100 research outputs found
Astragalus wui M. Idrees & Z. Y. Zhang 2021, nom. nov.
No full textAstragalus wui M. Idrees & Z.Y. Zhang, nom. nov. Replaced name:— Astragalus sylvaticus Y.H. Wu (2015: 718), nom. illeg., non A. sylvaticus (Pall.) Willd. (1802: 1300). Type:— CHINA. Xinjiang: Yecheng Country, Sukepiya, in border forest, alt. 3000 m, 15 Aug. 1987, Exped. Qinghai-Tibet Wu Yuhu 1067 (holotype: QTPMB, not seen). Etymology:—The specific epithet honours Prof. Dr. Wu Yuhu (Northwest Institute of Plateau Biology, Chinese Academy of Science, Xining, China), author of the replaced name, who first described this new species.Published as part of Idrees, Muhammad & Zhang, Zhiyong, 2021, Astragalus wui, a new replacement name for A. sylvaticus Y. H. Wu (Galegeae, Papilionoideae, Fabaceae), pp. 210-211 in Phytotaxa 524 (3) on page 210, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.524.3.6, http://zenodo.org/record/564936
Salix diazii M. Idrees & J. M. H. Shaw 1015, nom. nov.
No full textSalix × diazii M. Idrees & J.M.H. Shaw, nom. nov. Replaced name:— Salix × longissima T.E.Díaz & J.Andrés (1987: 132), nom. illeg., non S. longissima P.Wessel (1855: 140). Type:— SPAIN. Léon Province: La Martina, 490 m, 29TPH91, 16 June 1985, T.E. Díaz et al. s.n. (holotype, LEB29538!, isotypes LEB29539!, LEB30605!). Etymology:— The specific epithet honours Prof. Dr. Tomás Emilio Díaz González (University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain), author of the replaced name, for his tremendous contributions to the taxonomy of the genus Salix. Distribution:— Spain, Léon Province (La Martina).Published as part of Idrees, Muhammad & Shaw, Julian M. H., 2022, A new name for extant Salix × longissima T. E. Díaz & J. Andrés (Salicaceae), pp. 213-214 in Phytotaxa 550 (2) on page 213, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.550.2.11, http://zenodo.org/record/664103
Readmission after pancreatic resection: causes, costs and cost-effectiveness analysis of high versus low quality hospitals using the Nationwide Readmission Database
No full textBackground: Objectives were to determine the causes of readmission and assess the cost-effectiveness of high (HQ) and low quality (LQ) hospitals in performing pancreatic resection, by using readmission rates as the measure of quality. Methods: We identified 53,572 pancreatic resection cases from National Readmission Database from 2010 through 2014. Hospitals were risk adjusted and ranked based on readmission. Top 20% HQ hospitals having the lowest readmission rates were compared to the bottom 20% LQ hospitals with the highest readmission rates. Results: The 90-day readmission rate was 27.2% (HQ: 25.7%, LQ: 30.9%, p < 0.001). Compared to LQ, HQ hospitals had lower mortality (2.1% vs 10.2%, p < 0.001) and major complication (10.5% vs 53%, p < 0.001). Major complication during index operation was a major predictor of readmission (RR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.6–1.7, p < 0.001). The optimal cut point of hospital volume associated with low mortality was 70 or more cases/year. Per year of survival benefit at HQ hospitals, the costs were lower by 6.98 million/year. Conclusion: HQ hospitals were cost-effective at performing pancreatic resection and achieved substantial cost-savings by avoiding major complications during index operation and having lower rates of readmissions. Hospital readmission rate is a strong marker of quality of care
Variation in Medicare Payments and Reimbursement Rates for Hepatopancreatic Surgery Based on Quality: Is There a Financial Incentive for High-Quality Hospitals?
No full textBackground: To better define the financial impact of high-quality care for payers and hospitals, we compared outcomes and Medicare payments between high-quality (HQ) and low-quality (LQ) hospitals after hepatopancreatic surgery. Study Design: Between 2013 through 2015, a total of 15,874 Medicare beneficiaries underwent hepatopancreatic surgery. Using the entire cohort, multivariable logistic regression was performed to categorize hospitals into quintiles based on the probability of experiencing a major complication; HQ (bottom 20%) and LQ (top 20%) hospitals were identified. Only HQ and LQ hospitals were included in the final propensity matching to compare payments. Major complication was defined as a complication associated with a length of stay of >75th percentile. Incremental payment and cost of complication were estimated using multivariable linear regression. Results: Major complications occurred in 9.7% (n = 309 of 3,182) at HQ hospitals compared with 20% (n = 625 of 3,130) at LQ hospitals (p < 0.001). The incremental increased payment associated with major complication was 42,935. The Medicare reimbursement rate was also 6% lower at both HQ and LQ hospitals when a major complication occurred vs not; however, HQ hospitals had a 3% higher reimbursement rate compared with LQ hospitals when a major complication did not occur (p = 0.002). Mean unadjusted Medicare payment was lower at HQ hospitals by 5,165 per patient vs LQ hospitals (p < 0.001), largely because HQ hospitals had a lower overall incidence of major complications (n = 315 vs n = 625). By having 310 fewer patients with a major complication, HQ hospitals collectively achieved 3.1 million/year in Medicare savings. Conclusions: High-quality hospitals are able to achieve substantial Medicare savings by avoiding major complications. Occurrence of major complications was associated with lower Medicare reimbursement rates at both HQ and LQ hospitals vs when no complications occurred
Synergistic Effects of Perioperative Complications on 30-Day Mortality Following Hepatopancreatic Surgery
No full textBackground: Data on the interaction effect of multiple concurrent postoperative complications relative to the risk of short-term mortality following hepatopancreatic surgery have not been reported. The objective of the current study was to define the interaction effect of postoperative complications among patients undergoing HP surgery on 30-day mortality. Methods: Using the ACS-NSQIP Procedure Targeted Participant Use Data File, patients who underwent HP surgery between 2014 and 2016 were identified. Hazard ratios (HRs) for 30-day mortality were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models. Two-way interaction effects assessing combinations of complications relative to 30-day mortality were calculated using the relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI) in separate adjusted Cox models. Results: Among 26,824 patients, 10,886 (40.5%) experienced at least one complication. Mortality was higher among patients who experienced at least one complication versus patients who did not experience a complication (3.0 vs 0.1%, p < 0.001). The most common complications were blood transfusion (16.9%, n = 4519), organ space infection (12.2%, n = 3273), and sepsis/septic shock (8.2%, n = 2205). Combinations associated with additive effect on mortality included transfusion + renal dysfunction (RERI 12.3, 95% CI 5.2–19.4), pulmonary dysfunction + renal dysfunction (RERI 60.9, 95% CI 38.6–83.3), pulmonary dysfunction + cardiovascular complication (RERI 144.1, 95% CI 89.3–199.0), and sepsis/septic shock + renal dysfunction (RERI 11.5, 95% CI 4.4–18.7). Conclusion: Both the number and specific type of complication impacted the incidence of postoperative mortality among patients undergoing HP surgery. Certain complications interacted in a synergistic manner, leading to a greater than expected increase in the risk of short-term mortality
Trends in centralization of surgical care and compliance with National Cancer Center Network guidelines for resected cholangiocarcinoma
No full textBackground: A retrospective study was performed to characterize trends in centralization of care and compliance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for resected cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), and their impact on overall survival (OS). Methods: Using the National Cancer Database (NCDB) 2004–2015 we identified patients undergoing resection for CCA. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analyses identified time periods and hospital volume groups for comparison. Propensity score matching provided case-mix adjusted patient cohorts. Cox hazard analysis identified risk factors for OS. Results: Among the 40,338 patients undergoing resection for CCA, the proportion of patients undergoing surgery at high volume hospitals increased over time (25%–44%, p < 0.001), while the proportion of patients undergoing surgery at low volume hospitals decreased (30%–15%, p < 0.001). Using ROC analyses, a hospital volume of 14 operations/year was the most sensitive and specific value associated with mortality. Surgery at high volume hospitals [HR] = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.88–0.97, p < 0.001) and receipt of care compliant with NCCN guidelines (HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.83–0.91, p < 0.001) were independently associated with improved OS. Conclusions: Both centralization of surgery for CCA to high volume hospitals and increased compliance with NCCN guidelines were associated with significant improvements in overall survival
Rubus coreanus var. nakaianus H. Leveille 1910
No full text5. Rubus coreanus var. nakaianus Léveillé (1910: 358) Type (lectotype designated here):— KOREA. Quelpaert: in silvis Hallaisan, June 1909, T. Taquet 2845 (barcode E00313541!). [Image available at https://data.rbge.org.uk/herb/ E00313541]. Note:— Léveillé (1910) cited three collections (Taquet 2834, 2835 & 2845)” in the protologue when he described this variety, but did not indicate the holotype specimen. In addition, no author has designated a lectotype, even inadvertently (Art. 7.11 of ICN). According to Stafleu and Cowan (1979), all of the Léveillé’ type specimens have been purchased by E in 1919. We locate three collections, one of them “ Taquet 2834 ” deposited in E (barcode 00010578), one of them “ Taquet 2835 ” in E (barcode 00313542), and the other material “ Taquet 2845 ” in E (barcode E00313541); all these collections should be regarded as syntypes (Art. 9.6 of ICN). All the specimens in E bear the information “ Syntype Rubus coreanus var. nakaianus H. Léveillé ”, and it is necessary to select one of them as the lectotype (Art. 9.12 of ICN). Hence, we designate the blooming specimen of “ T. Taquet 2845 ” in E (barcode E00313541) as the lectotype. The selected sheet bear the same locality and is morphological complete with the presence of stem, leaves, and flower that fully correspond with the protologue.Published as part of Idrees, Muhammad & Zhang, Zhiyong, 2022, Lectotypification of 16 names in Rubus subg. Idaeobatus, 12 names in R. subg. Malachobatus, and 1 name in R. subg. Chamaebatus (Rosaceae), pp. 13-24 in Phytotaxa 559 (1) on page 15, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.559.1.2, http://zenodo.org/record/700928
Rubus ourosepalus Cardot 1917
No full text29. Rubus ourosepalus Cardot (1917: 290) Type (lectotype designated here):— W. CHINA. July 1903, E.H.Wilson 3484 (barcode P00755302!, isolectotypes: A00040689!, A00133085!). [Image available at http://coldb.mnhn.fr/catalognumber/mnhn/p/p00755302]. Note:—In the protologue, Cardot (1917) described Rubus ourosepalus and cited “ Wilson 1903; Veitch Exped. 3484 ” as the type, but did not indicate where the type preserved. Since then, no author has designated a lectotype, even inadvertently (Art. 7.11, Turland et al. 2018). According to Stafleu and Mennega (1995), Cardot’ original materials were deposited at P. We locate three duplicates, two of them deposited in A (barcode 00040689 and 00133085), and one of them in P (barcode 00755302). All these collections should be regarded as syntypes (Arts. 9.6, and 40 Note 1, Turland et al. 2018); hence, a lectotype may be designated (Art. 9.12). We designate the sheet in P (barcode 00755302) as the lectotype, since it is morphological complete with the presence of stem, leaves, and flower that fully correspond with the protologue.Published as part of Idrees, Muhammad & Zhang, Zhiyong, 2022, Lectotypification of 16 names in Rubus subg. Idaeobatus, 12 names in R. subg. Malachobatus, and 1 name in R. subg. Chamaebatus (Rosaceae), pp. 13-24 in Phytotaxa 559 (1) on page 21, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.559.1.2, http://zenodo.org/record/700928
Rubus sachalinensis Leveille 1909
No full text15. Rubus sachalinensis Léveillé (1909: 332) Type (lectotype designated here):— JAPAN. Insula Sagalien: in silvis Korsakof, 30 July, 30 Sept. 1908, U. Fauire 566 (barcode E00317757!, isolectotype: A00040722!). [Image available at https://data.rbge.org.uk/herb/E00317757]. Note:— Léveillé (1909) mentioned the following locality: “Insula Sagalien: in silvis Korsakof, 30 July, 30 Sept. 1908 (U. Fauire 565 & U. Fauire 566); in herbidis Vladimirof, July 1908 (U. Fauire 597); in montibus Takinosawa, 24 July 1908 (U. Fauire 567 & U. Fauire 598 pro parte” in the protologue when he describing Rubus sachalinensis, but did not indicate the holotype specimen. In addition, no author has designated a lectotype, even inadvertently (Art. 7.11 of ICN). According to Stafleu and Cowan (1979), all of the Léveillé’s type specimens have been purchased by E in 1919. We locate five collections, which have been deposited in E (barcode 00010560, 00317757-00317760), and should be regarded as syntypes (Art. 9.6 of ICN); it is necessary to select one of them as the lectotype (Art. 9.12 of ICN). Hence, we designate the blooming specimen of“ U. Fauire 566 ” in E (barcode 00317757) as the lectotype since it is morphological complete with the presence of stem, leaves, inflorescence and flower that fully correspond with the protologue.Published as part of Idrees, Muhammad & Zhang, Zhiyong, 2022, Lectotypification of 16 names in Rubus subg. Idaeobatus, 12 names in R. subg. Malachobatus, and 1 name in R. subg. Chamaebatus (Rosaceae), pp. 13-24 in Phytotaxa 559 (1) on page 17, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.559.1.2, http://zenodo.org/record/700928
- …
