• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Mon, 21.04.25

Search results


March 2005
Z. Samra, O. Ofer and H. Shmuely
 Background: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus is a major nosocomial pathogen worldwide. Vancomycin is the traditional drug of choice, but decreasing susceptibility to vancomycin and other glycopeptides has been reported since 1996.

Objectives: To test the in vitro activity of linezolid (oxazolidinone) and other antimicrobial agents against MRSA[1] isolates recovered from hospitalized patients.

Methods: We tested 150 MRSA isolates recovered from hospitalized patients. The minimal inhibitory concentration of vancomycin, teicoplanin, pristinamycin (quinupristin-dalforistin), and linezolid was determined by the Etest method. Susceptibility to other antibiotics was tested by the disk diffusion method.

Results: All isolates were sensitive to vancomycin, teicoplanin, pristinamycin, and linezolid. The MIC90 was 2.0 mg/ml for vancomycin and teicoplanin (range 0.5–2.0 mg/ml and 0.125–2.0 mg/ml, respectively), and 0.5 mg/ml for pristinamycin and linezolid (range 0.125–0.75 mg/ml and 0.125–0.5 mg/m, respectively). Of the other antibiotics, fusidic acid showed the best in vitro activity, with 96.7% susceptibility, associated with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (85.8%) and minocycline (84%). Penicillin was associated with the lowest susceptibility (1.3%), associated with ofloxacin (3%) and erythromycin (14%). An increase in the minimal inhibitory concentration value of vancomycin was associated with a significant decrease in resistance to TMP-SMZ[2] (P < 0.01) and an apparent increase in resistance to other antibiotics.

Conclusion: The excellent in vitro activity of linezolid and its reported in vivo effectiveness renders it an important therapeutic alternative to vancomycin in the treatment of MRSA infection.

__________________

[1] MRSA = methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

[2] TMP-SMX = trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole

R. Reuveny, I. Ben-Dov, M. Gaides and N. Reichert
Background: One mechanism that may limit training effect in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is the ventilatory limitation and associated dyspnea. 

Objectives: To minimize ventilatory limitation during training of patients with severe COPD[1] by applying bi-level positive pressure ventilation during training in order to augment training intensity (and effect).

Methods: The study group comprised 19 patients (18 males, 1 female) with a mean age of 64 ± 9 years. Mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 32 ± 4% of predicted, and all were ventilatory-limited (exercise breathing reserve 3 ± 9 L/min, normal >15 L/min). The patients were randomized: 9 were assigned to training with BiPAP[2] and 10 to standard training. All were trained on a treadmill for 2 months, twice a week, 45 minutes each time, at maximal tolerated load. Incremental maximal unsupported exercise test was performed before and at the end of the training period.

Results: BiPAP resulted in an increment of 94 ± 53% in training speed during these 2 months, as compared to 41 ± 19% increment in the control group (P < 0.005). Training with BiPAP yielded an average increase in maximal oxygen uptake of 23 ± 16% (P < 0.005), anaerobic threshold of 11 ± 12% (P < 0.05) and peak O2 pulse of 20 ± 19% (P < 0.05), while peak exercise lactate concentration was not higher after training. Interestingly, in the BiPAP group, peak exercise ventilation was also 17 ± 20% higher after training (P < 0.05). Furthermore, contrary to our expectation, at any given work rate, ventilation (and tidal volume) in the BiPAP group was higher in the post-training test as compared to the pre-training test, and the end tidal partial pressure of CO2 at 55 watts was lower, 40 ± 4 and 38 ± 4 mmHg respectively (P < 0.05). No improvement in exercise capacity was observed after this short training period in the control group.

Conclusion: Pressure-supported ventilation during training is feasible in patients with severe COPD and it augments the training effect. The improved exercise tolerance was associated with higher ventilatory response and therefore lower PETCO2[3] at equal work rates after training.

______________________

[1] COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

[2] BiPAP = bi-level positive pressure ventilation

[3] PETCO2 = end tidal partial pressure of CO2
 

Z. Habot-Wilner, J. Moisseiev, H. Bin and B. Rubinovitch
M. Leitman, E. Peleg, R. Krakover, E. Sucher, S. Rosenblath, R. Zaidentstein and Z. Vered
February 2005
M.S. Shapiro, Z. Abrams and N. Lieberman

Background: Repaglinide, a new insulin secretagogue, is purported to be as effective as sulphonylurea but is less hypoglycemic-prone.

Objectives: To assess the efficacy of repaglinide and its proclivity for hypoglycemia in a post-marketing study.

Methods: The study group comprised 688 patients, aged 26–95 years, clinically diagnosed with non-insulin-dependent type 2 diabetes. The patients were divided into three groups based on previous therapy: a) sulphonylurea-treated (group 1, n=132); b) metformin with or without sulphonylurea where sulphonylurea was replaced with repaglinide. (group 2, n=302); and c) lifestyle modification alone (drug-naïve) (group 3, n=254). At initiation of the study, all patients were transferred from their current treatment to repaglinide. Only patients in group 2, with combined sulphonylurea plus metformin, continued with metformin plus repaglinide. Fasting blood sugar, hemoglobin A1c and weight were measured at study entry and 4–8 weeks following repaglinide therapy. A questionnaire documented the number of meals daily and the presence of eating from fear of hypoglycemia.

Results: The fasting blood sugar level of the entire cohort dropped from 191 ± 2.4 to 155 ± 2.0 mg/dl (P < 0.0001); HbA1c from 8.8 ± 0.1 to 7.7 ± 0.1% (P < 0.0001). The drop of HbA1c in groups 1, 2 and 3 respectively were: 1.04 ± 0.22% (P < 0.0001), 1.14 ± 0.24% (P < 0.0001), and 1.51 ± 0.31% (P = 0.0137). Weight dropped from 81 ± 0.7 to 80.2 ± 0.7 kg (P < 0.0001), and eating from fear of hypoglycemia from 157 to 97 (P < 0.001). The daily number of meals decreased from 2.9 ± 0.4 to 2.4 ± 0.4 (P < 0.001). No serious adverse reactions occurred during the study.

Conclusions: Repaglinide is an effective oral hypoglycemic agent taken either as monotherapy or combination therapy. There is less eating to avoid hypoglycemia, fewer meals consumed, and weight loss.
 

H. Tulchinsky, A. Keidar, G. Goldman, J.M. Klausner and M. Rabau
 Background: Restorative proctocolectomy eliminates the risk of colorectal cancer in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Complications and extra‑intestinal manifestations are inherent to the procedure.

Objectives: To evaluate operative procedures, complications, early and late results and long-term functional outcome in FAP[1] patients operated in our department.

Methods: The study group included all patients with FAP who were operated between 1988 and 2003. Demographic data, length of follow‑up, complications, colorectal cancer, pouch function and extracolonic manifestations were recorded.

Results: Median age at surgery was 33 years (range 13–61 years). The final operative breakdown was: 48 proctocolectomies, 41 ileal pouch-anal anastomoses, 2 Kock’s pouch, 5 permanent ileostomies, and 2 colectomies with ileorectal anastomosis. There was no perioperative mortality. Early and late complications occurred in 20 and 9 patients, respectively. Twelve patients required re‑operation. Colorectal carcinoma was diagnosed in eight patients, three of whom were in an advanced stage. The mean follow‑up was 74 months (range 3–288 months). Four patients were lost to follow‑up. Extracolonic manifestations developed in 38 patients, including desmoid tumors (in 12), duodenal adenomas (in 9), pouch adenomas (in 5), and rectal stump adenomas (in 3). Two patients died (4%) because of desmoid tumor and malignant fibrous histiocytoma. At last follow‑up, 37 IPAA[2] patients have (median) six bowel movements/24 hours and good fecal control.

Conclusions: Restorative proctocolectomy can be performed with low mortality, acceptable morbidity, and good functional results. Patients should be closely followed after surgery for development of other manifestations of the syndrome. Relatives of the affected patients should be referred to a specialist multidisciplinary clinic.

____________________________

[1] FAP = familial adenomatous polyposis

[2] IPAA = ileal pouch-anal anastomosis

R. Yagev, E. Tsumi, J. Avigur, P. Polyakov, J. Levy and T. Lifshitz
 Background: Uveitis is an acute or chronic inflammatory process of the uvea caused by a number of etiologies. In many patients the etiology is unknown.

Objective: To investigate the effect of the Dead Sea environment (climatotherapy) on the signs, symptoms and clinical course of chronic uveitis.

Methods: Fifty-five patients with chronic uveitis were examined at the beginning and end of a 3–4 week stay at the Dead Sea region and on repeat visits to the region. Study data included demographic information, medical history, etiology, diagnosis, medication, and a complete ophthalmic examination.

Results: Statistically significant improvements were seen between the two examinations within each visit in four parameters (negative values indicate improvement): a) visual acuity for near and far: Jaeger (‑1.18 ± 0.28, P < 0.0001) and best corrected visual acuity (‑0.08 ± 0.02, P < 0.0001); b) anterior chamber flare (-0.18 ± 0.06, P < 0.01); c) anterior chamber cells (-0.16 ± 0.05), P < 0.001); and d) vitreous cells (-0.15 ± 0.09, P < 0.05). There was a significant mean improvement during visits to the Dead Sea area and a slight dissipation of the effect during the intervals between visits. Sixty-four percent of the patients reported that they required less medication and had fewer and milder attacks of uveitis following the visits.

Conclusions: The results of this study provide evidence of short- and possibly long-term improvement in the signs and symptoms of uveitis following exposure to the Dead Sea environment.

K. Stav, N. Rahimi-Levene, A. Lindner, Y.I. Siegel and A. Zisman
 Bleeding during retropubic radical prostatectomy arises from venous structures in the majority of cases. Since its introduction two decades ago, the nerve-sparing procedure with surgical control of the dorsal venous complex has led to a reduction in blood loss and blood transfusion rate. The reduction in blood loss is a result of better understanding of the prostatic blood vessel anatomy, extensive surgical experience over time, and reduction in transfusion triggers with an acceptance of lower postoperative hemoglobin values. Increased blood loss during RRP[1] is associated with poorer outcomes most probably due to surgical difficulties. But as for now, there are no decisive risk factors for clinically significant bleeding during RRP although newer technologies for hemostasis of the dorsal vein complex are being utilized.

__________________

[1] RRP = retropubic radical prostatectomy
S. Sukenik, M. Abu-Shakra and D. Flusser
Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any matter.
The IMA is not responsible for and expressly disclaims liability for damages of any kind arising from the use of or reliance on information contained within the site.
© All rights to information on this site are reserved and are the property of the Israeli Medical Association. Privacy policy

2 Twin Towers, 35 Jabotinsky, POB 4292, Ramat Gan 5251108 Israel
ניתן להשתמש בחצי המקלדת בכדי לנווט בין כפתורי הרכיב
",e=e.removeChild(e.firstChild)):"string"==typeof o.is?e=l.createElement(a,{is:o.is}):(e=l.createElement(a),"select"===a&&(l=e,o.multiple?l.multiple=!0:o.size&&(l.size=o.size))):e=l.createElementNS(e,a),e[Ni]=t,e[Pi]=o,Pl(e,t,!1,!1),t.stateNode=e,l=Ae(a,o),a){case"iframe":case"object":case"embed":Te("load",e),u=o;break;case"video":case"audio":for(u=0;u<$a.length;u++)Te($a[u],e);u=o;break;case"source":Te("error",e),u=o;break;case"img":case"image":case"link":Te("error",e),Te("load",e),u=o;break;case"form":Te("reset",e),Te("submit",e),u=o;break;case"details":Te("toggle",e),u=o;break;case"input":A(e,o),u=M(e,o),Te("invalid",e),Ie(n,"onChange");break;case"option":u=B(e,o);break;case"select":e._wrapperState={wasMultiple:!!o.multiple},u=Uo({},o,{value:void 0}),Te("invalid",e),Ie(n,"onChange");break;case"textarea":V(e,o),u=H(e,o),Te("invalid",e),Ie(n,"onChange");break;default:u=o}Me(a,u);var s=u;for(i in s)if(s.hasOwnProperty(i)){var c=s[i];"style"===i?ze(e,c):"dangerouslySetInnerHTML"===i?(c=c?c.__html:void 0,null!=c&&Aa(e,c)):"children"===i?"string"==typeof c?("textarea"!==a||""!==c)&&X(e,c):"number"==typeof c&&X(e,""+c):"suppressContentEditableWarning"!==i&&"suppressHydrationWarning"!==i&&"autoFocus"!==i&&(ea.hasOwnProperty(i)?null!=c&&Ie(n,i):null!=c&&x(e,i,c,l))}switch(a){case"input":L(e),j(e,o,!1);break;case"textarea":L(e),$(e);break;case"option":null!=o.value&&e.setAttribute("value",""+P(o.value));break;case"select":e.multiple=!!o.multiple,n=o.value,null!=n?q(e,!!o.multiple,n,!1):null!=o.defaultValue&&q(e,!!o.multiple,o.defaultValue,!0);break;default:"function"==typeof u.onClick&&(e.onclick=Fe)}Ve(a,o)&&(t.effectTag|=4)}null!==t.ref&&(t.effectTag|=128)}return null;case 6:if(e&&null!=t.stateNode)Ll(e,t,e.memoizedProps,o);else{if("string"!=typeof o&&null===t.stateNode)throw Error(r(166));n=yn(yu.current),yn(bu.current),Jn(t)?(n=t.stateNode,o=t.memoizedProps,n[Ni]=t,n.nodeValue!==o&&(t.effectTag|=4)):(n=(9===n.nodeType?n:n.ownerDocument).createTextNode(o),n[Ni]=t,t.stateNode=n)}return null;case 13:return zt(vu),o=t.memoizedState,0!==(64&t.effectTag)?(t.expirationTime=n,t):(n=null!==o,o=!1,null===e?void 0!==t.memoizedProps.fallback&&Jn(t):(a=e.memoizedState,o=null!==a,n||null===a||(a=e.child.sibling,null!==a&&(i=t.firstEffect,null!==i?(t.firstEffect=a,a.nextEffect=i):(t.firstEffect=t.lastEffect=a,a.nextEffect=null),a.effectTag=8))),n&&!o&&0!==(2&t.mode)&&(null===e&&!0!==t.memoizedProps.unstable_avoidThisFallback||0!==(1&vu.current)?rs===Qu&&(rs=Yu):(rs!==Qu&&rs!==Yu||(rs=Gu),0!==us&&null!==es&&(To(es,ns),Co(es,us)))),(n||o)&&(t.effectTag|=4),null);case 4:return wn(),Ol(t),null;case 10:return Zt(t),null;case 17:return It(t.type)&&Ft(),null;case 19:if(zt(vu),o=t.memoizedState,null===o)return null;if(a=0!==(64&t.effectTag),i=o.rendering,null===i){if(a)mr(o,!1);else if(rs!==Qu||null!==e&&0!==(64&e.effectTag))for(i=t.child;null!==i;){if(e=_n(i),null!==e){for(t.effectTag|=64,mr(o,!1),a=e.updateQueue,null!==a&&(t.updateQueue=a,t.effectTag|=4),null===o.lastEffect&&(t.firstEffect=null),t.lastEffect=o.lastEffect,o=t.child;null!==o;)a=o,i=n,a.effectTag&=2,a.nextEffect=null,a.firstEffect=null,a.lastEffect=null,e=a.alternate,null===e?(a.childExpirationTime=0,a.expirationTime=i,a.child=null,a.memoizedProps=null,a.memoizedState=null,a.updateQueue=null,a.dependencies=null):(a.childExpirationTime=e.childExpirationTime,a.expirationTime=e.expirationTime,a.child=e.child,a.memoizedProps=e.memoizedProps,a.memoizedState=e.memoizedState,a.updateQueue=e.updateQueue,i=e.dependencies,a.dependencies=null===i?null:{expirationTime:i.expirationTime,firstContext:i.firstContext,responders:i.responders}),o=o.sibling;return Mt(vu,1&vu.current|2),t.child}i=i.sibling}}else{if(!a)if(e=_n(i),null!==e){if(t.effectTag|=64,a=!0,n=e.updateQueue,null!==n&&(t.updateQueue=n,t.effectTag|=4),mr(o,!0),null===o.tail&&"hidden"===o.tailMode&&!i.alternate)return t=t.lastEffect=o.lastEffect,null!==t&&(t.nextEffect=null),null}else 2*ru()-o.renderingStartTime>o.tailExpiration&&1t)&&vs.set(e,t)))}}function Ur(e,t){e.expirationTimee?n:e,2>=e&&t!==e?0:e}function qr(e){if(0!==e.lastExpiredTime)e.callbackExpirationTime=1073741823,e.callbackPriority=99,e.callbackNode=$t(Vr.bind(null,e));else{var t=Br(e),n=e.callbackNode;if(0===t)null!==n&&(e.callbackNode=null,e.callbackExpirationTime=0,e.callbackPriority=90);else{var r=Fr();if(1073741823===t?r=99:1===t||2===t?r=95:(r=10*(1073741821-t)-10*(1073741821-r),r=0>=r?99:250>=r?98:5250>=r?97:95),null!==n){var o=e.callbackPriority;if(e.callbackExpirationTime===t&&o>=r)return;n!==Yl&&Bl(n)}e.callbackExpirationTime=t,e.callbackPriority=r,t=1073741823===t?$t(Vr.bind(null,e)):Wt(r,Hr.bind(null,e),{timeout:10*(1073741821-t)-ru()}),e.callbackNode=t}}}function Hr(e,t){if(ks=0,t)return t=Fr(),No(e,t),qr(e),null;var n=Br(e);if(0!==n){if(t=e.callbackNode,(Ju&(Wu|$u))!==Hu)throw Error(r(327));if(lo(),e===es&&n===ns||Kr(e,n),null!==ts){var o=Ju;Ju|=Wu;for(var a=Yr();;)try{eo();break}catch(t){Xr(e,t)}if(Gt(),Ju=o,Bu.current=a,rs===Ku)throw t=os,Kr(e,n),To(e,n),qr(e),t;if(null===ts)switch(a=e.finishedWork=e.current.alternate,e.finishedExpirationTime=n,o=rs,es=null,o){case Qu:case Ku:throw Error(r(345));case Xu:No(e,2=n){e.lastPingedTime=n,Kr(e,n);break}}if(i=Br(e),0!==i&&i!==n)break;if(0!==o&&o!==n){e.lastPingedTime=o;break}e.timeoutHandle=Si(oo.bind(null,e),a);break}oo(e);break;case Gu:if(To(e,n),o=e.lastSuspendedTime,n===o&&(e.nextKnownPendingLevel=ro(a)),ss&&(a=e.lastPingedTime,0===a||a>=n)){e.lastPingedTime=n,Kr(e,n);break}if(a=Br(e),0!==a&&a!==n)break;if(0!==o&&o!==n){e.lastPingedTime=o;break}if(1073741823!==is?o=10*(1073741821-is)-ru():1073741823===as?o=0:(o=10*(1073741821-as)-5e3,a=ru(),n=10*(1073741821-n)-a,o=a-o,0>o&&(o=0),o=(120>o?120:480>o?480:1080>o?1080:1920>o?1920:3e3>o?3e3:4320>o?4320:1960*Uu(o/1960))-o,n=o?o=0:(a=0|l.busyDelayMs,i=ru()-(10*(1073741821-i)-(0|l.timeoutMs||5e3)),o=i<=a?0:a+o-i),10 component higher in the tree to provide a loading indicator or placeholder to display."+N(i))}rs!==Zu&&(rs=Xu),l=yr(l,i),f=a;do{switch(f.tag){case 3:u=l,f.effectTag|=4096,f.expirationTime=t;var w=Ar(f,u,t);ln(f,w); break e;case 1:u=l;var E=f.type,k=f.stateNode;if(0===(64&f.effectTag)&&("function"==typeof E.getDerivedStateFromError||null!==k&&"function"==typeof k.componentDidCatch&&(null===ms||!ms.has(k)))){f.effectTag|=4096,f.expirationTime=t;var _=Ir(f,u,t);ln(f,_);break e}}f=f.return}while(null!==f)}ts=no(ts)}catch(e){t=e;continue}break}}function Yr(){var e=Bu.current;return Bu.current=Cu,null===e?Cu:e}function Gr(e,t){eus&&(us=e)}function Jr(){for(;null!==ts;)ts=to(ts)}function eo(){for(;null!==ts&&!Gl();)ts=to(ts)}function to(e){var t=Fu(e.alternate,e,ns);return e.memoizedProps=e.pendingProps,null===t&&(t=no(e)),qu.current=null,t}function no(e){ts=e;do{var t=ts.alternate;if(e=ts.return,0===(2048&ts.effectTag)){if(t=br(t,ts,ns),1===ns||1!==ts.childExpirationTime){for(var n=0,r=ts.child;null!==r;){var o=r.expirationTime,a=r.childExpirationTime;o>n&&(n=o),a>n&&(n=a),r=r.sibling}ts.childExpirationTime=n}if(null!==t)return t;null!==e&&0===(2048&e.effectTag)&&(null===e.firstEffect&&(e.firstEffect=ts.firstEffect),null!==ts.lastEffect&&(null!==e.lastEffect&&(e.lastEffect.nextEffect=ts.firstEffect),e.lastEffect=ts.lastEffect),1e?t:e}function oo(e){var t=qt();return Vt(99,ao.bind(null,e,t)),null}function ao(e,t){do lo();while(null!==gs);if((Ju&(Wu|$u))!==Hu)throw Error(r(327));var n=e.finishedWork,o=e.finishedExpirationTime;if(null===n)return null;if(e.finishedWork=null,e.finishedExpirationTime=0,n===e.current)throw Error(r(177));e.callbackNode=null,e.callbackExpirationTime=0,e.callbackPriority=90,e.nextKnownPendingLevel=0;var a=ro(n);if(e.firstPendingTime=a,o<=e.lastSuspendedTime?e.firstSuspendedTime=e.lastSuspendedTime=e.nextKnownPendingLevel=0:o<=e.firstSuspendedTime&&(e.firstSuspendedTime=o-1),o<=e.lastPingedTime&&(e.lastPingedTime=0),o<=e.lastExpiredTime&&(e.lastExpiredTime=0),e===es&&(ts=es=null,ns=0),1u&&(c=u,u=l,l=c),c=Ue(w,l),f=Ue(w,u),c&&f&&(1!==k.rangeCount||k.anchorNode!==c.node||k.anchorOffset!==c.offset||k.focusNode!==f.node||k.focusOffset!==f.offset)&&(E=E.createRange(),E.setStart(c.node,c.offset),k.removeAllRanges(),l>u?(k.addRange(E),k.extend(f.node,f.offset)):(E.setEnd(f.node,f.offset),k.addRange(E)))))),E=[];for(k=w;k=k.parentNode;)1===k.nodeType&&E.push({element:k,left:k.scrollLeft,top:k.scrollTop});for("function"==typeof w.focus&&w.focus(),w=0;w=t&&e<=t}function To(e,t){var n=e.firstSuspendedTime,r=e.lastSuspendedTime;nt||0===n)&&(e.lastSuspendedTime=t),t<=e.lastPingedTime&&(e.lastPingedTime=0),t<=e.lastExpiredTime&&(e.lastExpiredTime=0)}function Co(e,t){t>e.firstPendingTime&&(e.firstPendingTime=t);var n=e.firstSuspendedTime;0!==n&&(t>=n?e.firstSuspendedTime=e.lastSuspendedTime=e.nextKnownPendingLevel=0:t>=e.lastSuspendedTime&&(e.lastSuspendedTime=t+1),t>e.nextKnownPendingLevel&&(e.nextKnownPendingLevel=t))}function No(e,t){var n=e.lastExpiredTime;(0===n||n>t)&&(e.lastExpiredTime=t)}function Po(e,t,n,o){var a=t.current,i=Fr(),l=su.suspense;i=jr(i,a,l);e:if(n){n=n._reactInternalFiber;t:{if(J(n)!==n||1!==n.tag)throw Error(r(170));var u=n;do{switch(u.tag){case 3:u=u.stateNode.context;break t;case 1:if(It(u.type)){u=u.stateNode.__reactInternalMemoizedMergedChildContext;break t}}u=u.return}while(null!==u);throw Error(r(171))}if(1===n.tag){var s=n.type;if(It(s)){n=Dt(n,s,u);break e}}n=u}else n=Al;return null===t.context?t.context=n:t.pendingContext=n,t=on(i,l),t.payload={element:e},o=void 0===o?null:o,null!==o&&(t.callback=o),an(a,t),Dr(a,i),i}function Oo(e){if(e=e.current,!e.child)return null;switch(e.child.tag){case 5:return e.child.stateNode;default:return e.child.stateNode}}function Ro(e,t){e=e.memoizedState,null!==e&&null!==e.dehydrated&&e.retryTime