Population and risk assessment of sympatric pheasant species in Palas Valley, Pakistan.

Pheasants are declining everywhere in the world and therefore updated information about their population and habitats are important for conservation and management. The present study was conducted in the Palas Valley, District Kohistan, Pakistan in late spring (May and June) 2020 and early spring (March and April) 2021 to assess the population and anthropogenic stress. The major focus was on three sympatric pheasant species, including Western Horned Tragopan (Tragopan melanocephalus), Himalayan Monal (Lophophorus impejanus), and Koklass Pheasant (Pucrasia macrolopha). We used the "Call Count Method" for the population assessment in the field, and a questionnaire survey was conducted to document the risk assessment of local residents of the valley. The population assessments revealed that the Koklass Pheasant is more adapted to increasing anthropogenic activities and its population appeared more or less similar as 22 years ago. In the past 22 years, Western Tragopan and Himalayan Monal have lost about 40-50% of their populations. Human interference in the form of illegal hunting, deforestation, and overgrazing was found to be common in the valley. The study concludes that the Palas Valley habitat is ideal for pheasant species; however, human interference in the form of urbanization, habitat fragmentation, illegal hunting, and deforestation is occurring at a rapid pace, causing havoc in the pheasant population.

Daily treatment with parathyroid hormone is associated with an increase in vertebral cross-sectional area in postmenopausal women with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis.

Daily treatment with hPTH (1-34) is associated with a significant increase in bone formation which results in large gains in lumbar spine bone mass. However, bone formation is known to occur on trabecular, endocortical and periosteal surfaces. The purpose of this study was to determine whether daily treatment with hPTH (1-34) for 1 year was associated with a change in vertebral cross-sectional area, or vertebral size, as measured by serial quantitative computed tomography scans. Fifty-one postmenopausal women treated chronically with both glucocorticoids and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) were randomized to either daily hPTH (1-34) for 1 year and HRT or to a control group treated with only HRT. Measurements of bone density of the spine were obtained every 6 months by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and annually by QCT of the L1 and L2 vertebrae. Vertebral cross-sectional area (VCSA) was obtained from the QCT scans. In addition, we estimated the vertebral compressive strength (VSFOM, g(2)/cm(4) = trabecular BMD(2) x VCSA). After 1 year of hPTH (1-34) treatment, VCSA increased 4.8% (p < 0.001), and 1 year after treatment was discontinued VCSA was still 2.6% higher than the baseline value (p < 0.05). The control group had no change in VCSA. In addition, estimated vertebral compressive strength increased more than 200% over baseline levels in the hPTH (1-34) treatment group and no change was observed in the control group. In summary, daily treatment with hPTH (1-34) for 1 year increased vertebral size as measured by VCSA and this increase was maintained after hPTH (1-34) was discontinued. Since vertebral fracture risk is related to both bone size and bone mass, we cautiously speculate that the increase in vertebral size associated with hPTH (1-34) treatment is at least partially responsible for increased vertebral bone strength and reduction of fracture risk associated with this therapy in postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Osteoporosis in the rheumatic disease patient.

Rheumatic disease patients often have both systemic and localized inflammatory processes. The result of this inflammation is tissue destruction and this translates into bone loss. Recent studies have highlighted the importance of systemic factors that either directly or indirectly activate receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand (RANKL) dependent osteoclast activation and induce bone loss. In this article we will review the pathogenesis of inflammatory bone loss and explore the possible interventions to prevent it.

Quantitative computed tomography of the lumbar spine, not dual x-ray absorptiometry, is an independent predictor of prevalent vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with osteopenia receiving long-term glucocorticoid and hormone-replacement therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To determine which measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) predicts vertebral fractures in a cohort of postmenopausal women with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. METHODS: We recruited 114 subjects into the study. All had osteopenia of the lumbar spine or hip, as demonstrated by dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and were receiving long-term glucocorticoids and hormone replacement therapy (HRT). Measurements of BMD by DXA of the lumbar spine, hip (and subregions), and forearm (and subregions), quantitative computed tomography (QCT) of the spine and hip (n = 59), and radiographs of the thoracolumbar spine were performed on all subjects to assess prevalent vertebral fractures. Vertebral fracture prevalence, as determined by morphometry, required a >or=20% (or >or=4-mm) loss of vertebral body height. Demographic information was obtained by questionnaire. Multiple regression and classification and regression trees (CART) analyses were used to assess predictors of vertebral fracture. RESULTS: Twenty-six percent of the study subjects had prevalent fractures. BMD of the lumbar spine, total hip and hip subregions, as measured by QCT, but only the lumbar spine and total hip, as measured by DXA, were significantly associated with prevalent vertebral fractures. However, only lumbar spine BMD as measured by QCT was a significant predictor of vertebral fractures. CART analysis showed that a BMD value <0.065 gm/cm(3) was associated with a 7-fold higher risk of fracture than a BMD value >or=0.065 gm/cm(3). CONCLUSION: In postmenopausal women with osteoporosis induced by long-term glucocorticoid treatment who are also receiving HRT, BMD of the lumbar spine as measured by QCT, but not DXA, is an independent predictor of vertebral fractures.

Bone loss. Therapeutic approaches for preventing bone loss in inflammatory arthritis.

Inflammatory arthritides are commonly characterized by localized and generalized bone loss. Localized bone loss in the form of joint erosions and periarticular osteopenia is a hallmark of rheumatoid arthritis, the prototype of inflammatory arthritis. Recent studies have highlighted the importance of receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand (RANKL)-dependent osteoclast activation by inflammatory cells and subsequent bone loss. In this article, we review the pathogenesis of inflammatory bone loss and explore the possible therapeutic interventions to prevent it.

Starting a disease modifying antirheumatic drug or a biologic agent in rheumatoid arthritis: standards of practice for RA treatment.

Our aim was to investigate the practices and standards by which disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) and biologics are and have been prescribed. We reviewed the literature and examined data from patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) participating in a national cohort: the National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases (NDB). Four pathways for DMARD prescription were identified: (1) A time-based pyramidal approach (the RA pyramid); (2) a severity-based pyramid in which the most effective treatment is given to those with more active disease; (3) a cost-based pathway in which the primary goal is cost containment--this pathway intertwines with the severity-based pathway; and (4) a patient preference pathway where treatment is geared to patient needs and wishes regardless of severity. Data show that the time-based and severity-based pathways are not generally used in contemporary expert practice, and that patients with all degrees of severity and disease duration are receiving DMARD and biologic treatment. With the abandonment of the pyramid and the development of effective therapy, rheumatic disease care has swung away from the imperative of time and severity-based treatment to the imperative of care based on patient preference. It is the standard of practice to treat patients with mild and early disease with aggressive therapy, with the goal of limiting subsequent damage and retarding progression, and with the realistic purpose of relieving symptoms. The standard may at times be in conflict with the goals of insurers, but there is no legitimate medical reason for such limitations.

When to try COX-2-specific inhibitors. Safer than standard NSAIDs in some situations.

COX-2-specific inhibitors, by sparing COX-1 enzyme and its physiologic functions, are a safer option than regular NSAIDs in patients who are at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding (e.g., patients with a history of peptic ulcer disease, gastritis, alcoholism, concomitant corticosteroid or anticoagulant use). They have been approved for use in arthritis, and their efficacy is comparable to that of other NSAIDs. Further clinical data are needed to establish the long-term safety profile of these newly introduced drugs.

Getting control of osteoarthritis pain. An update on treatment options.

Osteoarthritis consists of a heterogeneous group of disorders that result in articular cartilage degeneration and is diagnosed on the basis of clinical findings. Pathogenesis involves an imbalance between the synthetic and degradative processes that occur in joints. Current interest in the role of cytokines and metalloproteinases may lead to improved treatment of osteoarthritis. For now, management consists of combinations of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies. A general pharmacologic approach is to begin with acetaminophen and add a low-dose NSAID, nonacetylated salicylate, selective COX-2 inhibitor, or topical capsaicin cream if needed. If pain persists, full-dose NSAID therapy, with the addition of a protective agent in patients at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding, or full-dose COX-2 inhibitor therapy may be tried. Joint injections, irrigation, or arthroscopy may be beneficial in some cases. In patients who continue to have pain and limited function despite these measures, surgical intervention should be considered.