The most common indications for revision are infection, increased deformity, late operative site pain, pseudarthrosis, and implant dislodgement. Because revision cases are unique, preoperative planning should include a review of previous records and imaging Fludarabine inhibitor for a thorough understanding of the bony and neurologic anatomy and instrumentation. Preoperative discussion with colleagues may help prevent the need for additional revision. Measures to minimize blood loss should be taken. Deformity correction may include
mobilization by multiple osteotomies for long sweeping curves, or focal osteotomies (e. g., vertebral column resection or pedicle subtraction osteotomies) for focal deformity. If fusing additional levels, instrumentation should have adequate fixation and should connect to existing anchors so that the corrective force can be applied to the site of deformity. The possibility of occult infection should be considered; in the event of a late deep infection, options include removing implants and debriding the spine. However, there is a risk of increased deformity in the coronal and sagittal planes after implant removal. Because
revision surgery itself may have a higher subsequent reoperation rate, thorough preparation should be done to ensure success.
Conclusion. Cases of spine revision surgery in the pediatric population are best undertaken by an experienced surgeon and should involve thorough preoperative planning, proper equipment, and skilled assistance.”
“BACKGROUND: Selleckchem E7080 Survival after pediatric heart transplant has improved Semaxanib over time, as has the incidence of overall rejection. We studied the effect of era on the occurrence and outcome of rejection with hemodynamic compromise (HC).
METHODS: Data from 2227 patients who received allografts between 1993 and 2006 at
36 centers in the Pediatric Heart Transplant Study were analyzed to determine incidence, outcome, and risk factors for rejection with HC in early (1993-1999) and recent (2000-2006) eras. Rejection with HC was classified as severe (RSHC) when inotropes were used for circulatory support and mild (RMHC) when inotropes were not used.
RESULTS: Of 1217 patients with any episode of rejection, 541 had rejection with HC. Freedom from RMHC improved at 1 year (81% vs 90%, p < 0.001) and at 5 years (74% vs 85%, p < 0.001) in the early vs recent eras, but freedom from RSHC was similar between eras (93% vs 95% at 1 year and 85% vs 87% at 5 years, p = 0.24). Survival after RSHC (63% at 1 year and 49% at 5 years) was worse than after RMHC (87% at 1 year and 72% at 5 years, p < 0.001) and did not change over time. Risk factors for RSHC were non-white race (hazard ratio [HR]. 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.29-2.32, p < 0.01), older age (HR, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.24-6.53; p = 0.01), and non-A blood type (HR, 1.51;, 95% CI,0.01), older age (HR, 2.85; 95% CI, l.24-6.53;p = 0.01), and non-A blood type (HR, 1.