RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The femur is the most common long bone affected by metastatic bone disease, with 25% involving the proximal third of the femur. Long stem cemented hip replacement (LHR) is an important option for cases of impending fracture. Pulmonary embolism is a critical complication that can occur. This study evaluates the effectiveness of distal femoral canal decompression in reducing the risk of cardiopulmonary events. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty two patients with metastatic bone disease of the proximal femur undergoing LHR were recruited and randomized. Conventional technique was used in 16 cases and distal decompression of the medullary canal was carried out for the other 16 patients. The decompression was carried out through a trocar inserted into the distal medullary canal, connected to a vacuum suction. Quantity of emboli was detected through A4 chambers transesophageal echocardiography; the blood pressure and oxygen saturation readings were also recorded. RESULTS: The decompression group experienced significantly lower Grade 2 and Grade 3 embolic events compared to the conventional group (11 vs. 26), and the duration of the embolic phenomena was shorter. Insertion of the stem and relocating the hip gave the highest amount embolic events. There was a significant drop in systolic blood pressure (SBP) in 12 out of 16 patients (75.0%) in the conventional group and 5 out of 16 patients in the decompression group (31.3%). This is statically significant (P = 0.0124). The average drop in SBP for the conventional group is 45.8 mmHg and the decompression group was 32.9 mmHg. Oxygen saturation remained at above 96% in the decompression group. However, in the conventional group, 25% of the patients had their oxygen saturation drop to below 96% during the insertion of stem and relocation of hip joint. CONCLUSION: Distal femoral canal decompression is an effective method in reducing the risk of cardiopulmonary embolic events associated with LHR.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In a world of ever increasing health care costs, generic drugs represent a major opportunity to ensure access to essential medicines for people who otherwise would be unable to afford them. However, some clinicians and patients are still questioning the safety and effectiveness of generic formulations compared to the proprietary drugs necessitating further systematic research analyzing the generic drugs' efficacy. Our objective was to compare the lipid lowering effects of generic and branded atorvastatin. METHODS: This cross-sectional, retrospective cohort study was conducted at the University of Malaya Medical Centre from 1 May 2013 until 30 May 2013. We analyzed the lipid profiles (total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, triglycerides) of 629 patients before and at least 3 months after switching them from proprietary atorvastatin (Lipitor®) to generic atorvastatin (atorvastatin calcium from Ranbaxy Laboratories, Inc.). We also investigated if there was any difference in the effectiveness of both atorvastatin formulations in various ethnic groups. RESULTS: 266 patients were included in this study. When comparing the median values we found no statistically significant differences (Wilcoxon signed-rank test; p < 0.05) between proprietary and generic atorvastatin in lowering total cholesterol (4.60 mmol/l pre-transition vs. 4.50 mmol/l post-transition; p = 0.583), LDL-cholesterol (2.42 mmol/l vs. 2.41 mmol/l; p = 0.923) and triglycerides (1.50 mmol/l vs. 1.50 mmol/l; p = 0.513). While there was a statistically significant (p = 0.009) difference in HDL-cholesterol levels favouring proprietary atorvastatin, the extent of this change (1.26 mmol/l vs. 1.25 mmol/l) was deemed not to be clinically relevant. There was no statistically significant difference when analyzing the effects on various ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Substituting proprietary atorvastatin for its generic formulation atorvastatin calcium does not result in a less effective management of hyperlipidemia. Our findings lend support to the approach of lowering health care costs by switching patients from branded drugs to their less expensive generic analogues.