Comparison of Different Bone Age Methods and Chronological Age in Prediction of Remaining Growth Around the Knee.

BACKGROUND: Bone age (BA) has been shown to be superior to chronological age (CA) when predicting remaining growth. However, it is not known whether the calculations are more accurate when BA is assessed by the Greulich and Pyle (GP) or the Sauvegrain (SG) methods. The aim of our study was to identify the method which gives an estimate closest to actual growth in the lower extremities. METHODS: Leg length radiographs, hand radiographs, and elbow radiographs were simultaneously obtained during the adolescent growth spurt (10 to 16 years) in 52 children treated for LLD, with radiographic follow-up of segmental length (femur, tibia, and foot) until skeletal maturity, were randomly selected from a local institutional register. BA, according to GP and SG, were manually rated, and BA based on the GP method was additionally assessed by the automated BoneXpert (BX) method. The remaining growth was calculated based on the White-Menelaus method for both BA methods (GP, SG), the combination of the 2 methods, GP by BX, CA, and the combination of CA and GP by BX. Estimated growth was compared with the actual growth in the distal femur and proximal tibia from the time of BA determination until skeletal maturity. RESULTS: For all included methods, the average calculated remaining growth was higher compared with the actual growth. The mean absolute difference between calculated remaining growth and actual growth in the femur and tibia was lowest using GP by BX [0.66 cm (SD 0.51 cm) and 0.43 cm (SD 0.34 cm)] and highest using CA [1.02 (SD 0.72) and 0.67 (SD 0.46)]. It was a significant association between calculated growth and the difference between actual and calculated growth for the SG method ( P =<0.001). CONCLUSION: During the adolescent growth spurt, the GP method compared with the SG method and CA gives the most accurate estimate of remaining growth around the knee according to our results. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In calculations of remaining growth around the knee, BA assessment by the GP atlas or BX method should be used as the parameter of biological maturity.

A comparison of 3 different methods for assessment of skeletal age when treating leg-length discrepancies: an inter- and intra-observer study.

Background and purpose - Skeletal maturity is a crucial parameter when calculating remaining growth in children. We compared 3 different methods, 2 manual and 1 automated, in the radiological assessment of bone age with respect to precision and systematic difference. Material and methods - 66 simultaneous examinations of the left hand and left elbow from children treated for leg-length discrepancies were randomly selected for skeletal age assessment. The radiographs were anonymized and assessed twice with at least 3 weeks' interval according to the Greulich and Pyle (GP) and Sauvegrain (SG) methods by 5 radiologists with different levels of experience. The hand radiographs were also assessed for GP bone age by use of the automated BoneXpert (BX) method for comparison. Results - The inter-observer intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.96 for the GP and 0.98 for the SG method. The inter- and intra-observer standard error of the measurement (SEm) was 0.41 and 0.32 years for the GP method and 0.27 and 0.21 years for the SG method with a significant difference (p < 0.001) between the methods and between the experienced and the less experienced radiologists for both methods (p = 0.003 and p < 0.001). In 25% of the assessments the discrepancy between the GP and the SG method was > 1 year. There was no systematic difference comparing either manual method with the automatic BX method. Interpretation - With respect to the precision of skeletal age determination, we recommend using the SG method or preferably the automated BX method based on GP assessments in the calculation of remaining growth.

Norwegican Cartilage Project - a study protocol for a double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing arthroscopic microfracture with arthroscopic debridement in focal cartilage defects in the knee.

BACKGROUND: Focal lesions to the articular cartilage in the knee might have demolishing consequences to the knee. There exists a wide range of possible surgical procedures targeting these injuries, however no significant differences have been found between these procedures. This may support that the improvement is a result of rehabilitation, and not the surgery itself. Arthroscopic microfracture (MF) treatment has gained popularity, and has become the treatment of choice in patients with knee cartilage defects globally. In this study we want to increase knowledge, both clinical and economic, about arthroscopic microfracture (AF) compared to arthroscopic debridement (AD) and physical rehabilitation both in the short run, and in the long run. METHODS/DESIGN: To compare arthroscopic microfracture with arthroscopic debridement and physiotherapy for the treatment of focal cartilage lesions in the knee, a long-term, double-blinded, randomized controlled multicenter trial will be conducted. A total of 114 men and non-pregnant women with a symptomatic focal full thickness cartilage lesion in the knee less than 2 cm2 will be included in the study. The two treatment allocations will receive identical rehabilitation, which is made up of 3 phases: accommodation, rehabilitation and return to activity. Follow up is 24 months, where all will be invited to participate in late follow ups after 5 and 10 years. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) knee-related quality of life (QoL) subscore is the primary endpoint. Clinical parameters, questionnaires and radiologic modalities (Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and x-ray) will be used as secondary endpoints. DISCUSSION: This is an ongoing multicenter study with a high level of evidence to compare arthroscopic microfracture with arthroscopic debridement and physiotherapy for the treatment of isolated symptomatic full thickness cartilage lesions in the knee joint. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02637505 (December 15, 2015).

[Warfarin treatment and bleeding]. / Warfarinbehandling og blødninger.

BACKGROUND: Warfarin is involved in the majority of fatal adverse drug events in Norway. The aim of this study is to identify risk factors behind the haemorrhagic complications. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We analysed all adverse event reports involving bleeding related to warfarin that were received by the Norwegian Medicines Agency from 1990 to 2000. RESULTS: 713 reports were included; 71% of the patients were above 70 years of age. The most frequent diagnosis was atrial fibrillation (39%). Cerebral bleedings were reported in 57% of the cases, 73% of which were fatal, as were 39 % of gastrointestinal bleedings and 14% of other bleedings. International normalised ratio values (INR values) at the time of bleeding were reported in 83% of the cases; mean INR value was 4.4 (range 1.2 - > 8.0). INR values above recommended limits at the time of bleeding were found in 74% of the patients. In 63%, bleedings occurred during the first month; in 30% during the first five days. Median duration of treatment was shorter in fatal (16 days) than in non-fatal cases (24 days). INTERPRETATION: Our results show that haemorrhagic complications are associated with high INR values and initiation of treatment. Simple strategies for reducing bleedings include better monitoring of patients, careful dose adjustment, and INR values in the lower end of the recommended ranges.