4. Abbott Vascular - Xience V 4.1 - Background Xience V is an everolimus-eluting stent that was FDA approved in 2007, and has since been considered the second generation of drug eluting stents. The backbone in Xience V (Figure 3) is a copolymer comprised of vinylidene fluoride and hexafluoropropylene [16]. The stent consists of a Multi-Link Vision cobalt chromium (CoCr), and is coated with the active component everolimus [6]. The cobalt-chromium backbone is a unique feature, and why this stent was selected. Everolimus is a derivative of sirolimus, and acts as an immunosuppressant. A variety of Xience stents exist that differ in size, diameter, and length [16]. 4.2 - Device Process The cobalt-chromium balloon stent is delivered through a major artery using balloon angioplasty. The Multi-Link Vision stent is connected by serpentine rings from a single piece of medical grade L-605 CoCr alloy [16]. The effectiveness of the stent was tested in a clinical trial, in which 267 patients …show more content…
It is produced by the pharmaceutical company Abbott, and was FDA approved in July of 2016 [20]. The fully bioresorbable scaffold contains a polymer platform 150 µm thick made from polylactic acid (PLLA) and a poly-D,L-lactide (PDLLA) layer for rapid degradation. The PDLLA eludes the drug everolimus at a concentration of 8.2 µg/mm to prevent restenosis [3,5]. Within the first 30 days of implantation, approximately 80% of the everolimus is released, followed by a more gradual release of the remaining 20% [3]. Figure 4: Through the first 6 months, bioresorption maintains the mechanical support of the lumen. Over the next two years, the scaffold’s struts are replaced by connective tissue, and by 3 years, no polymer remains in the vessel. After 4 years, the arterial wall will have regained full function [20]. 5.2 - Device
Mr. Limon’s mother retained Plaintiff to pursue a tort claim on behalf of Mr. Limon and her (collectively, the “Clients”) against the allegedly negligent driver. The negligent driver had an automobile liability policy issued through defendant Geico. Plaintiff alleges that its attorney’s fee contract with the Clients granted it a one-third contingency fee in “all monies collected” as a result of the lawsuit against the negligent driver. (Petition, ¶¶ 5.2, 5.3) 4.
On 02/27/2017 Dennis Walford, on behalf of his employer Taylor Morrison Homes, contacted the Pasco Sheriff`s Office by telephone to report a Grand Theft from a new home construction site. Mr. Walford advised sometime between 1600 hours on 02/24/2017 and 0800 hours on 02/27/2017, an unknown suspect entered the unsecured home under construction through the open garage area. Once inside the garage the unknown suspect stole one double oven wall cabinet and one refrigerator side panel that were sealed in boxes and stored in the open garage. The unknown suspect then exited the scene with the noted property in an unknown direction by unknown means. Mr. Walford was unable to provide any suspect or witness information.
In Adarand v. Pena, Adarand challenged a federal program that provided incentives to employers that employ individuals that are “economically and socially disadvantaged” (Alexander 149). Adarand, a subcontractor provided the lowest bid for a job, however due to the federal government’s financial incentives the contract was awarded to Gonzales, who was certified as a disadvantaged business. The Court in Adarand held that strict scrutiny should be applied to affirmative action or remedial programs that was based on race because similar arguments in previous case laws recur, such as “skepticism of race-based classifications” and “position on the question of benefits vs. burdens or race neutrality”(Alexander 150).
Engel v. Vitale The Board of Regents for the state of New York authorized the students to say a volutary prayer and the pledge of allegience at the beginning of each day. The parents of the pupils disagreed to this because it is violating Ammendment 1. The parents sued the schools because it violated the freedom of religion granted to them. The case was decided in Warren court in 1962, the petitoner was Steven I. Engel, et al.
In a decision made by the United States Supreme court, it was decided “that motor vehicles deserve a reduced expectation of privacy (Atkinson, 2011). This decision is in response to the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which states that “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” The case of Elliot Watson delves into why no warrant was needed to search the trunk of his car. The arrest of Mr. Watson and the search of his vehicle were valid.
Newsreels touted the event, greatly enhancing the status of Johns Hopkins and solidifying the reputation of Blalock, who had been regarded as a maverick up until that point by some in the Hopkins old guard. Thomas' contribution remained unacknowledged, both by Blalock and by Hopkins. Within a year, the operation known as the Blalock-Taurus shunt had been performed on more than 200 patients at Hopkins, with parents bringing their suffering children from thousands of miles away. Thomas's surgical techniques included one he developed in 1946 for improving circulation in patients whose great vessels (the aorta and the pulmonary artery) were transposed. A complex operation called an atrial.
This case involves Robert Xie charged for the murder of Norman Lin, Lilly Lin, Irene Lin, Henry Lin and Terry Lin, although his wife believed that he was innocent. The reasoning for the murders were so he could have sexual access to his niece. The motive was previously not reported due to legal reasons. He continuously pleaded innocent. The case was under the jurisdiction of Common Law- Criminal.
The court in Townley, held that after the plaintiff has established a prima facie case for discrimination the corporation has the burden of proof to show that they attempted to accommodate the employee. Townley, 859 F.2d at 614. The Defendant is required to accommodate the employee unless the defendant can prove that accommodating the employee would have caused undue hardship for the employer. Id. Evee will argue that the employer told her to take 3 weeks to consider if she wants to keep her job on a part time basis or be fired which proves that the employer didn’t attempt to accommodate her because they didn’t offer an alternative option so that Evee could maintain her full-time position.
In 1969, he implanted an artificial heart in a human being for the first time. The patient, Haskell Karp lived for 64 hours with the implanted device before it could be replaced with a donor’s heart. The patient however died a day after the second operation and questions were asked about the doctor’s choice to implant the artificial heart in the first
You Will Be The Judge Facts: The case involves a 12 year old child named Griffin Grimbly who told the teacher that he was beaten with a clothesline by his father Mr.Gimli. In court, the Mr.Gimli argued that he was devoted to Christian and was following the Biblical injunction on child rearing, “Spare the rod and spoil the child”, as well as arguing that s 43 of the criminal code gives parents the right to use “reasonable force” in disciplining their children. Issue: Is Mr. Grimbly is guilty of or not guilty of assault ? Held: Mr.Grimbly is guilty of assault.
Read Case 10-2, Welge v. Planters Lifesavers, on page 243. What theory of liability did Justice Posner use in finding the defendant liable? Judge Posner used the strict product liability theory in finding the defendant liable (Herron, 2011). Under the strict product liability theory, K-Mart (seller) would be held liable for defects in their products even if those defects were not introduced by them; also for failing to discover them during production (Herron, 2011).
Focus on Glaucoma Neuroprotection therapies Introduction: In the world, glaucomatous optic neuropathy has been established as the most common cause of irreversible blindness and the second most common in developed countries such as North America and Europe. In glaucoma, the injury at the site of the optic disc leads to progressive loss of axons and cell bodies over time. So, in glaucoma, the visual loss was predominantly caused due to one of structural failures of the retinal ganglion cell and its axon as a result of injury, which was irreversible at the functional and structural level. Lowering intraocular pressure plays an efficacious role in slowing the progressive loss of vision,
1). The activate partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) is a “test used to measure and evaluate all the clotting factors of the intrinsic and common pathways of the clotting cascade and assesses factors I (fibrinogen), II (prothrombin), V, VIII, IX, X, XI, and XII”(Hammami, 2013, p. 1). When performed with prothrombin time (PT) test, it evaluates the extrinsic and common pathways of the coagulation cascade. The PT, along with the INR is used to assess the therapeutic of oral anticoagulants and can determine if the patient is at an increased risk of bleeding (if above range) or an increased risk of clotting (if below
Not only was the longevity outstanding but also the excellent recovery from the operation. Within three months he returned to work and did not miss a single day of work for the next 15 years, until he decided to retire. With technology advancing, in the future there could be the possibility of different ways towards a heart transplantation in which it would ensure the patient 's life at a higher percentage. There is always room for advancements and learning experiences that will make a huge difference in the
Was his machine tested enough to actually use it, yes he made progress towards medical advancement, but a life was lost in the process.2 William Devries tried very hard to implant a heart in Barney Clark, the following quotes describe his intent and thought process during the procedure: “there would be a lot of long faces around here if I backed out now,” “please, please, please work this time!”2 It is apparent that Devries was skeptical of the success of the operation and was doing it mostly to please the world and make a name for himself. Striving “to be the first,” in many cases resulted in going against the important medical principal of doing what is best for the