This Essay explores the sanction of “non-participation,” which has been used against Russia following the start of the war in Ukraine. After mapping out the multifaceted instances of Russia's exclusion from international organizations, the analysis considers the legality of measures adopted that do not have an explicit basis in institutional rules. The Essay concludes with broad reflections on the use of international organizations as platforms to stigmatize and isolate the violator and outlines some consequences and functions that the sanction of “non-participation” has today.

No abstract

Background: An early diagnosis of CHARGE syndrome is challenging, especially for the primary care physicians who often take care of neonates with multiple congenital anomalies. Here we report eight cases of CHARGE syndrome whose diagnosis was made early in life with the intent to identify the most helpful features allowing a prompt clinical diagnosis. Methods: Medical records of patients with CHARGE syndrome whose diagnosis was made at the Fondazione IRCCS Ca′ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico in Milan, Italy were retrospectively reviewed. Results: Taken together, these patients reflect the considerable phenotypic variability of the syndrome; in one patient, the diagnosis was made immediately after birth because all the major criteria were met. In six patients, presenting with relatively nonspecific defects, a temporal bone computerized tomography scan was essential to achieve the correct diagnosis. In one patient, the diagnosis was made later than the others were. A careful examination revealed the presence of outer, middle, and inner ear anomalies: these elements, in the absence of any additional major criteria, represented for us an important diagnostic clue. Conclusions: This article suggests that an accurate evaluation of the ear should be made every time CHARGE syndrome is considered as a likely diagnosis even when the standard criteria are not fulfilled.

The aim of our study was to verify whether threshold testing of the central area with a common automated perimeter could detect early glaucomatous damage. We selected 9 eyes of 9 patients with suspected primary open angle glaucoma and normal visual fields and 18 eyes of 18 age-matched normal subjects. They underwent the Macula Threshold Test of the Humphrey Field Analyzer using white and blue targets. We found no significant difference in retinal sensitivity to white targets between the two groups. Sensitivity to blue targets was significantly lower among glaucoma suspects (18.43 +/- 1.14 dB) than in the control group (22.37 +/- 0.94 dB) p less than 0.001). Blue thresholds related significantly to age only in normals (p = 0.028) while in glaucoma suspects they were strongly related to vertical cup/disc ratios (p less than 0.001). These results suggest that it is possible to detect early central visual disturbances from glaucoma using an automated perimeter and its built-in color filters.