To determine the influence of time from injury to surgery on neurological recovery and length of stay (LOS) in an observational cohort of individuals with traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI), we analyzed the baseline and follow-up motor scores of participants in the Rick Hansen Spinal Cord Injury Registry to specifically assess the effect of an early (less than 24 h from injury) surgical procedure on motor recovery and on LOS. One thousand four hundred and ten patients who sustained acute tSCIs with baseline American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grades A, B, C, or D and were treated surgically were analyzed to determine the effect of the timing of surgery (24, 48, or 72 h from injury) on motor recovery and LOS. Depending on the distribution of data, we used different types of generalized linear models, including multiple linear regression, gamma regression, and negative binomial regression. Persons with incomplete AIS B, C, and D injuries from C2 to L2 demonstrated motor recovery improvement of an additional 6.3 motor points (SE=2.8 p<0.03) when they underwent surgical treatment within 24 h from the time of injury, compared with those who had surgery later than 24 h post-injury. This beneficial effect of early surgery on motor recovery was not seen in the patients with AIS A complete SCI. AIS A and B patients who received early surgery experienced shorter hospital LOS. While the issues of when to perform surgery and what specific operation to perform remain controversial, this work provides evidence that for an incomplete acute tSCI in the cervical, thoracic, or thoracolumbar spine, surgery performed within 24 h from injury improves motor neurological recovery. Early surgery also reduces LOS.
Our study confirms that melasma is common among pregnant women in Tehran, Iran. They had a low level of awareness of the etiology of melasma. There is a need for educational programs on the etiology and prevention of melasma in Iranian women.
Neurologic impairment after spinal cord injury (SCI) is currently measured and classified by functional examination. Biological markers that objectively classify injury severity and predict outcome would greatly facilitate efforts to evaluate acute SCI therapies. The purpose of this study was to determine how well inflammatory and structural proteins within the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of acute traumatic SCI patients predicted American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grade conversion and motor score improvement over 6 months. Fifty acute SCI patients (29 AIS A, 9 AIS B, 12 AIS C; 32 cervical, 18 thoracic) were enrolled and CSF obtained through lumbar intrathecal catheters to analyze interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, monocyte chemotactic protein (MCP)-1, tau, S100β, and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) at 24 h post-injury. The levels of IL-6, tau, S100β, and GFAP were significantly different between patients with baseline AIS grades of A, B, or C. The levels of all proteins (IL-6, IL-8, MCP-1, tau, S100β, and GFAP) were significantly different between those who improved an AIS grade over 6 months and those who did not improve. Linear discriminant analysis modeling was 83% accurate in predicting AIS conversion. For AIS A patients, the concentrations of proteins such as IL-6 and S100β correlated with conversion to AIS B or C. Motor score improvement also was strongly correlated with the 24-h post-injury CSF levels of all six biomarkers. The analysis of CSF can provide valuable biological information about injury severity and recovery potential after acute SCI. Such biological markers may be valuable tools for stratifying individuals in acute clinical trials where variability in spontaneous recovery requires large recruitment cohorts for sufficient power.
Frail elderly people have an increased risk of cognitive decline. All frailty measures allowed quantification of individual vulnerability and predict both cognitive changes and mortality.
BackgroundOn average, cognition declines with age but this average hides considerable variability, including the chance of improvement. Here, we investigate how exercise is associated with cognitive change and mortality in older people and, particularly, whether exercise might paradoxically increase the risk of dementia by allowing people to live longer.Methods and Principal FindingsIn the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA), of 8403 people who had baseline cognition measured and exercise reported at CSHA-1, 2219 had died and 5376 were re-examined at CSHA-2. We used a parametric Markov chain model to estimate the probabilities of cognitive improvement, decline, and death, adjusted for age and education, from any cognitive state as measured by the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination. High exercisers (at least three times per week, at least as intense as walking, n = 3264) had more frequent stable or improved cognition (42.3%, 95% confidence interval: 40.6–44.0) over 5 years than did low/no exercisers (all other exercisers and non exercisers, n = 4331) (27.8% (95% CI 26.4–29.2)). The difference widened as baseline cognition worsened. The proportion whose cognition declined was higher amongst the high exercisers but was more similar between exercise groups (39.4% (95% CI 37.7–41.1) for high exercisers versus 34.8% (95% CI 33.4–36.2) otherwise). People who did not exercise were also more likely to die (37.5% (95% CI 36.0–39.0) versus 18.3% (95% CI 16.9–19.7)). Even so, exercise conferred its greatest mortality benefit to people with the highest baseline cognition.ConclusionsExercise is strongly associated with improving cognition. As the majority of mortality benefit of exercise is at the highest level of cognition, and declines as cognition declines, the net effect of exercise should be to improve cognition at the population level, even with more people living longer.
In prior analyses of the effectiveness of methylprednisolone for the treatment of patients with acute traumatic spinal cord injuries (TSCIs), the prognostic importance of patients' neurological levels of injury and their baseline severity of impairment has not been considered. Our objective was to determine whether methylprednisolone improved motor recovery among participants in the Rick Hansen Spinal Cord Injury Registry (RHSCIR).We identified RHSCIR participants who received methylprednisolone according to the Second National Spinal Cord Injury Study (NASCIS-II) protocol and used propensity score matching to account for age, sex, time of neurological exam, varying neurological level of injury, and baseline severity of neurological impairment. We compared changes in total, upper extremity, and lower extremity motor scores using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and performed sensitivity analyses using negative binomial regression.Forty-six patients received methylprednisolone and 1555 received no steroid treatment. There were no significant differences between matched participants for each of total (13.7 vs. 14.1, respectively; p=0.43), upper extremity (7.3 vs. 6.4; p=0.38), and lower extremity (6.5 vs. 7.7; p=0.40) motor recovery. This result was confirmed using a multivariate model and, as predicted, only cervical (C1–T1) rather than thoracolumbar (T2–L3) injury levels (p<0.01) and reduced baseline injury severity (American Spinal Injury Association [ASIA] Impairment Scale grades; p<0.01) were associated with greater motor score recovery. There was no in-hospital mortality in either group; however, the NASCIS-II methylprednisolone group had a significantly higher rate of total complications (61% vs. 36%; p=0.02)NASCIS-II methylprednisolone did not improve motor score recovery in RHSCIR patients with acute TSCIs in either the cervical or thoracic spine when the influence of anatomical level and severity of injury were included in the analysis. There was a significantly higher rate of total complications in the NASCIS-II methylprednisolone group. These findings support guideline recommendations against routine administration of methylprednisolone in acute TSCI.
Vitiligo may considerably affect various aspects of patients' lives. The knowledge of patients about the causes and course of their disease is limited.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.