The Experts below are selected from a list of 888 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Claudia M. F. Oliveira - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Mosquito mark release recapture (MMRR) collection points via handheld Aspirators, Sítio Novo, Olinda, RMR, Brazil, July 22–August 21, 2015.
2018Co-Authors: Anita Ramesh, Mary Cameron, Kirstin Spence, Remy Hoek Spaans, Maria A. V. Melo-santos, Marcelo H. S. Paiva, Duschinka R. D. Guedes, Rosangela M. R. Barbosa, Claudia M. F. OliveiraAbstract:Mosquito mark release recapture (MMRR) collection points via handheld Aspirators, Sítio Novo, Olinda, RMR, Brazil, July 22–August 21, 2015.
-
Collection method comparison (CMC) mosquito collection points via handheld Aspirators and CDC light traps, Sítio Novo, Olinda, RMR, Brazil, July 22–August 21, 2015.
2018Co-Authors: Anita Ramesh, Mary Cameron, Kirstin Spence, Remy Hoek Spaans, Maria A. V. Melo-santos, Marcelo H. S. Paiva, Duschinka R. D. Guedes, Rosangela M. R. Barbosa, Claudia M. F. OliveiraAbstract:Collection method comparison (CMC) mosquito collection points via handheld Aspirators and CDC light traps, Sítio Novo, Olinda, RMR, Brazil, July 22–August 21, 2015.
Marc Coosemans - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the efficacy of indoor cdc light traps for collecting the sandfly phlebotomus argentipes vector of leishmania donovani
Medical and Veterinary Entomology, 2008Co-Authors: Diwakar Singh Dinesh, Albert Picado, Clive R Davies, Niko Speybroeck, Marleen Boelaert, Marc CoosemansAbstract:The efficacy of light traps for collecting sandflies (Diptera: Psychodidae) varies both inter-specifically and intra-specifically (by gender and physiological status) as a result of significant differences in phototropic and other behavioural characteristics. The efficacy of miniature CDC light traps for collecting Phlebotomus argentipes Annandale & Brunetti, a vector of Leishmania donovani Laveran & Mesnil (Kinetoplastida: Trypanosomatidae), was assessed in the Indian state of Bihar. Sandflies were collected during the night from 16 houses in each of three villages over 3 months (four times at fortnightly intervals) using CDC light traps indoors, and by aspirator collection (carried out by one person for 30 min/house) from the walls of the same houses the following morning. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) between CDC light trap collections and aspirator collections were obtained through a negative binomial regression with household as random effect. CDC light traps were especially effective in catching males (IRR 3.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.12-4.46) and unfed females (IRR 3.50, 95% CI 2.37-5.16) of P. argentipes, and to a lesser extent gravids (IRR 1.77, 95% CI 1.07-2.93). However, only a relatively small proportion of all blood-fed P. argentipes were collected by light trap (IRR 0.45, 95% CI 0.28-0.73). Despite its limitations in collecting blood-fed female sandflies, the CDC light trap appears to trap a sufficient proportion of the indoor population of sandflies for sampling purposes, and as this light trap is also more convenient and more easily standardized than the aspirator method, we conclude that it is the most efficient method for monitoring P. argentipes populations in the Indian subcontinent.
Anita Ramesh - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Mosquito mark release recapture (MMRR) collection points via handheld Aspirators, Sítio Novo, Olinda, RMR, Brazil, July 22–August 21, 2015.
2018Co-Authors: Anita Ramesh, Mary Cameron, Kirstin Spence, Remy Hoek Spaans, Maria A. V. Melo-santos, Marcelo H. S. Paiva, Duschinka R. D. Guedes, Rosangela M. R. Barbosa, Claudia M. F. OliveiraAbstract:Mosquito mark release recapture (MMRR) collection points via handheld Aspirators, Sítio Novo, Olinda, RMR, Brazil, July 22–August 21, 2015.
-
Collection method comparison (CMC) mosquito collection points via handheld Aspirators and CDC light traps, Sítio Novo, Olinda, RMR, Brazil, July 22–August 21, 2015.
2018Co-Authors: Anita Ramesh, Mary Cameron, Kirstin Spence, Remy Hoek Spaans, Maria A. V. Melo-santos, Marcelo H. S. Paiva, Duschinka R. D. Guedes, Rosangela M. R. Barbosa, Claudia M. F. OliveiraAbstract:Collection method comparison (CMC) mosquito collection points via handheld Aspirators and CDC light traps, Sítio Novo, Olinda, RMR, Brazil, July 22–August 21, 2015.
Carlos A Pellegrini - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
esophageal manometry and 24 hour ph monitoring in the diagnosis of pulmonary aspiration secondary to gastroesophageal reflux
American Journal of Surgery, 1992Co-Authors: Marco G Patti, Haile T Debas, Carlos A PellegriniAbstract:Twenty-three consecutive patients who had persistent respiratory symptoms of unexplained etiology were evaluated to determine the presence of gastroesophageal reflux (GER) and its relationship to their respiratory complaints. Lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and upper esophageal sphincter (UES) pressures and the characteristics of the peristaltic waves in the proximal and distal esophagus were determined. Esophageal acid exposure 5 cm and 20 cm above the LES was measured using a pH probe with two antimony sensors. Aspiration was diagnosed when respiratory symptoms occurred during or within 3 minutes after a reflux episode, recorded at both levels of the esophagus. Based on these criteria, 12 patients were considered nonAspirators (group A), and 11 were categorized as Aspirators (group B). Aspirators had: (1) lower LES pressure (6.1 ± 3.1 versus 12 ± 4.8 mm Hg, p < 0.01); (2) decreased amplitude of peristalsis in the proximal esophagus (34 ± 16 versus 59 ± 21 mm Hg, p < 0.01) and distal esophagus (46 ± 25 versus 91 ± 28 mm Hg, p < 0.01), and higher incidence of simultaneous, non peristaltic waves (30% versus 4%); and (3) lower UES pressure (44 ± 23 versus 74 ± 38 mm Hg). Impaired peristalsis in Aspirators caused a higher acid exposure (11.4% ± 8.0% versus 1.0% ± 0.7% of time pH < 4, p < 0.01) and delayed clearance (5.5 ± 6.5 versus 0.7 ± 0.4 min) in the proximal esophagus. Our study shows that, in patients with respiratory symptoms of unexplained etiology, esophageal manometry and 24-hour pH monitoring will identify a subgroup of true Aspirators. These patients suffer from a panesophageal motor dysfunction that affects all three barriers to aspiration: the LES, the esophageal “pump mechanism,” and the UES.
-
esophageal manometry and 24 hour ph monitoring in the diagnosis of pulmonary aspiration secondary to gastroesophageal reflux
American Journal of Surgery, 1992Co-Authors: Marco G Patti, Haile T Debas, Carlos A PellegriniAbstract:Abstract Twenty-three consecutive patients who had persistent respiratory symptoms of unexplained etiology were evaluated to determine the presence of gastroesophageal reflux (GER) and its relationship to their respiratory complaints. Lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and upper esophageal sphincter (UES) pressures and the characteristics of the peristaltic waves in the proximal and distal esophagus were determined. Esophageal acid exposure 5 cm and 20 cm above the LES was measured using a pH probe with two antimony sensors. Aspiration was diagnosed when respiratory symptoms occurred during or within 3 minutes after a reflux episode, recorded at both levels of the esophagus. Based on these criteria, 12 patients were considered nonAspirators (group A), and 11 were categorized as Aspirators (group B). Aspirators had: (1) lower LES pressure (6.1 ± 3.1 versus 12 ± 4.8 mm Hg, p
Kirstin Spence - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Mosquito mark release recapture (MMRR) collection points via handheld Aspirators, Sítio Novo, Olinda, RMR, Brazil, July 22–August 21, 2015.
2018Co-Authors: Anita Ramesh, Mary Cameron, Kirstin Spence, Remy Hoek Spaans, Maria A. V. Melo-santos, Marcelo H. S. Paiva, Duschinka R. D. Guedes, Rosangela M. R. Barbosa, Claudia M. F. OliveiraAbstract:Mosquito mark release recapture (MMRR) collection points via handheld Aspirators, Sítio Novo, Olinda, RMR, Brazil, July 22–August 21, 2015.
-
Collection method comparison (CMC) mosquito collection points via handheld Aspirators and CDC light traps, Sítio Novo, Olinda, RMR, Brazil, July 22–August 21, 2015.
2018Co-Authors: Anita Ramesh, Mary Cameron, Kirstin Spence, Remy Hoek Spaans, Maria A. V. Melo-santos, Marcelo H. S. Paiva, Duschinka R. D. Guedes, Rosangela M. R. Barbosa, Claudia M. F. OliveiraAbstract:Collection method comparison (CMC) mosquito collection points via handheld Aspirators and CDC light traps, Sítio Novo, Olinda, RMR, Brazil, July 22–August 21, 2015.
