Comparative Study of Modified Posterior Operation to Treat Kümmell's Disease

The present study aimed at examining the curative effect of modified posterior operation on treatment of Kümmell''s disease.About 30 patients of Kümmell''s disease with complete image and clinical data treated during June 2004 to July 2013 were conducted with anterior and posterior approaches, respectively. Kyphotic Cobb angle, fractured vertebra wedge angle, and the anterior and posterior heights of fractured vertebra were all measured through x-ray before and after operation, and the pain visual analog scale (VAS) was determined for evaluating the effect of operations. The injury and restoration of neurological function were assessed using Frankel classification.Patients in group A were treated with anterior operation, whereas group B was posterior operation. Postoperatively, VAS score, kyphotic Cobb angle, anterior vertebra height, and pathologic vertebra wedge angle were all significantly improved in patients with Kümmell''s disease receiving modified posterior operation (group B). Similar results were also observed in patients with anterior operation. The improvement of VAS and correction rate of kyphotic Cobb angle indicated equivalent effects of posterior and anterior operations. Meanwhile, alleviated neurological function damage was observed in 2 groups. Relevant factor analysis illustrated that there was no significant correlation of the severity and improvement rate of pain symptoms with age, medical history, anterior and posterior vertebra heights, kyphotic Cobb angle, and pathological vertebra wedge angle.Compared with traditional anterior approach, modified posterior operation, adopting transpedicular vertebral body grafting combined with vertebral pedicle screw fixation, could produce equivalent effects on kyphosis correction, pain relief, and improvement of neurological function in patients with Kümmell''s disease.     

Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials: Efficacy and Safety of UDCA-Based Therapies in Primary Biliary Cirrhosis

Major ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA)-based therapies for primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) include UDCA only, or combined with either methotrexate (MTX), corticosteroids (COT), colchicine (COC), or bezafibrate (BEF). As the optimum treatment regimen is unclear and warrants exploration, we aimed to compare these therapies in terms of patient mortality or liver transplantation (MOLT) and adverse events (AE).PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for randomized controlled trials up to August 31, 2014. We estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) for MOLT and odds ratios (ORs) for AE. A sensitivity analysis based on the dose of UDCA was also executed.Thirty-one eligible articles were included. Compared with COT plus UDCA, UDCA (HR 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09–1.39), BEF plus UDCA (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.02–4.83), COC plus UDCA (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.07–2.25), MTX plus UDCA (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.05–1.63), or OBS (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.11–2.01) all provided an increased risk of MOLT. With respect to drug AE profile, although not differing appreciably, BEF plus UDCA was associated with more AEs compared with UDCA (OR 3.16, 95% CI 0.59–20.67), COT plus UDCA (OR 2.27, 95% CI 0.15–33.36), COC plus UDCA (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.09–12.16), MTX plus UDCA (OR 2.03, 95% CI 0.23–17.82), or OBS (OR 3.00, 95% CI 0.53–20.75). The results of sensitivity analyses were highly consistent with previous analyses.COT plus UDCA was the optimal UDCA-based regimen for both MOLT and AEs. BEF plus UDCA was most likely to cause AEs, whereas monotherapy with UDCA and coadministriation of COT plus UDCA appeared to be associated with the fewest AEs for PBC treatment.     

The primary health care physician and the cancer patient: tips and strategies for managing sexual health

There is a large and growing population of long-term cancer survivors. Primary care physicians (PCPs) are playing an increasingly greater role in the care of these patients across the continuum of cancer survivorship. In this role, PCPs are faced with the responsibility of managing a range of medical and psychosocial late effects of cancer treatment. In particular, the sexual side effects of treatment which are common and have significant impact on quality of life for the cancer survivor, often go unaddressed. This is an area of clinical care and research that has received increasing attention, highlighted by the presentation of this special issue on Cancer and Sexual Health. The aims of this review are 3-fold. First, we seek to overview common presentations of sexual dysfunction related to major cancer diagnoses in order to give the PCP a sense of the medical issues that the survivor may present with. Barriers to communication about sexual health issues between patient/PCPs in order are also described in order to emphasize the importance of PCPs initiating this important conversation. Next, we provide strategies and resources to help guide the PCP in the management of sexual dysfunction in cancer survivors. Finally, we discuss case examples of survivorship sexual health issues and highlight the role that a PCP can play in each of these case examples.