The number of ultrafine particles may be a more health relevant characteristic of ambient particulate matter than the conventionally measured mass. Epidemiological time series studies typically use a central site to characterize human exposure to outdoor air pollution. There is currently very limited information how well measurements at a central site reflect temporal and spatial variation across an urban area for particle number concentrations (PNC). The main objective of the study was to assess the spatial variation of PNC compared to the mass concentration of particles with diameter less than 10 or 2.5 mm (PM 10 and PM 2.5). Continuous measurements of PM 10 , PM 2.5 , PNC and soot concentrations were conducted at a central site during October 2002-March 2004 in four cities spread over Europe (Amsterdam, Athens, Birmingham and Helsinki). The same measurements were conducted directly outside 152 homes spread over the metropolitan areas. Each home was monitored during 1 week. We assessed the temporal correlation and the variability of absolute concentrations. For all particle indices, including particle number, temporal correlation of 24-h average concentrations was high. The median correlation for PNC per city ranged between 0.67 and 0.76. For PM 2.5 median correlation ranged between 0.79 and

22To gain a better understanding on the spatiotemporal variation of ultrafine particles (UFPs) in urban 23 environments, this study reports on the first results of a long-term UFP monitoring network, set up in were still obtained in terms of particle numbers (20-38% for total particle numbers and up to 49% for 38 size-resolved particle numbers), confirming the importance of local source contributions and the need

Inadequate secretion of vasopressin during fluid removal by hemodialysis may contribute to the cardiovascular instability that complicates this therapy and administration of exogenous hormone, by supporting arterial pressure, may facilitate volume removal. To test this, we measured plasma vasopressin in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) during hemodialysis and found that despite significant fluid removal, plasma vasopressin concentration did not increase. We further found that ESRD did not alter the endogenous removal rate of plasma vasopressin and that plasma hormone is not dialyzed. Finally, in a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial in 22 hypertensive patients, we examined the effect of a constant infusion of a non-pressor dose of vasopressin on the arterial pressure response during a hemodialysis in which the target fluid loss was increased by 0.5 kg over the baseline prescription. We found that arterial pressure was more stable in the patients receiving vasopressin and that while only one patient (9%) in the vasopressin group had a symptomatic hypotensive episode, 64% of the patients receiving placebo had such an episode (P=0.024). Moreover, increased fluid removal was achieved only in the vasopressin group (520+/-90 ml vs 64+/-130 ml, P=0.01). Thus, administration of non-pressor doses of vasopressin to hypertensive subjects improves cardiovascular stability during hemodialysis and allows increased removal of excess extracellular fluid. Inadequate vasopressin secretion during hemodialysis-induced fluid removal is a likely contributor to the intradialytic hypotension that limits fluid removal.

No abstract

No abstract