Trichinella T5, collected from sylvatic carnivores in North America, was identified previously as a different phenotype of Trichinella, with an uncertain taxonomic level due to the availability of only 2 isolates. Cross-breeding experiments carried out with single female and male larvae of 2 strains of Trichinella T5, with single female and male larvae of 2 strains of Trichinella spiralis, Trichinella nativa, Trichinella britovi, Trichinella pseudospiralis, Trichinella nelsoni, and Trichinella T6, showed a reproductive isolation of Trichinella T5. Viable offspring were obtained only when a female of Trichinella T5 was crossed with a male of T. britovi, but not vice versa. Furthermore, the analysis of biological, biochemical, and molecular data of 32 isolates collected from sylvatic animals in the Nearctic region and identified as Trichinella T5 permitted its reassessment at the species level. Trichinella murrelli n. sp. is characterized by the following: distribution in temperate areas of the Nearctic region; newborn larvae production in vitro of 29-36/72 hr; nurse cell development time between 24 and 70 days postinfection; reproductive capacity index in Swiss mice 1.2-9.5, in wild mice 29.5-159.8, in rats 0.7-2.4, and in pigs 0.03-0.0004; no resistance to freezing; ribosomal DNA fragments of 7.2 kb and/or 11.4 kb, plus 2.2 kb and 1.8 kb present after Dra I digested DNA when probed with total T. spiralis RNA; a specific amplicon of 179 bp after polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification with the primer set SB147G; a specific fragment of 1,600 bp after PCR amplification with the primer set Ts43CA and Hhb I digestion; long incubation period; and moderate to severe pathogenicity for humans. The new species is most similar to T. britovi, though it differs from T. britovi in the pattern of 2 allozymes, in the patterns of major ribosomal DNA and PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism fragments, and in geographical distribution.

No abstract

No abstract

The upper extremities limitation represents one of the essential functional impairments in patients with cervical spinal cord injury. Electromechanics assisted devices and robots are increasingly used in neurorehabilitation to help functional improvement in patients with neurological diseases. This review aimed to systematically report the evidence-based, state-of-art on clinical applications and robotic-assisted arm training (RAT) in motor and functional recovery in subjects affected by cervical spinal cord injury. The present study has been carried out within the framework of the Italian Consensus Conference on “Rehabilitation assisted by robotic and electromechanical devices for persons with disability of neurological origin” (CICERONE). PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) databases were systematically searched from inception to September 2021. The 10-item PEDro scale assessed the study quality for the RCT and the AMSTAR-2 for the systematic review. Two different authors rated the studies included in this review. If consensus was not achieved after discussion, a third reviewer was interrogated. The five-item Oxford CEBM scale was used to rate the level of evidence. A total of 11 studies were included. The selected studies were: two systematic reviews, two RCTs, one parallel-group controlled trial, one longitudinal intervention study and five case series. One RCT was scored as a high-quality study, while the systematic review was of low quality. RAT was reported as feasible and safe. Initial positive effects of RAT were found for arm function and quality of movement in addition to conventional therapy. The high clinical heterogeneity of treatment programs and the variety of robot devices could severely affect the generalizability of the study results. Therefore, future studies are warranted to standardize the type of intervention and evaluate the role of robotic-assisted training in subjects affected by cervical spinal cord injury.

4 irccs santa lucia foundation, rome, italy; 5 unit of neurorehabilitation, ss. antonio e biagio e cesare arrigo hospital, alessandria, italy; 6 irccs san camillo, Venice, italy; 7 irccs don carlo Gnocchi foundation, florence, italy; 8 azienda usl di bologna, bologna, italy; 9 unit of rehabilitation Medicine and neurorehabilitation, irccs istituto delle scienze neurologiche di bologna (isnb), bologna, italy; 10 irccs "bonino pulejo" neurolysis center, Messina, italy; 11 consorzio siciliano di riabilitazione (c.s.r.), catania, italy; 12 campus bio-Medico university, rome, italy; 13 national center for innovative technologies in public health, italian national institute of health, rome, italy; 14 padre pio foundation and rehabilitation centers, san Giovanni rotondo, foggia, italy; 15 Molinette hospital, città della salute e della scienza, turin, italy; 16 crrf "Mons. luigi novarese," Moncrivello, Vercelli, italy; 17 don carlo Gnocchi foundation, turin, italy;