No abstract

By changing the ratio of acrylic acid to styrene, the loading amount of fluorescent dye can be increased and the optical properties of the resulting bioimaging probe can be improved.

No abstract

In this study, tissue-penetrable near infrared (NIR)-II fluorescent polystyrene latex nanoparticles (NIR-PSt NPs) were designed and prepared as deep tissue in vivo imaging probes. An NIR-II fluorescent dye was successfully loaded into PSt NPs. The resulting NIR-PSt NPs showed strong NIR-II (1100 nm) emission in an aqueous environment. In addition, in vivo imaging of live mice was successfully performed using these NIR-PSt NPs. The prepared NIR-PSt NPs exhibited remarkable properties for in vivo fluorescence imaging.

Background and study aims: Transnasal endoscopy presents a technical difficulty when inserting the flexible endoscope, and it is unclear whether a particular breathing method is useful for transnasal endoscopy. Therefore, we conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial to compare endoscopic operability and patient tolerance between patients in the nasal breathing and oral breathing groups. Patients and methods: A total of 198 eligible patients were randomly assigned to undergo the transnasal endoscopy with nasal breathing and with oral breathing. Endoscopists and patients answered questionnaires on the endoscopic operability and patient tolerance using a 100-mm visual analog scale ranging from 0 (non-existent) to 100 (most difficult/ unbearable). The visibility of the upper-middle pharynx was recorded. Results: Patient characteristics didn’t differ significantly in both groups. Nasal breathing showed a higher rate of good visibility of the upper-middle pharynx than oral breathing (91.9% vs. 27.6%; p<0.05). Nasal breathing showed lower scores than oral breathing in overall technical difficulty (21.0±11.4 vs. 35.4±15.0; p<0.05). Regarding patient tolerance, nasal breathing showed lower scores than oral breathing in overall discomfort (22.1±18.8 vs. 30.5±20.9; p<0.05) and other symptoms, including nasal and throat pain, choking, suffocating, gagging, belching, and bloating (p<0.05). Pharyngeal bleeding rate was lower in the nasal breathing group than that in the oral breathing group (0% vs. 9.2%; p<0.05). Conclusions: Nasal breathing is superior to oral breathing in performing and undergoing transnasal endoscopy. Nasal breathing led to good visibility of the upper-middle pharynx, improved endoscopic operability and patient tolerance, and showed safety by decreasing pharyngeal bleeding.