In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

Ex Input:
Context: To describe technical challenges encountered using the Ovation endograft for abdominal aortic aneurysms and suggest tips and maneuvers for successful management.', "Deployment of the Ovation's unsupported main body is often associated with the anteroposterior arrangement of the limb gates instead of the usual side-by-side configuration, rendering contralateral catheterization challenging. Successful catheterization of the contralateral limb can be confirmed by lateral deviation of the ipsilateral stiff guidewire caused by balloon inflation within the contralateral limb. Moreover, failure to cannulate the contralateral limb gate due to persistent impingement of the guidewire or compromise of the inflated rings can be overcome using the transbrachial antegrade approach.\Question: Does technical challenge encountered during deployment of the ovation abdominal aortic stent-graft system?

Ex Output:
Awareness of certain aspects associated with the use of the Ovation device and adoption of the adjunctive techniques herein described helps the interventionist avoid unexpected challenges or manage technical difficulties to maximize the device's safety and effectiveness.


Ex Input:
Context: Psychostimulants are often used in close temporal proximity to nicotine and have been reported to enhance acutely nicotine's desirability in humans.", 'To investigate the acute associations between amphetamine and nicotine, we examined the potentiative interactions between clinically relevant, low doses of these drugs on locomotor activity, and dopamine overflow in the rat.', 'Locomotor activity was measured by telemetry in the home cage environment, and dopamine overflow was evaluated in striatal slice preparations from female Holtzman rats.', 'When administered simultaneously, nicotine and amphetamine produced a predominantly additive effect on locomotor behavior. However amphetamine, when given 2-4 h before nicotine, strongly potentiated nicotine-induced locomotor activity. Correspondingly, nicotine given 1-4 h before amphetamine robustly enhanced amphetamine-stimulated locomotor activity even when the effects of the nicotine pretreatment dissipated. Acute nicotine pretreatment similarly potentiated the effects of dopamine transporter ligands, cocaine, nomifensine, and methamphetamine but not a direct dopamine receptor agonist. Consistent with the behavioral studies, in vivo nicotine pretreatment exaggerated amphetamine-induced dopamine efflux from rat striatal slices. Likewise, in vivo pretreatment of rats with amphetamine potentiated nicotine-induced dopamine efflux from striatal slices. Direct pretreatment of striatal tissue by nicotine also potentiated subsequent amphetamine-stimulated dopamine overflow, further suggesting that the nicotine-amphetamine interaction occurs at the level of the dopamine terminal.\Question: Do nicotine and amphetamine acutely cross-potentiate their behavioral and neurochemical responses in female Holtzman rats?

Ex Output:
Overall, the present data demonstrate that acute interactions of nicotine and other psychomotor stimulants produce potentiative effects and that these transient interactions may play a role in the frequent co-use and abuse of nicotine and other stimulants.


Ex Input:
Context: To evaluate whether core length impacts biopsy accuracy and Gleason score underestimation compared to radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens.', 'From 2010 to 2011, 8,928 cores were trans-rectal obtained from 744 consecutive patients (178 RP, 24%), 557 by an experienced performer (>250/year) and 187 (25%) by in-training urology residents. Prospectively analyzed variables were core length, age, prostate volume, free and total prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density and free/total PSA ratio.', 'Mean core length for Gleason upgrading on RP (42.7%, n = 76) was 11.61 (±2.5, median 11.40) compared to 13.52 (±3.2, median 13.70), p < 0.001 for perfect biopsy-RP Gleason agreement (57.3%, n = 102). In multivariate analysis, for each unit of core length increment in millimeter, the Gleason upgrading risk decreased 89.9%, p = 0.049 [odds ratio (OR) 0.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01-0.99]. Biopsy positivity between experienced (35.5%) and in-training performer (30.1%) was not significantly different (p = 0.20), with comparable mean patient age (65.1 vs. 64.1), prostate volume (52.3 vs. 50.7) and median PSA (5.2 vs. 5.1), respectively. Denoting wider variability in terms of core length, in-training performers obtained significantly larger cores for positive biopsies (11.33 ± 3.42 vs. 10.83 ± 3.68), p = 0.043, compared to experienced performer (11.39 ± 3.36 vs. 11.37 ± 3.64), p = 0.30. In multivariate analysis, PSA density (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02-1.28) and age (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.07) were significantly associated with biopsy positivity, p = 0.021 and p = 0.011, respectively.\Question: Is gleason underestimation predicted by prostate biopsy core length?

Ex Output:

While core length on trans-rectal biopsy independently affects Gleason upgrading on RP specimens, performer experience has minor impact on Gleason discordance or biopsy positivity due to a sharp learning curve.