Given a passage with a context and an answer, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.

Q: Context: The safety of Deltamethrin (DM) has been raised as a point of concern. The current investigation was envisaged to explore the responsiveness of oxidative stress parameters, DNA fragmentation and expression levels of TP53, cycloxygenase 2 (COX2) and cytochrome p4502E1 (CYP2E1) as toxicological endpoint in rats treated with DM. as well as attention was provided to the neuroprotective effect of vitamin E (VE).', 'Four different groups of rats were used in this study, group I served as control, group II received DM (0.6 mg/kg BW), group III received both DM plus VE and finally group IV received VE only (200 mg/kg BW). The treatment regimen was extending for one month for all groups and the brain tissues were collected for further analysis.', 'The obtained results showed a highly statistically significant increase in lipid peroxidation (LPO) content, nitric oxide concentration, and DNA fragmentation percentage and expression level of CYP2E1, TP53 and COX2 genes, in addition statistical significant reduction in total antioxidant capacity in DM treated group as compared to control were detected. Oral administration of VE attenuated the neurotoxic effects of DM through improvement of oxidative status, DNA fragmentation percentage and suppressing the expression level of CYP2E1, TP53 and COX2 genes.
Answer: From this study we concluded that VE supplementation has beneficial impacts on DM neurotoxicity in rats through its antioxidant and antiapoptotic properties.

A: Does vitamin E attenuate neurotoxicity induced by deltamethrin in rats?
****
Q: Context: Within Australian hospitals, cardiac and respiratory arrests result in a resuscitation attempt unless the patient is documented as not for resuscitation.', 'To examine the consistency of policies and documentation for withholding in-hospital resuscitation across health services.', 'An observational, qualitative review of hospital policy and documentation was conducted in June 2013 in three public and two private sector hospitals in metropolitan Melbourne. Not for resuscitation (NFR) forms were evaluated for physical characteristics, content, authorisation and decision-making. Hospital policies were coded for alerts, definition of futility and burden of treatment and management of discussions and dissent.', 'There was a lack of standardisation, with each site using its own unique NFR form and accompanying site-specific policies. Differences were found in who could authorise the decision, what was included on the form, the role of patients and families, and how discussions were managed and dissent resolved. Futility and burden of treatment were not defined independently. These inconsistencies across sites contribute to a lack of clarity regarding the decision to withhold resuscitation, and have implications for staff employed across multiple hospitals.
Answer: NFR forms should be reviewed and standardised so as to be clear, uniform and consistent with the legislative framework. We propose a two-stage process of documentation. Stage 1 facilitates discussion of patient-specific goals of care and consideration of limitations of treatment. Stage 2 serves to communicate a NFR order. Decisions to withhold resuscitation are inherently complex but could be aided by separating the decision-making process from the communication of the decision, resulting in improved end-of-life care.

A: Does comparison of not for resuscitation ( NFR ) form across five Victorian health services?
****
Q: Context: Previous studies have proved the feasibility of performing a pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple operation) in patients with portal vein-superior mesenteric vein and hepatic artery invasion. We report our institutional experience with the use of a variety of vascular reconstructive methods during pancreatic resections for adenocarcinoma.', 'A retrospective review was performed identifying all patients undergoing a Whipple operation or total pancreatectomy procedure from January 2003 to December 2013. All venous (portal vein-superior mesenteric vein) and arterial (superior mesenteric artery-hepatic artery) reconstructions were extracted and reviewed to determine survival and perioperative complications.', 'During the 10-year study period, 270 Whipple and total pancreatectomy procedures were performed, of which 183 were for adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Of the 183 operations, a total of 60 (32.8%) vascular reconstructions were found, 49 venous and 11 arterial. Venous reconstruction included 37 (61.7%) primary repairs, four (6.7%) reconstructions with CryoVein (CryoLife, Inc, Kennesaw, Ga), three (5.0%) repairs with autologous vein patch, three (5.0%) autologous saphenous reconstructions, and two (3.33%) portacaval shunts. In addition, there were 11 (18.3%) arterial reconstructions (seven hepatic artery and four superior mesenteric artery). The 1-year survival for all reconstructions was 71.1%, which is equivalent to T3 lesions that did not receive vascular reconstruction (70.11%), with a median survival time of 575.28 days and 12 patients still alive. Survival time was comparable with each type of venous reconstruction, averaging 528 days (11 of 49 patients still alive). There was a total thrombosis rate of seven of 60 (11.6%), all of which were portal vein thrombosis: three in the primary repair group and four delayed thromboses seen in primary repair, CryoVein repair, and vein patch repair. There was no thrombosis in any patients after arterial reconstruction.
Answer: An aggressive approach for stage II pancreatic cancers with venous or arterial invasion can be performed with comparable results when it is executed by an experienced institution with skilled oncologic and vascular surgeons.

A:
Does vascular reconstruction play an important role in the treatment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma?
****