Simultaneous bilateral hip replacement reveals superior outcome and fewer complications than two-stage procedures: a prospective study including 1819 patients and 5801 follow-ups from a total joint replacement registry

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Total joint replacements represent a considerable part of day-to-day orthopaedic routine and a substantial proportion of patients undergoing unilateral total hip arthroplasty require a contralateral treatment after the first operation. This report compares complications and functional outcome of simultaneous versus early and delayed two-stage bilateral THA over a five-year follow-up period.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study is a post hoc analysis of prospectively collected data in the framework of the European IDES hip registry. The database query resulted in 1819 patients with 5801 follow-ups treated with bilateral THA between 1965 and 2002. According to the timing of the two operations the sample was divided into three groups: I) 247 patients with simultaneous bilateral THA, II) 737 patients with two-stage bilateral THA within six months, III) 835 patients with two-stage bilateral THA between six months and five years.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Whereas postoperative hip pain and flexion did not differ between the groups, the best walking capacity was observed in group I and the worst in group III. The rate of intraoperative complications in the first group was comparable to that of the second. The frequency of postoperative local and systemic complication in group I was the lowest of the three groups. The highest rate of complications was observed in group III.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>From the point of view of possible intra- and postoperative complications, one-stage bilateral THA is equally safe or safer than two-stage interventions. Additionally, from an outcome perspective the one-stage procedure can be considered to be advantageous.</p

Multivoxel Pattern Analysis Reveals Auditory Motion Information in MT+ of Both Congenitally Blind and Sighted Individuals

Cross-modal plasticity refers to the recruitment of cortical regions involved in the processing of one modality (e.g. vision) for processing other modalities (e.g. audition). The principles determining how and where cross-modal plasticity occurs remain poorly understood. Here, we investigate these principles by testing responses to auditory motion in visual motion area MT+ of congenitally blind and sighted individuals. Replicating previous reports, we find that MT+ as a whole shows a strong and selective responses to auditory motion in congenitally blind but not sighted individuals, suggesting that the emergence of this univariate response depends on experience. Importantly, however, multivoxel pattern analyses showed that MT+ contained information about different auditory motion conditions in both blind and sighted individuals. These results were specific to MT+ and not found in early visual cortex. Basic sensitivity to auditory motion in MT+ is thus experience-independent, which may be a basis for the region's strong cross-modal recruitment in congenital blindness

VeriStrat® has a prognostic value for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with erlotinib and bevacizumab in the first line: pooled analysis of SAKK19/05 and NTR528

BACKGROUND: VeriStrat(®) is a serum proteomic test used to determine whether patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have already received chemotherapy are likely to have good or poor outcomes from treatment with gefitinib or erlotinib. The main objective of our retrospective study was to evaluate the role of VS as a marker of overall survival (OS) in patients treated with erlotinib and bevacizumab in the first line. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were pooled from two phase II trials (SAKK19/05 and NTR528). For survival analyses, a log-rank test was used to determine if there was a statistically significant difference between groups. The hazard ratio (HR) of any separation was assessed using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: 117 patients were analyzed. VeriStrat classified patients into two groups which had a statistically significant difference in duration of OS (p = 0.0027, HR = 0.480, 95% confidence interval: 0.294-0.784). CONCLUSION: VeriStrat has a prognostic role in patients with advanced, nonsquamous NSCLC treated with erlotinib and bevacizumab in the first line. Further work is needed to study the predictive role of VeriStrat for erlotinib and bevacizumab in chemotherapy-untreated patients