Fracture healing following high energy tibial trauma: Ilizarov versus Taylor Spatial Frame

Introduction

The optimal treatment of high energy tibial fractures remains controversial and a challenging orthopaedic problem. The role of external fixators for all these tibial fractures has been shown to be crucial.

Methods

A five-year consecutive series was reviewed retrospectively, identifying two treatment groups: Ilizarov and Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF; Smith & Nephew, Memphis, TN, US). Fracture healing time was the primary outcome measure.

Results

A total of 112 patients (85 Ilizarov, 37 TSF) were identified for the review with a mean age of 45 years. This was higher in women (57 years) than in men (41 years). There was no significant difference between frame types (p=0.83). The median healing time was 163 days in both groups. There was no significant difference in healing time between smokers and non-smokers (180 vs 165 days respectively, p=0.07), open or closed fractures (p=0.13) or age and healing time (Spearman''s r=0.12, p=0.18). There was no incidence of non-union or re-fracture following frame removal in either group.

Conclusions

Despite the assumption of the rigid construct of the TSF, the median time to union was similar to that of the Ilizarov frame and the TSF therefore can play a significant role in complex tibial fractures.     

Chediak-Higashi gene in humans. I. Impairment of natural - killer function

Natural-killer (NK)-cell function was profoundly depressed in donors homozygous for the Chediak-Steinbrinck-Higashi syndrome (C-HS) gene when compared with age- and sex-matched normals. This apparent defect was not simply a result of a delayed response because little cytolysis was evident in kinetics experiments even after 24 h of incubation. NK cells from C-HS donors failed to lyse adherent (MDA, CEM, and Alab) or nonadherent (K562 and Molt-4) tumor cell lines or nontransformed human fetal fibroblasts. Therefore, the apparent C-HS defect was not a result of a shift in target selectivities. In addition, the depressed reactivity did not appear to be a result of suppressor cells or factors because: (a) enriched NK populations (nonadherent lymphocytes bearing receptors for the Fc portion of IgG) from C-HS donors were low in NK-cell function, (b) C-HS mononuclear cells did not inhibit the cytotoxicity of normal cells in coculture experiments, and (c) cells from the C-HS donors remained poorly reactive even after culture for up to 7 d. The nature of the defective NK activity in C-HS patients is not clear but may lie within the lytic mechanism rather than at the level of the recognition structure or population size because the frequency of target-binding cells was normal. In vitro NK activity could be partially restored by interferon treatment. Combined with the results presented in the following paper (4), these observations suggest that the C-HS gene causes a selective immunodeficiency disorder, mainly involving NK cells. This finding, in conjunction with the high incidence of spontaneous possibly malignant, lymphoproliferative disorders in these patients, may have important implications regarding the theory of immune surveillance mediated by NK cells.     

High-dose atorvastatin therapy in severe heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia

Lipid targets can be difficult to attain in familial hypercholesterolaemia. To compare atorvastatin with simvastatin- fenofibrate and simvastatin-cholestyramine therapy, we studied 54 patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia over periods of 2-6 months on each therapeutic regimen. The atorvastatin regimen reduced total cholesterol by 41.2 +/- 11.2%, LDL by 45.6 +/- 15.5%, triglycerides by 33.8 +/- 24.8%, and increased HDL by 2.3 +/- 37.0%. Simvastatin- fenofibrate therapy achieved reductions of 33.9 +/- 8.5% in cholesterol, 42.0 +/- 12.2% in LDL, 34.7 +/- 38.3% for triglycerides, and a 25.4 +/- 55.1% increase in HDL. Simvastatin-cholestyramine gave a reduction of 31.3 +/- 11.8% in cholesterol, 36.0 +/- 14.4% in LDL, 13.7 +/- 36.3% in triglycerides, and a 1.1 +/- 30.3% rise in HDL. The atorvastatin regimen was marginally but not significantly better than simvastatin-fenofibrate in improving the LDL:HDL ratio, LDL:apoB and and apolipoprotein B:A1 ratios. Eleven patients (20.4%) had side- effects: two discontinued atorvastatin due to side-effects; two patients had rashes; six had myalgia and two had diarrhoea. Gastrointestinal side-effects were described in 16 (30.1%) patients on simvastatin-cholestyramine therapy and four cases of myalgia (11.2%) were seen with simvastatin-fenofibrate. In nine patients on atorvastatin (20.4%) a 30% or greater fall in HDL was observed, compared to five patients with resin therapy (9.2%) and two with fibrate therapy (5.5%). There were no significant differences in liver or muscle biochemistry between the regimens, but atorvastatin did raise transaminase and creatine kinase concentrations significantly compared to pre-treatment values (p = 0.001). Atorvastatin significantly improves the lipid profile in most patients compared with other regimens. It has a comparable incidence of side-effects to combination therapy regimens.