La carga inmediata con implantes Microdent en el maxilar superior. II. Aspectos prostodóncicos / Immediate loading with microdent implants in maxilla. II. Prosthetic step

Introducción. El objetivo del presente trabajo era valorar el protocolo protésico de la carga inmediata en el tratamiento con implantes oseointegrados del maxilar superior. La fase protésica de la carga inmediata con implantes para el tratamiento del maxilar edéntulo constituye un complejo protocolo que incluye el objetivo de minimizar los riesgos de cargas oclusales adversas que incrementen la remodelación ósea. El implantólogo debe evaluar la magnitud, la duración y el tipo de las fuerzas, especialmente las situaciones parafuncionales y el bruxismo. La prótesis fija inmediata provisional puede ser elaborada utilizando la férula quirúrgica perforada y rellenada con resina acrílica. Posteriormente, la prótesis es ajustada sobre los implantes y finalmente es evaluada la oclusión. Conclusiones. Este trabajo indica que el protocolo prostodóncico del tratamiento del maxilar superior mediante la carga inmediata de los implantes puede constituir una terapéutica exitosa (AU)

Introduction. The aim of this paper was to present prosthodontic aspects of immediate loading of implants in the treatment of maxilla. Prosthetic phase of immediate functional loading of dental implants for rehabilitation of maxilla constitute a complex protocol that include the goal of decrease the risk of occlusal overload that increase the remodelling rate of bone. The dentist must evaluate magnitude, duration and type of forces, especially parafunction and bruxism. Immediate transitional fixed prosthesis may be fabricated by the dentist with a perforated surgical template used for the implant insertion with acrylic material. After, temporary prosthesis is adjusted with the abutment and finally, oclussion is evaluated. Conclusions. This paper indicate that prosthodontic step of treatment of maxilla by immediate loading with osseointegrated implants may constitute a high successful treatment (AU)

Estudio abierto aleatorio y comparativo de la monoterapia con topiramato frente a carbamacepina en el tratamiento de pacientes pediátricos con epilepsia de reciente diagnóstico / A randomised open trial comparing monotherapy with topiramate versus carbamazepine in the treatment of paediatric patients with recently diagnosed epilepsy

Introducción. Se conocen estudios que han mostrado la eficacia del topiramato (TPM) en niños con epilepsia. Objetivo. Demostrar la eficacia, tolerabilidad y seguridad de TPM como monoterapia en niños con epilepsia parcial de reciente diagnóstico y compararlo con la carbamacepina (CBZ). Pacientes y métodos. Se realizó un estudio multicéntrico, abierto, comparativo, aleatorizado, en epilepsia parcial con o sin generalización secundaria, y se asignó a un grupo de tratamiento: TPM o CBZ. Se excluyeron los pacientes con enfermedades degenerativas. Los datos se analizaron mediante el paquete informático SPSS versión 11.0 con estadística no paramétrica. Para comparaciones entre grupos se empleó la 2 en caso de variables cualitativas y la t de Student en el caso de las cuantitativas. Resultados. Se incluyeron 88 pacientes, 33 en el grupo 1 (TPM) y 32 en el grupo 2 (CBZ). Abandonaron el estudio por eventos adversos o pérdidas en el seguimiento 23 (13 del grupo 1 y 10 del grupo 2). Ambos grupos presentaron una disminución del número de crisis; sin embargo, en los meses 6 y 9 de seguimiento, la diferencia entre los grupos fue estadísticamente significativa a favor del TPM (p = 0,01, t de Student). El porcentaje de pacientes libres de crisis fue mayor en el grupo 1 que en el 2, (p = 0,02, 2). Los eventos adversos más frecuentes fueron: somnolencia (9 por ciento) y pérdida de peso (6 por ciento) en el grupo 1, y somnolencia (19 por ciento), mareo (3 por ciento) y descontrol de crisis (3 por ciento) en el grupo 2. Conclusiones. Se observó en ambos grupos buena eficacia y escasos eventos adversos. El TPM es una buena alternativa como tratamiento de la epilepsia en niños de reciente diagnóstico comparado con el tratamiento de referencia (AU)

Introduction. In some studies in children, topiramate showed efficacy. Aim. To evaluate efficacy, tolerability and safety of topiramate in monotherapy in newly diagnosed epilepsy vs carbamazepine in children. Patients and methods. In a multicentre, open-label, comparative and randomized study patients with partial epilepsy, were randomized to received topiramate or carbamazepine treatment. Patients with degenerative disease were excluded. Data were analysed by SPSS statistical program v. 11.0, and non parametric test. Comparisons between groups were made with chi square test and t Student’s test. Results. In total were included 88 patients, 33 in group 1 (topiramate), 32 group 2 (carbamazepine), 23 were drop-outs because adverse events and lost in follow-up (13 in group 1 y 10 group 2). In both groups were observed good efficacy, in month 6 and 9 of follow-up, the average of seizures in group 1 were better than group 2 (p = 0.01, t Student’s test). The percentage of free seizure patients was greater in group 1 than group 2 (statistical significance p = 0.02, chi square test). The adverse events were similar in both groups and mild, somnolence 9%, weight loss 6% in group 1 and somnolence 19%, dizziness 3% and seizure discontrol 3% in group 2. Conclusions. Good efficacy in both groups, and topiramate in good treatment choice in newly diagnosed epilepsy in children because it’s the efficacy and tolerability in comparison with the gold standard carbamazepine (AU)

[A randomised open trial comparing monotherapy with topiramate versus carbamazepine in the treatment of paediatric patients with recently diagnosed epilepsy]. / Estudio abierto aleatorio y comparativo de monoterapia con topiramato frente a carbamacepina en el tratamiento de pacientes pediátricos con epilepsia de reciente diagnóstico.

INTRODUCTION: In some studies in children, topiramate showed efficacy. AIM: To evaluate efficacy, tolerability and safety of topiramate in monotherapy in newly diagnosed epilepsy vs carbamazepine in children. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a multicentre, open-label, comparative and randomized study patients with partial epilepsy, were randomized to received topiramate or carbamazepine treatment. Patients with degenerative disease were excluded. Data were analysed by SPSS statistical program v. 11.0, and non parametric test. Comparisons between groups were made with chi square test and t Student's test. RESULTS: In total were included 88 patients, 33 in group 1 (topiramate), 32 group 2 (carbamazepine), 23 were drop-outs because adverse events and lost in follow-up (13 in group 1 y 10 group 2). In both groups were observed good efficacy, in month 6 and 9 of follow-up, the average of seizures in group 1 were better than group 2 (p = 0.01, t Student's test). The percentage of free seizure patients was greater in group 1 than group 2 (statistical significance p = 0.02 chi square test). The adverse events were similar in both groups and mild, somnolence 9%, weight loss 6% in group 1 and somnolence 19%, dizziness 3% and seizure discontrol 3% in group 2. CONCLUSIONS: Good efficacy in both groups, and topiramate in good treatment choice in newly diagnosed epilepsy in children because it's the efficacy and tolerability in comparison with the gold standard carbamazepine.

[Cholecystectomy: a choice technique in biliary microlithiasis]. / La colecistectomía: técnica de elección en la microlitiasis biliar.

The purpose of our study is to show results obtained after a cholecystectomy on 25 patients in order to present a suggestive clinic of bile origin and a positive result for determination of microcrystals in the bile probe even in the case of negative radiologic diagnoses (echography, cholecystography). Out of 25 patients operated on the following results were obtained: microscopic cholelithiasis in 12, granular cholelithiasis in 3, acute cholecystitis in 2, cholesterolosis in 2 and without pathologic findings in 6 patients after an observation period of 24 months following the operation it was demonstrated that almost all the patients (96%) had no symptoms. On the other hand, the above mentioned results are compared to the findings obtained during an observation period of a group of 34 patients with positive probe results with the same clinic characteristics and not having been operated on refusing the operation suggested.