Notes
Notes - notes.io |
There is great concern for cognitive function after resective temporal lobe surgery for drug-resistant epilepsy. However, few studies have investigated postoperative anatomical changes, and the downstream effects of surgery are poorly understood. This study investigated volumetric changes after resective surgery and vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) for epilepsy.
Preoperative and latest postoperative (mean, 28 months) structural T1 magnetic resonance imaging scans were retrospectively obtained for 43 patients 27 temporal lobe resections (TLRs), 6 extratemporal lobe resections, and 10 VNS, undergoing surgery for drug-resistant epilepsy between 2012 and 2017. Automated volumetric analyses of predefined cortical gray matter and subcortical structures were performed. Preoperative and postoperative volumes were compared, and the effects of age, gender, operation type, resection laterality, selectivity, time since surgery, and seizure outcome on volumetric changes were analyzed.
After TLRs, there were reductions eresting insight into functional network changes.
Robotic surgical systems have been developed to improve spine surgery accuracy. Studies have found significant reductions in screw revision rates and radiation exposure with robotic assistance compared with open surgery. The aim of the present study was to compare the perioperative outcomes between robot-assisted (RA) and fluoroscopically guided (FG) minimally invasive (MI) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) performed by a single surgeon.
The present retrospective cohort study analyzed all patients with lumbar degenerative disease who had undergone MI-TLIF by a single surgeon from July 2017 to March 2020. One group had undergone FG MI-TLIF and one group had undergone RA MI-TLIF.
Of the 101 patients included in the present study, 52 had undergone RA MI-TLIF and 49, FG MI-TLIF. We found no statistically significant differences in the operative time (RA, 241 ± 69.3 minutes; FG, 246.2 ± 56.3 minutes; P= 0.681). The mean radiation time for the RA group was 32.8 ± 28.8 seconds, and the mean fluoroscopy dose was 31.5 ± 30 mGy. The RA radiation exposure data were compared with similar data for the FG MI-TLIF group in a previous study (59.5 ± 60.4 mGy), with our patients' radiation exposure significantly lower (P= 0.035). The postoperative complications and rates of surgical revision were comparable.
Our results have demonstrated that RA MI-TLIF provides perioperative outcomes comparable to those with FG MI-TLIF. A reduced radiation dose to the patient was observed with RA compared with FG MI-TLIF. No differences were noted between the RA and FG cohorts in operative times, complication rates, revision rates, or length of stay.
Our results have demonstrated that RA MI-TLIF provides perioperative outcomes comparable to those with FG MI-TLIF. A reduced radiation dose to the patient was observed with RA compared with FG MI-TLIF. No differences were noted between the RA and FG cohorts in operative times, complication rates, revision rates, or length of stay.
Aortic disease requiring open or endovascular repair may result in spinal cord injury in approximately 2%-10% of patients. Cerebrospinal fluid diversion using lumbar drains (LDs) has been validated as a protective measure to mitigate this complication.
This single-institution retrospective study analyzed the implementation of a standardized protocol and subsequent educational intervention for LDs for aortic vascular procedures over a 4-year period.
In 2016-2019, 45 patients had LDs placed for open or endovascular procedures; group 1 included 19 patients with LDs placed before protocol implementation, and group 2 included 26 patients with LDs placed as per the institutional protocol. Demographics and procedural details in both groups were similar. However, there was a significant difference in the number of patients who had emergent versus planned placement of the LD (group 1, 89.5%; group 2, 50%; P < 0.01), volume of cerebrospinal fluid drained (group 1, 453 mL; group 2, 197 mL; P < 0.01), and compliance with 10 mL/hour drainage recommendation (group 1, 68.4%; group 2, 100%; P < 0.01). In group 1, 5 (31.6%) patients experienced neurological complications compared with only 1 (3.8%) in group 2. LD-related complications occurred 3 patients (15.8%) in group 1, whereas none occurred in group 2. Survey results suggested increased health care worker protocol familiarity with educational interventions.
Implementation of an institutional protocol for LDs for open or endovascular procedures is feasible and beneficial. Napabucasin Educational modules improve familiarity among all health care providers, which can improve patient care and complication avoidance.
Implementation of an institutional protocol for LDs for open or endovascular procedures is feasible and beneficial. Educational modules improve familiarity among all health care providers, which can improve patient care and complication avoidance.
The preoperative assessment of C2 morphology is important for safe instrumentation. Sclerotic changes are often seen in C2 pedicles. Evaluating the diameter measurements solely might not accurately assess the safety of screw insertion. We have proposed a novel grading system of the C2 pedicle that includes sclerosis and evaluated the predictive value of this grading system with the surgeon's safety evaluation.
We reviewed and measured the dimensional values in 220 cervical computed tomography angiograms. Additionally, we used a grading system that divides the findings into 5 grades according to the width measurement and degree of sclerosis in the C2 pedicle. Two spine surgeons independently classified the pedicles as follows safe (minimal risk of pedicle violation), caution needed (caution to minimize pedicle violation), or dangerous (a high risk of pedicle violation). Finally, we compared the measurements and the surgeons' safety assessments.
A total of 411 pedicles of 203 patients (mean age, 69.5 years; 49.5% women) were included. Of the 411 C2 pedicles, 170 were classified as high risk by ≥1 surgeon. Between the dimensional measurements and grading system, the sclerotic grade showed the best predictive value.
We have introduced a novel tool to evaluate the safety of C2 pedicle screw placement. Our results suggest that our pedicle width-sclerosis grading system is reproducible and predicts the surgeon's assessment of safe screw placement better than C2 pedicle diametrical measurements alone.
We have introduced a novel tool to evaluate the safety of C2 pedicle screw placement. Our results suggest that our pedicle width-sclerosis grading system is reproducible and predicts the surgeon's assessment of safe screw placement better than C2 pedicle diametrical measurements alone.
Here's my website: https://www.selleckchem.com/products/napabucasin.html
![]() |
Notes is a web-based application for online taking notes. You can take your notes and share with others people. If you like taking long notes, notes.io is designed for you. To date, over 8,000,000,000+ notes created and continuing...
With notes.io;
- * You can take a note from anywhere and any device with internet connection.
- * You can share the notes in social platforms (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, instagram etc.).
- * You can quickly share your contents without website, blog and e-mail.
- * You don't need to create any Account to share a note. As you wish you can use quick, easy and best shortened notes with sms, websites, e-mail, or messaging services (WhatsApp, iMessage, Telegram, Signal).
- * Notes.io has fabulous infrastructure design for a short link and allows you to share the note as an easy and understandable link.
Fast: Notes.io is built for speed and performance. You can take a notes quickly and browse your archive.
Easy: Notes.io doesn’t require installation. Just write and share note!
Short: Notes.io’s url just 8 character. You’ll get shorten link of your note when you want to share. (Ex: notes.io/q )
Free: Notes.io works for 14 years and has been free since the day it was started.
You immediately create your first note and start sharing with the ones you wish. If you want to contact us, you can use the following communication channels;
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: http://twitter.com/notesio
Instagram: http://instagram.com/notes.io
Facebook: http://facebook.com/notesio
Regards;
Notes.io Team
