No abstract

NOTICEThis report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof. Executive SummaryThe National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) routinely estimates the technical potential of specific renewable electricity generation technologies. These are technologyspecific estimates of energy generation potential based on renewable resource availability and quality, technical system performance, topographic limitations, environmental, and land-use constraints only. The estimates do not consider (in most cases) economic or market constraints, and therefore do not represent a level of renewable generation that might actually be deployed.This report is unique in unifying assumptions and application of methods employed to generate comparable estimates across technologies, where possible, to allow crosstechnology comparison. Technical potential estimates for six different renewable energy technologies were calculated by NREL, and methods and results for several other renewable technologies from previously published reports are also presented. The report first describes the methodology and assumptions for estimating the technical potential of each technology, and then briefly describes the resulting estimates. The results discussion includes state-level maps and tables containing available land area (square kilometers), installed capacity (gigawatts), and electric generation (gigawatthours) for each technology.

NOTICEThis report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof. Executive SummaryThe National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) routinely estimates the technical potential of specific renewable electricity generation technologies. These are technologyspecific estimates of energy generation potential based on renewable resource availability and quality, technical system performance, topographic limitations, environmental, and land-use constraints only. The estimates do not consider (in most cases) economic or market constraints, and therefore do not represent a level of renewable generation that might actually be deployed.This report is unique in unifying assumptions and application of methods employed to generate comparable estimates across technologies, where possible, to allow crosstechnology comparison. Technical potential estimates for six different renewable energy technologies were calculated by NREL, and methods and results for several other renewable technologies from previously published reports are also presented. The report first describes the methodology and assumptions for estimating the technical potential of each technology, and then briefly describes the resulting estimates. The results discussion includes state-level maps and tables containing available land area (square kilometers), installed capacity (gigawatts), and electric generation (gigawatthours) for each technology.

OBJECTIVE. The aim of this study was to define the relationshipCONCLUSION. This study identified a formula for accurately calculating percentage pneumothorax size as determined by helical CT from an erect posteroanterior radiograph. Using this formula with the clinical status of the patient should more easily identify patients requiring active intervention.

Until recently, the main indication for pelvic vein embolization (PVE) in women was to treat pelvic venous congestion syndrome (PVC) but increasingly, patients with refluxing pelvic veins associated with leg varicosities are also being treated. A more unusual reason for PVE is to treat pelvic venous malformations, although such lesions may be treated with sclerotherapy alone. Embolotherapy for treating PVC has been performed for many years with several published studies included in this review, whilst an emerging indication for PVE is to treat lower limb varicosities associated with pelvic vein reflux. Neither group, however, has been subjected to an adequate randomized, controlled trial. Consequently, some of the information presented in this review should be considered anecdotal (level III evidence) at this stage, and a satisfactory ‘proof’ of clinical efficacy remains deficient until higher-level evidence is presented. Furthermore, a wide range of techniques not accepted by all are used, and some standardization will be required based on future mandatory prospective studies. Large studies have also clearly shown an unacceptably high recurrence rate of leg varicose veins following venous surgery. Furthermore, minimally or non-invasive imaging is now revealing that there is a refluxing pelvic venous source in a significant percentage of women with de novo leg varicose veins, and many more with recurrent varicosities. Considering that just over half the world’s population is female and a significant number of women not only have pelvic venous reflux, but also have associated leg varicosities, minimally invasive treatment of pelvic venous incompetence will become a common procedure.

Pelvic vein incompetence is common in patients with atypical varicose veins, contributing to their recurrence after surgery. Therefore, refluxing pelvic veins should be identified and treated. We present our experience with pelvic vein embolisation in patients presenting with varicose veins. Patients presenting with varicose veins with a duplex-proven contribution from perivulval veins undergo transvaginal duplex sonography (TVUS) to identify refluxing pelvic veins. Those with positive scans undergo embolisation before surgical treatment of their lower limb varicose veins. A total of 218 women (mean age of 46.3 years) were treated. Parity was documented in the first 60 patients, of whom 47 (78.3%) were multiparous, 11 (18.3%) had had one previous pregnancy, and 2 (3.3%) were nulliparous. The left ovarian vein was embolised in 78%, the right internal iliac in 64.7%, the left internal iliac in 56.4%, and the right ovarian vein in 42.2% of patients. At follow-up TVUS, mild reflux only was seen in 16, marked persistent reflux in 6, and new reflux in 3 patients. These 9 women underwent successful repeat embolisation. Two patients experienced pulmonary embolisation of the coils, of whom 1 was asymptomatic and 1 was successfully retrieved; 1 patient had a misplaced coil protruding into the common femoral vein; and 1 patient had perineal thrombophlebitis. The results of our study showed that pelvic venous embolisation by way of a transjugular approach is a safe and effective technique in the treatment of pelvic vein reflux.

No abstract

NREL prints on paper that contains recycled content.