Julio A. Ramírez

The “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete” (“Code”) covers the materials, design, and construction of structural concrete used in buildings and where applicable in nonbuilding structures. The Code also covers the strength evaluation of existing concrete structures. Among the subjects covered are: contract documents; inspection; materials; durability requirements; concrete quality, mixing, and placing; formwork; embedded pipes; construction joints; reinforcement details; analysis and design; strength and serviceability; flexural and axial loads; shear and torsion; development and splices of reinforcement; slab systems; walls; footings; precast concrete; composite flexural members; prestressed concrete; shells and folded plate members; strength evaluation of existing structures; provisions for seismic design; structural plain concrete; strut-and-tie modeling in Appendix A; alternative design provisions in Appendix B; alternative load and strength reduction factors in Appendix C; and anchoring to concrete in Appendix D. The quality and testing of materials used in construction are covered by reference to the appropriate ASTM standard specifications. Welding of reinforcement is covered by reference to the appropriate American Welding Society (AWS) standard. Uses of the Code include adoption by reference in general building codes, and earlier editions have been widely used in this manner. The Code is written in a format that allows such reference without change to its language. Therefore, background details or suggestions for carrying out the requirements or intent of the Code portion cannot be included. The Commentary is provided for this purpose. Some of the considerations of the committee in developing the Code portion are discussed within the Commentary, with emphasis given to the explanation of new or revised provisions. Much of the research data referenced in preparing the Code is cited for the user desiring to study individual questions in greater detail. Other documents that provide suggestions for carrying out the requirements of the Code are also cited.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the burden of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is critical to allocate resources for prevention, management, and research. The objectives of this study were to define incidence, epidemiology, and mortality of adult patients hospitalized with CAP in the city of Louisville, and to estimate burden of CAP in the US adult population. METHODS: This was a prospective population-based cohort study of adult residents in Louisville, Kentucky, from 1 June 2014 to 31 May 2016. Consecutive hospitalized patients with CAP were enrolled at all adult hospitals in Louisville. The annual population-based CAP incidence was calculated. Geospatial epidemiology was used to define ecological associations among CAP and income level, race, and age. Mortality was evaluated during hospitalization and at 30 days, 6 months, and 1 year after hospitalization. RESULTS: During the 2-year study, from a Louisville population of 587499 adults, 186384 hospitalizations occurred. A total of 7449 unique patients hospitalized with CAP were documented. The annual age-adjusted incidence was 649 patients hospitalized with CAP per 100000 adults (95% confidence interval, 628.2-669.8), corresponding to 1591825 annual adult CAP hospitalizations in the United States. Clusters of CAP cases were found in areas with low-income and black/African American populations. Mortality during hospitalization was 6.5%, corresponding to 102821 annual deaths in the United States. Mortality at 30 days, 6 months, and 1 year was 13.0%, 23.4%, and 30.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The estimated US burden of CAP is substantial, with >1.5 million unique adults being hospitalized annually, 100000 deaths occurring during hospitalization, and approximately 1 of 3 patients hospitalized with CAP dying within 1 year.

BACKGROUND: Existing severity assessment tools, such as the pneumonia severity index (PSI) and CURB-65 (tool based on confusion, urea level, respiratory rate, blood pressure, and age >or=65 years), predict 30-day mortality in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and have limited ability to predict which patients will require intensive respiratory or vasopressor support (IRVS). METHODS: The Australian CAP Study (ACAPS) was a prospective study of 882 episodes in which each patient had a detailed assessment of severity features, etiology, and treatment outcomes. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify features at initial assessment that were associated with receipt of IRVS. These results were converted into a simple points-based severity tool that was validated in 5 external databases, totaling 7464 patients. RESULTS: In ACAPS, 10.3% of patients received IRVS, and the 30-day mortality rate was 5.7%. The features statistically significantly associated with receipt of IRVS were low systolic blood pressure (2 points), multilobar chest radiography involvement (1 point), low albumin level (1 point), high respiratory rate (1 point), tachycardia (1 point), confusion (1 point), poor oxygenation (2 points), and low arterial pH (2 points): SMART-COP. A SMART-COP score of >or=3 points identified 92% of patients who received IRVS, including 84% of patients who did not need immediate admission to the intensive care unit. Accuracy was also high in the 5 validation databases. Sensitivities of PSI and CURB-65 for identifying the need for IRVS were 74% and 39%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SMART-COP is a simple, practical clinical tool for accurately predicting the need for IRVS that is likely to assist clinicians in determining CAP severity.

BACKGROUND: Atherosclerosis is pathologically similar to a chronic inflammatory response. Recent reports have suggested that Chlamydia pneumoniae may play a role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. OBJECTIVE: To determine, by using various detection methods, whether C. pneumoniae is present in the coronary arteries of patients with coronary atherosclerosis. DESIGN: Multicenter investigation. SETTING: The Jewish Hospital Heart and Lung Institute in Louisville, Kentucky, and several laboratories. PATIENTS: 12 patients seeking heart transplantation. MEASUREMENTS: Culture for C. pneumoniae was done in HEp-2 cell monolayers. Other methods of detection included polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay, immunocytochemistry, transmission electron microscopy, and in situ hybridization. RESULTS: Chlamydia pneumoniae was cultured from atherosclerotic plaques in one patient with severe coronary artery disease. The organism was found in the atheromas of this patient by PCR assay, immunocytochemistry, electron microscopy, and in situ hybridization. In addition, at least one testing method showed C. pneumoniae in coronary artery tissue in six of nine additional patients with coronary atherosclerosis. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides direct evidence of the presence of viable C. pneumoniae in atheromatous lesions. A chronic inflammatory response caused by a persistent infection of the coronary arteries may explain the link between C. pneumoniae and atherosclerosis.