No abstract

Objective Despite adequate treatment 5-30 % of bone fracture patients experience delayed union. During normal fracture union, bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) induce healing through a sequential cascade of events. Improved fracture healing after BMP-2 or -7 supplementation in patients with impaired fracture union suggests a deficiency of one or more of these factors. We postulated that low levels of circulating BMPs may result in delayed bone healing. The aim of this study was to quantify differences in levels of circulating BMP-2, -4, -6, -7, and −9 in patients that have demonstrated normal or delayed fracture healing. Patients and methods Blood samples were collected from an unselected cohort of 65 patients that had been treated for a diaphyseal tibia or femur fracture. Patients were divided into a group with fracture healing within nine months after injury and a group with delayed fracture union. BMP plasma concentrations were quantified using ELISAs and compared between these two groups. Results Circulating plasma levels of BMP-2, -4, -6, and -7 did not differ between 34 patients with normal fracture healing and 31 patients with delayed fracture healing. Also the median BMP-9 plasma levels were not statistically different between the two groups of patients. However, the distribution in the patients with normal union showed a wider range (72-2496 pg/ml) compared with the delayed union group (120-816 pg/ml). Conclusion In general, circulating BMP concentrations are not statistically different between patients who demonstrated normal or delayed fracture healing. High circulating BMP-9 levels seem to be associated with faster fracture healing, but are apparently not decisive.

Non-union of a fracture is a phenomenon that may complicate bone healing. Consolidation of a fracture can be divided into three phases: inflammation, reconstruction, and remodeling. Both the complement system and the coagulation cascade interact at various steps throughout these phases. Several complement components are specifically associated with the inflammation phase of bone healing. However, in which way complement components influence the remodeling phase has not been established yet. Mannose-Binding Lectin (MBL) and its associated serine protease MASP-2 (Mannanbinding lectin serine protease-2) are important initiating proteins of the complement system and have also been implicated in coagulation. With respect to the characteristics and interactions of MBL, it is likely to assume a considerable influence of MBL in the remodeling phase of bone healing. A deficiency in MBL then, caused by a genetic variation, may disturb this particular process during bone healing, due to either an accumulation of apoptotic cells or to a diminished scaffold of fibrin molecules. The next step would be early identification of patients with a deficiency of MBL, allowing for early therapeutic intervention or even non-union preventive measures. This review aims to discuss the true and hypothesized role of MBL in bone healing and the consequences of a depletion of the protein in the etiology of fracture non-union.

During the late phase of the large West-African Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak, the majority of patients were cared for in designated treatment centers. However, the pre-existing health care infrastructure was overwhelmed with EVD in the first place. This had a huge impact on other, non-EVD related diseases, causing an un-preceded mounting of morbidity and mortality, which most likely exceeded the toll directly due to EVD. Consequently, one of the crucial questions is how to provide appropriate health care and safeguard functionality of a healthcare system also for all those patients not suspected or diagnosed to have EVD.We report here on the Lion Heart Medical Center experience in Sierra Leone and describe that a case definition broader than those commonly applied may be better suited in a scenario where it is of greater importance to identify atypically presenting, pauci-symptomatic cases.

Cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis affect a million people yearly, leading to skin lesions and potentially disfiguring mucosal disease. Current treatments can have severe side effects. Allylamine drugs, like terbinafine, are safe, including during pregnancy. This review assesses efficacy and safety of allylamines for the treatment of cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis. It followed the PRISMA statement for reporting and was preregistered in PROSPERO(CRD4201809068). MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Global Health Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and clinical trial registers were searched from their creation to May 24th, 2020. All original human, animal, and in vitro studies concerning allylamines and cutaneous or mucocutaneous leishmaniasis were eligible for inclusion. Comparators—if any—included both placebo or alternative cutaneous or mucocutaneous leishmaniasis treatments. Complete cure, growth inhibition, or adverse events served as outcomes. The search identified 312 publications, of which 22 were included in this systematic review. There were one uncontrolled and two randomised controlled trials. The only well-designed randomised controlled trial that compared the treatment efficacy of oral terbinafine versus intramuscular meglumine antimoniate in 80 Leismania tropica infected patients showed a non-significant lower cure rate for terbinafine vs meglumine antimoniate (38% vs 53%). A meta-analysis could not be performed due to the small number of studies, their heterogeneity, and low quality. This systematic review shows that there is no evidence of efficacy of allylamine monotherapy against cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis. Further trials of allylamines should be carefully considered as the outcomes of an adequately designed trial were disappointing and in vitro studies indicate minimal effective concentrations that are not achieved in the skin during standard doses. However, the in vitro synergistic effects of allylamines combined with triazole drugs warrant further exploration.

Many different animal models are in use for drug development for leishmaniasis, but a universal model does not exist. There is a plethora of models, and this review assesses their design, quality, and limitations, including the attention paid to animal welfare in the study design and execution. A systematic review was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines of available literature after the year 2000 describing animal models for leishmaniasis. The risk of bias was determined using the SYstematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) risk of bias assessment tool. A total of 10,980 records were initially identified after searching the databases PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS, and SciELO. Based on the application of predetermined exclusion and inclusion criteria, a total of 203 papers describing 216 animal experiments were available for full analysis. Major reasons for exclusion were a lack of essential study information or appropriate ethical review and approval. Mice (82.8%; an average of 35.9 animals per study) and hamsters (17.1%; an average of 7.4 animals per study) were the most frequently used animals, mostly commercially sourced, in the included studies. All studies lacked a formal sample size analysis. The promastigote stages of L. amazonensis or L. major were most frequently used to establish experimental infections (single inoculum). Animal welfare was poorly addressed in all included studies, as the definition of a human end-point or consideration of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) was hardly addressed. Most animals were euthanized at the termination of the experiment. The majority of the studies had an unknown or high risk of bias. Animal experiments for drug development for leishmaniasis mainly poorly designed and of low quality, lack appropriate ethical review, and are deficient in essential information needed to replicate and interpret the study. Importantly, aspects of animal welfare are hardly considered. This underpins the need to better consider and record the details of the study design and animal welfare.