RESUMEN
Resumen: Introducción: El hallux valgus es una patología con alta prevalencia en la población. Técnicas de corrección quirúrgica han crecido en popularidad últimamente. Una de ellas es la de Reverdin-Isham (RI: osteotomía incompleta medial en primer metatarsiano), se desarrolló un dispositivo de protección y guía de corte para dicho procedimiento: el sistema BARU. Objetivo: Probar la utilidad del sistema BARU como factor protector de estructuras blandas adyacentes al sitio de abordaje y guía para osteotomía. Material y métodos: Estudio cadavérico; seis pies (dos frescos y cuatro formolados) sin abordajes previos. Tres con el sistema BARU y tres sin éste. Posteriormente disección por dos disectores con enmascaramiento simple ciego. Se evaluaron 13 estructuras en cada pie. Los datos fueron recabados con Microsoft Office Excel y procesados en SPSS. Se realizó test de χ2 (valor p < 0.05 significativo) y se calculó el riesgo relativo. Resultados: El sistema BARU fue satisfactorio. Su colocación fue sencilla y el control radiológico mostró adecuada ubicación espacial. Ayudó como referencia para la dirección y profundidad del corte. Se encontraron 65 de las 78 estructuras buscadas (83.3%). En las estructuras evaluadas hubo seis lesiones: nervio plantar medial (uno dañado), arteria plantar medial (uno dañado), músculo flexor corto (tres dañados), músculo abductor (uno dañado). Cinco de estas lesiones ocurrieron en pies donde no se utilizó el sistema BARU. Conclusión: Resultados prometedores en cuanto a protección de estructuras cercanas, guía de corte y facilidad para la intervención. Cálculos estadísticos no significativos, la muestra debería ampliarse.
Abstract: Introduction: Hallux valgus is a high frequency disorder, affecting the first ray. Operative correction techniques have grown popularity lately. One of them is the Reverdin-Isham technique (first metatarsal medial incomplete osteotomy). Recently, a protection and osteotomy cutting guide has been developed: the BARU system. Objective: To test the usefulness of the BARU system as a protective factor for soft structures adjacent to the surgical site and guidance for osteotomy. Material and methods: Experimental cadaveric study. Six cadaveric feet (two fresh-frozen and four in formaldehyde solution), unapproached. Feet were numbered and intervened with RI technique, three of them with BARU system and three without it. Afterwards, dissection by two dissectors who did not know whether the BARU system had been used or not, establishing a single-blinded model. 13 structures were evaluated in each foot. Data was recovered into Microsoft Office Excel and processed with SPSS. χ2 test (significative if p value < 0.05) and relative risk were calculated. Results: Approach using BARU system was satisfactory, with usual-size operation-ports. BARU system colocation was simple and radiological control showed adequate spatial location. The device contributed as reference for cutting direction and depth. 65 out of the 78 searched structures were found (83.3%). Six injuries were found among the assessed structures: plantar medial nerve (one injury), plantar medial artery (one injury), flexor brevis muscle (three injuries), abductor muscle (one injury). Five of these injuries occurred in non-utilizing BARU system feet. Conclusion: Promising results in terms of protection of nearby structures, cutting guide, and ease of intervention. Avoids X-rays exposure. Not significant statistical calculations, the sample should be enlarged.
RESUMEN
Graft rejection is the major cause of failure of HLA mismatched bone marrow transplantation because of residual host immunity. we have proposed to use a monoclonal murine antibody specific for the LFA-1 molecule (25-3) to prevent graft failure in HLA mismatched bone marrow transplantation (BMT). The rationale for this approach is three fold: LFA-1 deficient patients (3/3) do not reject HLA mismatched BMT; anti LFA-1 blocka in vitro the induction of T cell responses and T/ non T cytotoxic functions; LFA-1 is not expressed by other cells than leucocytes. We have accordingly treated twenty two patients with inherited diseases and 8 with leikemia. The bone marrow was T cells depled by E rosetting of Campath antibody. The antibody was given at days -3, -1, +1, +3, +5 at dose of .1 mg/kg/d for the first 9 and then .2mg/kg/d from day -3 to +6. Engraftment occured in 23/30 patients as shown by at least HLA typing. Hematological recovery was rapid, GVH was limited. Side effects of antibody infusion included fever and possibly an increased incidence of early bacteral infection (sepsis, 1 death). Immunological reconstitution occured slowly leading in six cases to EBV-induced B cell poliferation (1 death and in two others to transient auto immune hemolytic anemia. There has been only one secondary graft rejection. Sisteen patients are alive 3 to 26 months post transplant with functional grafts. Although the number of patients treated is still low the absence of late rejection so far, gives hope for long term maintenance of the graft using anti LFA-1. Since the antibody is an IgG 1 unable to bind human complement, and since it is known to inhibit phagocytosis, there is a good suggestion that 25-3 act through functional blocking of host T and non T luymphocytes at both induction and effector levels.