Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(9): 2475-2479, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34424168

ABSTRACT

Reports of organisms harboring multiple carbapenemase genes have increased since 2010. During October 2012-April 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention documented 151 of these isolates from 100 patients in the United States. Possible risk factors included recent history of international travel, international inpatient healthcare, and solid organ or bone marrow transplantation.


Subject(s)
Bacterial Proteins , beta-Lactamases , Bacterial Proteins/genetics , Gram-Negative Bacteria , Humans , United States/epidemiology , beta-Lactamases/genetics
2.
Clin Orthop Relat Res ; 473(10): 3197-203, 2015 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26100255

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cementing the metaphyseal stem during hip resurfacing surgery improves the initial fixation of the femoral component. However, there may be long-term detrimental effects such as stress shielding or an increased risk of thermal necrosis associated with this technique. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We compared (1) long-term survivorship free from radiographic femoral failure, (2) validated pain scores, and (3) radiographic evidence of component fixation between hips resurfaced with a cemented metaphyseal stem and hips resurfaced with the metaphyseal stem left uncemented. METHODS: We retrospectively selected all the patients who had undergone bilateral hip resurfacing with an uncemented metaphyseal stem on one side, a cemented metaphyseal stem on the other side, and had both surgeries performed between July 1998 and February 2005. Forty-three patients matched these inclusion criteria. During that period, the indications for cementing the stem evolved in the practice of the senior author (HCA), passing through four phases; initially, only hips with large femoral defects had a cemented stem, then all stems were cemented, then all stems were left uncemented. Finally, stems were cemented for patients receiving small femoral components (< 48 mm) or having large femoral defects (or both). Of the 43 cemented stems, two, 13, 0, and 28 came from each of those four periods. All 43 patients had complete followup at a minimum of 9 years (mean, 143 ± 21 months for the uncemented stems; and 135 ± 22 months for the cemented stems; p = 0.088). Survivorship analyses were performed with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards ratios using radiographic failure of the femoral component as the endpoint. Pain was assessed with University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) pain scores, and radiographic femoral failure was defined as complete radiolucency around the metaphyseal stem or gross migration of the femoral component. RESULTS: There were four failures of the femoral component in the press-fit stem group while the cemented stem group had no femoral failures (p = 0.0471). With the numbers available, we found no differences between the two groups regarding pain relief or radiographic appearance other than in patients whose components developed loosening. CONCLUSIONS: Cementing the metaphyseal stem improves long-term implant survival and does not alter long-term pain relief or the radiographic appearance of the proximal femur as had been a concern based on the results of finite element studies. We believe that patients with small component sizes and large femoral head defects have more to gain from the use of this technique which adds surface area for fixation, and there is no clinical downside to cementing the stem in patients with large component sizes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.


Subject(s)
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip/methods , Bone Cements , Hip Prosthesis , Female , Femur , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
3.
J Bone Joint Surg Am ; 97(11): 920-4, 2015 Jun 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26041853

ABSTRACT

UNLABELLED: Liner cementation into a preexisting stable socket may reduce the morbidity of revision hip arthroplasty and preserve acetabular bone. However, the long-term outcomes of this technique remain unknown. The purpose of this report was to analyze the long-term results of a previously reported cohort of patients. Cementation of thirty-two liners (seventeen polyethylene and fifteen metal liners) into preexisting sockets was performed during revision hip arthroplasty, and the patients were followed for a minimum of two years. A retrospective chart review was performed to investigate the complications and survivorship. The mean duration of follow-up was 12.7 years (range, 2.1 to 19.1 years), with ten hips requiring rerevision at a mean of 6.4 years (range, 1.0 to 15.5 years). Nine patients experienced posterior dislocations, and two hips required rerevision for instability. Liner dissociation from the shell occurred in two patients. Survivorship analysis, with rerevision as the end point, demonstrated ten and fifteen-year survivorship of 77.3% and 68.8%, respectively. Dissociation of the cemented liner from the acetabular shell was an infrequent cause of failure despite long-term follow-up. Given the high rate of dislocations in this study, careful patient selection and surgical technique should be considered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Subject(s)
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip/methods , Cementation/methods , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip/adverse effects , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip/instrumentation , Bone Cements/therapeutic use , Cementation/adverse effects , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Hip Dislocation/etiology , Hip Prosthesis/adverse effects , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Middle Aged , Polyethylene/therapeutic use , Prosthesis Failure/adverse effects , Reoperation/methods , Retrospective Studies
4.
Am J Public Health ; 105(2): 302-3, 2015 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25521877

ABSTRACT

We asked persons who inject drugs questions about HCV, including past testing and diagnosis followed by HCV testing. Of 540 participants, 145 (27%) were anti-HCV positive, but of those who were positive, only 46 (32%) knew about their infection. Asking about previous HCV testing results yielded better results than did asking about prior HCV diagnosis. Factors associated with knowing about HCV infection included older age, HIV testing, and drug treatment. Comprehensive approaches to educating and screening this population for HCV need implementation.


Subject(s)
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Hepatitis C/psychology , Substance Abuse, Intravenous/psychology , AIDS Serodiagnosis/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , California/epidemiology , Female , Hepatitis C/epidemiology , Hepatitis C/etiology , Humans , Male , Risk Factors , Serologic Tests/psychology , Serologic Tests/statistics & numerical data , Substance Abuse, Intravenous/complications , Substance Abuse, Intravenous/therapy , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...