How to optimize current (available) diagnostic tests.

Isolation of mycobacterium tuberculosis is the gold standard in the diagnosis of childhood tuberculosis. However, it has inherent limitations due to paucibacillary nature of the disease in children and technical difficulties encountered in collection of appropriate sample. Thus, diagnosis is dependent on circumstantial evidence at best supported by conventional tests such as tuberculin test and chest radiograph. Several new tests are being developed but they lack ideal sensitivity and specificity. Hence, it is important to optimise use of current diagnostic tests. Clinical suspicion based on protocol developed by IAP is a pre-requisite of ordering tests and it is only then that proper interpretation is possible. Tuberculin skin test is still a useful screening test. It does help in establishing presence of infection though not necessarily disease. Attention must be paid to ideal test solution, proper technique and cautious interpretation. BCG test is not recommended. Miliary shadows and fibrocaseious cavitary lesions in chest radiograph are highly suggestive of tuberculosis in our epidemiology. CT scan is rarely necessary and is not cost and radiation-effective. It is ideal to attempt bacteriological examination in every suspected case of childhood tuberculosis. Most practical method is collection of gastric aspirate for smear and culture. It is possible to carry out this procedure in out-patient clinic. Better yield is likely with increasing expertise especially in extensive disease. Bronchoalveolar lavage is an invasive test and bacterial yield is comparable to that of gastric aspirate. Tissue collected for histopathological examination must be submitted for bacteriological tests. PCR is not easily available. It has high sensitivity but lower specificity and thus, is not routinely recommended. Serology has no place in diagnosis of tuberculosis. Interferon gamma release assays are also now available. Sensitivity and specificity of Quantiferon Gold and T-spot tests have not been studied in children and hence are not recommended in routine practice. Instead of trying newer tests, it may be best to avail an expert advice in difficult cases.

Clinical application of curvilinear distraction osteogenesis for correction of mandibular deformities.

PURPOSE: To report the use of a semiburied curvilinear distraction device, with a 3-dimensional (3D) computed tomography treatment planning system, for correction of mandibular deformities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective evaluation of 13 consecutive patients, with syndromic and nonsyndromic micrognathia, who underwent correction by curvilinear distraction osteogenesis. A 3D computed tomography scan was obtained for each patient and imported into a 3D treatment planning system (Slicer/Osteoplan). Surgical guides were constructed to localize the osteotomy and to drill holes to secure the distractor's proximal and distal footplates to the mandible. Postoperatively, patients were followed by clinical examination and plain radiographs to ensure the desired vector of movement. At end distraction, when possible, a 3D computed tomography scan was obtained to document the final mandibular position. RESULTS: Of the 13 patients, 8 were females and 5 were males, with a mean age of 11.9 years (range 15 months to 39 years). All 13 underwent bilateral mandibular curvilinear distraction. Of the 13 patients, 8 were 16 years old or younger and 5 were younger than 6 years of age. The diagnoses included Treacher Collins syndrome (n = 3), Nager syndrome (n = 3), craniofacial microsomia (n = 2), post-traumatic ankylosis (n = 1), and micrognathia (syndromic, n = 3; nonsyndromic, n = 1). The correct distractor placement, vector of movement, and final mandibular position were achieved in 10 of 13 patients. In the other 3 patients, the desired jaw position was achieved by "molding" the regenerate. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a semiburied curvilinear distraction device, with 3D treatment planning, is a potentially powerful tool to correct complex mandibular deformities.

Range of curvilinear distraction devices required for treatment of mandibular deformities.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the range of fixed trajectory curvilinear distraction devices required to correct a variety of severe mandibular deformities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans from 18 patients with mandibular deformities were imported into a CT-based software program (Osteoplan). Three-dimensional virtual models of the individual skulls were made with landmarks to track movements. An ideal treatment plan was created for each patient. Upper and lower boundaries for the dimensions of curvilinear distractors were established based on manufacturing and geometric constraints. Then, anatomically acceptable distractor attachment points were identified on the models using proximal and distal grids. Treatment plans were simulated for a series of distractors with varying radii of curvature, elongations (arc-length of device), and placements along the grids. The outcomes using these distractors were compared with the ideal treatment plans. Discrepancies were quantified in millimeters by comparing landmarks in the simulated versus ideal movements. RESULTS: Approximately 400,000 simulated 3-dimensional movements, based on the distractor parameters and variations in placement were computationally evaluated for the 18 cases. It was determined that, by varying distractor placement, a family of 5 distractors, with 3, 5, 7, and 10 cm radii of curvature and a straight-line device, could be used to treat all 18 cases to within 1.8 mm of error. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that a family of 5 curvilinear distractors may suffice to treat a broad range of mandibular deformities.

Analysis of skeletal movements in mandibular distraction osteogenesis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to use geometric parameters of movement, calculated from 3-dimensional computed tomography (CT) data, to determine the curvilinear distractor dimensions required to correct mandibular deformities in a series of patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Preoperative CT scans from 15 patients with symmetric (n = 5) and asymmetric (n = 10) deformities were imported into a CT-based software program (Osteoplan; an open-source visualization application developed by Gering et al at the Surgical Planning Laboratory [SPL, Brigham and Womens Hospital, Boston, MA]). The software was used to reconstruct virtual 3-dimensional models from these scans. Two experienced surgeons, working with a computer scientist, then used Osteoplan to create an ideal treatment plan for each patient. In each case, the 3-dimensional curvilinear movement was quantified using 4 "parameters of movement" (POMs). These parameters were then used to prescribe a distraction device capable of executing the planned skeletal correction. Curvilinear distractor dimensions calculated by Osteoplan included the radius of curvature of the prescribed device, and the distractor elongation, pitch, and handedness. RESULTS: Treatment plans including POMs were developed for each patient. The radii of curvature for the prescribed distractors ranged from 2.3 to 14.1 cm, the distractor elongation dimensions ranged from 0.7 to 3.2 cm, and the pitch (horizontal plane) dimensions ranged from 0.005 to 0.8 cm. Handedness was either a left (n = 12) or right (n = 8) turning helix. CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate that, using geometric parameters of movement calculated from 3-dimensional CT scans, curvilinear devices could be prescribed for correction of the range of skeletal deformities in this group of patients.