Derangement of the temporomandibular joint; a case study using Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy.

Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) is widely used for spinal problems, and more recently the principles and mechanical syndromes have been applied to extremity musculoskeletal problems. One of the most common classifications is derangement syndrome, which describes a presentation in which repeated movements causes a decrease in symptoms and a restoration of restricted range of movement. The case study describes the application of repeated movements to a patient with a 7-year history of non-specific temporomandibular pain and reduced function, who had had lots of previous failed treatment. Examination using repeated movements resulted in a classification of derangement, and the patient rapidly responded in 4 treatment sessions, with an abolition of pain and full restoration of function, and remained improved after many years. The case study demonstrates the application of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy principles to a patient with a temporomandibular problem.

Are the dynamics of gastric evacuation of natural prey in a piscivorous flatfish different from what is going on in a gadoid?

Despite the fact that the stomach of turbot Psetta maxima is a curved tube that forms a half circle, it was demonstrated that gastric evacuation in this predatory flatfish fed natural prey closely followed the surface-dependent cylinder model developed from studies on gadoids with a straight stomach. Evacuation experiments were performed on two size groups of P. maxima fed sandeel Ammodytes tobianus as well as on P. maxima fed brown shrimp Crangon crangon at three different temperatures. This enabled the provision of a gastric evacuation model for studies on P. maxima, which takes into account the effects of the explanatory variables predator size, temperature, prey energy density and resistance of prey to the digestive processes in the stomach. Basically, the cylinder model predicts that a square-root function accurately describes gastric evacuation, which is inconsistent with the conclusion of a previous study on P. maxima that evacuation of A. tobianus is essentially linear with time. Use of the cylinder model to the values of the explanatory variables presented in the latter study, however, gave accurate predictions of the actually acquired evacuation data, which points to the generic value of the model.

Factors influencing haematological recovery after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation in leukaemia patients treated with methotrexate-containing GVHD prophylaxis. A single-centre experience.

In the present single institution study of 66 leukaemia patients (28 AML, 23 ALL, 15 CML), the factors influencing haematological recovery after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (alloBMT) were analysed retrospectively to identify the optimal conditions required for rapid haematological recovery after alloBMT. All patients received GVHD prophylaxis with cyclosporine A plus methotrexate. The mean number of days required to achieve a neutrophil count > or = 0.5 x 10(9)/l after alloBMT was 17 (range 9-27), 19 patients (28.8%) had rapid neutrophil recovery within 15 days after alloBMT. Haematological recovery was more rapid in the 38 patients without GVHD or with only grade I GVHD. Also, 50% and 40% of patients receiving 10 (n = 18) or 5 (n = 20) micrograms/kg G-CSF per day, respectively, had rapid neutrophil recovery within 15 days after alloBMT, as against only 7.1% of patients not receiving G-CSF after the transplant (n = 28); P < 0.001. The neutrophil recovery was similar in patients receiving either fresh or cryopreserved allografts and either a TBI-containing or a busulfan-containing conditioning regimen. A significant correlation was found between the neutrophil recovery and either the MNCs or CFU-GM contents of the allografts. The mean number of days required for neutrophil recovery was only 16 (range 9-24) in patients receiving allografts containing > 1 x 10(5) CFU-GM/kg (n = 28), as against 19 (range 13-27) in patients receiving allografts containing < or = 1 x 10(5) CFU-GM/kg (n = 35). Three patients receiving allografts containing < 0.5 x 10(5) CFU-GM/kg had primary neutrophil engraftment failure. The mean number of days required to achieve a platelet count > or = 20 x 10(9)/l was 21 (range 11-50), and 30 patients (46.9%) had platelet recovery within 20 days after alloBMT. The platelet recovery after alloBMT was not affected by the type of leukaemia, conditioning regimen, or G-CSF administration. The mean number of days required for platelet recovery after alloBMT was 20 in patients receiving allografts containing > 1.0 x 10(5) BFU-E/kg (n = 35), as against 23 days in patients receiving allografts containing < or = 1.0 x 10(5) BFU-E/kg (n = 24). Seven patients receiving allografts containing < 0.5 x 10(5) BFU-E/kg had primary platelet engraftment failure. The present study has identified the high number of progenitor cells in the allografts infused and the daily administration of G-CSF posttransplant as the optimal combination for rapid neutrophil recovery after alloBMT. More significantly, the number of BFU-E in allografts was the most significant determining factor in platelet recovery after alloBMT. The development of GVHD of grade II or more during the first weeks after alloBMT was associated with slower haematological recovery, a longer period of fever during neutropenia and longer hospitalization.

Long-term follow-up of leukaemia patients after related cryopreserved allogeneic bone marrow transplantation.

We have previously shown that allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT) with cryopreserved donor marrow cells can be used without prolonging the engraftment time or interfering with the reconstitution of haemopoiesis. In this report we extend our initial observations of the first 40 patients who underwent allogeneic bone marrow transplantation from related donors with cryopreserved donor bone marrow for haematological malignancies, including the long-term follow-up data of the previously reported patients. The outcome of these patients was compared with that of 40 related BMT recipients receiving fresh donor bone marrow (historic control group). Time until engraftment of all patients receiving cryopreserved bone marrow was not different from the control group (ANC > 0.5 x 10(9)/l 17d (range 11-24 d) versus 17.5 d (range 10-28 d): platelets > 20 x 10(9)/l 21 d (range 11-85 d) versus 22 d (range 13-69 d), respectively). There was the same incidence of acute and chronic GvHD in patients receiving either cryopreserved bone marrow or fresh bone marrow (acute GvHD > or = II 61% v 60% and chronic GvHD 56% v 52%, respectively). Chimaerism studies showed no difference between the patient groups. Furthermore, the two groups did not differ in day 100 survival (82% v 72%). With a median follow-up of 520 d (range 47-1365 d) and 1289 d (range 48-1849 d), 60% of the patients receiving cryopreserved and 53% of the patients receiving fresh allogeneic donor bone marrow, respectively, are alive. We conclude that cryopreservation of allogeneic related donor bone marrow does not adversely affect engraftment, does not decrease the incidence of severe acute GvHD, and does not seem to affect the day 100 survival or long-term haemopoiesis.

Factors influencing the haematological recovery after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation in leukaemia patients treated with methotrexate-containing GVHD prophylaxis: a single-centre experience.

In the present single institution study of 66 leukaemia patients (28 AML, 23 ALL, 15 CML), the factors influencing haematological recovery after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (alloBMT) were analysed retrospectively in order to identify the optimal conditions required for a rapid haematological recovery after alloBMT. All patients received GVHD prophylaxis with cyclosporine A plus methotrexate. The mean number of days required to achieve > or = 0.5 x 109/l neutrophil count after alloBMT was 17 (median 17, range 9 to 27 days) and 19 patients (28.8%) had rapid neutrophil recovery within 15 days after alloBMT. The haematological recovery was more rapid in the 38 patients without GVHD or with only grade I GVHD. Furthermore, 50% and 40% of patients receiving 10 (n = 18) or 5 (n = 20) micrograms/kg/day G-CSF had rapid neutrophil recovery within 15 days after alloBMT, versus only 7.1% of patients not receiving G-CSF post-transplant (n = 28), p < 0.001. The neutrophil recovery was similar in patients receiving either fresh or cryopreserved allografts and either TBI-containing or busulfan-containing conditioning regimen. A significant correlation was found between neutrophil recovery and either the MNC or CFU-GM content of the allografts, r = 0.33, p < 0.01. The mean number of days required for neutrophil recovery was only 16 days (median 16, range 9 to 24 days) in patients receiving allografts containing > 1 x 10(5) CFU-GM/kg (n = 28) versus 19 days (median 19, range 13 to 27 days) in patients receiving allografts containing < 1 x 10(5) CFU-GM/kg (n = 35). Three patients receiving allografts containing less than 0.5 x 10(5) CFU-GM/kg had primary neutrophil engraftment failure. The mean number of days required to achieve 20 x 109/l platelet count was 21 (median 20, range 11 to 50 days) and 30 patients (46.9%) had platelet recovery within 20 days after alloBMT. The platelet recovery after alloBMT was not significantly affected by the type of leukaemia, conditioning regimen, or G-CSF administration. The mean number of days required for platelet recovery after alloBMT was only 20 days (median 18 days) in patients receiving allografts containing > 1.0 x 10(5) BFU-E/kg (n = 35) versus 23 days (median 20 days) in patients receiving allografts containing < 1.0 x 10(5) BFU-E/kg (n = 24). Seven patients receiving allografts containing less than 0.5 x 10(5) BFU-E/kg had primary platelet engraftment failure. The present study has identified the high number of progenitor cells in the allografts infused and the daily administration of G-CSF post-transplant as the optimal combination for a rapid neutrophil recovery after alloBMT. More significantly, the number of BFU-E in allografts was the most significant factor to determine platelet recovery after alloBMT. The development of GVHD of grade II or more during the first weeks after alloBMT was associated with slower haematological recovery and longer period of fever during neutropenia and hospitalisation.