• Title/Summary/Keyword: 유출 발생

Search Result 3,252, Processing Time 0.024 seconds

Comparison of the Operative Results of Performing Endoscopic Robot Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery Versus Conventional Cardiac Surgery (수술용 내시경 로봇(AESOP)을 이용한 최소 침습적 개심술과 동 기간에 시행된 전통적인 개심술의 결과에 대한 비교)

  • Lee, Young-Ook;Cho, Joon-Yong;Lee, Jong-Tae;Kim, Gun-Jik
    • Journal of Chest Surgery
    • /
    • v.41 no.5
    • /
    • pp.598-604
    • /
    • 2008
  • Background: The improvements in endoscopic equipment and surgical robots has encouraged the performance of minimally invasive cardiac operations. Yet only a few Korean studies have compared this procedure with the sternotomy approach. Material and Method: Between December 2005 and July 2007, 48 patients (group A) underwent minimally invasive cardiac surgery with AESOP through a small right thoracotomy. During the same period, 50 patients (group B) underwent conventional surgery. We compared the operative time, the operative results, the post-operative pain and the recovery of both groups. Result: There was no hospital mortality and there were no significant differences in the incidence of operative complications between the two groups. The operative $(292.7{\pm}61.7\;and\;264.0{\pm}47.9min$, respectively; p=0.01) and CPB times ($128.4{\pm}37.6\;and\;101.7{\pm}32.5min$, respectively; <0.01) were longer for group A, whereas there was no difference between the aortic cross clamp times ($82.1{\pm}35.0\;and\;87.8{\pm}113.5min$, respectively; p=0.74) and ventilator times ($18.0{\pm}18.4\;and\;19.7{\pm}9.7$ hr, respectively; p=0.57) between the groups. The stay on the ICU $(53.2{\pm}40.2\;and\;72.8{\pm}42.1hr$, respectively; p=0.02) and the hospitalization time ($9.7{\pm}7.2\;and\;14.8{\pm}11.9days$, respectively; p=0.01) were shorter for group A. The Patients in group B had more transfusions, but the difference was not significant. For the overall operative intervals, which ranged from one to four weeks, the pair score was significantly lower for the patients of group A than for the patients of group B. In terms of the postoperative activities, which were measured by the Duke Activity Scale questionnaire, the functional status score was clearly higher for group A compared to group B. The analysis showed no difference in the severity of either post-repair of mitral ($0.7{\pm}1.0\;and\;0.9{\pm}0.9$, respectively; p=0.60) and tricuspid regurgitation ($1.0{\pm}0.9\;and\;1.1{\pm}1.0$, respectively; p=0.89). In both groups, there were no valve related complications, except for one patient with paravalvular leakage in each group. Conclusion: These results show that compared with the median sternotomy patients, the patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery enjoyed significant postoperative advantages such as less pain, a more rapid return to full activity, improved cosmetics and a reduced hospital stay. The minimally invasive surgery can be done with similar clinical safety compared to the conventional surgery that's done through a median sternotomy.

Application of OECD Agricultural Water Use Indicator in Korea (우리나라에 적합한 OECD 농업용수 사용지표의 설정)

  • Hur, Seung-Oh;Jung, Kang-Ho;Ha, Sang-Keun;Song, Kwan-Cheol;Eom, Ki-Cheol
    • Korean Journal of Soil Science and Fertilizer
    • /
    • v.39 no.5
    • /
    • pp.321-327
    • /
    • 2006
  • In Korea, there is a growing competitive for water resources between industrial, domestic and agricultural consumer, and the environment as many other OECD countries. The demand on water use is also affecting aquatic ecosystems particularly where withdrawals are in excess of minimum environmental needs for rivers, lakes and wetland habits. OECD developed three indicators related to water use by the agriculture in above contexts : the first is a water use intensity indicator, which is expressed as the quantity or share of agricultural water use in total national water utilization; the second is a water stress indicator, which is expressed as the proportion of rivers (in length) subject to diversion or regulation for irrigation without reserving a minimum of limiting reference flow; and the third is a water use efficiency indicator designated as the technical and the economic efficiency. These indicators have different meanings in the aspect of water resource conservation and sustainable water use. So, it will be more significant that the indicators should reflect the intrinsic meanings of them. The problem is that the aspect of an overall water flow in the agro-ecosystem and recycling of water use not considered in the assessment of agricultural water use needed for calculation of these water use indicators. Namely, regional or meteorological characteristics and site-specific farming practices were not considered in the calculation of these indicators. In this paper, we tried to calculate water use indicators suggested in OECD and to modify some other indicators considering our situation because water use pattern and water cycling in Korea where paddy rice farming is dominant in the monsoon region are quite different from those of semi-arid regions. In the calculation of water use intensity, we excluded the amount of water restored through the ground from the total agricultural water use because a large amount of water supplied to the farm was discharged into the stream or the ground water. The resultant water use intensity was 22.9% in 2001. As for water stress indicator, Korea has not defined nor monitored reference levels of minimum flow rate for rivers subject to diversion of water for irrigation. So, we calculated the water stress indicator in a different way from OECD method. The water stress indicator was calculated using data on the degree of water storage in agricultural water reservoirs because 87% of water for irrigation was taken from the agricultural water reservoirs. Water use technical efficiency was calculated as the reverse of the ratio of irrigation water to a standard water requirement of the paddy rice. The efficiency in 2001 was better than in 1990 and 1998. As for the economic efficiency for water use, we think that there are a lot of things to be taken into considerations to make a useful indicator to reflect socio-economic values of agricultural products resulted from the water use. Conclusively, site-specific, regional or meteorogical characteristics as in Korea were not considered in the calculation of water use indicators by methods suggested in OECD(Volume 3, 2001). So, it is needed to develop a new indicators for the indicators to be more widely applicable in the world.