A comparison of once and twice daily administration of trilostane to dogs with hyperadrenocorticism

2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (06) ◽  
pp. 415-424 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Burden ◽  
R. Neiger ◽  
I. Ramsey ◽  
M. Augusto
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Daily Administration ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Final Visit ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Laboratory Findings ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Clinical Scores ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group Post

Summary Objective: This retrospective study describes the use of trilostane given once versus twice daily in dogs with hyperadrenocorticism (SID vs. BIDgroup) in separate clinical trials. Material and methods: The groups were compared over a six month period using laboratory findings, dose required to suppress post-ACTH cortisol, and clinical scores from owner and clinician questionnaires. Results: Ninety-three dogs enrolled the trials but for analysis of the final visit results only 56 dogs filled the inclusion criteria: 30 dogs in the SID-group and 26 dogs in the BID-group. Both treatment groups showed an improvement in clinical scores with time and no significant difference between them. In the BID-group post-ACTH cortisol concentrations went below 250 nmol/l sooner and in a higher proportion of dogs than in the SID-group.Twice-daily administration of trilostane also achieved a faster and more effective control for comparable daily doses. A higher individual tolerability (based on clinical scores) was found in the SID-group but there were no supporting laboratory findings. No dogs developed serious side-effects. Conclusion: This study reveals only small practical differences between once and twice daily trilostane administrations in treating hyperadrenocorticism. And the overall benefits of twice daily dosing have to be considered against the effect on the owners and their compliance with treatment.

scholarly journals MLTI-14. A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF TREATMENT PARADIGMS FOR PATIENTS WITH BREAST CANCER AND ONE OR MORE BRAIN METASTASES

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i17-i17
Author(s):  
Yosef Ellenbogen ◽  
Karanbir Brar ◽  
Nebras Warsi ◽  
Jetan Badhiwala ◽  
Alireza Mansouri
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Brain Metastases ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Molecular Features ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract BACKGROUND: Upwards of 50% of patients with advanced breast cancer are diagnosed with brain metastases (BM). Treatment options for these patients have been rapidly evolving due to increased understanding of the tumor pathophysiology and its genetic underpinnings. This systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to clarify the evidence guiding the treatment of brain metastases from breast cancer. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, ClincialTrials.gov, and Web of Science were searched from inception to October 2018 for RCTs comparing treatments for breast cancer BM. We screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias independently and in duplicate. Outcomes assessed were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (Grade 3+). RESULTS: Among 3188 abstracts, only 3 RCTs (N=412; mean sample size per group N=54.7) meeting inclusion criteria were identified. The studies were phase II or III open-label parallel superiority trials. Inclusion criteria among these trials consisted of age >18 with radiologic evidence of >1 BM. Exclusion criteria consisted of poor-performance functional status (ECOG >2 or KPS < 70). The treatment groups included whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) vs WBRT + Temozolomide, WBRT vs WBRT + Efaproxiral, and Afatinib vs Vinorelbine vs investigators’ choice (86% of these patients received WBRT or SRS prior to study enrolment). While two trials found no significant difference in OS, one trial found significant improvement in OS with Efaproxiral in addition to WBRT compared to WBRT alone (HR 0.52; 95%CI 0.332–0.816). No significant differences were found with PFS or rate of adverse events amongst treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Considering the high prevalence of breast cancer BM and our improved understanding of genomic/molecular features of these tumors, a greater number of RCTs dedicated at this disease are needed.

scholarly journals The Effects of Succimer and Penicillamine on Acute Lead Poisoning Patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 33474-33474
Author(s):  
Gholamali Dorooshi ◽  
◽  
Negar Molavi ◽  
Rokhsareh Meamar ◽  
Akbar Hasanzadeh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lead Poisoning ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Blood Lead ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
Easy Access ◽  
Laboratory Findings ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Lead Levels ◽  
The Mean

Background: Lead poisoning was on the rise in recent years. There exists a lack of easy access to some of the main chelator drugs in developing countries. Thus, this study aimed to explore the comparative effects of Succimer and D-Penicillamine on acute lead poisoning patients from 2013 to 2018. Methods: This descriptive study was conducted in the Clinical Toxicology Department of Khorshid Hospital in Isfahan City, Iran. Adult patients with acute lead poisoning were included in the study. Patients in the 3 treatment groups of D-Penicillamine, D-Penicillamine with succimer, and succimer were compared concerning demographic characteristics as well as clinical and laboratory findings at admission time and two weeks later. Results: In total, 163 patients were evaluated in this research. There was no significant difference between the treatment groups respecting improvement in clinical symptoms. The mean blood lead levels during hospitalization and two weeks after the treatment did not significantly differ between the three groups; however, there was a significant reduction in all study groups after two weeks of treatment (P<0.05). The mean white blood cell count was significantly lower only in the D-Penicillamine group two weeks after hospitalization (P<0.05). In the D-Penicillamine group, the mean platelet, hematocrit, and hemoglobin levels were significantly lower two weeks after hospitalization, although within the healthy range. Conclusion: D-Penicillamine may be an acceptable chelator drug for treating patients with acute lead poisoning, especially in communities without access to drugs, like succimer.

scholarly journals Clinical and laboratory findings and PCR results in severe and non-severe COVID19 patients based on CURB-65 and WHO severity indices

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Farnaz Karimi ◽  
Mahshid Saleh ◽  
Amir Abbas Vaezi ◽  
Mostafa Qorbani ◽  
Foroogh Alborzi Avanaki
Keyword(s):  
Oxygen Saturation ◽  
Vital Signs ◽  
Signs And Symptoms ◽  
National Guideline ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Laboratory Findings ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Chronic Heart Disease ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Severity Of The Disease

Abstract Background The importance of clinicolaboratory characteristics of COVID-19 made us report our findings in the Alborz province according to the latest National Guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19 in outpatients and inpatients (trial five versions, 25 March 2020) of Iran by emphasizing rRT-PCR results, clinical features, comorbidities, and other laboratory findings in patients according to the severity of the disease. Methods In this study, 202 patients were included, primarily of whom 164 had fulfilled the inclusion criteria. This cross-sectional, two-center study that involved 164 symptomatic adults hospitalized with the diagnosis of COVID-19 between March 5 and April 5, 2020, was performed to analyze the frequency of rRT-PCR results, distribution of comorbidities, and initial clinicolaboratory data in severe and non-severe cases, comparing the compatibility of two methods for categorizing the severity of the disease. Results According to our findings, 111 patients were rRT-PCR positive (67.6%), and 53 were rRT-PCR negative (32.4%), indicating no significant difference between severity groups that were not related to the date of symptoms' onset before admission. Based on the National Guideline, among vital signs and symptoms, mean oxygen saturation and frequency of nausea showed a significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.05); however, no significant difference was observed in comorbidities. In CURB-65 groups, among vital signs and comorbidities, mean oxygen saturation, diabetes, hypertension (HTN), hyperlipidemia, chronic heart disease (CHD), and asthma showed a significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.05), but no significant difference was seen in symptoms. Conclusion In this study, rRT-PCR results of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were not related to severity categories. From initial clinical characteristics, decreased oxygen saturation appears to be a more common abnormality in severe and non-severe categories. National Guideline indices seem to be more comprehensive to categorize patients in severity groups than CURB-65, and there was compatibility just in non-severe groups of National Guideline and CURB-65 categories.

Relevance Predictability in Information Retrieval Systems

1967 ◽  
Vol 06 (02) ◽  
pp. 45-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Kent ◽  
J. Belzer ◽  
M. Kuhfeerst ◽  
E. D. Dym ◽  
D. L. Shirey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Information Retrieval ◽  
Experimental Conditions ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Retrieval Systems ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Information Retrieval Systems ◽  
High Predictability ◽  
Intermediate Response ◽  
Quantitative Indicators ◽  
Level Of Processing

An experiment is described which attempts to derive quantitative indicators regarding the potential relevance predictability of the intermediate stimuli used to represent documents in information retrieval systems. In effect, since the decision to peruse an entire document is often predicated upon the examination of one »level of processing« of the document (e.g., the citation and/or abstract), it became interesting to analyze the properties of what constitutes »relevance«. However, prior to such an analysis, an even more elementary step had to be made, namely, to determine what portions of a document should be examined.An evaluation of the ability of intermediate response products (IRPs), functioning as cues to the information content of full documents, to predict the relevance determination that would be subsequently made on these documents by motivated users of information retrieval systems, was made under controlled experimental conditions. The hypothesis that there might be other intermediate response products (selected extracts from the document, i.e., first paragraph, last paragraph, and the combination of first and last paragraph), that would be as representative of the full document as the traditional IRPs (citation and abstract) was tested systematically. The results showed that:1. there is no significant difference among the several IRP treatment groups on the number of cue evaluations of relevancy which match the subsequent user relevancy decision on the document;2. first and last paragraph combinations have consistently predicted relevancy to a higher degree than the other IRPs;3. abstracts were undistinguished as predictors; and4. the apparent high predictability rating for citations was not substantive.Some of these results are quite different than would be expected from previous work with unmotivated subjects.

Effect of Fixed Minidose Warfarin, Conventional Dose Warfarin and Aspirin on INR and Prothrombin Fragment 1 + 2 in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

1997 ◽  
Vol 77 (05) ◽  
pp. 0845-0848 ◽  
Author(s):  
B G Koefoed ◽  
C Feddersen ◽  
A L Gulløv ◽  
P Petersen
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
International Normalized Ratio ◽  
Coagulation System ◽  
Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Prothrombin Fragment ◽  
Conventional Dose ◽  
Dose Warfarin ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Changes Over Time

SummaryThe efficacy of conventional dose adjusted oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation is well- documented but not considered ideal as primary antithrombotic treatment in elderly patients. The antithrombotic effect of fixed minidose warfarin 1.25 mg/day alone or in combination with aspirin 300 mg/day, of conventional dose adjusted warfarin (INR 2.0-3.0), and of aspirin 300 mg/day have been investigated in outpatients with chronic nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in the second Copenhagen Atrial Fibrillation, Aspirin and Anticoagulant Therapy Study (AFASAK 2). In order to investigate the effect on the coagulation system of the treatments, the International Normalized Ratio of the prothrombin time (INR) and prothrombin fragment 1 + 2 (F1 +2) were monitored at baseline and after three months of treatment in 100 patients consecutively included in the trial. At baseline no differences in INR and F1+2 between the four treatment groups were present. After three months of therapy the level of INR increased significantly from baseline in patients receiving warfarin in any dose and the level of F1+2 decreased significantly by combined minidose warfarin-aspirin and by dose adjusted warfarin. When comparing the changes over time in FI +2 (three-month value minus baseline value) during therapy with fixed minidose warfarin, combined minidose warfarin-aspirin and aspirin alone no significant difference between the groups was found. In conclusion, INR was changed by all three warfarin regimens but only dose adjusted warfarin (INR 2.0-3.0) had a marked effect on F1+2.

scholarly journals The The Effectiveness of Early Mobilization Time on Balance and Functional Ability after Ischemic Stroke

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (7) ◽  
pp. 1088-1092
Author(s):  
Umi Budi Rahayu ◽  
Samekto Wibowo ◽  
Ismail Setyopranoto
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Functional Ability ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Early Mobilization ◽  
Berg Balance Scale ◽  
Early Mobilisation ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference

BACKGROUND: Early mobilisation (EM) after-ischemic stroke is a motor learning intervention aimed to restore nerve cells and to improve balance and functional ability. Unfortunately, the study of when this intervention began has not been widely studied. AIM: On this study was compared the effect of EM started at 24 hours and 48 hours after an ischemic stroke on balance and functional ability. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Randomized controlled trial involving 40 patients on 2 groups meeting predefined inclusion criteria. The levels of balance were measured using the Berg Balance Scale, and the functional ability was measured using the Barthel Index, at 5th and 7th day. RESULTS: A significant difference was observed in both balance (p = 0.038) and functional ability (p = 0.021) obtained on the 7th day of assessment between both groups. A significant difference on the 5th day was observed only in the functional ability (p = 0.002) and not in the balance (p = 0.147), between the groups. CONCLUSION: EM started at 24 hours after the ischemic stroke has been found to have a better impact on balance and functional ability compared to that at 48 hours.

scholarly journals On the design of early-phase Alzheimer’s disease clinical trials with cerebrospinal fluid tau outcomes

2021 ◽  
pp. 174077452110344
Author(s):  
Michelle M Nuño ◽  
Joshua D Grill ◽  
Daniel L Gillen ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cerebrospinal Fluid ◽  
Phosphorylated Tau ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Total Tau ◽  
Prodromal Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Study Power

Background/Aims: The focus of Alzheimer’s disease studies has shifted to earlier disease stages, including mild cognitive impairment. Biomarker inclusion criteria are often incorporated into mild cognitive impairment clinical trials to identify individuals with “prodromal Alzheimer’s disease” to ensure appropriate drug targets and enrich for participants likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease dementia. The use of these eligibility criteria may affect study power. Methods: We investigated outcome variability and study power in the setting of proof-of-concept prodromal Alzheimer’s disease trials that incorporate cerebrospinal fluid levels of total tau (t-tau) and phosphorylated (p-tau) as primary outcomes and how differing biomarker inclusion criteria affect power. We used data from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative to model trial scenarios and to estimate the variance and within-subject correlation of total and phosphorylated tau. These estimates were then used to investigate the differences in study power for trials considering these two surrogate outcomes. Results: Patient characteristics were similar for all eligibility criteria. The lowest outcome variance and highest within-subject correlation were obtained when phosphorylated tau was used as an eligibility criterion, compared to amyloid beta or total tau, regardless of whether total tau or phosphorylated tau were used as primary outcomes. Power increased when eligibility criteria were broadened to allow for enrollment of subjects with either low amyloid beta or high phosphorylated tau. Conclusion: Specific biomarker inclusion criteria may impact statistical power in trials using total tau or phosphorylated tau as the primary outcome. In concert with other important considerations such as treatment target and population of clinical interest, these results may have implications to the integrity and efficiency of prodromal Alzheimer’s disease trial designs.

scholarly journals AB0809 HOW WELL ARE BIOLOGICS RETAINED IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS - A REAL WORLD STUDY

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1706.1-1706
Author(s):  
I. Jawad ◽  
M. K. Nisar
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Real World ◽  
Biologic Therapy ◽  
Health Economy ◽  
Nice Guidelines ◽  
Drug Survival ◽  
Gi Symptoms ◽  
Conventional Dmards ◽  
Significant Difference

Background:Biologics have led to a sea change in the management of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) with unprecedented improvement in the signs, symptoms and radiographic damage, resulting in improvement in functionality and quality of life. However longitudinal data for their retention and tolerability is sparse.Objectives:Our objective was to evaluate real-world biologic therapy duration and reasons for discontinuing treatment.Methods:We conducted a retrospective analysis of our PsA electronic register from 1994 up to and including April 2019 at our university teaching hospital. We had access to full patient records including details on co-morbidities, drugs and disease management.Results:335 patients were identified with PsA. 58% of them were female with mean age of 46 yr (13-81). 113 (33.7%) patients had been treated with a biologic with 105 (93%) continuing at the time of analysis. 60 individuals were prescribed combination therapy with DMARDs. Mean age was 43.3 years (13-81) with 56% women. The biologics sample was ethnically diverse including 80% White Caucasian patients, 17% Asian and others (3%). Significant co-morbidities included cardiovascular disease (18.6%) and diabetes (4.4%). Eight different biologics were in use with adalimumab being the most prescribed (67%).35 (30.9%) patients had stopped biologics at some point with 76 episodes of cessation. 6% of our sample had discontinued two or more biologic treatments. The mean duration before biologic therapy was discontinued was 18.2 months (8 days to 9.5 years), which was almost twice as long as the average period before discontinuing a DMARD (9.9 months). Main reasons for stopping treatment included 23% each due to GI symptoms, neurological causes, cutaneous symptoms and other side effects. The remaining 8% reported fatigue as the reason for stopping therapy.Conclusion:To our knowledge this is the first dedicated retrospective review of a large real world PsA cohort comparing drug survival and tolerability of biologics against DMARDs. Biologic therapies are well tolerated in psoriatic arthritis. There is no significant difference amongst various modes of action. Over a quarter of the patients discontinue the drug owing to intolerance with mean drug survival of 18 months. In contrast nearly two-thirds were intolerant of DMARDs and stopped within ten months. Thus both the rate and duration of biologic retention is significantly better than conventional DMARDs. This has significant economic impact as NICE guidelines require an adequate trial of two DMARDs for six months prior to advanced therapy. However, this approach is unlikely to be cost effective as the disease progresses whilst patients struggle with DMARDs prescription and thus delay biologics which are more likely to be tolerated and retained longer. Hence there is an urgent need to review NICE guidelines to allow earlier employment of biologics in the treatment paradigm with significant benefits to both patients and the health economy.Disclosure of Interests:Issrah Jawad: None declared, Muhammad Khurram Nisar Grant/research support from: Muhammad Nisar undertakes clinical trials and received support (including attendance at conferences, speaker fees and honoraria) from Roche, Chugai, MSD, Abbvie, Pfizer, BMS, Celgene, Novartis and UCB, Consultant of: Muhammad Nisar undertakes clinical trials and received support (including attendance at conferences, speaker fees and honoraria) from Roche, Chugai, MSD, Abbvie, Pfizer, BMS, Celgene, Novartis and UCB, Speakers bureau: Muhammad Nisar undertakes clinical trials and received support (including attendance at conferences, speaker fees and honoraria) from Roche, Chugai, MSD, Abbvie, Pfizer, BMS, Celgene, Novartis and UCB

scholarly journals Association of biological antirheumatic therapy with risk for type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study in incident rheumatoid arthritis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e042246
Author(s):  
Sanjoy K Paul ◽  
Olga Montvida ◽  
Jennie H Best ◽  
Sara Gale ◽  
Attila Pethö-Schramm ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
T Cell ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Therapy ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Necrosis Factor

ObjectiveTo explore possible associations of treatment with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), including T-cell-based and interleukin-6 inhibition (IL-6i)-based therapies, and the risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Study design, setting and participantsFive treatment groups were selected from a United States Electronic Medical Records database of 283 756 patients with RA (mean follow-up, 5 years): never received bDMARD (No bDMARD, n=125 337), tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi, n=34 873), IL-6i (n=1884), T-cell inhibitors (n=5935) and IL-6i+T cell inhibitor abatacept (n=1213). Probability and risk for T2DM were estimated with adjustment for relevant confounders.ResultsIn the cohort of 169 242 patients with a mean 4.5 years of follow-up and a mean 641 200 person years of follow-up, the adjusted probability of developing T2DM was significantly lower in the IL-6i (probability, 1%; 95% CI 0.6 to 2.0), T-cell inhibitor (probability, 3%; 95% CI 2.3 to 3.3) and IL-6i+T cell inhibitor (probability, 2%; 95% CI 0.1 to 2.9) groups than in the No bDMARD (probability, 5%; 95% CI 4.6 to 4.9) and TNFi (probability, 4%; 95% CI 3.7 to 4.7) groups. Compared with No bDMARD, the IL-6i and IL-6i+T cell inhibitor groups had 37% (95% CI of HR 0.42 to 0.96) and 34% (95% CI of HR 0.46 to 0.93) significantly lower risk for T2DM, respectively; there was no significant difference in risk in the TNFi (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.06) and T-cell inhibitor (HR 0.96; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.12) groups.ConclusionsTreatment with IL-6i, with or without T-cell inhibitors, was associated with reduced risk for T2DM compared with TNFi or No bDMARDs; a less pronounced association was observed for the T-cell inhibitor abatacept.

scholarly journals Single-bone versus both-bone plating of unstable paediatric both-bone forearm fractures. A randomized controlled clinical trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed Khaled ◽  
Amr A. Fadle ◽  
Ahmed Khalil Attia ◽  
Andrew Sami ◽  
Abdelkhalek Hafez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Forearm Fractures ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Fracture Union ◽  
Exclusion Criteria ◽  
Bone Fixation ◽  
Fixation Group ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Single Bone

Abstract Purpose This clinical trial compares the functional and radiological outcomes of single-bone fixation to both-bone fixation of unstable paediatric both-bone forearm fractures. Methods This individually randomized two-group parallel clinical trial was performed following the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement at a single academic tertiary medical centre with an established paediatric orthopaedics unit. All children aged between nine and 15 years who presented to the emergency department at Assiut university with unstable diaphyseal, both-bone forearm fractures requiring surgical intervention between November 1, 2018, and February 28, 2020, were screened for eligibility against the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria were diaphyseal unstable fractures defined as shaft fractures between the distal and proximal metaphyses with an angulation of > 10°, and/or malrotation of > 30°, and/or displacement > 10 mm after attempted closed reduction. Exclusion criteria included open fractures, Galeazzi fractures, Monteggia fractures, radial head fractures, and associated neurovascular injuries. Patients who met the inclusion criteria were randomized to either the single-bone fixation group (intervention) or the both-bone fixation group (control). Primary outcomes were forearm range of motion and fracture union, while secondary outcomes were forearm function (price criteria), radius re-angulation, wrist and elbow range of motion, and surgical time Results A total of 50 children were included. Out of these 50 children, 25 were randomized to either arm of the study. All children in either group received the treatment assigned by randomization. Fifty (100%) children were available for final follow-up at six months post-operatively. The mean age of single-bone and both-bone fixation groups was 11.48 ± 1.93 and 13 ± 1.75 years, respectively, with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.006). There were no statistically significant differences in gender, laterality, affection of the dominant hand, or mode of trauma between single-bone and both-bone fixation groups. All patients in both groups achieved fracture union. There mean radius re-angulation of the single-bone fixation groups was 5.36 ± 4.39 (0–20) degrees, while there was no radius re-angulation in the both-bone fixation group, with a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). The time to union in the single-bone group was 6.28 ± 1.51 weeks, while the time to union in the both-bone fixation group was 6.64 ± 1.75 weeks, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.44). There were no infections or refractures in either group. In the single-bone fixation group, 24 (96%) patients have regained their full forearm ROM (loss of ROM < 15°), while only one (4%) patient lost between 15 and 30° of ROM. In the both-bone fixation group, 23 (92%) patients have regained their full forearm ROM (loss of ROM < 15°), while only two (8%) patients lost between 15 and 30° of ROM. There was no statistically significant difference between groups in loss of forearm ROM (p = 0.55). All patients in both groups regained full ROM of their elbow and wrist joints. On price grading, 24 (96%) and 23 (92%) patients who underwent single bone fixation and both-bone fixation scored excellent, respectively. Only one (4%) patient in the single-bone fixation group and two (8%) patients in the both-bone fixation group scored good, with no statistically significant difference in price score between groups (p = 0.49). The majority of the patients from both groups had no pain on the numerical pain scale; 22 (88%) patients in the single-bone fixation group and 21 (84%) patients in the both-bone fixation groups, with no statistically significant difference between groups (p = 0.38). The single-bone fixation group had a significantly shorter mean operative time in comparison to both-bones plating (43.60 ± 6.21 vs. 88.60 ± 10.56 (min); p < 0.001). Conclusion Single-bone ulna open reduction and plate fixation and casting are safe and had a significantly shorter operative time than both-bone fixation. However, single-bone ORIF had a higher risk radius re-angulation, alas clinically acceptable. Both groups had equally excellent functional outcomes, forearm ROM, and union rates with no complications or refractures. Long-term studies are required.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document