ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Use of ICP monitoring is considered to be part of "standard of care" in management of severe traumatic brain injury, but it is rarely used in developing countries. The authors present a study which evaluates the efficacy and outcomes of ICP monitoring at a high-volume trauma center in India. METHODS: Data on management and outcomes for 126 patients who were admitted with diffuse traumatic brain injury (GCS 3-8) were studied prospectively over an 18-month period. These patients were treated by one of the two specific protocols: ICP monitoring-based or non-ICP monitoring-based. The primary outcome was measured based on 2 weeks mortality and GOS-E at 1, 3, and 6 months. Secondary outcome was measured based on need for brain-specific treatment, length of ICU stay, and radiation exposure. RESULTS: Mortality in a subset of patients who underwent surgical intervention later due to increased ICP values, drop in GCS, or radiological deterioration was noted to be significantly lower in the ICP monitoring group (p = 0.03), in spite of statistically insignificant difference in overall mortality rates between groups. GOS-E scores at 1 month were significantly better (p = 0.033) in ICP monitoring group, even though they equalized at 3 and 6 months. The need for brain-specific treatment (p < 0.001), radiation exposure (p < 0.001), and length of ICU stay (p = 0.013) was significantly lower in the ICP monitoring group. CONCLUSIONS: ICP monitoring-based treatment protocol helps in achieving faster recovery; lowers mortality rates in operated patients; and reduces ICU stay, radiation exposure, and the need for brain-specific treatment.
Subject(s)
Brain Injuries/surgery , Developing Countries , Facilities and Services Utilization , Intracranial Pressure , Monitoring, Physiologic/methods , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Child , Female , Humans , India , Male , Middle Aged , Monitoring, Physiologic/economics , Monitoring, Physiologic/statistics & numerical data , Neurosurgical Procedures/adverse effects , Postoperative Complications/prevention & controlABSTRACT
AIMS: The present study aimed to compare apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH Plus. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Eighty extracted human maxillary anterior teeth with fully formed apex and straight root were collected for this study. The root canals were cleaned and shaped using a standard step back preparation to size 60# master apical file at the established working length and divided into four groups: Group 1, GuttaFlow sealer with gutta-percha; Group 2, AH Plus sealer with gutta-percha; Group 3, positive control group (Teeth were instrumented and left without obturation); Group 4, negative control group (Teeth were totally coated with nail varnish) Dye leakage was carried out. Statistical analysis was done using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software and Student's unpaired t-test. RESULTS: The GuttaFlow group had a mean leakage of 1.38 mm whereas AH Plus had a mean of 1.425 mm. The standard deviation of GuttaFlow and AH Plus were 0.3861 and 0.3226, respectively. Student's unpaired t-test disclosed no significant difference (P < 0.05) between the groups. CONCLUSION: None of the sealers used in the study could completely seal the apical foramen to have a fluid-tight seal. GuttaFlow and AH Plus showed no statistically significant difference in microleakage; the better result was shown by GuttaFlow.
