Die biomechanischen Eigenschaften von künstlichen Implantaten der lumbalen Bandscheibe

Zöllner, Johann Philipp; Rompe, Jan D.; Eysel, Peer

doi:10.1055/s-2000-10178

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 12 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Die begrenzten Erfahrungen mit von dorsal eingesetzten Implantaten [10, 11, 27 ± 29, 32] gestatten keine endgültige Bewertung, wiewohl die Implantation des Ray-Implantats als auch die Verwendung eines autopolymerisierendem Kunststoffes zur Wiederherstellung der Segmentsteifigkeit nach vorheriger Nukleotomie führen sollen [39]. Die von ventral implantierten Endoprothesen [1 ± 3, 5, 9, 15, 16, 20 ± 22, 38] vermehrte Belastung der angrenzenden Segmente analog der Belastung nach einer Fusionsoperation gewertet werden muss und ob Beeinflussungen der Gelenkfunktionen durch Implantation der Pedikelschrauben und Distanzhalter möglich sind.…”

Section: Diskussionunclassified

Indikation, Biomechanik und Frühergebnisse des künstlichen Bandscheibenersatzes

Hopf¹,

Heeckt²,

Beske³

2004

Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In younger patients with mono- or bisegmental disc degeneration there is an indication for the implantation of a disc endoprosthesis. A facet joint arthrosis and an age over 45 years are contraindications for the operation. The indication in patients with a classic failed back surgery syndrome is still unclear, the improvement of the instrumentation and a further adaptation of the systems to the known biomechanics of the lumbar spine are mandatory as is an intensive discussion of the operative procedure in the case of revision operations. The Dynesys method, with the inherent danger of segmental kyphozitation, a published, significant revision quota combined with a reduction of motility, does not fulfill this criterion.

show abstract

Section: Diskussionunclassified

Indikation, Biomechanik und Frühergebnisse des künstlichen Bandscheibenersatzes

Hopf¹,

Heeckt²,

Beske³

2004

Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1,2 Currently, it has affected approximately 6 million people over more than 200 countries. 3 SARS-CoV-2 infection can cause serious lower respiratory tract infections that can be fatal in some patients, however, many individuals remain asymptomatic during the infection. 4,5 Especially asymptomatic individuals have been a major factor in increasing the transmission rate of the disease and evolving it into a pandemic.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does sampling saliva increase detection of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR? Comparing saliva with oro-nasopharyngeal swabs

Doğan

Kose

Ağaoğlu

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The gold standard method in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection is the detection of viral RNA in nasopharyngeal sample by RT-PCR. Recently, saliva samples has been suggested as an alternative due to being fast, reliable and non-invasive, rather than nasopharyngeal samples. We compared RT-PCR results in nasopharyngeal, oro-nasopharyngeal and saliva samples of COVID-19 patients. 98 of 200 patients were positive in RT-PCR analysis performed before the hospitalization. In day 0, at least one sample was positive in 67% of 98 patients. Positivity rate was 83% for both oro-nasopharyngeal and nasopharyngeal samples, while it was 63% for saliva samples (p<0.001). On day 5, RT-PCR was performed in 59 patients, 34% had at least one positive result. The positivity rate was 55% for saliva and nasopharyngeal samples, while it was 60% for oro-nasopharyngeal samples. Our study shows that the sampling saliva does not increase the sensitivity of RT-PCR tests at early stages of infection. However, on 5th day, viral RNA detection rates in saliva were similar to nasopharyngeal and oro-nasopharyngeal samples. In conclusion, we suggest that, in patients receiving treatment, virus presence in saliva, in addition to the standard samples, is important to determine the isolation period and to control the transmission.

show abstract

Die biomechanischen Eigenschaften von künstlichen Implantaten der lumbalen Bandscheibe

Cited by 2 publications

References 12 publications

Indikation, Biomechanik und Frühergebnisse des künstlichen Bandscheibenersatzes

Indikation, Biomechanik und Frühergebnisse des künstlichen Bandscheibenersatzes

Does sampling saliva increase detection of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR? Comparing saliva with oro-nasopharyngeal swabs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About