Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban ; 49(5): 851-854, 2017 10 18.
Artigo em Chinês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29045968

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To compare the difference between non-operative and operative treatment of humeral shaft fractures. METHODS: From March 2005 to October 2012, 252 cases of humeral shaft fractures were treated and were adequately followed up. According to the treatment methods, the patients were divided into 2 groups: the non-operative group and the operative group. In the non-operative group, there were 76 cases treated with plaster/small splint fixation,meanwhile there were 176 cases treated with internal fixation either by plating or by nailing in the operative group. The follow-up parameters included: fracture healing rate, fracture union time, complications rate, Constant- Murley shoulder score and Mayo elbow score. RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was (31.24±20.06) months (ranging 6 to 103 months). There were no statistical differences in age, open fracture number, fracture site and Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) classification between the non-operative group and the operative group. The fracture healing rate: the non-operative group: 96.1%(72/76), the operative group: 97.7%(172/176), P=0.46; the fracture union time: the non-operative group: (10.24±2.93) weeks, the operative group: (10.69±2.51) weeks, P=0.22; the complication rate: the non-operative group: 5.3%(4/76),the operative group: 15.3%(27/176), P=0.03. The complications included: nonunion: the non-operative group: 3.95%(3/76), the operative group: 2.3%(4/176), P=0.434; radial nerve palsies: the non-operative group: 0%(0/76), the operative group: 5.7%(10/176), P=0.035; bone split: the non-operative group: 0%(0/76), the operative group: 1.7%(3/176), P=0.556; elbow stiffness: the non-operative group:1.3%(1/76), the operative group: 0.6%(1/176), P=1.000; shoulder pain: the non-operative group:0%(0/76), the operative group: 5.1%(9/176), P=0.061. The Constant-Murley shoulder score: the non-operative group: 97.37±4.94, the operative group: 96.34±6.88, P=0.244. The Mayo elbow score: the non-operative group: 99.80±1.72, the operative group: 99.49±2.73,P=0.923. CONCLUSION: The results of non-operative treatment of humeral shaft fractures appeared with excellent results with lower complications rate compared with that of the operative treatment.


Assuntos
Fixação Interna de Fraturas , Fixação Intramedular de Fraturas , Fraturas do Úmero , Placas Ósseas , Articulação do Cotovelo , Consolidação da Fratura , Humanos , Fraturas do Úmero/cirurgia , Úmero , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
Artigo em Chinês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35325936

RESUMO

Objective: To explore the effect of vestibular rehabilitation and to identify factors that can affect rehabilitation outcomes. Methods: From December 2018 to October 2020, patients who underwent vestibular rehabilitation in the Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat Hospital of Fudan University were prospectively followed up. A battery of vestibular function examinations and psychological status evaluations were applied before and after rehabilitation initiation. The main outcomes were vertigo/dizziness and unsteadiness, measured by visual analogue scale (VAS); Secondary outcomes were daily activities and participation, assessed by vestibular activities and participation measure (VAP). Paired t-test was used to compare the effects before and after rehabilitation. Binary logistic regressions were applied to analyze the influencing factors of rehabilitation outcomes. Results: A total sample of 171 patients was followed up regularly with a median time of 11 months. Of the 171 patients evaluated, 72 were males and 99 were females; age ranged from 10 to 89 years old with a median age of 55 years old. At 6-month follow-up, the difference of VAS score of vertigo/dizziness and unsteadiness pre-post rehabilitation was 1.79±1.80 and 1.56±1.76, respectively; The difference of activity and participation domain of VAP score was 2.51±13 and 1.27±3.75, respectively. All differences pre-post rehabilitation exhibited statistically significant with P values<0.01. Regression analysis demonstrated that the length of symptom onset was a significant predictor of poor balance recovery (OR=6.52; 95%CI:2.10, 20.27). Visual dependence (OR=5.44; 95%CI: 1.38, 21.47) and suspectable anxiety (OR=6.45; 95%CI: 1.49, 28.30) were identified as risk factors for poor recovery of vertigo/dizziness. Conclusions: Vestibular rehabilitation effectively reduces dizziness, promotes balance, and improves the function of daily activities. Time from the onset, visual dependence and suspectable anxiety are the main factors hindering a desirable rehabilitation outcome.


Assuntos
Tontura , Vestíbulo do Labirinto , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Ansiedade , Criança , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Resultado do Tratamento , Vertigem , Adulto Jovem
3.
Zhonghua Xue Ye Xue Za Zhi ; 39(4): 305-309, 2018 Apr 14.
Artigo em Chinês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29779327

RESUMO

Objective: To probe the feasibility of decitabine (DAC) combined with micro-transplantation as consolidation treatment for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Methods: Between November 2012 and September 2015, 37 consecutive patients with AML ≥60 years of age were analyzed. Of them, 19 patients received consolidation therapy with DAC followed by micro-transplantation (microtransplant group). Another 18 ones (chemo group) were treated with DAC plus priming regimen as consolidation chemotherapy in the same period. Results: There were no significant differences in terms of age, WBC count, and disease status of onset between the microtransplant and chemo groups (P>0.05). The two regimens were well tolerated. There was no difference of CTC grade 3-4 nonhematologic toxicities between the microtransplant and chemo groups (36.8% vs 27.8%, χ(2)=0.347, P=0.728). The median recovery durations for neutrophil and platelet in the microtransplant group were similar to those in the chemo group (12 vs 13 days, z=1.599, P=0.110; 14 vs 12 days, z=-1.314, P=0.189, respectively). No graft-versus-host disease was observed in the microtransplant group. The 2-year leukemia-free survival and overall survival were better in microtransplant group (50.7% and 54.9%, respectively) than in chemo group (24.3% and 30.0%, respectively) (P=0.047 and P=0.071, respectively). Conclusion: DAC combined with micro-transplantation as a consolidation regimen may be a safe and promising option for older patients with AML.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda/tratamento farmacológico , Quimioterapia de Consolidação , Citarabina , Decitabina/administração & dosagem , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA