Vertaling van "no " (Nederlands → Frans) :

NO X (zowel NO als NO 2 ) zijn belangrijk bij het vormen van zowel (secundair) fijn stof als ozon.
Le NO X (tant le NO que le NO 2 ) joue un rôle important dans la formation aussi bien de particules fines (secondaires) que de l’ozone.

White blood cells : ASA I en II : No Sedimentation : ASA I : No Haemostasis : ASA I en II : No (except in case of bloody surgery) Renal function : Na and K : ASA I en II : No Creatinine : ASA I en II : No, except > 60 y Random glucose : ASA I : No Urine analysis : ASA I: No
White blood cells : ASA I en II : No Sedimentation : ASA I : No Haemostasis : ASA I en II : No (except in case of bloody surgery) Renal function : Na and K : ASA I en II : No Creatinine : ASA I en II : No, except > 60 y Random glucose : ASA I : No Urine analysis : ASA I: No Pregnancy test : ask questions ALAT : ASA I en II : No Hepatitis B : protection of hospital staff

· stikstofoxiden (NO), meer bepaald stikstofdioxide (NO) en stikstofmonoxide (NO); · vluchtige organische stoffen (VOS).
· les oxydes d’azote (NO), et plus précisément le dioxyde d’azote (NO) et le monoxyde d’azote (NO) ;

Statement Glucose Consider > 40y No No, consider if renal disease
Haemostasis No No No, consider if renal disease Renal function No Consider > 40y, Yes Yes if renal or CV disease

scope and purpose: 10/12 stakeholders involvement: 8/16 rigour of development: 7/28 (methods available only on request) clarity and presentation: 8/16 applicability: 3/12 editorial independence: 2/8 question: adequate search: insufficient selection: unclear quality appraisal: fair data-extraction: not given characteristics of original studies: not given meta-analysis: no pooling Randomisation: good concealment of allocation: no Blinding of outcome assessors: unclear Baseline characteristics comparable: yes Follow-up: sufficient Intention-to-treat: yes Contamination: unclear
scope and purpose: 10/12 stakeholders involvement: 8/16 rigour of development: 7/28 (methods available only on request) clarity and presentation: 8/16 applicability: 3/12 editorial independence: 2/8 question: adequate search: insufficient selection: unclear quality appraisal: fair data-extraction: not given characteristics of original studies: not given meta-analysis: no pooling

Blood gases No Consider Consider HCN Full blood count : In case of bloody surgery: bloodgroup and rhesys-factor (+irregular anti-bodyÊs) + Hb Hb : ASA I en II : No ( Except not Caucasian).
Urine analysis Consider Consider Consider Blood gases No Consider Consider HCN Full blood count : In case of bloody surgery: bloodgroup and rhesys-factor (+irregular anti-bodyÊs) + Hb Hb : ASA I en II : No ( Except not Caucasian).

11. De nitrosothiolgroepen en de synthese van NO: de vaststelling van het loskomen van nitrosothiolgroepen (-SNO) in positie Cys-β93 van hemoglobine na het vrijkomen van aan haem gehecht zuurstof, met de productie van NO, heeft geleid tot de hypothese van een regulerend mechanisme van de vaattonus door hemoglobine zelf.
11. Les groupes nitrosothiol et la synthèse de NO (oxyde nitrique): la constatation du relargage de groupes nitrosothiol (–SNO) en position Cys-β93 de l’hémoglobine après la libération de l’oxygène fixé à l’hème, avec génération de NO, a fait naître l’hypothèse d’un mécanisme de régulation du tonus vasculaire par l’hémoglobine elle-même.

2. Het rapport is beschikbaar op de website van het NOKC [http ...]
2. Le rapport peut être téléchargé depuis le site Internet du NOKC ( [http ...]

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 5. Art.No.:CD009329.
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 5.Art.No.:CD009329.DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009329.pub2

In the first scenario, there is no significant difference between the respondents with regard to the choice of the place where the information is given (inside or outside the existing decision-making organs) according their current/past membership (or not) of the INAMI – RIZIV organs.
Only 26% would choose to inform the patient outside the existing organs, and with a stronger preference on informing after the decision is taken. In the first scenario, there is no significant difference between the respondents with regard to the choice of the place where the information is given (inside or outside the existing decision-making organs) according their current/past membership (or not) of the INAMI – RIZIV organs.