FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1988402014> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1988402014 endingPage "335" @default.
• W1988402014 startingPage "334" @default.
• W1988402014 abstract "In this issue, Dr Treasure asks the fundamental question that has guided our entire research effort these past 20 years, “Is controlled reperfusion helpful?” Many areas of our work are quoted throughout this analysis, including an astounding editorial comment in the bibliography. There is concern for the clinical validity of our methods, and for Teoh’s suggestion of routine controlled reperfusion, based upon clinical metabolic analysis. Teoh’s report is the only reported clinical manuscript added to our 32 publications. Their clinical study in this issue analyzes 20 patients treated by a modified reperfusion protocol, and concludes that controlled reperfusion is not useful, and should be abandoned routinely.The value of scientific work is its reproduction by others, and this evaluation is welcomed. These new experiments must start with a bias, for that is the reason for the study. To reject the initial hypothesis you must precisely reproduce the approach of others. The experimenter must then abandon this bias, and become an observer to see if the experiment is correct, or if nature (or the subject studied) has not been perturbed properly. Doctor Treasure states this clearly in his editorial, “Minimization; the platinum standard for trials?”[1Treasure T. MacRae K. Minimization the platinum standard for trials?.Br Med J. 1998; 317: 362-363Crossref PubMed Scopus (254) Google Scholar] An additional philosophic concept was stated by Claude Bernard, a French physiologist who wrote in “The Introduction to Experimental Medicine,” that “excessive faith in your preconceived ideas leads to distorted observations that often neglect important factors that do not further your aim” [2Bernard C. An introduction to the study of experimental medicine. Dover Publications, New York1957: 38Google Scholar].The absence of benefits from controlled reperfusion is apparent from the manuscript. Doctor Ferguson asked me to comment on this contradiction of our work, and to give my thoughts about the current status of warm substrate enriched cardioplegic reperfusion, a term that I find more accurate than hot shot. My response requires understanding the method used for protection to avoid ischemia, and determining if warm cardioplegic reperfusion delivered in this study matched the approach described in our cited multiple manuscripts.The role of St. Thomas solution in blood to prevent ischemic damage is clear neither from the content of this paper, nor from its use of the bibliography, and the value of its antegrade reinfusion of each 30 minutes is not established. This contrasts to the antegrade or retrograde delivery administered more frequently clinically, based on experimental and clinical work. St. Thomas is a crystalloid solution and is mixed with blood and cooled by a circulating system. It is not clear if cardioplegic dilution resulted when a 4 to 1 blood to cardioplegia was used, nor whether this changed the basic crystalloid constituents evaluated without blood. It is important to know the precise limitations of protection, after cardioplegic delivery is introduced to reduce ischemic or reperfusion damage. One cannot determine this from the available blood St. Thomas information. This issue is the subject of my recent editorial, “Unproven Herbal Approaches vs Tested Scientific Study”[3Buckberg G.D. Unproven herbal approaches vs tested scientific study.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1999; 118 ([Letter]): 975-977Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar].The authors enumerated 32 of our publications, “according to Buckberg’s precise specifications.” However, their reperfusion approach indicates these manuscripts were not carefully read. The detailed biochemical markers of damage show reperfusion injury. More importantly, the 5% to 10% mortality, despite short (< 60 minutes) aortic clamping in 40 valve patients, coupled with intraaortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP) use and longer intensive care unit stays establish a good starting point for controlled reperfusion.Our clinical approach to limit reperfusion damage is cited [4Buckberg G.D. Antegrade/retrograde blood cardioplegia to ensure cardioplegic distribution operative techniques and objectives.J Card Surg. 1989; 4: 216-238Crossref PubMed Scopus (137) Google Scholar], but was not followed. Reperfusion calcium is lowered to 0.2 to 0.3 mmol to limit Ca++ influx [5Allen B.S. Okamoto F. Buckberg G.D. et al.Reperfusate composition benefits of marked hypocalcemia and diltiazem on regional recovery.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1986; 92: 564-572PubMed Google Scholar], not to 0.5 to 0.8 μmol/L as in this study. I presume the pharmacist added less citrate phosphate dextrose (CPD). High reperfusate K+ (20 mmol/L) is avoided to minimize a delay in resuming electromechanical activity. Our 8 to 10 mmol/L KCl dose also limits high potassium that may accelerate Ca++ entry after ischemia. These investigators used a 20 mmol/L dose and encountered the expected delay in coming off bypass. Reperfusion is at 150 mL/min for 3 minutes to further limit postischemic arrest after unclamping, and to keep the reperfusion pressure less than 50 mm Hg to reduce endothelial damage [5Allen B.S. Okamoto F. Buckberg G.D. et al.Reperfusate composition benefits of marked hypocalcemia and diltiazem on regional recovery.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1986; 92: 564-572PubMed Google Scholar]. Instead, 1000 mL of high potassium solution for 5 minutes at approximately 75 mm Hg pressure. Osmolarity of 360 to 400 mOsm limits edema [6Okamoto F. Allen B. Buckberg G.D. Young H. Bugyi H. Leaf J. Reperfusate composition interaction of marked hyperglycemia and marked hyperosmolarity in allowing immediate contractile recovery after four hours of regional ischemia.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1986; 92: 583-593PubMed Google Scholar], yet the authors used 320 to 360 mOsm. The substrate dose was accurate, but the increased flow, pressure, K+, Ca++, and lower osmolarity disregarded our recommendations. The result in 20 patients receiving modified reperfusion in their study differs from our results, but that is not surprising because the methods they employ were not like ours. To validate our results I will summarize some clinical reports listed below, which follow our principles, but are not cited in their bibliography.Loop, at the Cleveland Clinic [7Loop F.D. Higgins T.L. Panda R. Pearce G. Estafanous F.G. Myocardial protection during cardiac operations.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1992; 104: 608-618PubMed Google Scholar], studied greater than 800 high-risk coronary patients, including valve repair and replacement, and found patients treated without our protocol were 95% more likely to have a morbid event, as compared to patients treated according to our protocol. This was despite a shorter cross-clamp time (66 vs 81 minutes) in patients not treated with our protocol. A cost analysis of Cleveland Clinic data showed a $2,200.00 per patient savings, and further cost savings would occur by including outlier patients with prolonged intensive care unit and hospital times.Kirklin evaluated substrate enhanced controlled reperfusion in greater than 2300 coronary artery bypass graft patients, and quantified the reduced mortality to approximately 2% after greater than 60 to 180 minutes of ischemia [8Kirklin J.W. Technical and scientific advances in cardiac surgery over the past 25 years.Ann Thorac Surg. 1990; 49: 26-31Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (18) Google Scholar]. In approximately 1500 patients receiving integrated blood cardioplegic protection (including warm or cold, antegrade or retrograde, and intermittent or continuous delivery) mortality was 1.6% with greater than 50% in the high-risk category [9Buckberg G.D. Beyersdorf F. Allen B.S. Robertson J.R. Integrated myocardial management, background and initial application.J Card Surg. 1995; 10: 68-69Crossref PubMed Scopus (83) Google Scholar]. The integrated method was used in 82 consecutive high-risk patients with prolonged aortic clamping during complex valve procedures (mitral repair, 186 minutes, Ross procedure, 217 minutes) and a less than 3% IABP use and less than 2% mortality occurred [10Beyersdorf F. Allen B. Buckberg G.D. Myocardial protection with integrated blood cardioplegia.in: Franco K. Verrier E.D. Advanced therapy in cardiac surgery. BC Decker, Inc, London1999: 38-50Google Scholar].Our warm reperfusion protocol was established in 1986, in the Supplement quoted in the bibliography. It evolved experimentally and was administered to patients. This contrasts to cardiac operation, as there is no protection of the heart after acute coronary occlusion, and total recovery is dependent upon warm reperfusion. This method was tested in a 156 patient international study and again in Germany [11Allen B.S. Buckberg G.D. Fontan F. et al.Superiority of controlled surgical reperfusion vs PTCA in acute coronary occlusion.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1993; 105: 864-884PubMed Google Scholar, 12Beyersdorf F. Sarai K. Maul F.D. Wendt T. Satter P. Buckberg G.D. Immediate functional benefits after controlled reperfusion during surgical revascularization for acute coronary occlusion.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1991; 102: 856-866PubMed Google Scholar]. Return of immediate contractility after greater than 6 hours of coronary occlusion occurred in 87%, no deaths in 90 nonshock patients, and a 10% mortality in acute myocardial infarction patients in shock.Each of these aforementioned precise applications of our controlled reperfusion analysis was based upon a method that appears in their bibliography. Perhaps deviation from these established protocols implies this investigating team thought that markedly reducing reperfusion calcium, avoiding hyperkalemia, restricting the dose, limiting hypertensive reperfusion, and counteracting edema, was unhelpful in the modified reperfusate they delivered to the 20 patients. This disregard however did not detract recommending abandonment of routine controlled warm substrate enriched blood cardioplegic reperfusion.To answer Dr Ferguson’s second question, regarding the value of warm substrate enriched blood cardioplegic reperfusion, I believe surgical ischemia is needed to enhance visualization during operation. Consequently, reperfusion damage can occur from blood flow interruption (valve removal and suture placement, coronary revascularization) [13Piper H.M. Garcia-Dorado D. Ovize M. Review a fresh look at reperfusion injury.Cardiovascular Research. 1998; 38: 291-300Crossref PubMed Scopus (458) Google Scholar]. We codified some fundamental factors that limit damage, including the value of lowering Ca++, and avoiding early electromechanical activity. This was only one alteration of our multiple aspect reperfusion approaches.The ischemic heart is vulnerable to sudden calcium influx immediately after unclamping; usually 2 to 3 synchronous beats occur, followed by ventricular fibrillation after normal blood reperfusion. Unprotected calcium entry (ie, normal Ca++) may cause hypercontracture with subsequent sarcolemmal damage. Initial cardioplegic reperfusion maintains arrest and prevents this hypercontracture, allowing a brief interval where ionic balances can recover more normally during immediate reoxygenation. Recovery of spontaneous rhythm is common. Other methods of limiting reperfusion calcium damage include calcium channel blockers and sodium/hydrogen ion exchange inhibitors. In the future, more comprehensive approaches (ie, reducing neutrophils, oxygen radical scavengers, etc) will be added as new information unfolds.The cardiac surgeon must be aware that reperfusion injury after ischemia may be controlled by warm substrate enriched modified cardioplegic reperfusion before restoring regular blood flow by aortic unclamping. This control provides an important tool for our armamentarium. The 3 to 5 minutes to accomplish this task is a small price, compared to the morbidity and mortality from low output syndrome and subsequent exorbitant expenditure of myocytes and dollars. More information is needed before following the conclusion to abandon routine warm blood cardioplegic reperfusion after this 20 patient study. My observations underline potential dangers from imposing Procrustean ideas on complex reperfusion phenomena.I borrow again from Claude Bernard who said, “men who have excessive faith in their theories and ideas are not only ill prepared for making discoveries. They also make very poor observations. Of necessity, they observe with a preconceived idea and when they devise an experiment, they can see, in its results, only confirmation of their theory. In this way, they distort observation and often neglect very important facts” [2Bernard C. An introduction to the study of experimental medicine. Dover Publications, New York1957: 38Google Scholar]. In this issue, Dr Treasure asks the fundamental question that has guided our entire research effort these past 20 years, “Is controlled reperfusion helpful?” Many areas of our work are quoted throughout this analysis, including an astounding editorial comment in the bibliography. There is concern for the clinical validity of our methods, and for Teoh’s suggestion of routine controlled reperfusion, based upon clinical metabolic analysis. Teoh’s report is the only reported clinical manuscript added to our 32 publications. Their clinical study in this issue analyzes 20 patients treated by a modified reperfusion protocol, and concludes that controlled reperfusion is not useful, and should be abandoned routinely. The value of scientific work is its reproduction by others, and this evaluation is welcomed. These new experiments must start with a bias, for that is the reason for the study. To reject the initial hypothesis you must precisely reproduce the approach of others. The experimenter must then abandon this bias, and become an observer to see if the experiment is correct, or if nature (or the subject studied) has not been perturbed properly. Doctor Treasure states this clearly in his editorial, “Minimization; the platinum standard for trials?”[1Treasure T. MacRae K. Minimization the platinum standard for trials?.Br Med J. 1998; 317: 362-363Crossref PubMed Scopus (254) Google Scholar] An additional philosophic concept was stated by Claude Bernard, a French physiologist who wrote in “The Introduction to Experimental Medicine,” that “excessive faith in your preconceived ideas leads to distorted observations that often neglect important factors that do not further your aim” [2Bernard C. An introduction to the study of experimental medicine. Dover Publications, New York1957: 38Google Scholar]. The absence of benefits from controlled reperfusion is apparent from the manuscript. Doctor Ferguson asked me to comment on this contradiction of our work, and to give my thoughts about the current status of warm substrate enriched cardioplegic reperfusion, a term that I find more accurate than hot shot. My response requires understanding the method used for protection to avoid ischemia, and determining if warm cardioplegic reperfusion delivered in this study matched the approach described in our cited multiple manuscripts. The role of St. Thomas solution in blood to prevent ischemic damage is clear neither from the content of this paper, nor from its use of the bibliography, and the value of its antegrade reinfusion of each 30 minutes is not established. This contrasts to the antegrade or retrograde delivery administered more frequently clinically, based on experimental and clinical work. St. Thomas is a crystalloid solution and is mixed with blood and cooled by a circulating system. It is not clear if cardioplegic dilution resulted when a 4 to 1 blood to cardioplegia was used, nor whether this changed the basic crystalloid constituents evaluated without blood. It is important to know the precise limitations of protection, after cardioplegic delivery is introduced to reduce ischemic or reperfusion damage. One cannot determine this from the available blood St. Thomas information. This issue is the subject of my recent editorial, “Unproven Herbal Approaches vs Tested Scientific Study”[3Buckberg G.D. Unproven herbal approaches vs tested scientific study.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1999; 118 ([Letter]): 975-977Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar]. The authors enumerated 32 of our publications, “according to Buckberg’s precise specifications.” However, their reperfusion approach indicates these manuscripts were not carefully read. The detailed biochemical markers of damage show reperfusion injury. More importantly, the 5% to 10% mortality, despite short (< 60 minutes) aortic clamping in 40 valve patients, coupled with intraaortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP) use and longer intensive care unit stays establish a good starting point for controlled reperfusion. Our clinical approach to limit reperfusion damage is cited [4Buckberg G.D. Antegrade/retrograde blood cardioplegia to ensure cardioplegic distribution operative techniques and objectives.J Card Surg. 1989; 4: 216-238Crossref PubMed Scopus (137) Google Scholar], but was not followed. Reperfusion calcium is lowered to 0.2 to 0.3 mmol to limit Ca++ influx [5Allen B.S. Okamoto F. Buckberg G.D. et al.Reperfusate composition benefits of marked hypocalcemia and diltiazem on regional recovery.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1986; 92: 564-572PubMed Google Scholar], not to 0.5 to 0.8 μmol/L as in this study. I presume the pharmacist added less citrate phosphate dextrose (CPD). High reperfusate K+ (20 mmol/L) is avoided to minimize a delay in resuming electromechanical activity. Our 8 to 10 mmol/L KCl dose also limits high potassium that may accelerate Ca++ entry after ischemia. These investigators used a 20 mmol/L dose and encountered the expected delay in coming off bypass. Reperfusion is at 150 mL/min for 3 minutes to further limit postischemic arrest after unclamping, and to keep the reperfusion pressure less than 50 mm Hg to reduce endothelial damage [5Allen B.S. Okamoto F. Buckberg G.D. et al.Reperfusate composition benefits of marked hypocalcemia and diltiazem on regional recovery.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1986; 92: 564-572PubMed Google Scholar]. Instead, 1000 mL of high potassium solution for 5 minutes at approximately 75 mm Hg pressure. Osmolarity of 360 to 400 mOsm limits edema [6Okamoto F. Allen B. Buckberg G.D. Young H. Bugyi H. Leaf J. Reperfusate composition interaction of marked hyperglycemia and marked hyperosmolarity in allowing immediate contractile recovery after four hours of regional ischemia.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1986; 92: 583-593PubMed Google Scholar], yet the authors used 320 to 360 mOsm. The substrate dose was accurate, but the increased flow, pressure, K+, Ca++, and lower osmolarity disregarded our recommendations. The result in 20 patients receiving modified reperfusion in their study differs from our results, but that is not surprising because the methods they employ were not like ours. To validate our results I will summarize some clinical reports listed below, which follow our principles, but are not cited in their bibliography. Loop, at the Cleveland Clinic [7Loop F.D. Higgins T.L. Panda R. Pearce G. Estafanous F.G. Myocardial protection during cardiac operations.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1992; 104: 608-618PubMed Google Scholar], studied greater than 800 high-risk coronary patients, including valve repair and replacement, and found patients treated without our protocol were 95% more likely to have a morbid event, as compared to patients treated according to our protocol. This was despite a shorter cross-clamp time (66 vs 81 minutes) in patients not treated with our protocol. A cost analysis of Cleveland Clinic data showed a $2,200.00 per patient savings, and further cost savings would occur by including outlier patients with prolonged intensive care unit and hospital times. Kirklin evaluated substrate enhanced controlled reperfusion in greater than 2300 coronary artery bypass graft patients, and quantified the reduced mortality to approximately 2% after greater than 60 to 180 minutes of ischemia [8Kirklin J.W. Technical and scientific advances in cardiac surgery over the past 25 years.Ann Thorac Surg. 1990; 49: 26-31Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (18) Google Scholar]. In approximately 1500 patients receiving integrated blood cardioplegic protection (including warm or cold, antegrade or retrograde, and intermittent or continuous delivery) mortality was 1.6% with greater than 50% in the high-risk category [9Buckberg G.D. Beyersdorf F. Allen B.S. Robertson J.R. Integrated myocardial management, background and initial application.J Card Surg. 1995; 10: 68-69Crossref PubMed Scopus (83) Google Scholar]. The integrated method was used in 82 consecutive high-risk patients with prolonged aortic clamping during complex valve procedures (mitral repair, 186 minutes, Ross procedure, 217 minutes) and a less than 3% IABP use and less than 2% mortality occurred [10Beyersdorf F. Allen B. Buckberg G.D. Myocardial protection with integrated blood cardioplegia.in: Franco K. Verrier E.D. Advanced therapy in cardiac surgery. BC Decker, Inc, London1999: 38-50Google Scholar]. Our warm reperfusion protocol was established in 1986, in the Supplement quoted in the bibliography. It evolved experimentally and was administered to patients. This contrasts to cardiac operation, as there is no protection of the heart after acute coronary occlusion, and total recovery is dependent upon warm reperfusion. This method was tested in a 156 patient international study and again in Germany [11Allen B.S. Buckberg G.D. Fontan F. et al.Superiority of controlled surgical reperfusion vs PTCA in acute coronary occlusion.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1993; 105: 864-884PubMed Google Scholar, 12Beyersdorf F. Sarai K. Maul F.D. Wendt T. Satter P. Buckberg G.D. Immediate functional benefits after controlled reperfusion during surgical revascularization for acute coronary occlusion.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1991; 102: 856-866PubMed Google Scholar]. Return of immediate contractility after greater than 6 hours of coronary occlusion occurred in 87%, no deaths in 90 nonshock patients, and a 10% mortality in acute myocardial infarction patients in shock. Each of these aforementioned precise applications of our controlled reperfusion analysis was based upon a method that appears in their bibliography. Perhaps deviation from these established protocols implies this investigating team thought that markedly reducing reperfusion calcium, avoiding hyperkalemia, restricting the dose, limiting hypertensive reperfusion, and counteracting edema, was unhelpful in the modified reperfusate they delivered to the 20 patients. This disregard however did not detract recommending abandonment of routine controlled warm substrate enriched blood cardioplegic reperfusion. To answer Dr Ferguson’s second question, regarding the value of warm substrate enriched blood cardioplegic reperfusion, I believe surgical ischemia is needed to enhance visualization during operation. Consequently, reperfusion damage can occur from blood flow interruption (valve removal and suture placement, coronary revascularization) [13Piper H.M. Garcia-Dorado D. Ovize M. Review a fresh look at reperfusion injury.Cardiovascular Research. 1998; 38: 291-300Crossref PubMed Scopus (458) Google Scholar]. We codified some fundamental factors that limit damage, including the value of lowering Ca++, and avoiding early electromechanical activity. This was only one alteration of our multiple aspect reperfusion approaches. The ischemic heart is vulnerable to sudden calcium influx immediately after unclamping; usually 2 to 3 synchronous beats occur, followed by ventricular fibrillation after normal blood reperfusion. Unprotected calcium entry (ie, normal Ca++) may cause hypercontracture with subsequent sarcolemmal damage. Initial cardioplegic reperfusion maintains arrest and prevents this hypercontracture, allowing a brief interval where ionic balances can recover more normally during immediate reoxygenation. Recovery of spontaneous rhythm is common. Other methods of limiting reperfusion calcium damage include calcium channel blockers and sodium/hydrogen ion exchange inhibitors. In the future, more comprehensive approaches (ie, reducing neutrophils, oxygen radical scavengers, etc) will be added as new information unfolds. The cardiac surgeon must be aware that reperfusion injury after ischemia may be controlled by warm substrate enriched modified cardioplegic reperfusion before restoring regular blood flow by aortic unclamping. This control provides an important tool for our armamentarium. The 3 to 5 minutes to accomplish this task is a small price, compared to the morbidity and mortality from low output syndrome and subsequent exorbitant expenditure of myocytes and dollars. More information is needed before following the conclusion to abandon routine warm blood cardioplegic reperfusion after this 20 patient study. My observations underline potential dangers from imposing Procrustean ideas on complex reperfusion phenomena. I borrow again from Claude Bernard who said, “men who have excessive faith in their theories and ideas are not only ill prepared for making discoveries. They also make very poor observations. Of necessity, they observe with a preconceived idea and when they devise an experiment, they can see, in its results, only confirmation of their theory. In this way, they distort observation and often neglect very important facts” [2Bernard C. An introduction to the study of experimental medicine. Dover Publications, New York1957: 38Google Scholar]." @default.
• W1988402014 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1988402014 creator A5067633921 @default.
• W1988402014 date "2000-02-01" @default.
• W1988402014 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W1988402014 title "Substrate enriched warm blood cardioplegia reperfusion: an alternate view" @default.
• W1988402014 cites W1561293316 @default.
• W1988402014 cites W1965559130 @default.
• W1988402014 cites W1983680862 @default.
• W1988402014 cites W2054093846 @default.
• W1988402014 cites W2080045599 @default.
• W1988402014 cites W2097420238 @default.
• W1988402014 cites W2395474442 @default.
• W1988402014 cites W2397921038 @default.
• W1988402014 cites W2430265218 @default.
• W1988402014 cites W4294641131 @default.
• W1988402014 cites W79619738 @default.
• W1988402014 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-4975(99)01514-3" @default.
• W1988402014 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10735658" @default.
• W1988402014 hasPublicationYear "2000" @default.
• W1988402014 type Work @default.
• W1988402014 sameAs 1988402014 @default.
• W1988402014 citedByCount "10" @default.
• W1988402014 countsByYear W19884020142015 @default.
• W1988402014 countsByYear W19884020142020 @default.
• W1988402014 countsByYear W19884020142022 @default.
• W1988402014 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1988402014 hasAuthorship W1988402014A5067633921 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConcept C111368507 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConcept C127313418 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConcept C164705383 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConcept C2777289219 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConcept C42219234 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConceptScore W1988402014C111368507 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConceptScore W1988402014C126322002 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConceptScore W1988402014C127313418 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConceptScore W1988402014C164705383 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConceptScore W1988402014C2777289219 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConceptScore W1988402014C42219234 @default.
• W1988402014 hasConceptScore W1988402014C71924100 @default.
• W1988402014 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W1988402014 hasLocation W19884020141 @default.
• W1988402014 hasLocation W19884020142 @default.
• W1988402014 hasOpenAccess W1988402014 @default.
• W1988402014 hasPrimaryLocation W19884020141 @default.
• W1988402014 hasRelatedWork W1531601525 @default.
• W1988402014 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W1988402014 hasRelatedWork W2758277628 @default.
• W1988402014 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W1988402014 hasRelatedWork W2935909890 @default.
• W1988402014 hasRelatedWork W2948807893 @default.
• W1988402014 hasRelatedWork W3173606202 @default.
• W1988402014 hasRelatedWork W3183948672 @default.
• W1988402014 hasRelatedWork W2778153218 @default.
• W1988402014 hasRelatedWork W3110381201 @default.
• W1988402014 hasVolume "69" @default.
• W1988402014 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1988402014 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1988402014 magId "1988402014" @default.
• W1988402014 workType "article" @default.