Carbon nanotube (CNT) reinforced (0.05–0.5% by wt) polycaprolactone (PCL)‐based composites were prepared by compression molding. Addition of 0.2% CNT caused a 131% improvement of tensile strength (TS) of PCL films. The tensile modulus (TM) and elongation at break (Eb) of PCL were also significantly improved with the addition of CNT. The water vapor permeability of PCL was 1.51 g·mm/m2·day but 0.2% CNT containing PCL films showed 1.08 g·mm/m2·day. Similarly, the oxygen transmission rate (OTR) of PCL films was found to decrease with the addition of CNT. But, carbon dioxide transmission rate (CO2TR) of PCL film was improved due to incorporation of CNT. Effect of gamma radiation on PCL films and CNT reinforced PCL‐based composites were also studied. The TS of the irradiated (10 kGy) PCL films gained to 75% higher than control sample. The TS of the 0.2% CNT reinforced composite film was reached to 41 MPa at 15 kGy dose. The barrier properties of non‐irradiated and irradiated (10 kGy) PCL films and composites (0.2% CNT reinforced) were also measured. Both PCL films and composites showed lower values of WVP upon irradiation and indicated better water vapor barrier. The OTR and CO2TR of the irradiated (10 kGy) PCL films and composites were decreased compared to their counterparts. Surface and interface morphologies of the composites were studied by scanning electron microscopy. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 2013

Abstract. The currently used classification reflects our understanding of the pathogenesis of the various forms of lupus nephritis, but clinicopathologic studies have revealed the need for improved categorization and terminology. Based on the 1982 classification published under the auspices of the World Health Organization (WHO) and subsequent clinicopathologic data, we propose that class I and II be used for purely mesangial involvement (I, mesangial immune deposits without mesangial hypercellularity; II, mesangial immune deposits with mesangial hypercellularity); class III for focal glomerulonephritis (involving Ͻ50% of total number of glomeruli) with subdivisions for active and sclerotic lesions; class IV for diffuse glomerulonephritis (involving Ն50% of total number of glomeruli) either with segmental (class IV-S) or global (class IV-G) involvement, and also with subdivisions for active and sclerotic lesions; class V for membranous lupus nephritis; and class VI for advanced sclerosing lesions]. Combinations of membranous and proliferative glomerulonephritis (i.e., class III and V or class IV and V) should be reported individually in the diagnostic line. The diagnosis should also include entries for any concomitant vascular or tubulointerstitial lesions. One of the main advantages of the current revised classification is that it provides a clear and unequivocal description of the various lesions and classes of lupus nephritis, allowing a better standardization and lending a basis for further clinicopathologic studies. We hope that this revision, which evolved under the auspices of the International Society of Nephrology and the Renal Pathology Society, will contribute to further advancement of the WHO classification.The morphologic changes in a renal biopsy from a patient with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) comprise a spectrum of vascular, glomerular, and tubulointerstitial lesions. The classification of SLE nephritis has evolved over the past 40 years as more lesions were identified and defined. It has been an increasing challenge to apply new pathogenetic insights to the interpretation of the renal biopsy in SLE and to correlate pathologic findings with clinical symptoms, choice of treatment, and prognosis. The current classification, which was advanced in 1982 (1) and revised in 1995 (2), reflects our understanding of the pathogenesis of the various forms of renal injury in SLE nephritis. However, subsequent clinicopathologic studies have revealed the need for clarification of the different categories and the diagnostic terminology. The clas-

No abstract

The currently used classification reflects our understanding of the pathogenesis of the various forms of lupus nephritis, but clinicopathologic studies have revealed the need for improved categorization and terminology. Based on the 1982 classification published under the auspices of the World Health Organization (WHO) and subsequent clinicopathologic data, we propose that class I and II be used for purely mesangial involvement (I, mesangial immune deposits without mesangial hypercellularity; II, mesangial immune deposits with mesangial hypercellularity); class III for focal glomerulonephritis (involving <50% of total number of glomeruli) with subdivisions for active and sclerotic lesions; class IV for diffuse glomerulonephritis (involving > or =50% of total number of glomeruli) either with segmental (class IV-S) or global (class IV-G) involvement, and also with subdivisions for active and sclerotic lesions; class V for membranous lupus nephritis; and class VI for advanced sclerosing lesions. Combinations of membranous and proliferative glomerulonephritis (i.e., class III and V or class IV and V) should be reported individually in the diagnostic line. The diagnosis should also include entries for any concomitant vascular or tubulointerstitial lesions. One of the main advantages of the current revised classification is that it provides a clear and unequivocal description of the various lesions and classes of lupus nephritis, allowing a better standardization and lending a basis for further clinicopathologic studies. We hope that this revision, which evolved under the auspices of the International Society of Nephrology and the Renal Pathology Society, will contribute to further advancement of the WHO classification.