Changes in postural stability on balance platform in patients after meniscal repair - two years follow up.

PURPOSE: The aim of this work was to evaluate postural stability on the balance platform averagely 2 years following meniscal repair. METHODS: This is a retrospective, case-control comparative analysis of patients who underwent surgical repair for the isolated longitudinal traumatic meniscal tear versus matched healthy controls. The study group consisted of 30 patients (mean age 29.93 years; averagely 2.3 years after surgery) and the control group - of 30 people. Following physical examination and completion of the IKDC, and the Lysholm questionnaires, the evaluation of the postural stability using two single-leg stabilometry tests was performed. In the static test, the analyzed variables included deviations from the horizontal, vertical axes and the length of the balance path travelled. In the dynamic test, the length of the path travelled and the time to complete task were recorded. Between-limb and between-groups comparison of collected stabilometry tests were performed. Additionally, the IKDC and the Lysholm questionnaires scores were compared between the study and heathy groups. RESULTS: No abnormalities were found on clinical examination in the study group nor any differences between the operated and contralateral knee ( p > 0.05). In stabilometry: (1) in the study group, the operated extremity scored worse than the contralateral limb (length of path traveled in: A) static test x = 56.7 cm SD = 37.91 cm vs. x = 21.6 cm SD = 9.06 cm; p = 0.002 and B) dynamic test x = 82.57 cm, SD = 50.43 cm vs. x = 53.32 cm, SD = 13.82 cm; p = 0.003); (2) In the control group, no leg-related differences were noted ( p > 0.05); (3) Between-group comparison revealed that the study group scored worse than the control group (length of path traveled in: A) static test x = 56.7 cm, SD = 37.91 cm vs. x = 17.23 cm, SD = 3.39 cm; p = 0.001 and B) dynamic test x = 82.57 cm, SD = 50.43 cm vs. x = 32.13 cm, SD = 9.41 cm; p < 0.001). Study group scored worse on IKDC scores ( p < 0.001) but not on Lysholm score ( p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Postural stability deficit persists despite a successful meniscal repair.

The use of endobronchial ultrasonography in assessment of bronchial wall remodeling in patients with asthma.

BACKGROUND: Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) is a new technique that enables the assessment of bronchial wall layers. The aim of the study was to verify the utility of EBUS for the assessment of bronchial wall remodeling in patients with asthma. METHODS: In 35 patients with asthma and 23 control subjects, high-resolution CT (HRCT) scanning and EBUS were used to measure bronchial wall thickness in the 10th segment of the right lung. With a radial 20-MHz probe, EBUS identified the 5-laminar structure of the bronchial wall. Layer 1 (L(1)) and layer 2 (L(2)) were analyzed separately, and layers 3 through 5 (L(3-5)), which corresponded to cartilage, were analyzed jointly. Digitalized EBUS images were used for the quantitative assessment of bronchial wall thickness and the wall area (WA) of the layers. Finally, bronchial biopsy specimens were taken for measuring the thickness of the reticular basement membrane (RBM). The thickness and WA of the bronchial wall layers, which were assessed using EBUS, were correlated with FEV(1) and RBM. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the measurements of total bronchial wall thickness using EBUS and HRCT scanning. The thickness and WA of the bronchial wall and its layers were significantly greater in patients with asthma than in the control subjects. A negative correlation among the thicknesses of L(1), L(2), and L(3-5) and FEV(1), and a positive correlation with RBM were observed only in the patients with asthma. CONCLUSIONS: EBUS allows precise measurement of the thickness and WA of bronchial wall layers. The correlation of these parameters with asthma severity suggests implementation of EBUS in the assessment of bronchial wall remodeling in patients with asthma.

High-resolution computed tomography evaluation of peripheral airways in asthma patients: comparison of focal and diffuse air trapping.

BACKGROUND: Air trapping evaluated in high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) reflects changes in small bronchi. We simultaneously evaluated focal and diffuse air trapping in asthmatic patients. OBJECTIVES: (1) To evaluate air trapping and bronchial wall thickness in asthmatics. (2) To estimate the relationship between air trapping and bronchial wall thickness, pulmonary function tests (PFTs), age, gender and asthma severity. (3) To compare air trapping between subgroups of asthmatic patients with normal FEV(1) % pred. and FEV(1)/FVC % and controls. (4) To compare air trapping and bronchial wall thickness between aspirin-induced asthmatics (AIA) and aspirin-tolerant asthmatics (ATA). METHODS: Both groups (asthmatics and controls) included 30 patients. All patients underwent HRCT and PFTs. RESULTS: Focal (p < 0.0001) and diffuse (p = 0.0004) air trappings and bronchial wall thickness (T: p < 0.0001; T/D: p < 0.0001; WA%: p < 0.0001) were significantly greater in asthmatics. Focal and diffuse air trappings were inversely correlated (p = 0.021). Diffuse air trapping correlated with bronchial wall thickness: T/D (p = 0.047), T (p = 0.037), and WA% (p = 0.048). There was a significant difference in the extent of focal air trapping between a subgroup of asthmatics with normal FEV(1) % pred. and FEV(1)/FVC % and controls (p < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in focal (p = 0.095) and diffuse air trapping (p = 0.186) and bronchial wall thickness (T: p = 0.086; T/D: p = 0.428; WA%: p = 0.428) between AIA and ATA patients. CONCLUSIONS: Both focal and diffuse air trappings provide valuable diagnostic information and therefore deserve to be estimated. The lack of significant differences in air trapping and bronchial wall thickness between AIA and ATA patients needs further investigation.