L Ottosen | PubMed Health

PubMed2003

Possible applications for municipal solid waste fly ash.

The present study focuses on existing practices related to the reuse of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) fly ash and identifies new potential uses. Nine possible applications were identified and grouped into four main categories: construction materials (cement, concrete, ceramics, glass and glass-ceramics); geotechnical applications (road pavement, embankments); "agriculture" (soil amendment); and, miscellaneous (sorbent, sludge conditioning). Each application is analysed in detail, including final-product technical characteristics, with a special emphasis on environmental impacts. A comparative analysis of the different options is performed, stressing the advantages but also the weaknesses of each option. This information is systemized in order to provide a framework for the selection of best technology and final products. The results presented here show new possibilities for this waste reuse in a short-term, in a wide range of fields, resulting in great advantages in waste minimization as well as resources conservation.

Agriculture↗

PubMed2000

Three methods for hysterectomy: a randomised, prospective study of short term outcome.

OBJECTIVE: To detect differences in clinical short term outcome between total abdominal hysterectomy, vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital of Helsingborg, Sweden. SAMPLE: One hundred-twenty women scheduled for hysterectomy for various indications. METHODS: Randomisation into three treatment arms: total abdominal hysterectomy (n = 40); vaginal hysterectomy (n = 40) and laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy (n = 40). During traditional abdominal and vaginal surgery, laparoscopic assistance was kept to a minimum. Substantial number of cases needed volume-reducing manoeuvres due to uterine size. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Duration of surgery, anaesthesia, time in hospital and recovery time. RESULTS: Mean duration (range) of surgery was significantly longer for laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy compared with vaginal hysterectomy and total abdominal hysterectomy, 102 min (50-175), 81 min (35-135) and 68 min (28-125), respectively. Mean stay in hospital and mean time to recovery was significantly longer for total abdominal hysterectomy compared with vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy. The difference between vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy was not significant. It was possible to remove uteri under 600 g with all three methods. Four laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomies and one vaginal hysterectomy were converted to open surgery. Reoperation and blood transfusion were required after two vaginal hysterectomies and one laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy. One woman needed blood transfusion after total abdominal hysterectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Traditional vaginal hysterectomy proved to be feasible and the faster operative technique compared with vaginal hysterectomy with laparoscopic assistance. The abdominal technique was somewhat faster, but time spent in theatre was not significantly shorter. Abdominal hysterectomy required on average a longer hospital stay of one day and one additional week of convalescence compared with traditional vaginal hysterectomy. Vaginal hysterectomy should be a primary method for uterine removal.

Adult↗