简介:AbstractBackground:The optimal surgical approach for four-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical and radiological outcomes and complications between the anterior and posterior approaches for four-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy.Methods:A total of 19 patients underwent anterior decompression and fusion and 25 patients underwent posterior laminoplasty and instrumentation in this study. Perioperative information, intraoperative blood loss, clinical and radiological outcomes, and complications were recorded. Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, 36-item short form survey (SF-36) score and cervical alignment were assessed.Results:There were no significant differences in JOA scores between the anterior and posterior group preoperatively (11.6 ± 1.6 vs. 12.1 ± 1.5), immediately postoperatively (14.4 ± 1.1 vs. 13.8 ± 1.3), or at the last follow-up (14.6 ± 1.0 vs. 14.2 ± 1.1) (P > 0.05). The JOA scores significantly improved immediately postoperatively and at the last follow-up in both groups compared with their preoperative values. The recovery rate was significantly higher in the anterior group both immediately postoperatively and at the last follow-up. The SF-36 score was significantly higher in the anterior group at the last follow-up compared with the preoperative value (69.4 vs. 61.7). Imaging revealed that there was no significant difference in the Cobb angle at C2-C7 between the two groups preoperatively (-2.0° ± 7.3° vs. -1.4° ± 7.5°). The Cobb angle significantly improved immediately postoperatively (12.3° ± 4.2° vs. 9.2° ± 3.6°) and at the last follow-up (12.4° ± 3.5° vs. 9.0° ± 2.6°) in both groups compared with their preoperative values (P = 0.00). Three patients had temporary dysphagia in the anterior group and four patients had persistent axial symptoms in the posterior group.Conclusions:Both the anterior and posterior approaches were effective in treating four-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy in terms of neurological clinical outcomes and radiological features. However, the JOA score recovery rate and SF-36 score in the anterior group were significantly higher. Persistent axial pain could be a major concern when undertaking the posterior approach.
简介:AbstractThis study aims to investigate cases of human plague in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region (IMAR), China, and to inform the development of plague prevention and control strategies. On 12th of November 2019, two herdsmen from Sunitezuo Banner, Xilingol League were diagnosed with pneumonic plague in Beijing, China. On November 16th, one resident of Xianghuang Banner, Xilingol League was diagnosed with bubonic plague in Huade County Hospital, Ulanqab, China. On 27th of November, one resident of Siziwang Banner was diagnosed with bubonic plague. In total, 78 close contacts were monitored over a period, but none of them developed symptoms. Plague outbreaks in animals had been reported in Sunitezuo Banner, Xianghuang Banner, and Siziwang Banner in 2019. Two of the four cases were related (husband and wife), but not the other two. All the cases may be associated with contact with rodents (hare) or infected fleas. The cases highlight the importance of early identification of plague cases in humans in order to stop further infection. This demonstrates the value of monitoring and ongoing vigilance on endemic diseases, the importance of updating medical training and raising public awareness about infectious diseases that even have not been observed over decades.
简介:摘要目的分析振幅整合脑电图(aEEG)、脑电图(EEG)分型、全面无反应性量表(FOUR)评分在重型颅脑外伤性昏迷患者预后判断中的应用。方法选取2017年1月至2019年1月本院收治的重型颅脑外伤性昏迷的84例患者作为研究对象,采用aEEG监测、EEG分型以及FOUR评分对患者预后进行判断,分析其对预后判断的价值。结果aEEG、EEG分型、FOUR评分对预后判断结果与随访结果的Kappa值分别为0.628、0.468、0.569。aEEG、EEG分型、FOUR评分以及三者联合的灵敏度分别为78.79%、75.76%、66.67%、87.88%,特异度分别为84.31%、72.55%、78.43%、90.20%,阳性预测值分别为76.47%、64.10%、66.67%、85.29%,阴性预测值分别为86.00%、82.22%、78.43%、92.00%,准确度分别为82.14%、73.81%、73.81%、89.29%。联合检测的特异度、阳性预测值、准确度明显高于EEG分型(均P<0.05);联合检测的灵敏度、阳性预测值、准确度明显高于FOUR评分(均P<0.05)。结论aEEG、EEG分型、FOUR评分对重型颅脑外伤性昏迷患者预后判断均有一定价值,其中aEEG的有效性略高于EEG分型、FOUR评分,并且三者联合预测的有效性高于单一指标预测,值得临床推广。