosis. Moreover, a higher level of inflammatory cytokine and activation of the NLRP3/caspase‐1 pathway in PM2.5‐induced inflammation mice models and 16HBE cells. Mechanistically, pretreatment with MCC950, a NLRP3/caspase‐1 pathway inhibitor, prevented PM2.5‐induced lung injury, inflammatory response, and the number of inflammatory cells in BALFs, as well as promoted cell viability and decreased inflammatory cytokine secretion. Collectively, our findings indicated that the NLRP3/caspase‐1 pathway serves a vital role in the pathological changes of pulmonary inflammation caused by PM2.5 exposure. MCC950 was expected to be the therapeutic target of PM2.5 inhalation mediated inflammatory diseases.

Background The worldwide COVID-19 pandemic was caused by a newly discovered Coronavirus. The treatment methods for COVID-19 are emerging and rapidly evolving. Existing drugs, including Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, offer the hope of effective treatment in early disease. In this study, we investigated and compared outcomes of Ivermectin-Doxycycline vs. Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromycin combination therapy COVID19 patients with mild to moderate disease.Methods Patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 disease, tested positive by RT PCR for SARS-CoV-2 infection at Chakoria Upazilla Health Complex, Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh, were included in this study.Patients were divided randomly into two groups: Ivermectin 200µgm/kg single dose + Doxycycline 100 mg BID for 10days in group A, and Hydroxychloroquine 400 mg 1st day, then200mg BID for 9days + Azithromycin 500 mg daily for 5 days in group B. PCR for SARS-CoV-2 was repeated in all symptomatic patients on the second day onward without symptoms, or, for those who were asymptomatic (throughout the process), on the 5th day after taking medication and repeated every two days onward if the result is positive. Time to negative PCR and time to full symptomatic recovery was measured for each group.Results All subjects in the Ivermectin-Doxycycline group (group A) reached a negative PCR for SARS-CoV-2, at a mean of 8.93days, and all reached symptomatic recovery, at a mean of 5.93days, with 55.10% symptom-free by the 5th day. In the Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromcyin group (group B), 96.36% reached a negative PCR at a mean of 6.99days and were symptoms-free at 9.33days. Group A patients had symptoms that could have been caused by the medication in 31.67% of patients, including lethargy in 14(23.3%), nausea in 11(18.3%), and occasional vertigo in 7(11.66%) of patients. In Group B, 46.43% had symptoms that could have been caused by the medication, including 13(23.21%) mild blurring of vision and headache; 22(39.2%) increased lethargy and dizziness, 10(17.85%) occasional palpitation, and 9(16.07%) nausea and vomiting. ConclusionThe Ivermectin-Doxycycline combination showed a trend toward superiority to the Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromycin combination therapy in the case of patients with mild to moderate COVID19 disease, though the difference in time to becoming symptom-free and the difference in time to negative PCR was not statistically signi cant. Background:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID19) is a WHO declared a global pandemic. Over eight million people have already been infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), and billions have been affected by the socioeconomic squeal. As SARS-CoV-2 is a novel virus, there are not yet proven treatment options. Early treatment, before the disease becomes severe, would be optimal.Current considerations for treatment include Lopinavir/ritonavir, favipiravir, and remdesivir, which are all currently in wide use in the case of moderate to severe COVID19 patients. Treatments for patients earlier in disease with mild to mode...

The concept of circular economy (CE) has recently gained momentum in the political, scientific, and economic debate, especially in China and Europe. As a result, organizations and scholars have started to establish different sets of principles for its adoption. For this reason, it is important to identify and assess the differences and similarities among existing sets of CE principles, and how organizations and individuals understand and translate them into practice. In this paper, we firstly present a brief review and analysis of the coherence among six existing sets of principles. Our analysis finds that, despite the mixed degree of coherence, all sets describe the necessity to implement CE principles at all levels of a company. We then present the results of an in-depth qualitative survey that investigates how 19 key informants representing small, medium, and multinational companies based in China understand and carry out the CE principles laid out by the BSI standard BS 8001:2017; how these principles can transform the culture and processes of these companies; and what are the opportunities and threats that such transformation can bring. Results describe a good awareness and knowledge of the CE principles and an optimistic outlook concerning their adoption. At the same time, numerous barriers and threats that the implementation of these principles might entail are presented. Overall, respondents confirm the complexity of implementing the principles of the CE in an integrated and consistent way in the management and strategies of Chinese companies and highlight the challenges that might arise during their implementation.