Pensar la Educación desde el cerebro

Debido a la importancia de conocer el proceso del aprendizaje, todos los que participan en la docencia deben tener al menos una aproximación a los saberes actuales que involucran el neuroaprandizaje. En este texto, haremos una aproximación a la neurociencia como base científica para el entendimiento concreto desde las diferentes disciplinas que componen el estudio del sistema nervioso central, buscando satisfacer las necesidades individuales que tienen los estudiantes. Esta obra fue posible gracias a la colaboración técnica editorial de: RADJHESUS Instituto de InvestigaciónEducativa. Chiapas, México. Comunicaciones: (52) 9612235919 Email: [email protected] Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Chiapas, México, 202

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF LUMBAR PLEXUS PATH ON THE LEFT AND RIGHT SIDES THROUGH THE PSOAS MUSCLE

ABSTRACT Objective: Spine surgery with a minimally invasive lateral approach and validate possible anatomical differences between the right and left sides. Methods: Four measurements (cm) were taken on 38 cadavers: the distance between the lumbar plexus and the transverse process (L4-L5) and the distance between the lumbar plexus and the midline of the lumbar spine, both on the right and left sides. Results: The mean distance between the lumbar plexus and the transverse process of L4-L5 was 1.03 cm and the distance to the midline was 3.99 cm for the right side. The averages of the left side were 1.13 cm and 3.38 cm, respectively. There is statistical difference between the sides (p<0.05) using the non-parametric Wilcoxon test. Conclusions: The authors suggest that the transverse process might be used as an anatomical landmark to define the surgical approach through the psoas muscle. Level of Evidence IV; Cadaveric study

Variations in management of A3 and A4 cervical spine fractures as designated by the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System

© 2022 The authors.OBJECTIVE Optimal management of A3 and A4 cervical spine fractures, as defined by the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System, remains controversial. The objectives of this study were to determine whether significant management variations exist with respect to 1) fracture location across the upper, middle, and lower subaxial cervical spine and 2) geographic region, experience, or specialty. METHODS A survey was internationally distributed to 272 AO Spine members across six geographic regions (North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East). Participants’ management of A3 and A4 subaxial cervical fractures across cervical regions was assessed in four clinical scenarios. Key characteristics considered in the vignettes included degree of neurological deficit, pain severity, cervical spine stability, presence of comorbidities, and fitness for surgery. Respondents were also directly asked about their preferences for operative management and misalignment acceptance across the subaxial cervical spine. RESULTS In total, 155 (57.0%) participants completed the survey. Pooled analysis demonstrated that surgeons were more likely to offer operative intervention for both A3 (p &lt; 0.001) and A4 (p &lt; 0.001) fractures located at the cervicothoracic junction compared with fractures at the upper or middle subaxial cervical regions. There were no significant variations in management for junctional incomplete (p = 0.116) or complete (p = 0.342) burst fractures between geographic regions. Surgeons with more than 10 years of experience were more likely to operatively manage A3 (p &lt; 0.001) and A4 (p &lt; 0.001) fractures than their younger counterparts. Neurosurgeons were more likely to offer surgical stabilization of A3 (p &lt; 0.001) and A4 (p &lt; 0.001) fractures than their orthopedic colleagues. Clinicians from both specialties agreed regarding their preference for fixation of lower junctional A3 (p = 0.866) and A4 (p = 0.368) fractures. Overall, surgical fixation was recommended more often for A4 than A3 fractures in all four scenarios (p &lt; 0.001). CONCLUSIONS The subaxial cervical spine should not be considered a single unified entity. Both A3 and A4 fracture subtypes were more likely to be surgically managed at the cervicothoracic junction than the upper or middle subaxial cervical regions. The authors also determined that treatment strategies for A3 and A4 subaxial cervical spine fractures varied significantly, with the latter demonstrating a greater likelihood of operative management. These findings should be reflected in future subaxial cervical spine trauma algorithms.N