DocumentsDate added
Original article
Ajit Swamy1*,Kartikeya Sharma2,Mukesh Phalak3,Divyansu Goyel4,Aniruddha Khirsagar5
1 HOU & Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Dr. DY Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Pimpri, Pune, India
2,5 PG Final Year, Department of Orthopaedics, Dr. DY Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre,Pimpri, Pune, India
3 Associate Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Dr. DY Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre,Pimpri, Pune, India
4 Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Dr. DY Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre,Pimpri, Pune, India
Address reprint requests to
*Dr. Ajit Swamy, HOU & Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Dr. DY Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Pimpri, Pune, India
Article citation: Swamy A, Sharma K,Phalak M, Goyel D, Khirsagar A. A study of arthroscopic management of meniscal injuries in 20 patients. J Pharm Biomed Sci 2016;06(02):130–133. Available at www.jpbms.info
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20936/jpbms/1602010
ABSTRACT
Background Meniscal injuries are common as a result of sports related injuries and motor vehicle accidents. Current arthroscopic partial meniscectomy is indicated for the management of meniscal tears because of early rehabilitation and return to work and minimal complications. Present study is a hospital-based retrospective study of 20 adult cases admitted at Dr. DY Patil Medical College from January 2015 to January 2016. Common age group was between 10 and 40 years with mean of 27.05 years.
Aims and Objectives To study the effectiveness of arthroscopic management of meniscal injuries using Lysholm knee scoring and Tapper and Hoover grading system. To determine the type of meniscal injury that occurs in clinically suspected cases of meniscal injuries.
Materials and Methods This study includes 20 cases of menisical injuries of knee treated by closed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy at Dr. DY Patil Medical College, Pune from January 2015 to January 2016. Follow up has been done up to 6 months. This is a retrospective time-bound study conducted during the period from January 2015 to January 2016. Sample size consists of 20 patients.
Results The study consists of 20 cases of meniscal injuries with or without ACL tear,treated surgically by partial meniscectomy, 17 patients were male and 3 patients were female. Meniscal injuries on right knee were 11 cases and left knee were 9 cases. Type of meniscal tear was longitudinal 10 cases, oblique 5 cases, horizontal 3 cases, radial 1 case and complex (with discoid meniscus) tear 1 case. Meniscal injuries associated with partial/complete ACL tear were 6 cases. There was one case of discoid meniscus. Surgery was performed at an average 1 month after meniscal tear, duration of hospital stay was 3–6 days ranging from 3–6 days, mean time for earliest return to work was 14.35 days with range 10–16 days. Excellent to good results were seen in 95% of cases. Conclusion Incidence of meniscal injuries is most common due to motor vehicle accident and other causes being sports related injuries and fall by slip. The advantage of arthroscopic meniscectomyis minimally invasive technique includes early return to work,minimal complications, early post-operative rehabilitation, short duration of hospital stay. Hence this is the preferred technique for treatment of meniscal injuries.
KEYWORDS meniscal injuries, arthroscopic management
REFERENCES
1.Simpson DA, Thomas NP, Aichroth PM. Open and closed meniscectomy. A comparative analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br.1986;68:301–4.
2.Dandy DJ. The arthroscopic anatomy of symptomatic meniscal lesions. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1990;72:628–33.
3.Shrive NG, O’Connor JJ, Goodfellow JW. Load-bearing in the knee joint. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1978;(131):279–87.
4.Lysholm J, Gillquist J. Endoscopic meniscectomy. Int Orthop.1981;5(4):265–70.
5.Rao SK, Rao PS. Lysholm II scoring system to evaluate meniscal injury. Indian J Orthop. 1997;31(2):107–9.
6.Dandy DJ, Jackson RW. The impact of arthroscopy on the management of disorders of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 1975;57:346–48.
7.Umar M. Ambulatory arthroscopic knee surgery: results of partial meniscectomy. J Pak Med Assoc. 1997;47(8):210–3.
8.Dandy DJ. Early results of closed partial meniscectomy. Br Med J. 1978;1099–100.
9.Tapper EM, Hoover NW. Late results after meniscectomy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51(3):517–26.
10.McGinity JB, Geuss LF, Marvin RA. Partial or total meniscectomy:a comparative analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1977;59:763–6.
11.Gillquist J, Oretorp N. Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. Technique and long-term results. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982;167:29–33.
12.Tregonning RJ. Closed partial meniscectomy: early results for simple tears with mechanical systems. J Bone Joint Surg Br.1983;65:378–82.
13.Whipple TL, Caspari RB, Meyers JF. Arthroscopic meniscectomy.An interim report at three to four years after operation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1984;183:105–14.
Statement of originality of work: The manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors, the requirements for authorship have been met, and that each author believes that the manuscript represents honest and original work.
Sources of support: None
Competing interest / Conflict of interest: The author(s) have no competing interests for financial support, publication of this research,patents, and royalties through this collaborative research. All authors were equally involved in discussed research work. There is no financial conflict with the subject matter discussed in the manuscript.
Disclaimer: Any views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense.
Original article
Sarat Kumar Behera*,Sudeep Kumar Patra,Saiprasanna Behera
Department of TB and Chest, Hi-Tech Medical College & Hospital, Pandara, Rasulgarh,Bhubaneswar, Odisha-751025, India
Address reprint requests to
*Dr. Sarat Kumar Behera,
Associate Professor, Department of TB and Chest,Hi-Tech Medical College & Hospital,Pandara, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar,Odisha-751025, India
Article citation: Behera SK, Patra SK,Behera S. A study on budesonide/formoterol vs. fluticasone/salmeterol inhaled combination in moderate to severe asthma. J Pharm Biomed Sci 2016;06(02):124–129.Available at www.jpbms.info
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20936/jpbms/160209
ABSTRACT
Background and Objectives The addition of an inhaled long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) to an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) gives optimal control of asthma in most patients. The LABA salmeterol xinafoate (salmeterol) with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) fluticasone propionate (fluticasone) and formoterol with budesonide are available as a combination product pMDI in a single aerosol inhaler. This study compared the efficacy and safety of commercially available salmeterol/fluticasone with formeterol/budesonide.
Materials and Methods Patients aged >12 years inclusive of either sex (N = 40) with persistent asthma as defined by NHLBI for >6 months prior to screening were included in the study. After a screening phase (1 week), eligible patients were enrolled in the study with 2 weeks run-in period. Eligible patients were randomized to receive either of the two treatment groups [HFA-propelled pMDI salmeterol/fluticasone (50/100 mcg) or HFA propelled formoterol/budesonide (6/100 mcg) pMDI] in a ratio of 1:1 for the 12-week treatment period. The primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of salmeterol/fluticasone vs. formoterol/budesonide, measured by mean pre-dose forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1), at week 12.
Results This study provides evidence for the primary efficacy endpoint that salmeterol/ fluticasone was statistically as well as clinically non-inferior to formoterol/budesonide in the treatment of patients with persistent asthma. This was supported by secondary endpoints which demonstrate that salmeterol/fluticasone appeared to be comparable to formoterol/budesonide in terms of efficacy for the secondary efficacy endpoints (morning PEFR, evening PEFR, diurnal variability of PEFR, daytime and night-time asthma symptoms score, average need for short-acting β2-agonists, proportion of patients that required rescue medication, patients with nocturnal asthma, patients without asthma symptoms of score 0 and average number of days without asthma symptoms of score 0). Salmeterol/fluticasone was safe and well tolerated; and safety profile is comparable to comparator formoterol/budesonide.
Conclusion The results of this study demonstrate that HFA formulations of salmeterol/fluticasone and formoterol/budesonide are clinically interchangeable. Overall, the study indicates that HFA-propelled salmeterol/fluticasone (50/100 mcg) pMDI was safe, well tolerated and non-inferior in efficacy compared to HFA-propelled formoterol/budesonide (6/100 mcg) pMDI.
KEYWORDS acute intestinal obstruction, gastrointestinal, adhesions
REFERENCES
1.Saetta M, Di Stefano А, Rosina C, Thiene G, Fabbri LM. Quantitative structural analysis of peripheral airways and arteries in sudden fatal asthma. Am Rev Resp Dis. 1991;143(1):138–43.
2.Carroll N, Cooke C, James A. The distribution of eosinophils and lymphocytes in the large and small airways of asthmatics. Eur Respir J. 1997;10(2):292–300.
3.Caroll N, Carello S, Cooke C, James A. Airway structure and inflammatory cells in fatal attacks of asthma. Eur Respir J. 1996;9(4):709–15.
4.Mauad T, Silva LF, Santos MA, Grinberg L, Bernardi FD, Martins MA. Abnormal alveolar attachments with decreased elastic fiber content in distal lung in fatal asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2004;170:857–62.
5.Hamid Q, Song Y, Kotsimbos TC, et al. Inflammation of small airways in asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1997;100(1):44–51.
6.Balzar S, Wenzel SE, Chu HW. Transbronchial biopsy as a tool to evaluate small airways in asthma. Eur Respir J. 2002;20(2):254–9.
7.Hamid QA. Peripheral inflammation is more important than central inflammation. Respir Med. 1997;91(Suppl. A):11–2.
8.Mitchell HW, Cvetkovski R, Sparrow MP, et al. Concurrent measurement of smooth muscle shortening, lumen narrowing and flow to acetylcholine in large and small porcine bronchi. Eur Respir J. 1998;12(5):1053–61.
9.Ellis JL, Hubbard WC, Meeker S, Undem BJ. Ragweed antigen E and anti-IgE in human central versus peripheral isolated bronchi. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1994;150(3):717–23.
10.Wenzel SE, Szefler SJ, Leung DY, et al. Bronchoscopic evaluation of severe asthma. Persistent inflammation associated with high dose glucocorticoids. Am J Respir Crit Care Med.1997;156(3):737–43.
11.Newnham DM, Grove A, McDevitt DG, Lipworth BJ. Subsensitivity of bronchodilator and systemic beta 2 adrenoceptor responses after regular twice daily treatment with formoterol dry powder in asthmatic patients. Thorax 1995;50:497–504.
12.Cates CJ, Cates MJ. The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 1.
13.Miller MR, Hankinson J, Brusasco V, et al. Standardisation of spirometry. Eur Respir J. 2005;26 (Suppl. 2):319–38.
14.Quanjer PH, Tammeling GJ, Cotes JE, et al. Lung volumes and forced ventilatory flows. Report Working Party Standardization of Lung Function Tests, European Community for Steel and Coal. Official Statement of the European Respiratory Society. Eur Respir J Suppl. 1993;16:5–40.
15.Kardos P, Wencker M, Glaab T, et al. Impact of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate versus salmeterol on exacerbations in severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007;175:144–9.
16.Ilyina TI, Chervinskaya TA, Bondareva GP, Vylegzhanina TG. Efficacy and safety of use of combined Flixotid drug in patients with moderate asthma. Primary Doctor 10/02.
17.Selivanova PA. Evaluation of controller medication efficiency in patients with moderate and severe uncontrolled asthma. Bull Siberian Med. 2009;71–7.
18.Juniper EF, Svensson K, Mork FC. Measurement properties and interpretation of three shortened versions of the Astma Control Questionnaire. Respir Med. 2005;99:553–8.
19.Zhong N, Lin J, Mehta P, Ngamjanyaporn P, Wu TC, Yunus F. Real-life effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy in asthma patients across Asia: SMARTASIA study. BMC Pulm Med. 2013;13:22.
20.Kardos P, Wencker M, Glaab T, Vogelmeier C. Impact of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate versus salmeterol on exacerbations in severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007;175:144–9.
21.Masoli M, Weatherall M, Holt S, Shirtcliffe P, Beasley R. Inhaled fluticasone propionate and adrenal effects in adult asthma: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Respir J. 2006;28: 960–967.
22.Aubier M, Wettenger R, Gans SJ. Efficacy of HFA-beclomethasone dipropionate extra-fine aerosol (800 microg day (-1)) versus HFA-fluticasone propionate (1000 microg day (-1)) in patients with asthma. Respir Med. 2001;95:212–20.
23.Quanjer PH, Tammeling GJ, Cotes JE, Pedersen OF, Peslin R,Yernault JC. Lung volumes and forced ventilator flows. Report Working Party Standardization of Lung Function Tests, European Community for Steel and Coal. Official Statement of the European Respiratory Society. Eur Respir J. 1993;16:5–40.
24.Papi A, Canonica GW, Maestrelli P, Paggiaro P, Olivieri D, Pozzi E et al. Rescue use of beclomethasone and albuterol in a single inhaler for mild asthma. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:2040–52.
25.Jones B, Jarvis P, Lewis JA, Ebbutt AF. Trials to assess equivalence:the importance of rigorous methods. BMJ. 1996;313:36–9.
26.Ebbutt AF, Frith L. Practical issues in equivalence trials. Stat Med. 1998;17:1691–701.
27.Dhillon S, Keating GM. Beclometasone dipropionate/formoterol:in an HFA propelled pressurised metered-dose inhaler.Drugs. 2006;66:1475–83.
28.Verbanck S, Schuermans D, Paiva M, Vincken W. The functional benefit of anti-inflammatory aerosols in the lung periphery. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2006;118:340–6.
29.Martin RJ. Therapeutic significance of distal airway inflammation in asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2002;2(Suppl.):S447–S460.
30.Goldin JG, Tashkin DP, Kleerup EC, Greaser LE, Haywood UM,Sayre JW et al. Comparative effects of hydrofluoroalkane and chlorofluorocarbon beclomethasone dipropionate inhalation on small airways: assessment with functional helical thin-section computed tomography. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1999;104:S258–S267.
31.VanAalderen WM, Price D, De Baets FM, Price J. Beclometasone dipropionate extrafine aerosol versus fluticasone propionate in children with asthma. Respir Med. 2007;101:1585–93.
32.Rabe KF. Formoterol in clinical practice—safety issues. Respir Med. 2001;95(Suppl B):S21–S25.
Statement of originality of work: The manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors, the requirements for authorship have been met, and that each author believes
that the manuscript represents honest and original work.
Sources of support: None
Competing interest / Conflict of interest: The author(s) have no competing interests for financial support, publication of this research,patents, and royalties through this collaborative research. All authors were equally involved in discussed research work. There is no financial conflict with the subject matter discussed in the manuscript.
Disclaimer: Any views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense.
Original article
Amit Anand1*,Alin Kumar Nayak2,Nirmalya Nirbisank3
1 Third year PG student, Department of General Surgery, Hi-Tech Medical College and Hospital, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
2 Third year PG student, Department of General Surgery, Hi-Tech Medical College and Hospital, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
3 Senior resident, Department of General Surgery, Hi-Tech Medical College and Hospital, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
The name of the department(s) and institution(s) to which the work should be attributed:
Department of General Surgery, Hi-Tech Medical College and Hospital Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
Address reprint requests to
*Dr Amit Anand, 3rd yr PG student, Department of General Surgery, Hi-Tech Medical College and Hospital, Bhubaneshwar, Orissa, India
Article citation: Anand A, Nayak AK,Nirbisank N. Case study on various presentation and management of acute intestinal obstruction. J Pharm Biomed Sci 2016;06(02):121–123.Available at www.jpbms.info
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20936/jpbms/160208
ABSTRACT
Bowel obstruction remains one of the most common intra-abdominal problems faced by general surgeons in their practice whether caused by hernia, neoplasm, adhesions or related to biochemical disturbance. Small or large bowel continues to be a major cause of morbidity and mortality to identify and analyse the clinical presentation, management and outcome of the patients with acute intestinal obstruction. The objectives are to study the various mode of presentation, various causes, influence of various factor like age, sex, diet and socioeconomic status in the pathogenesis of intestinal obstruction, morbidity and mortality rates in acute intestinal obstruction.
Materials and Methods Clinical study of intestinal obstruction were collected from case admitted to various surgical wards in Hi-Tech Medical College and Hospitals, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India, during the period from August 2013 to September 2015.
Results The study was conducted on 50 cases who were admitted in Hi-Tech Medical College with features of intestinal obstruction.
Conclusion In this study we assess the common causes of intestinal obstruction in different age groups and its management.
KEYWORDS acute intestinal obstruction, gastrointestinal, adhesions
REFERENCES
1.Scott G Houghton, Antonio Ramos De la Medina, Michael G Sarr. Bowel obstruction, 11th ed., Ch 17. In: Michael J Zinner, Stanley W Ashley, (eds): Maingot’s Abdominal Operations.New York: McGraw-Hill Medical; 2007. pp. 479–505.
2.Drake RL, Vogl WA, Mitchell AWM. Abdomen, 2nd ed., Ch 4.In: Gary’s Anatomy for Student. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier; 2010. p. 300.
3.William F Ganong. Regulation of gastrointestinal function, 19th ed., Ch 26. In: Review of Medical Physiology. Philadelphia, USA: Appleton and Lance; 1999. p. 483.
4.Zinner MJ, Ashley SW. Maingot’s Abdominal Operation. History of Acute Intestinal Obstruction, 11th ed. 2008; pp. 479–507.
5.Tsumura H, Ichikawa T, Murakami Y, Sueda T. Laproscopic adhesiolysis recurrent small bowel obstruction. Hepatogastroenterology. 2004;51:1058–61.
6.Maa J, Kirkwood KS. The Appendix. In: Townsend CM Jr,Beauchamp RD, Evers BM, Mattox KL, (eds): Sabiston Textbook of Surgery, 18th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2008. pp. 1333–47.
7.Becker JM, Stucchi AF. Intraabdominal adhesion prevention: are we getting any closer? Ann Surg. 2012;240:202–4.
8.Fazio VW, Cohen Z, Fleshman JW, van Goor H, Bauer JJ, Wolff BG, et al. Reduction in adhesive small-bowel obstruction by Seprafilm adhesion barrier after intestinal resection. DisColon Rectum. 2010;49:1–11.
9.Bass KN, Jones B, Bulkley GB. Current management of small bowel obstruction. Adv Surg. 2013;31:1–33.
10.Ağaoğlu N, Yücel Y, Türkyilmaz S. Surgical treatment of sigmoid volvulous. Acta Chir Belg. 2014;105:365–8.
Statement of originality of work: The manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors, the requirements for authorship have been met, and that each author believes
that the manuscript represents honest and original work.
Sources of support: None
Competing interest / Conflict of interest: The author(s) have no competing interests for financial support, publication of this research,patents, and royalties through this collaborative research. All authors were equally involved in discussed research work. There is no financial conflict with the subject matter discussed in the manuscript.
Disclaimer: Any views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense.
Review article
Bharati Kolliyavar1*,Leena Shettar2,Srinath Thakur3
1* Assistant Professor, Department of Periodontics & Oral Implantology, SDM College of Dental Sciences & Hospital,Sattur, Dharwad, Karnataka, India
2 Professor and Head of Department of Periodontics, SDM College of Dental Sciences & Hospital, Sattur, Dharwad,Karnataka, India
3 Professor and Principal, SDM College of Dental Sciences & Hospital, Sattur,Dharwad, Karnataka, India
Address reprint requests to
*Dr. Bharati Kolliyavar, Assistant Professor, Department of Periodontics & Oral Implantology, SDM College of Dental Sciences & Hospital, Sattur, Dharwad, Karnataka, India
Article citation: Kolliyavar B, Shettar L,Thakur S. Chlorhexidine: the gold standard mouth wash. J Pharm Biomed Sci 2016;06(02):106–109.Available at www.jpbms.info
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20936/jpbms/160205
ABSTRACT
Chlorhexidine (CHX) is used as the broad spectrum antiseptic since 1950. It is a widely used mouth wash because of its antiplaque and antigingivitis properties. Antibacterial activity of CHX is mainly by disrupting bacterial cell membrane, which causes leakage of cellular constituents and brings about cell death. Bactericidal and bacteriostatic activity depends on the dosage. This article discusses various clinical applications, properties and adverse effects of CHX.
KEYWORDS chlorhexidine, mouth wash, antiplaque agent
REFERENCES
1.Balagopal S, Arjunkumar R. Chlorhexidine: the gold standard antiplaque agent. J Pharm Sci Res. 2013;5(12):270–4.
2.Gunsolley JC. A meta-analysis of six-month studies of antiplaque and antigingivitis agents. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006;137(12):1649–57.
3.Schroeder HE. Formation and Inhibition of Dental Calculus. Berlin: Hans Huber; 1969. pp. 145–72.
4.Löe H, Von der Fehr FR, Schiött CR. Inhibition of experimental caries by plaque prevention. The effect of chlorhexidine mouth rinses. Scand J Dent Res. 1972;80(1):1–9.
5.Corbet EF, Tam JO, Zee KY, Wong MC, Lo EC, Mombelli AW.Therapeutic effects of supervised Chlorhexidine mouth rinses on untreated gingivitis. Oral Dis. 1997;3:9–18.
6.Grenier D. Effect of chlorhexidine on the adherence properties of Porphyromonas gingivalis. J Clin Periodontol. 1996;23(2):140–2.
7.Vianna ME, Gomes BP, Berber VB, Zaia AA, Ferraz CC, de Souza-Filho FJ. In vitro evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of chlorhexidine and sodium hypochlorite. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004;97(1):79–84.
8.Bonesvoll P, Gjermo PA. Comparison between chlorhexidine and some quaternary ammonium compounds with regard to retention, salivary concentration and plaque inhibiting effect in human mouth after mouth rinses. Arch Oral Biol. 1978;23:289–94.
9.Addy M. Chlorhexidine compared with other locally delivered antimicrobials. A short review. J Clin Periodontol. 1986;13: 957–64.
10.Addy M, Renton-Harper P. The role of antiseptics in secondary prevention. In Lang NP, Karring T, Lindhe J (eds): Proceedings of the 2nd European Workshop on Periodontology, Chemicals in Periodontics. Berlin: Quintessence; 1996. pp. 152–73.
11.Elley BM. Antibacterial agents in the control of supragingival plaque—a review. Br Dent J. 1999;186:286–96.
12.Flötra L, Gjermo P, Rölla G, Waerhaug J. Side effects of chlorhexidine mouth washes. Scand J Dent Res. 1971;79:119–25.
13.Addy M. Evaluation of clinical trials of agents and procedures to prevent caries and periodontal disease, choosing products and recommending procedures. Int Dent J. 1995;45:185–96.
14.Watts A, Addy M. Tooth discolorations and staining: a review of the literature. Br Dent J. 2001;190:309–16.
15.Rosenberg M, Gelernter I, Barki M, Bar-Ness R. Day long reduction of oral malodor by two phase oil: water mouth rinse as compared to chlorhexidine and placebo rinses. J Periodontol. 1992;63:39–43.
16.Franco Neto CA, Parolo CC, Rösing CK, Maltz M. Comparative analysis of the effect of two chlorhexidine mouth rinses on plaque accumulation and gingival bleeding. Braz Oral Res. 2008;22(2):139–44.
17.Van Leewen MP, Slot DE, Vander Weijden GA. Essential oil compared to chlorhexidine with respect to plaque and parameters of gingival inflammation a systematic review. J Periodontol.2011;82:174–94.
18.Papaionnou W, Vassilopoulos S, Vrotsos I, Margaritis V, Panis V. A comparison of a new alcohol-free 0.2% chlorhexidine oral rinse to an established 0.2% chlorhexidine rinse with alcohol for the control of dental plaque accumulation. Int J Dent Hyg. September 2015 [Epub ahead of print].
19.Van Strydonck DA, Slot DE, Van der Velden U, Van der Weijden F. Effect of a chlorhexidine mouth rinse on plaque, gingival inflammation and staining in gingivitis patients: a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol. 2012;39:1042–55.
20.Najafi MH, Taheri M, Mokhtari MR, Forouzanfar A, Farazi F,Mirzaee M, Ebrahiminik Z, Mehrara R. Comparative study of 0.2% and 0.12% digluconate chlorhexidine mouth rinses on the level of dental staining and gingival indices. Dent Research J (Isfahan). 2012;9:305–8.
21.Mirzadeh A, Rahmani S, Sirjani M, Mirzadeh A, Salahi S. A comparative study on the effect of 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash and 0.2% chlorhexidine gel on gingivitis and plaque accumulation. Bull Env Pharmacol Life Sci. 2014;3:140–4.
22.Gunsolley JC. A meta-analysis of six-month studies of antiplaque and antigingivitis agents. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006;137(12):1649–57.
23.Solís C, Santos A, Nart J, Violant D. 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash with an antidiscoloration system versus 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash: a prospective clinical comparative study. J Periodontol. 2011;82(1):80–5.
24.Winkel EG, Roldán S, Van Winkelhoff AJ, Herrera D, Sanz M.Clinical effects of a new mouthrinse containing chlorhexidine, cetylpyridinium chloride and zinc-lactate on oral halitosis. A dual center, double-blind placebo-controlled study, J Clin Periodontol. 2003;30(4):300–6.
25.Van Steenberghe D, Avontroodt P, Peeters W, Pauwels M,Coucke W, Lijnen A, et al. Effect of different mouth rinses on morning breath. J Periodontol. 2001;72(9):1183–91.
Statement of originality of work: The manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors, the requirements for authorship have been met, and that each author believes
that the manuscript represents honest and original work.
Sources of support: None
Competing interest / Conflict of interest: The author(s) have no competing interests for financial support, publication of this research,patents, and royalties through this collaborative research. All authors were equally involved in discussed research work. There is no financial conflict with the subject matter discussed in the manuscript.
Disclaimer: Any views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense.
Original article
Vinod Nair,Satish Uchale,Prafulla Govind Herode,Aabhijeet Shroff,Krishan Yadav*
Department of Orthopaedics, Dr. D.Y. Patil Medical College, Pimpri, Pune, Maharashtra
Address reprint requests to
*Dr. Krishan Yadav,
Department of Orthopaedics, Dr. D.Y. Patil Medical College, Pimpri, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Article citation: Nair V, Uchale S, Herode PG, Shroff A, Yadav K. Comparative study between the role of medial LCP and anterolateral LCP in the management of fractures of distal tibia. J Pharm Biomed Sci 2016;06(02):115–120. Available at www. jpbms. info
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20936/jpbms/160207
ABSTRACT
Background As the civilisation proceeds towards industrialisation more and more accidents have been experienced. In almost all over the world, the incidence of road traffic and industrial accidents are growing up, resulting in fracture of various bones of body. Leg bones fracture are very common because it is the most distal part of the body and is actively involved in locomotive system. Out of all the leg bones fracture, a significant number of cases are of distal tibia which are generally comminuted in nature and are unstable. As these fractures occur in proximity of weight bearing surface of ankle joint, a slight maladjustment in inclination of ankle joint may lead to permanent disability. Besides closed reduction with casting many osteosynthesis techniques can be used for these fracture such open reduction and internal fixation with locking plate, external fixation with or without limited internal fixation, intra-medullary nailing. Two types of LCP can be used in the management of fractures of distal one third of tibia i.e. medial LCP and the newer anterolateral LCP.
Aims and Objectives To study the management of fractures of distal tibia using medial LCP and anterolateral LCP and to assess and compare the end results of above procedure in terms of benefits and complications.
Materials and Methods This is a prospective randomised study from December 2013 to December 2015 for management of distal tibia fractures treated by medial LCP and Anterolateral LCP.
Results Study was performed on 50 patients out of which 25 were treated by medial LCP and 25 by anterolateral LCP. In study it was seen that medial and anterolateral plating duration of surgery, time of appearance of callus, and time for full weight bearing of patient were almost same but infection rate and hardware problem was lower in anterolateral plating.
Conclusion The objective is to obtain anatomic realignment of the joint surface while providing enough stability to allow early motion. This should be accomplished using techniques that minimise osseous and soft tissue devascularisation in the hopes of decreasing the complications resulting from treatment.
KEYWORDS distal tibia fractures, internal fixation, open reduction, Laughansen, mortise view, anatomical reduction
REFERENCES
1.Bone L, Stegemann P, McNamara K, Seibel R. External fixation of severely comminuted and open tibial pilon fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993;292:101–7.
2.McFerran MA, Smith SW, Boulas HJ, Schwartz HS. Complications encountered in the treatment of pilon fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 1992;6(2):195–200.
3.Oh CW, Kyung HS, Park IH, Kim PT, Ihn JC. Distal tibia metaphyseal fractures treated by percutaneous plate osteosynthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;408:286–91.
4.Teeny SM, Wiss DA. Open reduction and internal fixation of tibial plafond fractures: variables contributing to poor results and complications. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993;292:108–17.
5.Thordarson DB. Complications after treatment of tibial pilon fractures: prevention and management strategies. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2000;8(4):253–65.
6.Watson JT, Moed BR, Karges DE, Cramer KE. Pilon fractures: treatment protocol based on severity of soft tissue injury. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;375:78–90.
7.Wolinsky P, Lee M. The distal approach for anterolateral plate fixation of the tibia: an anatomic study. J Orthop Trauma. 2008;22(6):404–7.
8.Collinge C, Sanders R, DiPasquale T. Treatment of complex tibial periarticular fractures using percutaneous techniques. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;375:69–77.
9.Helfet DL, Shonnard PY, Levine D, Borrelli J Jr. Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis of distal fractures of the tibia. Injury. 1997;28(Suppl 1):A42–A47.
10.Redfern DJ, Syed SU, Davies SJ. Fractures of the distal tibia: minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis. Injury. 2004;35(6):615–20.
11.Shon OJ, Park CH. Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis of distal tibial fractures: a comparison of medial and lateral plating. J Orthop Sci. 2012;17(5):562–6.
12.Sohn OJ, Kang DH. Staged protocol in treatment of open distal tibia fracture: using lateral MIPO. Clin Orthop Surg. 2011;3(1):69–76.
Statement of originality of work: The manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors, the requirements for authorship have been met, and that each author believes that the manuscript represents honest and original work.
Sources of support: None
Competing interest / Conflict of interest: The author(s) have no competing interests for financial support, publication of this research,patents, and royalties through this collaborative research. All authors were equally involved in discussed research work. There is no financial conflict with the subject matter discussed in the manuscript.
Disclaimer: Any views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense.