J. Inst. Brew. 117(3), 314-328, 2011Kieselguhr or diatomaceous earth is the most commonly used filter aid for beer filtration. However, lately the use of kieselguhr has come under increased criticism. Some of the reasons for this are cost of disposal, limited resources and hazards to health from diatomite powder. One alternative to filtration with kieselguhr could be cellulose. Cellulose can be regenerated several times, is easy to dispose of, bears no health risks and as a renewable raw material is widely available. Previous single filtrations with cellulose were not satisfactory. A pre-clarification of wort and green beer with silica sol was used in this work to improve the haze of the filtered beer. Furthermore, silica sol was added to the cellulose mixture for body-feed during filtration. This represents a new field of application. When adding silica sol, filtrate haze was reduced in both applications. The intensity of this effect was dependent on how, when and where the material is added. Another future alternative could be rice hull ash because of its similarities to kieselguhr.

Background and aim: Favorable outcomes of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) over open hepatectomy (OH) have been demonstrated. LH offers less postoperative morbidity, less blood loss and shorter hospital stay, while maintaining oncological safety. Only limited evidence about outcomes of LH in elderly is currently available. Therefore, this study aimed to compare short term outcomes of LH to OH for patients >65 years. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to Cochrane guidelines. Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched to identify eligible studies. Studies were included if they compared LH to OH, and focused on an elderly population, or had a majority of patients >65 years. Perioperative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Results: Thirteen studies with 1174 patients (LH:532, OH:642) were included for analysis. When compared to OH, elderly undergoing LH had significantly less postoperative complications (relative risk [RR]0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI):0.43-0.63), less blood loss (mean difference [MD]-198.58; 95% CI:-299.88 to −97.28), and shorter length of stay (MD-4.83; 95%CI:-7.91 to −1.84), while oncological safety was non-inferior (RR1.04; 95%CI:1.00-1.08). Conclusions: Within the elderly population LH seems to be superior to OH, concerning short-term outcomes. However, for broader applicability more trials are needed including more difficult and major resections.

No abstract

Supervision is one important way to socialize Ph.D. candidates into open and responsible research. We hypothesized that one should be more likely to identify open science practices (here publishing open access and sharing data) in empirical publications that were part of a Ph.D. thesis when the Ph.D. candidates’ supervisors engaged in these practices compared to those whose supervisors did not or less often did. Departing from thesis repositories at four Dutch University Medical centers, we included 211 pairs of supervisors and Ph.D. candidates, resulting in a sample of 2062 publications. We determined open access status using UnpaywallR and Open Data using Oddpub, where we also manually screened publications with potential open data statements. Eighty-three percent of our sample was published openly, and 9% had open data statements. Having a supervisor who published open access more often than the national average was associated with an odds of 1.99 to publish open access. However, this effect became nonsignificant when correcting for institutions. Having a supervisor who shared data was associated with 2.22 (CI:1.19–4.12) times the odds to share data compared to having a supervisor that did not. This odds ratio increased to 4.6 (CI:1.86–11.35) after removing false positives. The prevalence of open data in our sample was comparable to international studies; open access rates were higher. Whilst Ph.D. candidates spearhead initiatives to promote open science, this study adds value by investigating the role of supervisors in promoting open science.

Background Parastomal hernia after ileal conduit urinary diversion is an underestimated and undertreated clinical entity, which heavily impairs patients’ quality of life due to symptoms of pain, leakage, application or skin problems. As for all gastrointestinal stomata the best surgical repair technique has yet to be determined. Thereby, surgery for ileal conduit parastomal hernias poses some specific perioperative challenges. This review aims to give an overview of current evidence on the surgical treatment of parastomal hernia after cystectomy and ileal conduit urinary diversion, and on the use of prophylactic mesh at index surgery in its prevention. Methods A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA-guidelines. The electronic databases Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched. Studies were included if they presented postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing surgical treatment of parastomal hernia at the ileal conduit site, irrespective of the technique used. A search was performed to identify additional studies on prophylactic mesh in the prevention of ileal conduit parastomal hernia, that were not identified by the initial search. Results Eight retrospective case-series were included for analysis, reporting different surgical techniques. If reported, highest complication rate was 45%. Recurrence rates varied highly, ranging from 0 to 80%. Notably, lower recurrence rates were reported in studies with shorter follow-up. Overall, available data suggest significant morbidity after the surgical treatment of ileal conduit parastomal hernias. Data from five conference abstracts on the matter were retrieved, and systematically reported. Regarding prophylactic mesh in the prevention of ileal conduit parastomal hernia, 5 communications were identified. All of them used keyhole mesh in a retromuscular position, and reported on favorable results in the mesh group without an increase in mesh-related complications. Conclusion Data on the surgical treatment of ileal conduit parastomal hernias and the use of prophylactic mesh in its prevention is scarce. Given the specific perioperative challenges and the paucity of reported results, more high-quality evidence is needed to determine the optimal treatment of this specific surgical problem. Initial results on the use of prophylactic mesh in the prevention of ileal conduit parastomal hernias seem promising.