The Hip–Spine Connection: How to Differentiate Hip Conditions From Spine Pathology

Orthopedics ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Lyall Ashberg ◽  
Mary R. Close ◽  
Itay Perets ◽  
John P. Walsh ◽  
Edwin O. Chaharbakhshi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Ma ◽  
Yuan Gao ◽  
Wei Tang ◽  
Wei Huang ◽  
Yong Tang

Background: Studies have suggested that cognitive impairment in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is associated with dendritic spine loss, especially in the hippocampus. Fluoxetine (FLX) has been shown to improve cognition in the early stage of AD and to be associated with diminishing synapse degeneration in the hippocampus. However, little is known about whether FLX affects the pathogenesis of AD in the middle-tolate stage and whether its effects are correlated with the amelioration of hippocampal dendritic dysfunction. Previously, it has been observed that FLX improves the spatial learning ability of middleaged APP/PS1 mice. Objective: In the present study, we further characterized the impact of FLX on dendritic spines in the hippocampus of middle-aged APP/PS1 mice. Results: It has been found that the numbers of dendritic spines in dentate gyrus (DG), CA1 and CA2/3 of hippocampus were significantly increased by FLX. Meanwhile, FLX effectively attenuated hyperphosphorylation of tau at Ser396 and elevated protein levels of postsynaptic density 95 (PSD-95) and synapsin-1 (SYN-1) in the hippocampus. Conclusion: These results indicated that the enhanced learning ability observed in FLX-treated middle-aged APP/PS1 mice might be associated with remarkable mitigation of hippocampal dendritic spine pathology by FLX and suggested that FLX might be explored as a new strategy for therapy of AD in the middle-to-late stage.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 485
Author(s):  
Tsung-Cheng Yin ◽  
Adam M. Wegner ◽  
Meng-Ling Lu ◽  
Yao-Hsu Yang ◽  
Yao-Chin Wang ◽  
...  

Background: Disorders of the hip and lumbar spine can create similar patterns of pain and dysfunction. It is unknown whether all surgeons, regardless of orthopedic or neurosurgery training, investigate and diagnose concurrent hip and spine pathology at the same rate. Methods: Data were retrieved from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). Enrolled patients were stratified into hip and spine surgery at the same admission (Both), hip surgery before spine surgery (HS), or spine surgery before hip surgery (SH). The SH group was further subdivided based on whether spine surgery was performed by an orthopedic surgeon (OS) or neurosurgeon (NS), and differences in preoperative radiographic examinations and diagnoses were collected and analyzed. Results: In total, 1824 patients received lumbar spine surgery within 1 year before or after hip replacement surgery. Of these, 103 patients had spine and hip surgery in the same admission (Both), 1290 patients had spine surgery before hip surgery (SH), and 431 patients had hip surgery before spine surgery (HS). In the SH group, patients were categorized into spine surgery by orthopedic surgeons (OS) (n = 679) or neurosurgeons (NS) (n = 522). In the SH group, orthopedic surgeons investigated hip pathology with X-rays more often (52.6% vs. 38.1%, p < 0.001) and diagnosed more cases of hip disease (43.6% vs. 28.9%, p < 0.001) than neurosurgeons. Conclusions: Of patients in Taiwan’s NHIRD who had concurrent surgical degenerative hip and lumbar spine disorders who had spine surgery before hip surgery, orthopedic surgeons obtained hip images and made hip-related diagnoses more frequently than did neurosurgeons.


Author(s):  
Louis O’Halloran ◽  
Daniel P. Ahern ◽  
Jake M. McDonnell ◽  
Gráinne M. Cunniffe ◽  
Michael K. Dodds ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has had profound implications on healthcare institutions. Aims This study aims to assess and compare referral patterns during COVID-19 to corresponding dates for the preceding 3 years (2017–2019), in order to preemptively coordinate the logistics of the surgical unit for similar future experiences. Methods Retrospective review for our institution, a national tertiary referral centre for spine pathology. Two distinct time-points were chosen to represent the varied levels of social restriction during the current pandemic: (i) study period 1 (SP1) from 11 November 2020 to 08 June 2020 represents a national lockdown, and (ii) study period 2 (SP2) from 09 June 2020 to 09 September 2020 indicates an easing of restrictions. Both periods were compared to corresponding dates (CP1: 11 March–08 June and CP2 09 June–09 September) for the preceding 3 years (2017–2019). Data collected included age, gender, and mechanism of injury (MOI) for descriptive analyses. MOIs were categorised into disc disease, cyclist, road-traffic-accident (RTA), falls < 2 m, falls > 2 m, malignancy, sporting injuries, and miscellaneous. Results All MOI categories witnessed a reduction in referral numbers during SP1: disc disease (−29%), cyclist (−5%), RTAs (−66%), falls < 2 m (−39%), falls > 2 m (−17%), malignancy (−33%), sporting injuries (−100%), and miscellaneous (−58%). Four of 8 categories (RTAs, falls < 2 m, malignancy, miscellaneous) showed a trend towards return of pre-lockdown values during SP2. Two categories (disc disease, falls > 2 m) showed a further reduction (−34%, −27%) during SP2. One category (sporting injuries) portrayed a complete return to normal values during SP2 while a notable increase in cyclist-related referrals was witnessed (+ 63%) when compared with corresponding dates of previous years. Conclusion Spinal injury continues to occur across almost all categories, albeit at considerably reduced numbers. RTAs and falls remained the most common MOI. Awareness needs to be drawn to the reduction of malignancy-related referrals to dissuade people with such symptoms from avoiding presentation to hospital over periods of social restrictions.


Author(s):  
Mauro Ruella ◽  
Francisco Marco del Pont ◽  
Aguilar Martin ◽  
Sebastián Juan María Giovannini ◽  
Tomás Ries Centeno ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

Neuroscience ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 396 ◽  
pp. 36-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiram Tendilla-Beltrán ◽  
Rubén Antonio Vázquez-Roque ◽  
Andrea Judith Vázquez-Hernández ◽  
Linda Garcés-Ramírez ◽  
Gonzalo Flores

Author(s):  
Aditiya Saraf ◽  
Raies Ahmad Begh ◽  
Deep Jyoti ◽  
Parmod Kalsotra

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> The aim of our study was to evaluate various etiologies of referred otalgia.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> The present study was conducted in the department of ENT, SMGS Hospital, GMC Jammu from January 2019 to January 2020. A total of 65 patients with complaint of pain in ear but normal ear examination was included in our study. All patients underwent complete ENT examination.  </p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> The most common cause for referred otalgia was dental pathology (58.4%), followed by pharyngitis (16.9%), tonsillitis (10.7%), supraglottic cancer (7.6%), cervical spine pathology (3.07%) and peritonsillar abscess (3.07%).</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Otalgia is a symptom with diverse causes. Though many causes are otogenic, referred pain from other regions of head and neck is also very common.</p>


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 390
Author(s):  
Yukihide Koyama ◽  
Koichi Tsuzaki ◽  
Kazuo Ohmori ◽  
Koichiro Ono ◽  
Takeshi Suzuki

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document